No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 1

Running head: NO DRINKING, NO DRUGS, NO LESBIANS

No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians

Higher Education 552

Emil L. Cunningham

The Pennsylvania State University

No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 2

In a 1986 article in the Chicago Sun-Times, Rene Portland reported that one of the first things she discusses during a recruiting visit with a prospective student athlete is lesbian activity

(Figel, 1986). Portland is quoted as stating that she does not tolerate it in her program (Figel,

1986). Over the course of Portland‟s career as the head coach for the Lady Lions basketball team at The Pennsylvania State University (Penn State), her purported anti-lesbian policies have remained public knowledge (Franklin, 1991). In fact, in 1987 a campus study group attempted to bring the issue of sexual orientation based discrimination to the Penn State board of trustees, but unfortunately the group was never heard (Kissel, 1991a). During the changeover of presidency from President Bryce Jordan to President Joab Thomas in 1990, students and faculty alike were concerned with the major issue of the addition of protecting sexual orientation in the anti- discrimination policy (Bauman, 1990). During his first few years in office, President Thomas proposed an amendment to the anti-discrimination policy, however, the proposed amendment did not specifically add sexual orientation as a clause (Kissel, 1991a). It was because of this that a majority of the faculty senate, in a 93-12 decision, adjusted the president‟s proposal to specifically include sexual orientation as a protected group and sent the proposal before the Penn

State board of trustees to be discussed at their next meeting (Kissel, 1991a). After an 18-7 vote by the board of trustees, the proposed ratification from the faculty senate was officially added to the anti-discrimination policy (Franklin, 1991a). While Portland‟s feelings and opinions were a major reason for the anti-discrimination policy change (Kissel, 1991b), her sentiment did not seem to waiver, but instead it become silenced (Cart, 1992).

Portland faced no repercussions from the Penn State administration or the Athletics

Director for her public anti-lesbian feelings during past years (Cart, 1992). A 1992 article in the

Los Angeles Time recited Portland‟s infamous three rules that she exalted publicly prior to the No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 3 anti-discrimination policy change (Cart, 1992).These rules were no drinking, no drugs, and no lesbians (Cart, 1992). At the time, it seemed that with the installment of the new anti- discrimination policy, which was supported by the president, the board of trustees, the faculty senate, and a majority of students, Portland had learned to become more accepting of her student athletes‟ sexual orientation. Unfortunately, this was not the case. In 2005, Jennifer Harris filed a lawsuit against Portland, Athletic Director Tim Curley, and Penn State on the grounds that she was removed from the women‟s basketball team unjustly, and that she had been harassed and discriminated against based on her race, gender, and perceived sexual orientation, while members of the Penn State administration did nothing (Harris v. Portland et al, 2005a).

This lawsuit brought back to light Portland‟s history of anti-lesbianism on her basketball team. Although Portland remained quiet in the media with regards to her sentiments about lesbians on her team, it appeared that her feelings and actions based on these sentiments continued to plague her coaching methods (Osborne, 2007). Portland‟s actions in the lawsuit bring to light the issue of what administrators should have done to prevent this sort of behavior from happening. In 1991 when students protested in Old Main, a vehement request was made for the administration to consider both the ratification of the anti-discrimination policy and disciplinary actions for Portland (DiFilipo, 1991b). Unfortunately, as previously stated, no official university sanctions were ever made. The university officials instead acted in a reactionary approach and required that coaches and administrators in the athletics department attend a mandatory homophobia workshop (Cart, 1992). The previous decisions of inaction and reaction from the Penn State administration should have been called into question. With the lawsuit filed against Portland, it would seem that the previous strategies used to protect the rights of students had failed and new initiatives were needed. No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 4

In order to fully understand the lawsuit against Portland, it may be helpful to know the background information leading up to it. Harris was recruited by Portland to play for Penn State on a full athletic scholarship and was advised by Portland during the recruitment process that

Portland does not permit lesbians to play on her team (Osborne, 2007). In fact, when Harris informed Portland that she was considering attending University of Virginia (Virginia), Harris alleged that Portland indicated that at Virginia the women date women and at Penn State, the women date men (Osborne, 2007; Harris v. Portland et al, 2005a).

