We have experienced as children the enjoyment of playing with a friend on a teeter-totter. We learned very quickly that if the child on each end of the teeter-totter was approximately equal size, then things worked well and everyone could have fun. This represents equality and is the goal of everyone interested in Title IX.

But suppose one child is much larger than the other. Now the teeter-totter does not work well and neither child is happy. One solution is to put several children on each end of the teeter-tooter. Now you have more variables in balancing the teeter-totter as you can add or subtract children from each side. Again it is possible for the teeter-totter to work well.

But suppose it doesn't balance. One solution is to add children to the lighter end. If that does not work, then the second solution is to remove children from the heavier end. This second solution has the added advantage of saving by reducing the number of children that are needed. The disadvantage is that fewer children get to enjoy the fun.

This is precisely the problem faced by most university athletics departments in fulfilling Title IX to the satisfaction of the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights. A university either can add women participants to one side or remove male participants from the other side. One is cheaper but removes opportunity.

But suppose you have a teeter-totter with a problem. It has a 300-pound lead weight permanently attached to one end. Now it takes a lot of children on the other end and only a few children on the end with the lead weight in order to balance. But suppose there are a lot of children who want to sit with the lead weight and you can't find enough willing to balance the other end. Again you either have to find a lot more children to balance the lead weight or else remove many children sitting with the lead weight.

That lead weight is football, and it is firmly attached to the men's side of the university athletics department. A lot of young men would like to sit on the teeter-totter, but not enough young women care to sit on the other end to achieve a balance.

One solution is to remove the lead weight from the teeter-totter. But suppose that lead weight is holding the entire playground in place and supplying the financial resources for all the other teeter-totters. Some universities have done this by dropping football, but that requires that football income be replaced by student fees, or tax dollars.

A better solution is to let the lead weight teeter-totter sit by itself and continue to hold the playground together. Then all the other teeter-totters can be balanced with boys and girls on each end who want to play. The lead weight can sit to the side and provide revenue for all the teeter-totters on the playground.

Title IX can never achieve equality for men and women as long as football is included in the formula. It provides such a heavy weight on the men's side that the only way to achieve a balance with football is to add all possible women's sport participants and remove many male participants.

If football cannot be set aside, then reduce the size of the lead weight. In other words, trim football to a reasonable number of participants. Reduce the budget and the number of scholarships and coaches. Many of the 85 scholarship players never play a down in their four or five years of college.

Any reasonable person who really cares about both male and female athletes should be willing to accept equality of participation without football in the equation. If equal numbers are needed for balance on a fall afternoon, then what about the cheerleaders and spirit squads?

Just like football players, they have school uniforms, coaches and tutors. They practice long hours, perform for the alumni and even compete in national championships. This could help balance the number of male and female participants.

Most athletics departments will "circle their wagons" to protect football at all costs. Even though many college football teams actually lose money for the school, the No. 1 goal of most athletics directors is to maximize football revenues. They will eliminate or reduce any other men's sport, other than basketball, in order to protect football. Football is the "cash cow." Without it, many other men's and women's sports would not exist on most university campuses. Are we really ready to lose almost all other men's sports in order to have football and Title IX?

There must be better ways to balance the teeter-totter than to eliminate opportunities for either gender. We must solve this problem of meeting the goals of Title IX, not because of money or egos, but because it is the correct thing to do for student-athletes.

Phillip L. Henson
Associate Professor of Kinesiology
Indiana University, Bloomington

Cooperation is the answer to Title IX funding question

When will the leaders of women's athletics stop attacking wrestling? Wrestling is not threatening women's opportunities for participation. When Title IX is changed, it will not lessen the funding or opportunities for women.

Many individuals and groups are afraid of change because they fear they will lose something. When Title IX is changed, it will strengthen funding for female and male athletes, "if done correctly." Here lies the problem: what is 'correctly'?

By all accounts, Title IX has not reached its zenith. When Title IX is changed correctly, then it should reach its zenith and not threaten the opportunities or funding for either gender.

Was the intent of Title IX to eliminate opportunities or funding for men's sports? No, but many universities choose the opportunity to use it for that propose.

Every female who wants Title IX to reach its zenith should join behind wrestling and for change. Now is the time to improve the athletics situation for both female and male sports.

Student-athletes should be given equal funding and opportunity for participation in all sports.

The answer is complicated, but let's not add to the problem -- band together and help find the answer.

David E. Schutter
Wrestling Coach -- Truman State University