Quinnipiac University has managed to embroil itself in a bizarrely twisted lawsuit that’s likely to make feminists run in circles.  QU decided to get rid of its women’s volleyball team, arguing that cheerleading is a competitive sport for purposes of Title IX.  The plaintiff volleyballers rested their case yesterday, arguing that cheerleading is as much a sport as chess.

Chess players are pissed.  Winks players are also pissed, realizing that they’re next on the hit list.

Whether cheerleading is a sport is really not the point.  Having watched competitive cheerleading on television and in the movies, it seems to me that they do some extraordinarily athletic moves and, when competing, fight for the win as much as any other team.  It’s not just the sideline “U-G-L-Y” cheer.  But the denigration of cheerleading in the suit is required, since it would allow QU to sideline what is unquestionably a sport, women’s volleyball, and still make their Title IX numbers.  I’m putting aside, for the purpose of this post, collateral issues about whether QU otherwise fudged the stats.

Title IX, now 38 years old, compels colleges receiving federal funds to provide equivalent athletic opportunity for women as it does for men.  On its face, it’s both fair and right.  As if plays out, it’s a problem.

As with Title VII, prohibiting certain employment discrimination, Title IX has been tested via disparate treatment and impact analysis, the numbers game.  The way to avoid scrutiny is to keep the number of women involved in sports the same as the number of men.  As a result, colleges have eliminated many sports for men while offering them for women.  The law of unintended consequences cannot be denied.  Avoiding disparate impact begets disparate impact.

The reasons for this problem are fairly simple and straightforward.  First, teams cost money.  They don’t give those uniforms, cleats and pompoms away for free, you know.  Schools, therefore, maintain the sports that bring in money, like football and basketball, both via ticket sales and alumni support.  Not exactly in the spirit of amateur athletics, but abundantly practical.

These big money teams, however, have a lot of guys on the roster.  For the school to maintain them, they need to have the same number of women (nobody calls them coeds anymore, do they?) playing sports.  Not necessarily the same sport, but any sport.  The numbers are all in the aggregate. 

It’s not always that easy, however, to keep an equal number of women on teams.  Inexplicably, there aren’t always as many women as men who choose to play college sports.  Some are very zealous in their interest and desire, not to mention skill.  Others, not so much.  It’s more of a guy thing.

This is a recipe for Title IX disaster.  Colleges actively recruit women for sports, even the sports that don’t generate big bucks, while turning the boys away.  In a sport of particular interest to me, fencing, there are a wealth of women’s NCAA fencing teams, but only a handful of men’s.  There’s plenty of scholarship money for women fencers.  A grand total of three male fencers per year get free dinner coupons at the Olive Garden to fence.  Hence, “will fence for food.” Title IX equivalency is a one way street.

The combination of these two factors, cost and availability of sufficient female athletes, has produced some problematic results.  Men’s sports that don’t generate money are tossed, no matter whether there’s a great deal of interest or little, no matter that they are traditional amateur sports (as would typically be the case for non-money sports) that one would expect to see colleges fostering.

It’s not like anyone can force women to play if they don’t want to.  And they shouldn’t have to.  But then, nobody gets to play, even if there is money.

QU is trying to circumvent the system, by eliminating a low numbers, non-money women’s sport and replacing it with cheerleading, where there is greater interest and a better fit with the big money male sports.  It’s a nasty game to trade off women’s volleyball for cheerleading,   It puts the volleyball plaintiffs in the awkward position of having to denigrate competitive cheerleading to save their own sport.  It’s unfortunate that they are in this position, and no doubt there will be many other women who will decry their argument that cheerleading is not a sport.

Don’t blame the volleyballers.  Don’t blame the cheerleaders.  Blame Title IX, a nice idea that goes too far and defies reality.  As this case shows, it hasn’t served well for anyone, male or female.