Sutasaurus Posted April 24, 2015 Share Posted April 24, 2015 Sorry, but I gotta hijack this thread for a moment to say congrats to this year's HOFrs. All deserving in their own unique ways. A special tip of the helmet to Bill Harty. It was an honor to share the competition field with the Guardsmen....a top notch organization run by people who really cared about it's marching members and the drum corps activity as a whole. Bravo! And now back to your regularly scheduled.......... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xandandl Posted April 25, 2015 Author Share Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) Title 9 is the standard in college sports and other programs where if a dollar is spent for the guys per person, the same amount has to be spent for the gals. It is a well known standard for college students today, the same age demographic which gives us todays MMs. (I am paraphrasing here, not speaking legalese so no attacks because I am not a civil lawyer.) As NCAA has its national office in Indy and Indy has been at the forefront of the debate about inclusion, recognition, and discrimination, it would seem common sense that DCI with its HQ also in Indy would be super alert to use the Title 9 principal in all its activities including HoF and Jim Jones. Unfortunately, common sense isn't always so common. Edited April 25, 2015 by xandandl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HockeyDad Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 Title 9 is the standard in college sports and other programs where if a dollar is spent for the guys per person, the same amount has to be spent for the gals. It is a well known standard for college students today, the same age demographic which gives us todays MMs. (I am paraphrasing here, not speaking legalese so no attacks because I am not a civil lawyer.) As NCAA has its national office in Indy and Indy has been at the forefront of the debate about inclusion, recognition, and discrimination, it would seem common sense that DCI with its HQ also in Indy would be super alert to use the Title 9 principal in all its activities including HoF and Jim Jones. Unfortunately, common sense isn't always so common. Really? If Cadets have 80 male members and 70 females, should they be forced to cut 5 of the males and replace them with 5 females? Is this what you want? Because this would be your Title 9 solution. Also, it's quite a stretch to tie Title 9 to a hall of fame selection. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HornTeacher Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 (edited) Difficult situation. A matter of dollars and cents is simply a matter of equal financial support. When applied to actual human beings in a selection process, then it becomes (or can be interpreted as being) a "quota" issue. And I fear that once we go down the "quota" path, then we're opening up for every group that feels they're being shortchanged. In terms of the HOF, it might be reasoned that every subgroup (Corps originators, Directors, Instructors, Adjudicators, and those who perform meritorious service outside those other areas) should be equally represented. As I said...tough situation. EDIT: Please let me add that, if this is already the practice of the HOF selection committee, then the above is moot. Sorry if I am in error. Edited April 26, 2015 by HornTeacher Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xandandl Posted April 26, 2015 Author Share Posted April 26, 2015 Really? If Cadets have 80 male members and 70 females, should they be forced to cut 5 of the males and replace them with 5 females? Is this what you want? Because this would be your Title 9 solution. Also, it's quite a stretch to tie Title 9 to a hall of fame selection. I am deliberately overstating an image to pull the pendulum from its static position; your pull the other direction counter-balances. Hopefully, where it stops at its new position will be a better place than what we now have. 1 female named every 7 years for a total of 6 in 42 years is really a max injustice I think even a Flatlander like yourself would agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xandandl Posted April 26, 2015 Author Share Posted April 26, 2015 Really? If Cadets have 80 male members and 70 females, should they be forced to cut 5 of the males and replace them with 5 females? Is this what you want? Because this would be your Title 9 solution. Also, it's quite a stretch to tie Title 9 to a hall of fame selection. Hmm. 80+70=150. 80-5=75. 75+70=145= needs 5 females. Ahhh.... You're doing that Power of 10 thing, ha, ha.!! How appropriate for 2015, O HockeyDad. [Go Islanders!!!] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.