Seven Duke Ladies Dismissed entirely From NCAA College Basketball Due To Lesbianism Act and Marijuana Use

The headline “Seven Duke Ladies Dismissed Entirely From NCAA College Basketball Due to Lesbianism Act and Marijuana Use” suggests a dramatic and controversial event, but it’s important to approach such a topic with sensitivity and an understanding of context.

Firstly, it’s crucial to address the use of the term “lesbianism act.” The phrase itself is outdated and stigmatizing. Sexual orientation, including being lesbian, is a personal identity and does not constitute an “act.” The language used in the headline reflects a lack of understanding and could be interpreted as homophobic, as it unjustly frames being lesbian as something scandalous or criminal. In today’s society, universities and athletic programs, including Duke University, are expected to foster environments of inclusivity and respect, where athletes and students are supported regardless of their sexual orientation.

If a group of athletes were indeed dismissed from a college basketball team, the focus should be on the specific actions that violated team or school policies, such as drug use, rather than their sexual orientation. Marijuana use, depending on the state’s laws and the institution’s policies, could lead to disciplinary action. Many colleges have strict policies regarding drug use by student-athletes, as these individuals represent the school and are often held to higher standards due to their visibility and influence on and off-campus.

Duke University, like many institutions, has a code of conduct for its student-athletes that typically includes prohibitions against drug use. If the dismissal of these seven athletes were related to marijuana use, this would likely be framed as a violation of university policy or NCAA regulations. The NCAA has clear guidelines regarding substance use, and athletes are subject to random drug testing. A positive test can result in suspensions or dismissals, depending on the circumstances and the institution’s policy.

However, if the dismissal of these players was due in part to their sexual orientation, this would raise serious ethical and legal questions. Discriminating against someone based on their sexual orientation is not only unethical but is also illegal under various federal and state laws, including Title IX, which prohibits sex-based discrimination in any school or education program that receives federal funding. In recent years, interpretations of Title IX have been expanded to protect LGBTQ+ students and athletes from discrimination and harassment.

The combination of marijuana use and the alleged focus on the players’ sexual orientation complicates the situation further. While substance use can be a legitimate reason for disciplinary action, the implication that sexual orientation was a factor in their dismissal could suggest a prejudiced or discriminatory motive. If the dismissal were indeed based on both factors, Duke University would need to clarify its stance and ensure that its actions were in compliance with both its own policies and federal law.

In conclusion, a headline suggesting the dismissal of athletes due to their sexual orientation and marijuana use is not only sensational but potentially misleading and harmful. It’s important for any institution