The 85 Universities that Discriminate on the Basis of Sex

The Title IX Equity Project today is releasing a list of 85 colleges and universities in the nation with severe violations of the federal Title IX law that bars sex discrimination in schools. These 85 institutions offer at least ten more scholarships for female students, compared to the number of scholarships for male students. The 85 colleges are located in 34 states across the nation: AL, AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MA, MN, MS, MO, NV, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, and WY.

One of the worst offenders in the country is the University of Missouri – Columbia, which offers 70 scholarships for female students, and one for male students. The 70 female-only scholarships address a broad range of academic fields, including medicine, education, journalism, art, and other areas. The sole award for male students, the Eric G. Rowe Scholarship Fund, is reserved for “deserving farm boys” who plan to attend the university’s School of Agriculture.

[‘Social Justice’ Ideology Is Damaging American Values]

On September 20, 2019, the SAVE Title IX Equity Project sent a letter to Chancellor Alexander Cartwright listing the discriminatory scholarships and requesting a substantive response. The university never replied. On January 28, 2020, the Title IX Equity Project filed a formal complaint with the federal Office for Civil Rights, alleging a willful breach of federal non-discrimination requirements. The decision to open a federal investigation is pending.

Such disparities not only violate federal law, but they also offend basic notions of fairness. At the University of Missouri – Columbia, female students outnumber males, 11,789 to 10,695Nationwide, 56% of undergraduate students are female, and 44% are male.

The listing of all 85 universities is available online.  The federal Office for Civil Rights is currently investigating over 80 sex-discrimination complaints that were filed by parties alleging discrimination against male students.

University of Michigan-Flint professor Mark Perry has commented, ironically, “universities would never tolerate any special preferences for men or discrimination against women; but, on the other hand, they not only tolerate discrimination against men and special preferences for women, they actively promote, fund and endorse illegal discrimination. The illegal discriminatory programs are not being corrected internally despite huge staffs of diversity officers.”


17 thoughts on “The 85 Universities that Discriminate on the Basis of Sex

  1. Universities discriminate hugely against men. Yet the most intelligent people in any society, and the only ones who should be at university, are always men. Men have a higher average IQ and a bigger standard deviation of IQ, so that the top 10%, top 20%, etc. most intelligent people will always be overwhelmingly male. White males are far more intelligent than any other demographic for biological reasons, and no amount of discrimination against them can change that biological fact. Men should set up their own all-male places of learning.

  2. No matter how absurd the efforts to appease feminists, they will always shift the goal posts to maintain victim status. Until their grievance mongering is ignored, until the majority are willing to stand up and tell women “No more”, at best nothing will change, at worst the discrimination against men will continue becoming ever more blatant and damaging to the social fabric.

    Even supposed “rational” people still suffer under the delusion that women are oppressed. Even the most “enlightened” believe that women must receive special treatment to counter that oppression. Nothing could be further from the truth. Women are in fact the most coddled, protected, and catered to group of people to ever exist, and have been for quite some time.

    The modern woman is less accountable and receives more deference than royalty throughout most of history. Until this is recognized and accepted, men will continue to get the short end of the stick, socially, legally, and politically.

  3. The only thing surprising here is that we continue to be surprised at the hypocrisy, double-think, and Newspeak of the Academic Left.

    Racism and Sexism is bad, bad, bad….unless it’s our kind of racism and sexism. Discriminating on the basis of anything is horrible, horrible, horrible….unless it’s our kind of discrimination aimed at our especially-approved Higher Goods & Social Justicey Goals.

    You have to break a lot of eggs to make an omelet Stalin, of course, agreed: “You cannot make a revolution with silk gloves.” The Progressive agenda pushed at almost every institution of so-called ‘higher education’ only echoes that “end justifies the means” rationale: “Yes, of course we discriminate against the White, Male, Heteronormative, Cisgendered, Capitalist Rapists of the Patriarchy….how else can True Equality, Total Inclusivity, Absolute Diversity, and the Constant Ommmmmm of Social Justice otherwise be achieved???”

    ““If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face—for ever.” But damn, that stamping is what will (later rather than sooner….let’s not get ahead of ourselves) take us to that Perfect World. Can I get a “Right On!”?

    ““The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal. They weren’t only equal before God and the law. They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. All this equality was due to the 211th, 212th, and 213th Amendments to the Constitution, and to the unceasing vigilance of agents of the United States Handicapper General.” Vonnegut (Harrison Bergeron) Is there any doubt that she must have been educated at one of our ‘top’ 85??

  4. If this is only on the undergrad level it might explain why UMass Amherst isn’t on the list, but they have a LOT of these woman-only scholarships. “Women in STEM”, “Women in Engineering” — full graduate fellowships worth more than any scholarship because they come with a $20-$30K stipend, in addition to “full boat” scholarship.

    The other thing is something similar to what was keeping James Meridith out of “Olde Miss” — in his case the requirement of a letter of recommendation from an alumnus, at a time when all the alumni were White. UMass Amherst has a lot of “diversity” scholarships which require a faculty recommendation, with the faculty being told that they can ONLY recommend a female student, or (in some cases) a female or minority student, with the implication that it must be both.

    Hence while the scholarship itself is not explicitly illegal — no more than the University of Mississippi had any explicit “White Only” admissions policy — they use the regulations to ensure that they are female-only in fact.

  5. At the same time, many colleges and universities have lower entrance requirements for men than for women, in an effort to attract more men to their campuses.

    1. Lower entrance requirements? so is there any evidence, or just coming up with feminist “facts”

      1. See the citation above. Except for the top 50 or so colleges and universities, women significantly outnumber men on campus (except for technical institutes). In an effort to keep the balance more even (since both men and women prefer a sex-balanced campus), admissions officers admit men with lower test scores and (especially) grades. I don’t think this is especially terrible, since the students seem to prefer it for a healthy social atmosphere. But it’s important to see the reality that the grades and test scores that will get a man into these institutions may not get a woman in.

    2. Yes, but then look at the graduating classes of the same traditionally-female colleges and explain where the men went because they aren’t graduating.

    1. Too true!
      I’ve been a member of “The Patriarchy” for decades & decades and I’ve yet to be invited to any of the “Patriarchy World Planning and Domination Meetings”. Heck, I don’t even get the “Patriarchy Newsletter” (I’m assuming — we being all powerful and all — that we must have an official newsletter)….or any Patriarchy email news feeds from any of the Patriarchy Websites (that I have yet to find).

      The other day I walked into the grocery store — announced that a member of the Patriarchy had arrived — and absolutely nothing happened (well, nothing except for the loud snicker from the fresh vegetables aisle). I dunno; maybe we need to get a logo or something.

    2. I’ve seen that once the majority of a workplace is female, they’ll meet separately for “girl’s only” events so as to exclude their male colleagues from all decisions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *