Over 30 years ago, the U.S. government ratified Title IX of the 1972 Educational Amendments, mandating gender equity in all state-funded educational endeavors.
Paying homage to the law that has given women equal opportunities to compete in school, the group Women in Thought hosted a panel last week in the Penn Women's Center to examine the implications of Title IX on a college campus.
"If there was no Title IX, I don't think I would be here," said Wharton freshman Emily Puro, a volleyball player. "Volleyball has always been a part of my life."
The panel consisted of three female Penn athletes -- College senior Sunny Pitrof, Puro and College freshman Stefanie Williams -- attorney for Wolf Block Schorr Solis-Cohen Linda Hollinshead and Penn Associate Director of Athletics Mary DiStanislao.
Title IX has monumentally affected participation in women's athletics in all levels of competition since 1972. Since the law was founded, it has undergone several clarifications -- notably in 1975, 1979 and 1996.
Volleyball players Puro and Williams especially expressed their thanks to the gender equity law after having spoken to members of the 1979 Ivy League championship team after this year's squad won the league title.
Despite being crowned as best in the Ivy League in 1979, the Penn volleyball team shared uniforms with two other varsity sports, did not receive a championship ring and was not formally recognized for its achievements.
This year, the team was honored at halftime of a men's basketball game and will be again at halftime of the homecoming football game, when all of the Ivy champion teams are honored.
DiStanislao explained that she would not be able to work in athletics as she has were it not for Title IX. From 1976 to 1980, DiStanislao was the head women's basketball coach at Northwestern.
"I'm engaged in it every day," she said. "My position probably wouldn't exist were it not for Title IX."
Williams provided some of the legal background for the gender equity law, explaining its evolution and how it has evolved into legislation that is "less vague" than the original 1972 form.
The law has been in the news recently because of a lawsuit spearheaded by the National Wrestling Coaches Association against the Department of Education. The lawsuit primarily claims that proportionality -- the first prong for examining compliance with Title IX -- is illegal and the reason that male teams are being cut from varsity status.
"There is the spirit of the law, and then there's the letter of the law," Distanislao said. "A lot of schools won't address the elephant that sits in the middle of the room, and that is the amount of money that they spend on football and basketball."
DiStanislao addressed the uniqueness of the Ivy League and how it differs from others throughout the country in that it usually does not eliminate programs.
"With the Ivy League, in general, there is an ethic that everyone should have the opportunity to compete," she said.
"When Dartmouth announced that it was going to cut its swim programs, all of us looked at each other... and wondered, 'What's going on here?'"
The panel members did not dismiss the contention that a new interpretation of Title IX could maintain gender equity. However, they were concerned that such a change could revert the law to its preliminary stages.
