PROLOGUE
--------
 
    The following brief news article appeared in the "Fanfare" section of
the Washington "Post" several weeks ago - 4 June, 1992.  Some of you may
be wondering why I've waited nearly three weeks to post this information
more broadly to HOCKEY-L, or perhaps whether it should be posted at all.
As I've attempted to make clear in my epilogue comments to follow, it was
not an easy decision for me.  While I abhor institutional censorship, IMHO
self-censorship isn't necessarily wrong when only one side of the issue
is being presented, as can be argued concerning the remarks that follow.
However, today - 23 June, 1992 - marks the 20th anniversary of the passage
of Federal Legislation now collectively known as Title IX.  However much
some people might like the "problem" of gender equity / equal access pro-
visions to "just go away," it plainly will not - and should not.  In the
end I've decided to post the "Post" article as, I hope, a jumping-off point
for some thoughtful discussion in the days ahead ....
 
"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 discrim-
 ination under any educational program or activity receiving Federal
 financial assistance."
				Title IX - Education Amendments of 1972
 
"Bowdoin Faces Charge of Sex Discrimination"   [no byline]
 ------------------------------------------
 
    "Members of the Bowdoin College women's ice hockey team have filed a
sex discrimination complaint with the U.S. Dept. of Education, alleging
the school in Brunswick, Maine unjustly favors men's team sports.  On
behalf of the team, five recent Bowdoin graduates filed a Title IX complaint
under the education amendments of 1972 with the Department of Education's
civil rights office in Boston.  The complaint alleges the school discriminated
against female athletes in the awarding of scholarships, scheduling of events,
the hiring and payment of coaching staff, and the availability of support
services for athletes.  A Bowdoin spokesman declined to comment on the
complaint's specific allegations, but said the college does not discriminate
against women's athletics.
 
     Erin Miller of Swampscott, MA said she and four other team members filed
the complaint because of what they saw as an effort to undermine the women's
ice hockey program by limiting resources.  "We're a viable program and they've
been attempting to terminate us for at least the last five years," Miller
said. "But we're not self-sustaining.  We don't have the equipment, budget,
schedule and the things one is normally expected to have."
 
     The Department of Education's civil rights office received 3809
discrimination complaints in 1991, but only 407 of those alleged Title IX
sex discrimination, said spokesman Roger Murphy.  A small percentage of those
complaints were related to athletics, he said ...."
 
===== End of quoted material =================================================
 
EPILOGUE
--------
 
    Perhaps those of you who felt even a little twinge while reading the
preceding information can understand my initial reluctance and misgivings
about posting it to the List.  On the one hand, the broad societal issues of
"gender equity" in collegiate athletics is a topical one, as is obvious from
the discussions on HOCKEY-L concerning recent legislation enacted and pending
by the Big 10.  So too is the dismal state of women's ice hockey in New
England, as Mike M. described so well re: Northeastern several weeks ago. The
Bowdoin situation impacts on both these issues.  BUT, I'm very much aware of
the impact of HOCKEY-L in ways we never intended - what began as a sort of
computer "party-line" between college hockey fan(atic)s has now grown to
encompass coaches, Athletic Directors, SIDs, etc. such that the potential for
(inadvertent) consequences and repercussions has increased many-fold. I think
the degree to which I now must consciously self-censor my posts saddens me
the most.  I don't think it's so outrageous to contemplate a scenario whereby
some HOCKEY-L poster could be subpoenaed or threatened with legal action for
libelous comments.  That's a chilling thought.  Furthermore, I don't think I'm
alone in my concerns.  Paraphrasing (or relaying verbatim in the case of
brief) newspaper articles is one thing, but what of rumors overheard in the
stands or locker room ??  I've been guilty of occasional rumor-mongering my-
self here on the List, but have come to realize how dangerous - and unfair to
those on the opposite end of my electronic innuendo - it is.  Professional
print reporters have a highly-paid legal staff on retainer to arbitrate the
appropriateness of what gets printed - what do I have sitting here at my
terminal in Solomons ??  Ultimately, such decisions must be made by each of
us individually, each in our own way, and every situation is different.  How
simple it would be in a black and white world, but here I sit contemplating
shades of gray ....
				Resignedly from	the Chesapeake - Jim
 
  Jim Love <[log in to unmask]> Univ. of Maryland System / Solomons, Md (USA)
 
P.S.  Read More About It:
      Nelson, Mariah Burton, 1991.  "Are We Winning Yet ?"  [authored by a
        former Stanford Univ. basketball star; selected Sports Book of the
        Year by the Amateur Athletic Foundation]