Ah, another left-wing cliché, that conservatives have something in common with fascists. Conservatives don't like either leftists or fascists since both are totalitarian and deny people freedom in order to impose an ideological agenda.
On the other hand, I don't just talk about equal opportunities in sports for both genders, I coached females on a volunteer basis at least as early as 1969, when T&FN didn't act like there was such a thing as women's or girl's track. We are in sad shape here in the USA when a person is branded a bigot like Thurmond was back in '48 when he was a Democrat just for advocating equal treatment for all. ghill wrote: > Excuse me? Did I say anything about "correction"? Or suggest "payback" of > any kind? I said the current system sucked (and needs fixing). I said the > past system sucked (and needed fixing). > > I then said that of the two sucky systems, I preferred the current one. > > gh > > ps--but for sake of argument, if I HAD been saying "current discrimination > correct past discrimination" how the heck would that be "leftist" logic? I > could swear Ed Grant called anybody who was pro Title IX was a fascist. You > boys better decide which side of which war you're fighting on. > > Wait, I get it! Wayne's saying track would be better off if Strom Thurmond > had won in'48! :-) > > > From: "Wayne T. Armbrust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Organization: Computomarx™ > > Reply-To: "Wayne T. Armbrust" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2003 17:32:39 -0600 > > To: track list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Re: t-and-f: St. John's > > > > No, I'm sorry. I can't go along with this typical leftist logic (an oxymoron > > if > > there ever was one). There is no way that discrimination against a group of > > people who never discriminated against anyone can correct past discrimination > > against another group. > > > > ghill wrote: > > > >> Nasty-nasty situation. While there's no doubt the current climate is an > >> abomination and is punishing innocents, I'd take this setup anyday over the > >> way it was pre-Title IX when women were pointedly excluded from collegiate > >> athletic endeavours altogether. > >> > >> The problems faced by today's men are a mere piffle compared to what women > >> had to endure then. > >> > >> gh > >> > >>> From: "Ed Grant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Reply-To: "Ed Grant" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:30:52 -0800 > >>> To: "track net" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Subject: t-and-f: St. John's > >>> > >>> Netters: > >>> > >>> Having been occupied the past week or so with a rare visit from the > >>> Irish side of our widespread family, I have not had the time to comment on > >>> the deplorable decision of St. John's to drop its men's track and field > >>> program. I am sure that what follows will more than make up for the delay > >>> (as well as probably infuriate some memners of our list) > >>> > >>> > >>> Let's state it as plainly as possible. St. John's has been forced > >>> into this decision by a fascistic organization which claims as its purpose > >>> the elevation of women in athletics. The Women Sports Foundation and its > >>> leaders would have been right at home in Nazi Germany or communist Russia. > >>> It operates from the same principles as those totalitarian governments did; > >>> among other thibngs it is a master of the big lie. > >>> > >>> I have watched some of its leaders defend their policies on various > >>> TV programs recently and have winced at their distortion of what is > >>> happening in college athletics today. I have also winced at the cowardice of > >>> the hosts of these programs in failing to properly challenged these > >>> distortions. > >>> > >>> For example, let us look at the mathematical monstrosity which has > >>> compelled St. John's to drop men;s track and out in its place men's > >>> lacrosse. As Jim Hurt points out in Walt Murphy's latest newsletter, the two > >>> sports could have roughly the same number of participants, which he puts at > >>> 35. But the track number is more than doubled by the fiction of counting the > >>> 35 twice, once for indoors and once for outdoors, then, for good measure, > >>> adding another dozen for cross-country. The fact that no more than 35 > >>> individuals are involved is simply ignored. > >>> > >>> This in the face of the fact that the great god NCAA limited its > >>> athletes to a certain number of meets (I believe, but am not sure, it is > >>> 18), counting indoors and outdoors together. In other words, it's two > >>> seasons when you want it to be and one when you don't. But this kind of > >>> thing happens all the time. > >>> > >>> The idea of breaking what was once a one-season sport (with one head > >>> coach handling all three) is a relatively recent thing. It happened in NJ > >>> around 1960 and was a direct result of the raging jealousy which coaches in > >>> other sports had because track and field was the only nine-month sport. > >>> (Football coaches, in particular in our state, were livid because they were > >>> denied te privilege of spring practice) Track coaches like Marshall Brown at > >>> Plainfield and Ed Mather at Bernards, who raised their programs to the > >>> status of a major sport, paid the penalty of scorn from colleagues in other > >>> sports. > >>> > >>> It is particularly ironic that St. Johbn's should be the latest > >>> victim of this mathematical distortion, for it was a student at that > >>> school--in fact, the athlete who Hurt singles out, properly, as the greatest > >>> in the school's long history of the sport, who provided one of the highest > >>> moments our sport has known when, after much soul-searching, he thumbled his > >>> nose at the autocratic (and that's a mild word) NCAA to compete in the 1965 > >>> AAU championshiops. I refer, of course, to Tom Farrell. > >>> > >>> (Incidentally, the cutoff of the program will also cut short the > >>> five years Tom had intended to serce as an unpaid volunteer coach at his > >>> alma mater to pay it back for all it had done for him.) > >>> > >>> My hope is that some of the graduates of St. John's Law School, a > >>> number of whom are former members of the track team, will get together to > >>> challenge the way Title IX is being interpreted and put it where it belongs, > >>> on the ash heap of history. (Too bad the leaders of the WSF can't be put > >>> there with it.) > >>> > >>> Don't bother trying to change my mind on this. I have been covering > >>> sports longer than most of you have been alive and have seen this whole > >>> matter develop from the days when these women's ideological ancestors were > >>> leading the drive against participation by girls in interscholastic > >>> athletics (during six years of which I was coaching girls who had nowhere to > >>> go after they graduated from grammar school.) > >>> > >>> Ed Grant . > >>> > > > > -- > > Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Computomarx™ > > 3604 Grant Ct. > > Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA > > (573) 445-6675 (voice & FAX) > > http://www.Computomarx.com > > "Know the difference between right and wrong... > > Always give your best effort... > > Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..." > > - Coach Bill Sudeck (1926-2000) > > > > -- Wayne T. Armbrust, Ph.D. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computomarx™ 3604 Grant Ct. Columbia MO 65203-5800 USA (573) 445-6675 (voice & FAX) http://www.Computomarx.com "Know the difference between right and wrong... Always give your best effort... Treat others the way you'd like to be treated..." - Coach Bill Sudeck (1926-2000)
