RM> Matt, can you be more specific as to the law in this case?
ºW> Perhaps you could clarify or expand upon the concept of
RM> "exceedingly persuasive"?  Perhaps an explication as to the
RM> legal argument made by thevPe> aintant (I'm assuming there
RM> WAS one?) in the VMI case? 
    The legal argument was just that the state of Virginia's "separate but 
equal" women's-leadership program run somewhat along VMI lines was not equal 
to VMI, and that "separate but equal" is as illogical with respect to sex in 
education as it is to race.
    "Exceedingly persuasive" arguments being required for segregation in 
education means, in a short non-lawyer phrase, you can't do it!
RM> It seems to me that the arguments are identical, though the
RM> outcomes appear to be opposed... In each case, one action 
RM> results in a group being handicapped, while the other action 
RM> results in that same group being benefitted with no loss to 
RM> any other group....
    Not true.
    VMI's "adversative-education" system will collapse when VMI goes coed.  
For one thing, being that it's extremely unlikely that many women will enroll 
the first year, women students will not get the benefits of the 
barracks-living experience (since there will be so few that they will not 
live in a mass barracks).  For another thing, the "adversative" hazing of the 
rat line will no longer be allowed since it will invite sexual-harassment 
claims (based on established law about exposing women to sexually-demeaning 
remarks being harassment).
    Women at VMI just won't get the "benefit" you talk about, since the 
system they seek will inevitably end when they enter!
RM> The males at VMI (or Citadel) are not handicapped by the 
RM> inclusion of females, but their EXCLUSION results in a
RM> handicap for the females..
    Talk to a Citadel grad...I do often.
    He'll tell you what I explained above.
RM> handicap for the females... Similarly, a coed math class 
RM> seems to result in damages to females, as do coed classes
RM> with black males. 
    Remember the court rulings on _racially_ "separate but equal" schools?
RM> In any event, could you please pretend that you are acting as 
RM> an expert (and unbiased) witness and refrain from 
RM> editorializing or putting your own spin on this
    There is no such thing as an unbiased "expert witness".
    "Expert witnesses" in trials are almost always _paid_ by one side!  
Lawyers get lists of "expert witnesses" willing to testify for hire.
--- Simplex BBS (v1.07.00Beta [DOS])
---------------