Female Athletics at UK
Throughout much of the 19th and early 20th century, scientists and doctors considered physical exertion and sport harmful to women's reproductive system. Still, believing athletics and sport were beneficial to their female students, many educators -particularly female educators - argued that, so long as the women were properly supervised, athletics would not be harmful.
Basketball was one of the earliest and most competitive sports offered at UK at the start of the early 20th century, particularly for women. Basketball was considered a sport women could and should enjoy because of its emphasis on teamwork and its limited court size. Very quickly after the invention of the sport in 1891, hundreds of cities, schools, and youth groups created teams, including the University of Kentucky, which created their first women's basketball team in 1903.
Despite the fact that physical educators agreed that exercise and sport was beneficial to both genders, the University of Kentucky severely restricted women's access to sport in comparison to men students. By 1924, the UK women's basketball team was dismantled and women were prevented from participating in varsity sports except for rare exceptions. For the most part, University-sponsored sport was an arena reserved for men at UK during the first half of the 20th century. Similar restrictions were instituted across the United States at all levels of education.
By the the 1960s - an era filled with movements for greater equality across race and gender - many looked around and wondered why universities generated so much opportunity and availability of sport to male students but not to female students despite the same tuition costs.
A change would come with the passing of the Title IX of the 1972 Education Amendment. With much fanfare (and some protest) the United States Federal government demanded equality for all students attending college, which would have an incredible effect on the college experience. Title IX stated 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."
The law does not require that money be taken from men's athletics and given to women, nor does it require absolutely equal funding be divided between the genders. Instead, the law requires that colleges and universities receiving Federal support may no longer use gender as a justification for denying female students the opportunity to participate in any educational program - including athletics.
Title IX of the Education Amendments was a logical product of the United State's march toward true equality during the tumultuous decade of the 1960s, building particularly on the freedoms guaranteed to Americans in the Civil Rights Act of 1964: the freedom to not be discriminated against on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin.
Unfortunately, not all Americans understood this new law to be a natural product of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Instead, many in the media and public saw the bill as a threat to men in college athletics or even as a threat to all intercollegiate athletic programs in general.
Luckily for UK - and for hundreds of other colleges and universities across the nation - there were many strong female and male leaders who believed that both men and women could and should have equal opportunity to participate in sport with enough patience and determination.
There were, of course, a few hiccups in the process of obtaining that equal opportunity now required by law.
Federal law can only take a society so far. Female UK athletes still struggled to find a balance between claiming equality with men and retaining their femininity. In a 1970s press release on the UK women's basketball team, the Lady Kats, female athletic director Sue Feamster explained of the players: "Our girls play hard and they play to win. But the minute the game is over they think about their comb and lipstick."
Clearly women struggled with how to balance their athletic talent and remain feminine and "normal" women in the public's eye.
Not only did women athletes struggle to find a compromise between equality and femininity, the general public did as well. In 1982 a local Kentuckian and UK basketball fan Dan Ashley wrote an editorial to the "Lexington Herald" criticizing the news outlet for not covering UK's strong women's basketball team. Ashley wrote,“Come on, now. The only thing holding women’s basketball back is chauvinistic attitudes from the media, such as yourself. Let the people know what’s going on in the other world of basketball. Until you do, you’re cheating your readers out of a fascinating and most often more exciting brand of sport.”
Ashley, and many others, understood that bias still existed when the media only gave attention to male athletes. By ignoring female athletes, the "Herald" helped to perpetuate the idea that men were more worthy of attention than women athletes, an issue that is, of course, false and yet continues today.
Clearly, more than just law would have to change for women to have an equal footing with men in the arena of college sport.
Unfortunately, even when women's sports were covered in the news, journalists and editors often chose to focus on female athletes' looks or marriage potential alongside their skill.
For example, in February 1982, the "Lexington Herald" published an article titled, "Wise Getting Second Looks on Court Now," where the author wrote:
"The hairdo is part Farrah Fawcett, the jumper part Paul Westphal; the smile, however, is all charm. Heavens, is there anyone out there who would not accuse Kentucky Lady Kat junior guard Lea Wise of being a female? Here is someone not only attractive, but also of considerable basketball skill. And the situation has caused the focus to be not on Wise’s skills, but on her looks, at least until now. Maybe, finally, the stigma – pretty girls can’t play – is being lifted. Just yesterday, the same Lea Wise of golden hair and golden jumpers was named to the All-Southeastern Conference team."
A university athlete competing on a national level - most notable for her good looks.
In 1983, as basketball superstars Lea Wise and Valerie Still were getting ready to graduate, the "Kentucky Kernel" noted about their early years at UK that "when the new crop of freshmen arrived, Kentucky Lady Kat basketball seemed so small, a miniscule part of campus life, of community life. It was there, forced by Title IX, but few noticed. Just girls attempting basketball.”
This attitude toward women "attempting" college sport was not uncommon and was likely a part of the reason that the UK women's swim coach filed a complaint of sexual discrimination in 1980, causing the University of Kentucky to be found out of compliance with Title IX and put under Federal investigation by the Office of Civil Rights.
In 1980 the "Kentucky Kernel" explained, "According to Title IX, in athletics, women are supposed to have the same advantages as men. However, because of a legal loophole in the amendment, as long as swimming remains a club rather than a varsity sport, UK is abiding with Title IX...The budget is $350 for the [women's club] team…. It would cost $50 to open the doors because there had to be a janitor to watch the basketball trophies. At Miami University of Ohio, a team which faced UK recently, the budget is around $75,000. The Kentucky men’s team receives nine and one-half scholarships and a paid coach. The women have two volunteer coaches, limited practice time, and no scholarships available.” Opportunities for funding for female athletes, despite Title IX, were skewed.
From 1970 to 1983 the UK women’s swim team competed as a club sport. Originally included as one of six sports chosen for varsity status in 1974, after the passage of the Education Amendment, the team was nudged out by field hockey because UK’s then 20-year-old pool was declared inadequate and too overcrowded to accommodate the addition of another varsity team.
Jill Vaughan, a member of the swim team said, “'I don’t think they’re (the Athletic Association) giving us a fair chance,' Vaughan said. 'It really makes me mad.'”
“'We are not pushing for equality as much as we are asking for a start,' women's volunteer swim coach Ray Mernaugh said. 'We are not asking for the moon like some people in the athletic department want us to.' He said he could ask that the funds be distributed equally among the men’s and women’s teams. 'We could argue that,' Mernaugh said, 'but the women didn’t want to hurt the men’s program."
In 1983, as a result of its investigation, the Federal Office of Civil Rights rulied that UK needed to to expand women's athletics to ensure that both men and women had an equal opportunity to participate in athletics.
Women’s participation in sport signaled the end of one of the last artificial – yet very real – walls that society supported to keep women on a level less than equal with men.
The University of Kentucky continued to struggle with equal funding for male and female student athletes. In 1998, a study by the "Cincinnati Enquirer" found that UK was one of the worst universities in the nation in spending for women's athletics. The University spent only 18% of its athletic funding on women's sport teams while maintaining a 50% ratio of male to female students across the student body as a whole.
