There’s no victory in Title IX compliance
The UCLA Athletic Department is now officially, even legally, in
compliance with Title IX, once again proving that it is a leader in
the struggle for equality in athletics. By adding women’s
crew to the existing 21 varsity teams, the Athletic Department has
finally rid itself of those two pesky little groups known as the
National Organization for Women (NOW) and the Office of Civil
Rights (OCR). The Department is in compliance, and a victory for
crew is a victory for women everywhere. I don’t think so. One
other club team was in contention for being a fully funded sport:
women’s lacrosse. The decision to add crew instead of
lacrosse was not made through careful consideration of Title IX and
the desire to end sex discrimination. It could be said that the
best man won, because in the long run, no women did. Before I
explain my sarcasm, I would like to sincerely congratulate the
women’s crew team. It will be an amazing experience for every
member and I wish you only the best. I would also like to say that
as a recent graduate and former UCLA lacrosse player, I have
nothing to gain by writing this article. Had women’s lacrosse
been added instead of crew, my eligibility would have already been
used up, and I think it’s safe to say I wouldn’t have
been hired as an assistant coach (my current unpaid position). UCLA
has indeed been a leader in the fight for women’s rights in
sports, I won’t argue that. However, the reason for adding
crew has nothing to do with progress, or what’s in the best
interest of women. Crew was added instead of lacrosse on the sole
basis of the number of participants “officially”
allowed in each sport. Whereas lacrosse can only carry 30 to 40
members, crew can have as many as 100 participants, a number that
would make any athletic administration dealing with Title IX
salivate. In recent years, the department has avoided adding an
entire team by simply adding more women to the existing teams. This
seems like a great solution for the department but it hinders the
potential success of those teams that have to deal with exceeding
numbers. After all, a swimming pool only has so many lanes to use
for practice. Now, if the department ever needs to meet compliance
again it can simply add more members to the crew team, and no
matter how big the team gets it only needs to produce eight girls
that actually compete. There’s progress for you. Had lacrosse
been added, the department might have needed to do the unthinkable
in 10 to 20 years and bring up another women’s sport. Title
IX is part of the Educational Amendments of 1972 and it bans sex
discrimination in schools in academics and athletics. There are
three primary areas that determine if an institution is in
compliance, and I’m going to focus on the second one in
regards to the decision that was made at UCLA. The university must
be “demonstrably responsive to the developing interests and
abilities of the underrepresented sex.” The Athletic
Department did not make this a deciding factor, or a factor at all,
freely admitting that numbers were the main consideration, a
solution only conceived in a creative effort to sidestep actual
progress. From its very first season 10 years ago, the
women’s lacrosse team has always had greater numbers on the
field than crew has ever had on the water. The
“interest” in lacrosse, thus measured, has been
greater. In terms of ability, the lacrosse team has earned a
reputation as a force to be reckoned with in the Western
Women’s Lacrosse League, which includes varsity programs such
as Stanford and Cal. The lacrosse team ended the 1999-2000 season
in third place as the best club team in the western states and
almost beating Stanford in the WWLL semifinals. The majority of our
starters had never played lacrosse before attending UCLA, and I
can’t help but think that with the same players and a little
funding we would have won the Final Four tournament (the farther we
go in playoffs and finals, the more we pay out of our own pockets
for transportation, hotels, etc.). A club team changes drastically
from year to year, but UCLA has always managed to produce a quality
lacrosse team, whether we have a coach or not. Interest and ability
in regards to UCLA lacrosse reaches far beyond the 4.2-mile
perimeter of the campus. As the president of the team for two years
I received numerous letters from high school students who
desperately wanted to play for UCLA. I also received letters from
coaches hoping there was an opening for them, not realizing that we
were just a club and that being a coach of such a team was more of
a volunteer position than a lucrative career. I am in no way trying
to belittle the hard work and dedication of the women’s crew
team. However, the women’s lacrosse team has more members
(interest) and is more competitive within a very competitive league
(ability). These are significant criteria in determining what sport
should be elevated to varsity status. The struggle for varsity
status began before I even considered being a Bruin. The
women’s lacrosse team picked up where the women’s
soccer team was victorious. We were the impetus for the suit filed
by NOW, and this is a fact that cannot be disputed because I am the
subject of one of the points of contention within the petition
(hard to believe, I know). While the crew team was actively
supportive, women’s lacrosse led the way. Our fight was not
futile, a women’s sport was added and I want only success for
the women’s crew team. I just wish that the reason for adding
crew wasn’t based on the easiest way out of the situation,
but on true concern for women in athletics. Maybe progress will
come in spite of it all, but it was definitely not the
intention.
Suzanne Steiner (“˜00) Assistant coach, UCLA
women’s lacrosse