Um, earth to FairGameNews.com readers! Did no one read Laura’s post on Monday? (Actually our tracker shows they did). Then, why no comments to tell her she was talking crazy? C’mom — you’ve got to keep us on our toes!

I read it and nearly came through my computer screen. This is one of the issues on which Laura and I (respectfully, of course) disagree.

Personally, I couldn’t believe that this White House basketball thing made front page news. I saw it, read half of it, and became so disgusted by how PC we’ve all become that I didn’t even make it to the end.

I mean – really? At what point did it become the President of the United States’ (or, as Laura and other have so eloquently put it, the POTUS’) job to ensure gender equality on a pick-up basketball court?

Healthcare, social security, our ongoing wars in the Middle East… these are all things that demand his time and attention. Rallying the women of the White House to the b-ball court? Not his job.

I have a difficult time believing that any female White House staffer who showed up dressed to play ball would be turned away by the President.  He’s a husband who continues to date, adore, and showcase his ‘buff’ wife and a father to two burgeoning female athletes. Oh, and by the way, he just won the Nobel Peace Prize for his work in bridging divided groups. There is simply no reason to suspect he’s being prohibitive when it comes to women in any kind sports – informal or otherwise.

So if we don’t get to blame the President for the lack of women in b-ball, who can we blame? Hate to say it ladies, but it’s no one but ourselves. As long as we women wait for a special invitation, we’ll be missing the action. If the reality is that deals and decisions get made out there, then we better start working on our finger rolls and jump shots.

Let Danica Patrick, Michelle Wie, and Brittany Ryan serve as a lesson to us all: sports are no longer exclusive – unless we, as women, continue to play the part of the excluded.

Lauren Taylor is assistant lacrosse coach at Yale, a former three-time college All-American selection, and and 2009 graduate of the Yale School of Public Health who now works for the Yale Global Health Leadership Institute.

By Laura Pappano

Of course being hot helps. Good-looking athletes get our attention, whether we’re talking Danica Patrick or Tom Brady. It doesn’t make them any better on the racetrack or the football field, but it does attract fans and sponsors.

I get that.

But there’s trouble when we consider the broader implications of who gets a hearing and some respect in our society – whether it’s on the field – or on a campaign trail or in a boardroom.

Do we need sex to sell women’s sports? Do women have to be attractive to be listened to? Unfortunately, women are forced to occupy a very narrow cultural space in our society (bitch, bunny, or mom?) that’s tightly tied to our bodies.

Michele Obama may be smart and accomplished, but we are most comfortable talking about her outfits and messages about organic gardening and family nutrition. That’s not as scary as hearing what she thinks.

Isn’t it obvious that we need to expand the depth and breadth of female public images? We need women pioneers (more females on Supreme Court, in Congress, in executive suites, on Little League teams, represented as artists in museums, as directors in Hollywood, etc…). In other words: Normalize female leadership so it’s not FIRST about how you look.

Artist Lillian Hsu has just launched an art action and held a mass event last weekend in which supporters placed 8.5 X 11 posters reading “Beautiful Just the Way You Are” in front of magazine covers featuring all-too-familiar representations of glam-only objectified female bodies. Her point:  Intervene and interrupt the auto-absorption process that makes smart women feel inadequate if they aren’t skinny with perfect teeth and skin.

As Hsu puts it: “Before we are ten, and then without pause throughout our lives, we internalize the lesson that our bodies are how we will be first judged as individuals, and that there is a body type that we must attain to be judged worthy of attention.” And the judging of bodies she is talking about isn’t about what athletic feats those bodies can perform, but how hot they are doing it.

I’m not burning my bra  (‘specially my sports bra!) or throwing out the lipstick. It’s all right with me if Danica Patrick takes a Madonna-like command of her sexuality. But just as everyone knows that because Tom-Brady-the-model is pretty, doesn’t mean Tom-Brady-the-football-player isn’t tough, we need to extend that flexibility to women.

While we’re at it, let’s lose those tramp-victim-slut ads for jeans and perfume and popularize the scent of real female power.

By Lauren Taylor

Let’s get it out up front: No other team has put out a strong enough showing during the NCAA DI Tournament (or season) to make me doubt that the “purple haze” we’ve fallen into won’t continue.

I’d like to see another team besides Northwestern come out on top, (better for the game), but that’s personal wish – not professional opinion.

Here’s what they’ve got: Every player in a Northwestern jersey can run and gun, throw and catch and understand the game thanks to Kelly Amonte Hiller. She’s crafted a team whose balance is its greatest asset, and, ultimately, that’s what makes them unbeatable.

There’s not one girl to face guard; there are seven. There’s not one lock-off defender; there are seven. They are a team with players who take turns leading by example, and that quality — perhaps more than any other — has made them the dynasty they have become.

Northwestern may be a runaway favorite, but there is a lot to see when they take the field.

Five stats to watch for:

1.   How many goals does Northwestern manage to run up on Penn?

( In their game against Princeton, the Wildcats established a new program record with 373 goals scored this season.  That’s already 12 more than the championship team of two seasons ago).

2.  How many passes does Penn drop?

(My guess is will be under 10 in 60 minutes. Unreal. So consistent).

3.  How many aggressive double teams does Northwestern throw at its opponents?

(I bet more than 10 in 60 minutes. Also unreal. So high energy.)

4.   How many draw control does Penn’s Emma Spiro comes up with?

(She had 46 through the end of the regular season, dominating the Ivy League in that stat. But how does she fare against the Wildcats, also know for their aggression in the circle?)

5.    How many turnovers do North Carolina and Maryland commit?

(My prediction: It will be high on both ends, because of the hyper-aggressive run and gun game. Compare that state with Penn and you’ll be shocked these three teams have made it to the same point in the tournament.)

Lauren Taylor, who will receive her Master’s in Public Health from Yale on Monday, is assistant coach for the Yale Women’s Lacrosse team. As a player for Yale, she earned three All-America selections and was a four-time first team All-Ivy League selection.

Whether or not a judge rules that Quinnipiac University has violated Title IX by cutting its Women’s Volleyball team is less newsworthy than what we learned in court today.

That is, coaches manipulated rosters to meet Title IX requirements with men’s teams dropping players (and women’s teams padding rosters with players who wouldn’t get uniforms, equipment, playing time, or be able to travel with the team) in time for the school to submit required reports to the U.S. Department of Education showing they met gender equity rules.

Quinnipiac, like many colleges, chooses to demonstrate compliance with Title IX by meeting the proportionality prong of regulations. This means that the percentage of males and females in the student body must be reflected in the percentages of male and female athletes.

Increasingly, schools have used “roster management” as a tool to do this, meaning they will set target roster sizes for each sport to make numbers add up. This approach – we are hearing — is vulnerable to cheating.

Quinnipiac softball coach Germaine Fairchild, testified that she had been ordered to carry 25 players on her roster when she would normally have 17 to 19. Because these additional players were essentially only for compliance purposes (she did not receive extra budget to support their participation), most of them quit and by spring she could trim her roster to a manageable and appropriate 17.

“The number of female athletes receiving actual benefits was 17, not 26,” she testified, according to news reports.

Such manipulation of roster slots is outrageous – but likely not new and not limited to Quinnipiac University.

Two years ago, USA Today did a story highlighting the discrepancies between proportionality numbers as reported to the NCAA and to the U.S. Department of Education.

Unfortunately, the DOE collects, but doesn’t scrutinize the data it demands (or apparently care if it looks different from the NCAA numbers). This is a matter that needs attention – otherwise all the happy talk about the “benefits of Title IX” are merely camouflage for old-style gender bias.