International Olympic Committee has made a decision to remove wrestling from the list of sports for the Olympic Games 2020. The decision allowed the IOC to evaluate other sports for inclusion in the Olympic rotation. Jordan Burroughs, a 74kg gold medalist at the 2012 Olympics, has posted on his Twitter that the fight to defend wrestling had just started. In making such a decision, various factors such as finances, governance, and popularity were analyzed. Wrestling is one of the most historical Olympic sports dating back to the 1896 Olympics. The Olympics refer much to tradition and history as progress, so it will be unfair and irrational to eliminate one of the oldest and most popular sports. Elimination of Men’s Olympic Sports like wrestling, swimming, and volleyball will not only disappoint sportsmen and sports fans, but it at the same contradicts the requirements and qualifications of the Title IX law requirements.
Title IX prohibits gender discrimination in government-sponsored education programs. This law applies to athletics as it is considered an important part of an educational institution’s educational program. The Department of Education Civil Rights Authority is responsible for ensuring that sports programs are conducted without gender discrimination. The Title IX Enforcement Regulations contain certain provisions relating to sporting opportunities. It also gives individual institutions a lot of leeway when it comes to legal compliance. The Guideline Interpretation was created to provide the university with more specific information on how to fulfill the athletic obligations of the law stipulated in the Title IX Regulations. The policy interpretation, which outlines the standards of the rules, clarifies the university’s responsibilities in three areas: student interests and skills, motor benefits and opportunities, and financial support. Although the policy interpretation is written with college sports in mind, the general ideas and compliance standards could be applied to the case of the Olympic Games Sports.
Students’ interests and abilities in sports must be considered equally effective. Compliance with these elements is determined by considering the following: Determining students’ interest in and talent for school sports, Selection of sports offered, and the level of competition, including the team’s competitive opportunities. Thus, when eliminating such sports as volleyball, swimming, and wrestling, the interests of the sports teams, sportsmen, and sports trainers should be taken into consideration. In addition, when measuring those interests, the policy should not be discriminatory. It means that according to Title IX, when determining the list of sports, the selection process should not discriminate against genders. I think that eliminating male sports will be discriminatory towards men and thus contradict the law.
When choosing sports, institutions should take into account the interests and talents of men and women in sports equally. If the choice is based on competitive talent, or if the activity involves contact sports, the university or institution may sponsor different teams for men and women. In boxing, wrestling, rugby, ice hockey, soccer, basketball, and other sports, Title IX provisions apply if the goal or main action involves physical contact. In certain situations, a university that sponsors a team of one gender should also sponsor a team of the opposite sex. This applies to both contact and non-contact sports. Another team may be needed if there is sufficient desire and skill to maintain a team among members of the excluded gender and there is considerable competition for that team. If an institution sponsors a non-contact sports team for members of one gender, athletes of the opposite sex may also challenge the team if sports opportunities for members of the opposite sex have been limited in the past. Title IX rules also allow OCR to consider additional considerations when determining if there is equal opportunity. As a result, student-athlete recruitment and support services have been incorporated into the guidelines as these issues can affect the general provision of equal opportunity for male and female athletes. In connection with these factors, the interpretation of the policy states that the system must provide equality, services, and benefits.
When a university offers sports scholarships, it is necessary to provide members of each gender with a reasonable opportunity to receive such rewards in proportion to their participation in athletics between universities. Differences in grant allocation can be justified by rational, non-discriminatory considerations. For example, increased research funding for foreign residents can lead to unequal distribution of scholarships among male and female programs at some universities. These differences are not discriminatory unless they are due to a lack of scholarships for men or women from abroad. Professional decisions made by the university and university staff regarding program development can also explain the difference. At this point, it is important to the notion that one of the reasons for eliminating wrestling was financial analysis. However, sports should be provided with equal financial opportunities according to Title IX.
Prior to Title IX, most schools and universities traditionally prioritized the sport of male students, limiting the privileges and educational opportunities of female students in sports programs. Title IX focused on meeting the needs of female athletes and helped educators recognize their responsibility to provide equal sporting opportunities. As a result, more girls and women are participating in sports at all levels. Today there is a threat to male sports since eliminating men’s wrestling, volleyball, and swimming from the list of Olympic Sports could be considered discriminatory toward men. I think that referring to such an important document as Title IX is essential in the discussed case since the Title mentions many laws that could not be followed if the particular Olympic Sports were eliminated.