Harris would go on to apply and become accepted to Penn State and eventually play for

Portland as a starter in the majority of her games (Harris v. Portland et al, 2005a). During her first season with Portland, Harris and her teammates were questioned about Harris‟ perceived intimate relationship with a fellow team member (Osborne, 2007). Though none of these investigations were fruitful, according to Harris the pressure to acquiesce to Portland‟s rules became stressful and anxiety producing (Harris v. Portland et al, 2007a). During Harris‟ tenure as an athlete under Portland, she was purportedly often advised to dress more feminine and informed that refusal may play a role in disciplinary action from Portland (Harris v. Portland et al, 2005a). At the end of the 2005 basketball season, Harris was released from the team without apparent just cause even though she led the team in points scored and free throws, was ranked second in rebounds per game, maintained her academic eligibility and abided by all National

Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) standards (Osborne, 2007).

After Portland dismissed Harris from the team, Harris filed a complaint against Portland to Athletics Director Tim Curley stating that she had been the victim of discrimination (Harris v.

Portland et al, 2005a). At that time, she was informed that the matter was out of Curley‟s hands as Portland‟s decision to remove a player from the women‟s basketball team was irreversible No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 5

(Harris v. Portland et al, 2005a). As such, Harris would ultimately go on to lose her athletic scholarship, which was her primary means of affording attendance at Penn State, and would eventually transfer to James Madison University (ESPN.com, 2007a).

The 2005 case of Harris v. Portland et al officially ended in 2007 when a settlement was reached out of court (Harris v. Portland et al, 2005b). The court files were subsequently sealed and the case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning that Harris would never be allowed to file a lawsuit against Portland, Curley, or Penn State based on this issue again (Harris v. Portland et al,

2005b). The Penn State‟s internal investigation determined that Portland did in fact create a hostile environment for Harris, but that she did not act discriminatorily towards Harris based on her ethnicity (NCLR, 2006). Penn State fined Portland $10,000, issued a written reprimand, and mandated her to participate in professional development on issues of diversity (NCLR, 2006).

The lawsuit against Portland exposed a lot of problems regarding administrative authorities in college sports. In essence, through their silence administrators at Penn State had allowed Portland to discriminate against students even though they had implemented the new anti-discrimination policy and were aware of her public feelings regarding the issue.

Nonetheless, the Penn State administration is not the first institution to have enabled coaches and athletic programs that have shown signs of discriminatory actions. A similar situation occurred at the University of Florida (Florida) when a student believed that she was the victim of discrimination (Osborne, 2007). Similar to Harris, the victimized student scheduled a meeting to meet with administrators, who included the Athletics Director, the Assistant Athletics Director, and her coaches, to discuss her perceptions of being a victim (Osborne, 2007). However, her meeting proved to be no more than a ritual, which defined by Dill (1982) is a ceremony lacking any real purpose. Less than one week later, Florida suspended this student athlete from her team, No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 6 and less than two weeks later Florida dismissed her from the team altogether (Osborne, 2007).

These two situations are probably not the only instances in which students have turned to their respective administration for help, only to be denied any justice.

The problem that both students faced runs deeper than simply two coaches or two institutions. Salkever and Worthington (1998) note that “[a]thletic teams serve as highly visible representatives of the character and mission of their university” (p. 195). The authors continue on to write that:

As a result of the pressures of the spotlight, team success and image become primary

goals for many athletic departments…Each individual team member is expected to act in

accordance with these goals, regardless of whether they are misrepresented or stifled in

the process (Salkever & Worthington, 1998 p. 196).

This understanding of the perception of college athletic programs provides reasoning as to why both Penn State and Florida decided not to pursue more severe action against their respective coaches. It would be in poor judgment for the institution not to support their coaching staff.

Unfortunately, it leaves student athletes with a sense that the institution is more concerned with its image and to this degree student athletes are expendable. In Penn State‟s defense, the administration had good reason to protect Portland‟s image. In her 27 season career, Portland‟s coaching resume represented one of the best coaching statistics that an institution could ask for, as she was able to produce over 600 wins during her tenure (ESPN.com, 2007a), which was a feat not easily accomplished by many coaches. In fact, Portland will be “regarded more for her coaching accomplishments and contributions to the school than for her reputation as having issues with lesbian players” (ESPN.com 2007b p.1). No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 7

Though there are reasons to suggest that the administration may have acted appropriately in its initial backing of Portland, there still exists a need for change in both the coaching and administrative leadership. Chawansky (2005) offers the notion that it is important for coaches to be understanding in their care and concern of women student athletes. As such, implementing a feminist coaching approach, focused on empowering student athletes, may prove to benefit some athletic programs (Chawansky, 2005). Chawansky (2005) writes “coaches must work to create a space where team members who experience discrimination receive validation and support” (p.

