It is roughly 30 years into Title IX, and women still lag far behind men in college athletics. In addition, men's minor sports tend to pay disproportionately for many of the gains women have made.

As with any political controversy, the debate is burdened with institutional maneuvering that often obscures real solutions. One revealing example is in wrestling.

In Scenario 1, we have an attack against the application of Title IX funded by the National Wrestling Coaches Association (NWCA). In Scenario 2, we have a mountain of female wrestlers pounding on the door of opportunity for a chance to wrestle at the high-school and college levels, but no one is answering (a degree of hyperbole here -- there are now six varsity female wrestling programs). An analysis of this complicated situation suggests that we devise another plan for alleviating gender inequities: that is, bringing an end to male-exclusive sports, not by cutting them, but by adding women's wrestling and football teams.

First, I must admit (with a degree of embarrassment as a member of the NWCA) that there is a clear lack of support for women's wrestling within the National Wrestling Coaches Association, the very group that purports to advocate wrestling. Such neglect seems to me to be indefensible. After more than a decade of grass-roots organizing among female wrestlers and their parents, the NWCA has failed to advocate on their behalf. Never mind that female wrestling will debut as an Olympic sport in 2004, that wrestling could be the fastest-growing sport in the country among adolescent girls, and that currently there are as many as 4,000 girls wrestling in the U.S and probably twice that many who would wrestle immediately if there were girls' teams.

Instead, the thousands of girls who wrestle do so on male teams, enduring frequent harassment just for the chance to pursue their sport. They endure frequent harassment, just for the chance to pursue their sport. As a coach, it is disappointing to see the NWCA spend so much money on a lawsuit against Title IX while barely lifting a finger to support females who love wrestling. If we really loved the sport for its own sake, why wouldn't we want everyone to enjoy it?

Before the reader assumes that I am placing the blame of discrimination squarely on the back of the NWCA, consider other, more important factors in the equation: that is, the NCAA and university officials across the United States, neither of which appear to have much interest in promoting female wrestling. Such lack of interest probably grows out of a lack of understanding of the manner in which female wrestling has developed at the high-

school level (exclusively on boys' teams). The reasons given by universities for not supporting female wrestling, on the surface, might seem logical and even consistent with "policy." Nevertheless, from the perspective of female wrestlers, it is simply a failure to advocate for girls who want to pursue a sport that society as whole would rather not see them pursue. However, it would be immensely unfair to characterize all athletic administrators as being unsupportive. There are many who would love to see the sport succeed. They only need to find a way to organize with other athletics department leaders who sincerely want to accommodate the wrestling interests of females.

Regardless, the gender-equity struggle (and the NCAA) needs female wrestling teams because exclusively male sports are by nature sexist, and they create major difficulties for Title IX compliance. They represent the most hardened and untenable gender stereotypes, those most in need of being shattered. Someday the female prohibitions in wrestling and football will be a thing of the past, and shortly thereafter we will look upon the days of exclusively male sports as something akin to whites relegating Blacks to the Negro leagues while reserving Major League Baseball for whites only.

There is no convincing historical or philosophical argument that can justly defend the exclusion of females from any university activities. So why has no one litigated against a university for even sponsoring male-only football or wrestling teams? My guess is that this will happen eventually. I do not believe that Title IX supports anything that is male-exclusive. Past civil-rights cases have taught us that we tend to see discrimination for what it is only after there has been successful litigation and new legislation. Football is in such a cultural vacuum that it is difficult for many to see the blatant injustices that are natural byproducts of the normal administration of the sport.

Thus, one solution lies within some kind of reform of football. But, who will take the first, bold step? Which athletics conferences? Which college presidents? Without belaboring the well-known spending excesses of many football programs, I will underscore only the excessive scholarships and roster sizes of most Division I-A programs. If the NCAA stipulated that college football was limited to a 60-person roster and a 40-scholarship maximum, football would still remain popular and the bowl games would go on. The average television spectator would not detect a difference in the game, and networks would still grant lucrative contracts (if that is the chief objection to reductions in football). In other words, the sport itself would not be jeopardized.

And where would the other half of the scholarships, athletes and budgets go? To the start-up of women's football programs.

Does it sound crazy? People said the same thing about women playing any sports at all not too terribly long ago. Women wrestle and play rugby with virtually no real institutional support. We are wrong if we think women wouldn't play football with several years of promotion and scholarships on the table.

Gender equity needs male sports to have female counterparts (especially football). In the past 25 years, women's basketball became the most successful female college sport. Programs advanced relatively quickly, largely because they were able to point to extremely well-funded men's basketball teams and say, "We deserve comparable support." It often worked. Look at women's basketball today.

Someday women will say the same thing to football, and the courts will likely support them, too. That day is dawning first in the zeal of young female wrestlers.

This inspiration for change, ironically, has not come from the NCAA, university officials or Title IX seminars -- and no, not even from concerned coaches like myself. The impetus for real change was birthed in the hearts of adolescent girls, who about a decade or more ago simply started saying, "We want to wrestle."

It is truly a grass-roots, social movement, started among the smallest of female athletes who just want a chance to do what their brothers are doing. They pursue it today with increasing numbers, yet still they are without teams of their own.

Let's start listening to them. Let's bring an end to exclusivity. It is unjustifiable and it undermines gender equity. It is an obstacle to preserving minor male sports. This is an opportunity for the NCAA to lead in a revolutionary manner -- to move beyond the current stalemate and beyond old-school thinking about gendered sport.

Let the revolution begin that will demolish gender exclusivity in sport. It is the future.

Michael Burch is an assistant wrestling coach at Brown University, where he is a doctoral candidate in candidate in the history of religions and philosophies. He was head wrestling coach at the University of California, Davis, from 1995 to 2001. <