For the most part, Jon Japha's article, "Love Potion Title IX" appearing in the Daily on Oct. 31 did a good job of boiling down the Title IX issue. Tufts compliance to Title IX has been in raising the number of athletes instead of using other criteria such as equal number of male and female teams or equal funding to teams. Of particular interest was the acceptable leeway of a plus or minus five percent difference in participation rates of men and women.
However, Mr. Japha is incorrect in assuming that women's sports elevated to varsity status are "without male counterparts." Both the fencing and volleyball team have male counterparts, the difference is that they exist as club sports. Title IX has a profound impact on club sports, which has been ignored by the administration.
The Tufts fencing team that existed as a coed entity was broken up five years ago. It was identified as a competitive team, which required little funding - a good T IX fit. While I hold the women's fencing team in the highest regard, and do not doubt the merit of their competing on a varsity level, their separate accession to a varsity level of competition is a sore point for many male fencers.
This is compounded by the nature of collegiate fencing, where men's teams and women's teams from opposing schools face off simultaneously. While varsity men's and women's basketball teams have separate tournaments, and little contact with one another, collegiate fencing teams are rarely separate.
Most frustrating is that while our skills are on par with many regional NCAA squads, the lack of a NCAA designator keeps us from attending better tournaments where Tufts students could excel. The competitive nature competency is true for a number of other Tufts club squads, male and female.
The impact of T IX on club sports is implicit in how teams are selected for varsity status. If a team were to ask for varsity funding and recognition, it would need to find a comparable number of women to do the same.
However, most of these women's squads, which have already been gleaned by the Athletic department squads that fall through the cracks, are ones that gain no benefit from collegiate associations. Examples are the ultimate Frisbee teams (who use a US governing body rather than the NCAA) or the equestrian team (which is viewed as costly). Ironically compliance with T IX on the varsity level may lead to a disproportionate number of men in the club sports program.
Where would new varsity sports come from? History has shown they come from the club sport system. Last year, club sports were given charge of their own funding from the Athletic department. In addition this funding board was informed that at some point we would have to make allowances for new club sports.
Note that because of the zero-sum nature of the funding scheme there is little incentive to accept new teams. Those that do get accepted will likely be eyed as an avenue to varsity status by men's teams. This is wrong because club sports are supposed to respond to student interests and needs, not to the trickle down effect of T IX.
To the extent that upward mobility of qualified clubs has been impeded by T IX, the Athletic department has pushed responsibility of club (and eventual varsity) recognition, to the club sports.
Perhaps the questions one should ask is, what criteria exist for the creation of new varsity sports or the criteria for their termination? Nothing upsets me more than when men's Fencing, Volleyball, or Skiing finish high in the regional standings year after year, only to have the headline stolen by "Golf finishes 26th for the year."
A criteria must exist, if it isn't performance, what is it? How do varsity teams defend their continued existence if they do at all? This is a very complex issue, but that's not a reason to shy away.
There is something inherently inequitable about the Athletic Department using "tradition" as a criteria for keeping weighty T IX teams, like Football, while at the same time using it to deny other viable competitive sports teams. To add to the problem, the desire for varsity status has the potential to alter the selection process of new club sports, which is a disservice to all students.
Chris Greller is a fifth year student in the joint Tufts-Fletcher program. He is president of the men's fencing team.