111). The author also notes that athletic climates that endorse students silencing their beliefs prevent the team as a whole from becoming fully integrated (Chawansky, 2005). Portland‟s actions as a coach evidently did not create a safe space for all of her athletes nor did it produce a welcoming climate either. Additionally, the response by the Penn State and Florida administration does not offer support for women students who may identify as members of the

Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) community.

Leadership, however, should not be based solely on perceived actions (Birnbaum, 1992).

Birnbaum (1992) articulates that depending on the lens by which one chooses to view a leader, different results may be found. With regards to Portland‟s tenure as coach, the athletes who were never stigmatized or ostracized and ultimately went on to compete in the Women‟s National

Basketball Association (WNBA) may believe that Portland was a great influence, coach, and mentor. Likewise, those students, who perceived Portland as targeting them based on their sexual orientation, may view her in a negative regard. The point however is that “[l]eadership involves behavior that is meant to influence others, but not all attempts at influence can be thought of as resulting in leadership” (Birnbaum, 1992, p. 14). No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 8

This notion of influence applies both to Portland and the Penn State administration.

While Portland held the position as the coach, which is typically defined as the leader in a sports team setting, her attempts at leadership were wrought with problems and hindered her attempts to influence others. Similarly, the Penn State administration‟s attempts to influence Portland did not produce the results the administration had hoped for. Birnbaum (1992) articulates that coercive behavior on the part of leaders may reduce their ability to be influential in the future.

Unfortunately, this specific concept regarding leadership leaves little room for radical administrative action to take place. Though Portland did take a 14 year hiatus with regards to her public opinions concerning lesbians in sports, things might have played out differently if the

Penn State administration came down harsher and coerced Portland into changing. These actions may have set a precedent amongst college athletic administrations of acceptance and tolerance for generations to come.

Though admittedly a bit harsh and even potentially homophobic, Portland‟s assertion to not have lesbians on her team holds some merit with regards to recruiting. According to Griffin

(1999), a heterosexist ideal does in fact exist in college athletics. This ideal may have influenced

Portland‟s need to proclaim such a statement as, no lesbians, in order for her to ensure the success of her team. Griffin (1999) writes that “[w]omen coaches fear that they or their teams will be seen as lesbian” (p. 54). This fear of being perceived as a lesbian coach or athletic program is valid when considering parents‟ feelings towards sending their children to college. In a study on sexual prejudice and preference towards gay and lesbian coaches Sartore and

Cunningham (2009) found that parents were extremely prejudiced about their son or daughter having a gay or lesbian coach. Sartore and Cunningham (2009) also noted that current and former athletes would even refuse to play on a team coached by either a gay or lesbian coach. No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 9

Gay and lesbian coaches have been denied employment or released from their positions because of these perceptions (Osborne, 2007). Therefore, it may have been beneficial for Portland to continue to assert her stance of no lesbians since promoting anything less than a clear distinction from lesbianism may have harmed her recruiting efforts and ultimately the institution‟s athletic image.

During the course of Harris‟ lawsuit, the culture at Penn State very visibly changed.

Richardson (1994) outlines it perfectly with the concept of evolutionary change in three stages.

The first stage, which is the revolutionary stage (Richardson, 1994), happened when the public cried out because of the media attention drawn by the Harris v. Portland et al (2005a) case. As

Richardson (1994) articulates, the institution was unable to come to an agreement based upon a conflict. As a result of this inability, Portland would ultimately resign her position as head coach of the women‟s basketball team in March of 2007 (ESPN.com, 2007c). Portland‟s departure advanced the Penn State culture into the next stage.

