“Sport is a Reflection of society and, in many respects, society is a reflection of sport” (Holman p. 223). Due to the popularity of sport, it has an effect on the image of society. Sport is harder to enter into for women because the make up for sport is set up for male dominance. This shows that for some time sport was not held to the same laws of equality. Women had and still have to some degree, less opportunity than males do in sport. The greater laws of equality in society were not being passed on through sport. Since society today has realized the need for equality in society, sport is on its way to becoming equal. This means sport can no longer be exempt from sexual discrimination. This includes all types of sport who now must make decisions according to equality.
A major step was taken towards equality in sport with the passing of the Title IX – The Educational Amendments Act. This imposed not only equality in the classrooms between male and female, but also on the playing fields of athletics. Title IX states:
No person in the United States shall, on the bias of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program

Women’s Rights groups were very upset about this interpretation. In 1988 Congress passed the Civil Rights Restoration Act. This abolished the Grove City ruling. It did this by revamping the wording in Title IX. The change now ensured that even if only part of an institution was being given any kind of monies to fund their needs, then any kind of sexual discrimination is outlawed in any part of the entire institution. This obviously applied in the sports aspect of colleges, universities and high schools. The OCR also stated that it was going to “put its foot down” on gender discrimination in all federally funded institutions. It has now become a “top priority” for the OCR, so much so that it released a “Title IX Athletic Investigator’s Manual. This manual outlines the way in which the OCR deals with gender discrimination. This not only strengthened procedure, but it also set the rules in stone so that the general public realized the OCR’s seriousness on this topic.

Due to the unpopularity of the law, an amendment was made in 1985 to the Ontario Human Rights Code. It called for the uplifting of Section 19 (2), which allowed sex discrimination in sport. The amendment was successful in revoking the section and eliminating discrimination in sport. With the elimination of this section of the Code, people are able to file complaints of sexual discrimination to the Human Rights Commission. The Commission will decide whether or not the complaint truly reveals discrimination or not. If they view that the complaint does show discrimination, they must see to its correction. Ironically Ontario was the last province to eliminate sexual discrimination when it came to sport even though they were the frontrunners for equality in general. (Holman p 225)

The California Chapter of the National Organization for Women (NOW) has also made significant strides for girls and women athletes by taking offenders to court. Finding the entire California State University system in violation of the 1976 California Education Code mandating immediate progress in gender equity in CSU intercollegiate athletics, California NOW filed suit against all twenty University campuses. In an out-of-court settlement, CSU officials agreed to provide equal opportunities and funding for women’s and men’s athletics on all campuses by the 1998-99 school year.

Canada did not always support equal treatment to males and females, and when it came to sports, it was no different. In 1962, the Ontario Human Rights Code was introduced and started t