Just a month ago, the country watched proudly as the U.S. Women’s Soccer Team defeated China to win the World Cup, a spectacular victory before a worldwide television audience. But to hear some tell it, these women could not have achieved that victory without help from the federal government.

While the team celebrated, commentators and politicians attributed their victory to Title IX. Crediting a federal law with achieving such gains diminishes the team’s skill and determination. It also ignores the reality that, since its enactment in 1972, Title IX has been grossly misinterpreted and misapplied.

The original law stated there would be no discrimination based on gender in any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. It also clearly stated its purpose was not to establish quotas. However, the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR) issued two Policy Interpretations that evaluate compliance based on percentages.

The number of women participating in intercollegiate sports programs must be substantially proportionate to the female enrollment at the institution. Although these interpretations are not a product of the legislative process that holds lawmakers accountable at the ballot box, they are, nonetheless, enforced and schools across the country are scrambling to fortify themselves against gender discrimination lawsuits. Unfortunately, this has meant that many colleges have had to drop men’s teams or decrease the number of slots available.

For every woman added between 1992 and 1997, 3.6 men were dropped. The OCR seems determined to ignore the fact that legal equality does not mean sameness of interests. On average, women are not as interested as men in playing competitive sports, just as men are not as interested in drama and language arts programs. To force equality of participation in spite of different interests decreases opportunities for men while providing little or no increase in opportunities for women.

The Clinton administration now seeks to expand the quota system of Title IX beyond its traditional focus on sports programs. This means that academic programs will fall under its scythe as male participation in traditionally male-dominated fields is limited to the number of women interested in the field. This will also hurt women, as they find themselves excluded from an English program because there aren’t enough men enrolled. The good news is that this unfairness is being recognized, and men are fighting back.

At CSU Bakersfield, the members of the men’s wrestling team who were cut in the name of gender equity are using the real language of Title IX, which prohibits exclusion based on sex, to argue in federal court that those cuts actually violate the law used to justify them.

The original purpose of Title IX was to increase opportunity for women. Instead, it is being used to undermine equality of opportunity by placing the focus only on numerical outcomes. Fairness is best achieved by respecting individual interests and skill. Victory in sports, or any other pursuits, cannot be mandated. It can only be earned.

The World Cup victory came about not as a result of misapplied legislation, but because a talented group of soccer players showed the discipline and talent to win. More of that spirit, and fewer federal mandates, is the lesson of that victory.

—Joanna Elachi

Public Policy Fellow