The second stage, the evolutionary stage, as described by Richardson (1994) occurs when the culture makes a proactive stance rather than a reactive one. This proactive stance can be seen through the hiring of the new Penn State women‟s basketball coach, Coquese Washington

(ESPN.com, 2007d). This act was evolutionary because Washington inherited a team that had been nurtured and matured under one ideology for over 25 years. Additionally, Washington had not served in the capacity of head coach prior to accepting the Penn State offer (ESPN.com,

2007d). This move on behalf of the Penn State administration shows the desire to not only fill the role of the head coaching position, but to also be intentional with regards to ensuring that the next head coach will uphold the values of the institution. Essentially Penn State actively sought out an individual who provided more than just a winning resume, but a value set that was akin to No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 10

Penn State‟s as well. According to President Graham Spanier, Washington represented just this person (ESPN.com 2007d).

Lastly, the third stage of Richardson‟s (1994) evolution of culture theory is the maturational stage. Due to the relative novelty of Washington‟s hire it may be too early to show how the maturational stage has developed. However, a clear sign that it is occurring, is the sharp decline in the amount of media attention Penn State received surrounding Harris‟ lawsuit (Wible,

2008).

The issues surrounding Portland show a need for administrators in athletics to review ways in which to enforce their policies. Elfman (2007) offers the perspective of a former college basketball player, who staffed a basketball camp with Portland, proclaiming that it is not okay for someone‟s sexual orientation to be a factor, and it is up to the administrators to set the tone for coaches to ensure this sort of thing doesn‟t happen. “Given the overt hostility or conditional tolerance characteristics of many athletic departments” (Griffin, 1998, p.134), education on topics of diversity, social justice, and anti-gay prejudice in sports are a good place to start

(Griffin, 1998; Griffin, 1999). Additionally, advocating for the recruitment of LGBT athletes and coaches may help to create structural change within the organizational culture (Rankin, 1998).

Lastly, “[a]thletics departments can prevent harassment by creating an atmosphere of respect for and acceptance of others” (Osborne, 2007 p. 498). This simple act is something that can ultimately incite structural change within the institution.

Additionally, Richardson (1994) asserts that presidents play a vital role in shaping the culture of the institution. It could be argued that, from President Thomas to President Spanier, the role of the president in helping to address Portland‟s behavior and actions have been minimal. Throughout the entire ordeal with Portland, President Spanier‟s presence was non- No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 11 existence. In fact the brief mention of President Spaniers involvement occurred when Portland released an article to the press stating that she had been involved in closed door conversations with him (Portland, 2006). Padilla (2005) writes that “[t]he president delegates much of the work of the enterprise to the coaches and the athletic director, but when problems arise…the president is inevitably the responsible individual at the center of the media frenzy” (p. 25). At Penn State, it would seem that another ideology exists for the presidency, one that includes remaining protected and avoiding instances wherein further media excitement can be caused. Harris‟ case symbolizes the many challenges administrators face and provides insight as it creates a precedent for what can and should be done in future administrative issues in higher education. No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 12

References

Bauman, A. (1990). Students ready for incoming president. The Daily Collegian Online.

Retrieved on December 1, 2009 from http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/1990/08/08-

31-90tdc/08-31-90dnews-01.asp.

Birnbaum, R. (1992). Understanding leadership. In How academic leadership works:

understanding success and failure in the college presidency. (pp. 3-23). San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass.

Cart, J. (1992). Women Sports: Fear and discrimination are common as players deal with a

perception of homosexuality. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved on December 1, 2009 from

http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/psupride/articles/LA%20Times%2004061992.pdf.

Chawansky, M. (2005). That takes balls: Toward a feminist coaching methodology. Women’s

Studies Quarterly, 33(1/2), 105-119.

DiFilippo, D. (1991). Administrators' handling of Portland dispute draws demonstration to old

main's doorstep. The Daily Collegian Online. Retrieved on December 1, 2009 from

http://collegian.psu.edu/archive/1991/03/03-26-91tdc/03-26-91dnews-02.asp.

Dill, David. (1982). The management of academic culture: Notes on the management of meaning

and social integration. Higher Education, 11, 303-320.

Elfman, L. (2007). NCAA and gay rights group take on homophobia in college sports. Diverse

Issues in Higher Education, 24(4), 12.

ESPN.com (2007a). Resignation should spark time of healing for PSU. ESPN.com. Retrieved on

December 1, 2009 from

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncw/columns/story?columnist=voepel_mechelle&id=2808469.

ESPN.com (2007b). Penn State settlement leaves unsettling feeling. ESPN.com. Retrieved on No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 13

December 1, 2009 from

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncw/columns/story?columnist=voepel_mechelle&id=2755832.

