Sexism without Sexists: Public Opinion Toward Title IX and Integrated Athletics

• In Event: Sexism, Sexual Harassment and their Impacts on Politics and Women's Lives

Abstract

Few public policies enjoy the sort of sustained and extraordinary support as does Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. On the occasion of its 45th anniversary, 6 in 10 Americans expressed support for the law in a nationally representative survey; only 9% explicitly disapproved (Women’s Sports Foundation 2017). Implementation of policy has notably altered both educational and athletic opportunities for girls and women. Sporting prospects afforded to college women under the policy have grown twelve-fold since 1972, and the doors of higher education have opened to women at all levels (NCAA 2017; Rose 2018) leading to, what President Obama (2014) called “one of the greatest transformations” in American society. Such policy-driven transformations, general opinion polls suggest, have been overwhelmingly well-received.

Scholars of policy feedback have long argued that public policies “convey messages,” often through policy design, about their target populations (Mettler and Soss 2004; Schneider and Ingram 1993). Likewise, feminist scholars note that social institutions – like medical science -- play a central role in shaping our understandings about the meanings of gender and sex difference (e.g., Butler 1993; Fausto-Sterling 2000; Jordan-Young 2010; Jordan-Young and Karkazis 2019). The presumption embedded in narratives around Title IX is that the messages promoted by policy, as an institution, have been those of women’s empowerment and gender equality. But are these the sole messages endorsed and promulgated by policy design?

This paper explores public opinion about Title IX, gendered equality, and sex segregated sports – the element of Title IX’s policy design which has recently come under increased critique from social scientists (e.g., McDonagh and Pappano 2007; Sharrow 2017, 2019). The upsurge in athletic participation for women and girls has occurred almost entirely on segregated teams where equality is achieved through a practice of “separate but equal.” In contrast, integrated classrooms guide implementation on campus. The simultaneous segregation/integration of men and women, dependent on context, under the aegis of Title IX suggests a deep tension embedded in the meanings of sex non-discrimination at work in policy.

How has the reliance on contradictory interpretations (segregation versus integration) of non-discriminatory practice impacted public opinion toward equality issues? To what extent has Title IX’s implementation “transformed” ideologies about intellectual versus physical hierarchies between women and men? What does public opinion demonstrate about the relationship between policy and gendered ideologies in American society?

Historically, other de jure segregated systems on the basis of race were demonstrated to uphold systems of racial domination and racist hierarchies. Separate, in almost every legal context, is considered to be unequal. Yet political scientists have been slow to consider the role of treasured, liberal feminist public policy (i.e., Title IX) in potentially reifying, rather than challenging, the subtly internalized sexist hierarchies embedded Title IX’s segregation imperative. What are the contours and limits of opinion toward sex equity nearly 50 years after Title IX was passed? What vestiges of sexist ideology remain untouched by the Title IX “revolution”?

To explore this, I conduct a survey through YouGov of a representative sample of Americans (N=1000). In it, I explore 1) opinion toward coeducation and segregated athletics, 2) attitudes toward women’s intellectual versus physical ability, 3) conditions of support for (and resistance to) sex integrated athletics, and 4) evaluations of Title IX itself. I also measure demographic characteristics and previous experiences in competitive athletics, including on integrated teams (i.e., policy beneficiary status). I hypothesize that 1) support for co-education is higher than support for sex integrated athletics; 2) Americans are more apt to believe in men’s and women’s intellectual equality than in their physical equality; and 3) support for Title IX is – in contrast to our public dialogue about policy -- conditioned on belief in ideas about women’s physical weakness compared to men.

These analyses illustrate that vestiges of sexist ideologies that assume men’s physical superiority remain largely intact despite the policy celebrated as the silver bullet for addressing gendered hierarchies. Supporters of Title IX believe in physical inequality even as they herald equality policy. Sexist attitudes persist, even among those who believe that policy has been empowering. This tension within the politics of Title IX illustrates the need for critical perspectives on the successes and limitations of current policy design. This paper suggests that “separate” athletic spaces may undermine rather than engender progressive gender equality attitudes, even among Title IX’s most ardent supporters.

Author

• Elizabeth A. Sharrow, University of Massachusetts Amherst