I'm going to have to disagree w/ you. An unplanned pregnancy mandates a much greater responsibility from the mother as opposed to the father. There are many "deadbeat dads" that take no responsibility whatsoever and have no contact w/ their children or pay any sort of child support.

So, you're saying that because a woman is the only one that can become pregnant, she is the only one that has to be concerned w/ birth control (which is NEVER 100%) or to abstain altogether from sex while her male counterpart can continue to fornicate w/ anyone who is willing and able?(especially true in the context of the male athletes)

I'm not sure if you've read the civil rights but there cannot be discrimination based on "pregnancy" in regards to scholarships, participation in a program, or any other means that a university could require.

Would you think the same thing if a man wanted to ACTUALLY take responsibility and attempt to invoke the "pregnancy waiver" (as Butler did but was denied) to get an extra yr of eligibility care for his child? Your viewpoint sounds like you're behind the effort to keep the stereotype alive that "babies are a woman's responsibility", I honestly hope that there are not more many like you. Apparently you'd rather punish the female for her sexual acts and applaud the male for his sexual deviancy?

Unfortunately for you the NCAA has now granted a waiver for pregnant student athletes. They get an additional waiver for one year.

I understand that men think of having a child like a contract (?don't really know, don't have any kids, but males seem to give that "vibe"?) I don't think women should be treated like garbage and thrown out (even though they did have a "mishap" that they possibly could have prevented) because they became pregnant so now all their hopes of attaining an education or a life in the future are gone.

(**p.s. i am not a liberal, just very adament about women's rights in "sports"**)

interesting comments- While it is true, a man does not become "pregnant," he participates in the process. What are the consequences for a male athlete who co-creates a pregnancy? This appears to be neglected in this policy dispute. One may argue, "the man is not affected-physically. Hopefully, he is affected, and if he is not, so much the worse the man.

Personally, I do not agree that a woman ought to have her scholarship revoked. That is my opinion. An opinion based on my experience which I do not have to validate or justify any more than you do yours.

So many people have unexamined views of sex and the emotions that come along with it- a shortcoming of society. The feelings are powerful and are often manipulated at the interpersonal level as well as in advertising.

Policy disputes as a result of this "unconsciousness" frequently are outcome oriented (which is good) and they frequently ignore the individual interactions which lead to the results and tend to judge them as "good" or "bad." This may expedite our exchange of views; however, I suggest that a dialog that ignores how our personal interactions develop is largely superficial and political at best.

An examination of our interactions about sex and emotions in general tends to slow things down when what is often desired is an immediate gratification (much like sex itself). Such a discussion is not based so much on "here is what I think and this is why I am right" ( a predictable stance adopted by politicians and media ) that a discussion of what we can do to expand our awareness of how a differing point of view may be equally valid is often ignored.

However, should a discussion of this nature decide to germinate here, I am willing to participate.

What if a female athlete couldn't play because she was having bad menstrual cramps? Should she be required to forfeit a portion of her sholarship? After all she COULD have avoided the menstrual cramps by getting a hysterectomy.

At first I was planning to delete this comment because it's so incredibly stupid. Instead, I've decided to let it stand. After all, the only person or argument I feel it damages is Sean himself.

Expecting college students not to have sex is not realistic.

Some people would say getting a free $200k education in exchange for playing a game is unrealistic, too, but it happens.

The simple fact remains that sex can lead to pregnancy, and I'm not expecting them not to have sex. I'm expecting them, should a pregnancy arise, to not whine and complain and claim that Title 9 lets them keep their athletic scholarship. Shit happens and you pay the consequence for your choices and bad luck. If they're unable to perform athletically, they should lose the scholarship (unless the school wants to let them keep it). That's life.

Tim Buchheim said on May 14, 2007:

If they fail to do so, but still have this pregnancy rule, then they will be encouraging abortion.

No more so than I could argue they're encouraging abstinence. If I offered you $200k and two million or so extra dollars in lifetime earnings in exchange for four years of penetration abstinence, could you do it? I think it's a pretty fair offer. If they want to try to cheat the odds by having sex with protection (or even unprotected sex), they have to know the odds aren't 100% and they run the risk of getting "caught."

Tim Buchheim said on May 14, 2007:

What if the student in question is married? Are you going to ask her to avoid sex for the good of the athletic team in that case? I don't think her husband is going to go for that.

And how many married 19-year-olds on athletic scholarship do you know, Tim? Be reasonable here - the number of times that situation arises can be counted - per decade, probably - on your available digits.

And if I were married to one of those four athletes per decade getting a free education and all that, you're darn right "actual" sex could wait - there are other forms of pleasure, after all.

Tim Buchheim said on May 14, 2007:

In any case, I think athletic scholarships are silly. Learning should be the primary focus of students. Tying their scholarships to athletics encourages students to do otherwise.

That's a topic for another day, yes&helllip;

Current voting, by the way, is 28-12.

Expecting college students not to have sex is not realistic. No matter what you do, you're not going to be able to stop the vast majority of students (whether athletes or not) from having sex. The school should make condoms easily available (most do) and perhaps offer free or low cost hormonal contraception or IUDs to their female students as well, if they're worried about students becoming pregnant. If they fail to do so, but still have this pregnancy rule, then they will be encouraging abortion. Prevention is preferable to abortion, for many reasons which we don't have to rehash here.

What if the student in question is married? Are you going to ask her to avoid sex for the good of the athletic team in that case? I don't think her husband is going to go for that..

In any case, I think athletic scholarships are silly. Learning should be the primary focus of students. Tying their scholarships to athletics encourages students to do otherwise.

They also made the choice to work hard and sacrifice in order to excel at their sport so that they could receive a scholarship and get a good education to give them a head start in life.

And by choosing to get pregnant, Lilith, they've chosen to flip the bird at their athletic scholarship and the responsibility they have to the team and the university as an athlete.

If an athlete gets pregnant and is forced to choose between abortion and their scholarship, by all means I know what I hope they would do, but the simple fact of the matter is that they've broken their understanding, athletically, and that they have a choice to make.

I'm not saying the scholarship MUST be taken away - I believe schools should show compassion when appropriate and as befits their own policies - but I am saying that if an athlete can't compete at an acceptable level because they choose to get pregnant (as defined in the discussion above), the university has every right - if they choose to exercise it - to revoke the scholarship.

If you want further discussion, Lilith, please take it offline to email. I don't feel we're gaining much ground here.