Please consider the Geneseo broomball scoring policy

The National Organization for Women (NOW) at Geneseo is appreciative of the range of responses that we have received in reference to the intramural scoring policy. I would like to use this opportunity to further explain why we feel that this is an important issue which needs to be discussed.

In the Feb. 22 letter to the editor titled, "NOW wasting their time on intramural scoring policy," it was asked why Geneseo NOW wouldn't be concerned with broader-based feminist issues? While we appreciate that it is understood that there are larger issues yet to be undertaken, Geneseo NOW is a local organization which takes on many issues ranging from national to local. However, our primary focus is on equality here at Geneseo.

The likelihood that our organization could single-handedly change the wage gap, get the Equal Rights Amendment passed, or solve violence against women is slim. However, we do encourage advocacy and education about such issues. Furthermore, we are an organization dedicated to equality in all factions, whether it is in the workplace or in the broomball arena.

While many would claim that the intramural scoring issue is trite, it brings up a very interesting debate between equality of opportunity and equality. As I have stated in a previous letter to the editor, equality of opportunity is giving certain people incentives in order to achieve equality. This can be seen in Norway's mandatory quota which states that women must represent 40 percent of all public and recently private executive boards. Equality, on the other hand, is defining all people as equal and removing all incentives to any group. The current broomball scoring policy allots women equality of opportunity by giving them an incentive of an extra point each time they score.

Geneseo NOW is simply asking, is this distinction necessary in a co-ed recreational sport? Do women who play broomball need double the points in order for the game to be equal? We have yet to determine our position on this issue, but we believe it is important for it to be further discussed. NOW held an open meeting on Monday, March 26 in the Fireside Lounge at the Union inviting all who were concerned about this issue, whether it is for or against a change, to express their opinion so we can better understand the larger campus opinion. Further notice of future meetings will be posted in Whats-Up e-mails and flyers.

In