Manufacturing Equality: Title IX, Proportionality, and Natural Demand

Abstract

This paper poses the following question in the context of civil rights in education — is proportionality synonymous with parity? Since 1974 the Office of Civil Rights (OCR) has determined that in order for an educational institution to be in compliance with Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972, educational opportunities must be proportional to male/female demographics. In this paper, my empirical research shows that in fact interests are not proportional among men and women in many areas of education. In some areas, male interests are stronger than female interests, and in other areas the reverse is true. In support of my argument, I present a collection of studies that measure male and female demand in areas of sports and STEM, as well as demand for protection against sexual harassment. These studies cast light on the reality behind civil rights for both men and women in education, a reality that, I argue, civil rights theoreticians and advocates don’t want to see or cannot see. In September of 2015 President Obama issued an Executive Order to encourage the use of behavior science in lawmaking. The question remains as to why OCR continues to operate under the assumption that the interests of males and females are equal in all areas of education.