Uncategorized

Guarding Women’s Rugby

By Lavender April 10, 2009

Categories: Uncategorized

Tags:

When the women’s rugby college championship playoffs take place in Sanford, Florida, many top teams will wear jerseys prominently displaying the Army National Guard (ANG) logo. And when winners are determined at the finals at Stanford University, they’ll pose under an enormous banner thanking ANG for its support.

ANG is the primary sponsor of the collegiate tournaments. Without its donation of uniforms, practice and game balls, field flags, practice cones, goal post pads, and more, many club teams—notoriously poorly funded by their schools—would not exist.

As part of the United States Armed Forces, ANG adheres to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell—the only federal law that mandates firing a person because of sexual orientation. Yet, many of the colleges competing in what is officially called the National Guard Division I and II Women’s Collegiate Playoffs and Championship—including host Stanford—encompass sexual orientation in their nondiscrimination policies.

According to the coach of one of the nation’s best teams, who requested anonymity because of the controversial nature of the subject, “My program wrestles with this. The National Guard presence at the tournaments is huge. We have to stand in front of a big sign with their logo on it. The Guard is out there recruiting at these tournaments”—though, she laughs, “not particularly well.”

The coach says, “We’re not supposed to associate with organizations that discriminate. But we have to. It’s a devil’s choice. Without the National Guard, we wouldn’t have a national championship. They fund the lion’s share of it. They’ve stepped up big time, and no one else has.”

The coach’s team does not wear jerseys provided by the National Guard, with the requisite logo.

“We’re poor—we have to raise all our own funds—but we’re not so poor that I’ll sell out my kids or our university policy,” the coach explains.

Other major colleges, including Yale, are outfitted by ANG.
The coach states, “I don’t understand it. They play in National Guard gear, they wrap their goalposts in the Guard logo—and their school has a nondiscrimination policy!”

Before the tournament, the coach considered adding the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) logo to her team’s uniforms as a silent protest. Yet SLDN itself downplayed the controversy.

Aubrey Sarvis, Executive Director of SLDN, the organization working to end the statute, points out, “The National Guard didn’t write Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. It’s not their law. Congress owns it; the National Guard and other services have been ordered to implement it.”

Sarvis believes it is “entirely appropriate” for ANG to sponsor the women’s rugby college championships: “We don’t second-guess the National Guard, Army or Navy. The athletic activities they sponsor are up to them.”

Kerri Heffernan, who as coach of the Brown University team leads one of the most successful programs in the country, agrees in large part with Sarvis.

In Heffernan’s words, “The National Guard is not the problem. Brown has a nondiscrimination policy. It’s important for our team to respect that policy, which is a statement about inclusion and fairness—and at times, that position costs the university some support. We’re not forbidden from associating with the National Guard, and we don’t sneer at the Guardsmen. I just don’t believe as a coach—and an agent of my university—that I have the liberty to accept National Guard sponsorship. I suppose you could make an argument that Brown should fall on our sword, and not participate in any Guard-sponsored events. But I try to walk the best line I can. I appreciate that the National Guard funds the tournament, but Brown women will not accept any Guard sponsorship for our team.”

On the eve of this year’s national tournament, the anonymous coach remains conflicted, noting a lack of discussion in the women’s rugby world about National Guard sponsorship: “I think our financial positions, and our positions in our universities and on the larger sports stage, are so precarious that we’re falling in line, because we want our athletes to get the recognition they deserve, and our sport to get the respect it deserves. My athletes have serious aspirations about winning a national championship. With that comes tough choices about who to get in bed with, both literally and figuratively. At the same time, I wish universities would be more thoughtful about the ways in which we align ourselves with our own nondiscrimination policies.”

Be Sociable, Share!

One Response to Guarding Women’s Rugby

  1. KH says:

    The Brown coach is both right and wrong. As a college women’s rugby player our team too struggled with sponsorship. We are not a national caliber team and can’t hope for support from anyone but the National Guard. We do not support discrimination on our team, and we are one of the most open teams or groups on campus. But we have needs to be able to field a team at all and if our school is unwilling to help us then we have to get in bed with the enemy. If the school is serious about it’s non-discrimination policy it should help the teams that actively support said policy.

Links to this post
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!