Gender Discrimination In The United States

Other people around the country or world should care about gender discrimination not only in sports but in any other way, shape or form. This topic has come up plenty of times in court and there have been so many cases that have been settled but not finished because people care more about other topics that are not as bad or maybe just as bad as this. All these cases should be finished with a final decision and not just settled. This topic should not even be a problem here in the United States, we should live up to our high standards we set as a nation.

Yes I know this topic might be a little in the past with all the new topics like: Gay Marriage, Abortion, Animal Rights, Death Penalty and Censorship, and that is only a few to mention. I still

think this topic should be considered a hot topic in the United States, there have been many issues in the past with different cases about females not getting the right pay or not being able to do the same things as males because of their gender, and that is not right. People always say that America is ¨The Land of the Free and The home of the Brave,¨ although we might be living up to the home of the brave part, we are not living up to the land of the free, because people should be able to do as they like despite their gender, race, ethnicity. Gender discrimination has been going on for a long while now and it should be fairly easy to fix, but very few people are willing to stand up and say it is not right and needs to be fixed.
According to Moshak v.

Tennessee court case (paragraphs 5-8), Title IX was not intended be mostly for the sports side of things but ever since it became a law, it has been used more towards the sports side than any other types of cases because Title IX states that ¨No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.¨ The whole reason why the Moshak v. University of Tennessee case started was because three former University of Tennessee employee´s of the athletic department were arguing that there was an unequal pay between men and women employee´s in the athletic department. On January 7, 2016; The plaintiffs successfully settled their case, the university will have to pay more the $1 million as part of the settlement agreement. AAUW is thrilled for the plaintiffs and proud to have supported their case. I feel no matter what gender you are, you should not be discriminated and you definitely should not be paid less because of your gender. There should be no difference in pay or anything else along those lines that should be determined by your

gender.
Also according to the Lindsey Thomka court case which also supports what I am defending (paragraphs 1-4). It supports my case because she was not allowed to play in a golf tournament. She was the only female golfer in the school, but she was the only female who wanted to play this tournament at her school. She was denied the chance to play in the tournament because she was a female wanting to play an all male tournament. Also in the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association rules, it requires each school to provide equal sports opportunities for boys and girls. Since her school did not have a girls golf team, then she played on the boys team. Even though the team failed to qualify for a tournament, but Thomka argued that she should have been allowed the chance to play in a separate tournament in which players qualified individually. Thomka, who did qualify, would have been the only girl in the tournament, but the association said she could not play because, as a girl, she hit from a shorter tee.
Lastly according to the Brown University case, which may have been awhile ago, it still defends my case I am trying to show here (paragraphs 6-9). The last case that will support my side of this argument is the Brown University case that happened in 1993-94. The district court found that Brown's varsity program -- including university- and donor-funded sports -- provided 200 more job opportunities for men than women, thus maintaining a 13.01 percent disparity between female participation in it s sports programs and female enrollment. Further, Brown could not show that it was expanding its sports programs to be responsive to the unmet interests of its female students. The district court entered final judgment on September 1, 1995 fashioning specific relief to avoid protracted litigation. This was part of what went on in the court case,
Brown's proposal to cut men's teams is a permissible means of effectuating compliance with the statute.

Thus, although we understand the district court´s reasons for substituting its own specific relief under the circumstances at the time, and although the district court's remedy is within the statutory margins and constitutional, we think that the district court was wrong to reject out-of-hand Brown's alternative plan to reduce the number of men´s varsity teams. After all, the district court itself stated that one of the compliance options available to Brown under Title IX is to ¨demote or eliminate the requisite number of men´s positions….Our respect for academic freedom and reluctance to interject ourselves into the conduct of university affairs counsels that we give universities as much freedom as possible to conduct their operations consonant with constitutional and statutory

limits.