![]() |
Title IX and gendered prerequisites
I know *most* of the people on here aren't lawyers, but this is also wondering if anyone has heard of...
Would Title IX allow for a collegiate non-social GLO where the prerequisites would be impossible for one gender to achieve? For example: In order to pledge BCD you have to have been an Eagle Scout? In order to pledge EFG you have to have been a Girl Scout? In order to pledge HIK you have to have been a Deacon in the LDS church (which more or less means you were a male member of the LDS church between turning 12 and turning 14) Ideas? |
I'm not very familiar with Title IX but I believe non-social GLOs are co-ed by choice although I might be misunderstanding. I know Alpha Phi Omega voluntarily became co-ed.
|
Quote:
Some non-social GLOs did indeed choose to go co-ed before they had to, or complied willingly with Title IX. Others did so reluctantly because they were required by law to go co-ed or risk losing school recognition. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
But for at least one of those groups, "non-social GLO" that "chose to loosen [its] membership requirements" and was "allowed to maintain [its] academic focus" isn't quite accurate. We didn't change our membership requirements and we didn't have any "academic focus" as such, as we were never limited to music majors or minors. |
Quote:
I knew Phi Mu Alpha went through an uncertain period circa Title IX and decided to challenge it after we [SAI] were successful. All the other details - I wasn't totally sure of. I feel like we've had this conversation before here on GC. :) |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:45 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.