Debates surrounding Title IX, namely the Biden administration’s push to include gender identity, are overshadowing a debate that we should be having about sexual assault and misconduct faced by female athletes. As we continue to uncover new cases of misconduct, it’s clear that Title IX does not effectively address these problems and requires strengthening to fulfill its purpose.
Enacted in 1972, Title IX has fundamentally changed the environment of higher education and college athletics in the United States, ensuring equal opportunities for women in both fields. The law 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.” While initially focused on educational access, Title IX is now closely tied to athletics and combating sexual misconduct.
According to Teresa Manning, Policy Director at the National Association of Scholars, when Anita Hill accused Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas of sexually harassing her during their time at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the term “sexual harassment” entered the national spotlight and became a “household word.”
Households will likely know of other high-profile sexual harassment scandals, including the case of Larry Nassar, a former doctor at Michigan State University and a physician for USA Gymnastics, who was convicted of sexually abusing hundreds of female athletes over a span of two decades. His abuse was allowed to continue for years, raising significant concerns about the adequacy of reporting and protection mechanisms within athletic departments. Another significant case involved Scott Shaw, the former sports medicine director at San Jose State University, who was sentenced for sexual abuse. Shaw, much like Nassar, took advantage of his position of authority to exploit female athletes.
While Title IX requires that institutions receiving federal funding operate without discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual harassment and assault continue to be a persistent issue in collegiate sports. In cases like Nassar and Shaw, critics may argue that justice was ultimately served because both men went to jail. However, this perspective misses the critical time problem—the systemic delays and disbelief in the women accusing them that allowed the abuse to continue unchecked for years, and current policies seemed only to enable that.
In Nassar’s case, numerous athletes reported his behavior long before legal action was taken, but their voices were dismissed or ignored, allowing the abuse to persist and harm more victims. The issue wasn’t simply that Title IX eventually worked; rather, it failed these women over time because their reports were not taken seriously when they first came forward. This reflects a broader issue within athletic departments and universities: women were not believed, and the institutional culture often prioritized protecting reputations over protecting victims.
A recent USA Today investigation shows that many institutions fail to take meaningful action to vet coaches and staff who have faced misconduct allegations. The NCAA’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach to hiring often leaves female athletes vulnerable to predators, as many athletic programs are reluctant to engage in thorough background checks or adequately address past allegations.
This culture of silence perpetuates abuse that leaves many female athletes without proper recourse. Institutions must do more than the bare minimum required by Title IX to ensure that student-athletes are protected. When athletes come forward with allegations of harassment or abuse, their reports should be taken seriously, and actions should be swift. The reporting process is a critical element of Title IX, but the current framework often leaves survivors doubting whether their complaints will be believed or acted upon.
To enhance Title IX’s effectiveness in addressing sexual misconduct in college sports, institutions and policymakers should consider the following reforms:
One of the major flaws in the current system is the lack of enforcement. Schools that fail to comply with Title IX standards must face consequences. Financial penalties could be imposed on institutions that neglect to investigate reports of sexual misconduct or fail to implement effective reporting mechanisms.
A key preventative measure is education. Currently, universities are being required to implement annual educational programs that train coaches, staff, and athletes on how to recognize, prevent, and report sexual misconduct, but this effort is not enough. Universities need to implement programs and training sessions every other month that should cover issues such as understanding power dynamics, recognizing signs of abuse, and fostering a culture of accountability. These regularly enforced training sessions would empower athletes and staff to be more vigilant and proactive in identifying potential risks and speaking up against abuse.
The current “don’t ask, don’t tell” approach to hiring coaches and staff with prior misconduct allegations must end. A national database tracking Title IX violations and misconduct allegations should be created to prevent serial abusers from moving between schools unchecked.
Many survivors of sexual misconduct do not report incidents because they fear they won’t be taken seriously or believe that no action will be taken. Schools must create transparent and easily accessible reporting systems that prioritize survivors’ safety and confidentiality. Additionally, institutions should commit to swift and transparent investigations, clearly communicating outcomes to those involved. Ensuring that athletes feel supported and believed when they come forward is essential for Title IX to fulfill its mission.
As Manning highlights, the expansion of Title IX has shifted focus away from its original mission, ensuring fair treatment for women in education and athletics, by broadening its scope into areas far beyond its intent. Teresa points out several key examples: the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare’s interpretation led to equal spending on women’s sports, sometimes at the expense of men’s teams; the definition of “hostile environment” expanded from quid pro quo harassment to subjective claims of unwelcome conduct under the Clinton and Obama administrations; the 2011 “Dear Colleague” letter redefined sexual harassment, lowering due process protections. Furthermore, bureaucratic expansion has entrenched ideological agendas, creating large Title IX compliance offices that push institutional changes. This broad and vague interpretation puts more women at risk.
The law’s vagueness creates significant challenges in interpretation and enforcement, often prompting universities to overcompensate to avoid penalties. This overreaction can lead to the expansion of large bureaucracies or even the infringement of due process rights. Additionally, the “hostile environment” standard allows for subjective claims which lack clear boundaries. Given these expansions and ambiguous definitions, there’s a strong case for refining Title IX to ensure it’s applied consistently and fairly, without overreach.
Ultimately, institutions must take all Title IX policies seriously, especially in light of the new cases of sexual assault being uncovered. This includes conducting thorough investigations, ensuring proper reporting mechanisms, and, most importantly, believing and supporting student-athletes who come forward. Only then can Title IX fulfill its promise of creating an environment where women can participate fully and safely.
Image by lexiconimages — Adobe Stock — Asset ID#: 309052877