ESPN.com (2007c). Penn State‟s Portland makes „difficult‟ decision to quit. ESPN.com.

Retrieved on December 1, 2008 from

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncw/news/story?id=2808075.

ESPN.com (2007d). Washington becomes new Penn State Coach. ESPN.com. Retrieved on

November 17, 2009 from http://sports.espn.go.com//print?id=286247&type=story.

Figel, B. (1986). Lesbians in world of athletics. Chicago Sun Times. Retrieved on November 17,

2009 from http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/psupride/articles/Chicago%20Sun%20Times

%2006161986.pdf.

Franklin, A. (1991). Protective clause included in policy by PSU trustees. The Daily Collegian

Online. Retrieved on December 1, 2009 from

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/1991/06/06-13-91tdc/06-13-91dnews-10.asp.

Griffin, P. (1998a). The culture of the closet: Identity-management strategies of lesbian college

Coaches and athletes. In Strong Women, Deep Closets: Lesbians and Homophobia in

Sport. (pp. 134-156). Champaign: Human Kinetics.

Griffin, P. (1998b). Opening minds, opening closet doors: Transforming Women‟s Sport. In

Strong Women, Deep Closets: Lesbians and Homophobia in Sport. (pp. 208-227).

Champaign: Human Kinetics.

Griffin, P. (1999). Lesbians and bisexual women in sport. Journal of Physical Education,

Research & Dance, 70(4), 53-62.

Harris v. Portland et al, 1:05-CV-2648 (2005a)

Harris v. Portland et al, 1:05-CV-2648-CCC-JAS (2005b) No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 14

Kissel, K. P. (1991a). Penn St. faculty approves anti-discrimination policy. Philadelphia

Inquirer. Retrieved on November 17, 2009 from

http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/psupride/articles/Philadelphia%20Inquirer%2003211991.

Pdf.

Kissel, K. P. (1991b). Penn State protestors target coach. Philadelphia Inquirer. Retrieved on

November 17, 2009 from

http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/psupride/articles/Philadelphia%20Inquirer%2003261991.

Pdf.

National Center for Lesbian Rights (NCLR), (2006). Jennifer Harris vindicated and coach

Portland given slap on wrist. Retrieved on November 17, 2009 from

http://www.clubs.psu.edu/up/psupride/articles/NCLR%20Press%20Release%20041820

6.pdf.

Osborne, B (2007). “No drinking, no drugs, no lesbians”: Sexual orientation discrimination in

intercollegiate athletics. Marquette Sports Law Review, 17(2), 481-502.

Padilla, Arthur. (2005). Portraits in leadership. Six extraordinary university presidents. West

Port CT: American Council on Education Praeger Series on Higher Education.

Portland, R. (2008). In rebuttal: At Penn State women‟s basketball, fairness rules: A smear

campaign by the National Center for Lesbian Rights won‟t work. Post-Gazette.com.

Retrieved on November 17, 2009 from http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06139/691377-

109.stm.

Rankin, S. R. (1998). Heterosexism and the lesbian label in women‟s intercollegiate athletics. In

Sanlo R. L. (Ed.). Working With Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender College

Students: A Handbook for Faculty and administrators. (pp. 203-212). Westport: The No Drinking, No Drugs, No Lesbians 15

Greenwood Educators‟ Reference Collection.

Richardson, F.C. (1994). The president‟s role in shaping the culture of academic institutions. In

Davis, J.D., Coloring the halls of ivy: Leadership & diversity in the academy. (pp. 13-

24). Bolton, MA: Anker Pub. Co.

Salkever, K. & Worthington, R. L. (1998). Creating safe space in college athletics. In

Sanlo R. L. (Ed.). WorkingWith Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender College

Students: A Handbook for Faculty and administrators. (pp. 193-202). Westport: The

Greenwood Educators‟ Reference Collection.

Sartore, M. L. & Cunningham, G. B. (2009). Gender, sexual prejudice and sport participation:

Implications for sexual minorities. Sex Roles, 60, 100-113.

Wible, A. (2008). Coach helps bring „new era‟ to PSU. The Daily Collegian Online. Retrieved

on November 17, 2009 from

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2008/03/21/coach_helps_bring_new_era_to_p.aspx