Where’s the Line? An Analysis of the Shifts in Governance of Women’s Lacrosse, 1992-1998 Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Melissa C. Wiser, M.A. Graduate Program in Education The Ohio State University 2013 Dissertation Committee: Sarah K. Fields, Advisor Mary Thomas Mollie Blackburn i Copyright by Melissa C. Wiser 2013 ii Abstract In 1998, eight separate organizations merged to form US Lacrosse, the national governing body for both men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse. Before the change in structure, the United States Women’s Lacrosse Association governed women’s lacrosse, while numerous organizations managed the men’s game. The organizational shift represented the first time these two distinct sports would be administratively joined in the United States. A key motivating factor in the design of the merger was the long-term goal of inclusion at the Olympic Games; a base requirement of this attempt was one national governing body for one sport in one nation. Although men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse share a common name, the sports are historically distinct in course of play, field markings, and permissible physical contact. While located in broader sport systems rooted in gender equity and the notion of “separate but equal,” (e.g., Title IX and the Olympic Charter), men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse are presented as different versions of the same game. This faulty assumption ignores the history of each and forecloses sport options for men and women who want to play the lacrosse that is not available to them. Thus, I argue that although it attempted to achieve gender equity for the lacrosses and their representatives, the merger that created US Lacrosse is problematic due to its founding premise that conflates the sports and constrains the future of women’s lacrosse specifically. ii Dedication Dedicated to Grandmom Emilie Luise Lutz Horel 1913-2011 iii Acknowledgements Although it may feel isolating at times, a dissertation is a communal process. I am indebted to numerous people. First and foremost, I would like to thank Sarah Fields, my advisor, for her encouragement and creativity. She consistently devised new ways for me to consider not just the material but the entire intellectual process. My stubbornness and perfectionism frequently led to periods of limited productivity, but she constantly reminded me of the importance of my work and her faith in me as a scholar and as a person. I also appreciate the commitment of my committee members. Mary Thomas, whom I met in my very first graduate seminar, has challenged me intellectually for years and supported my efforts to conceptualize the power of a line on a field. Mollie Blackburn, whose energy and vigor for knowledge is infectious, triggered fresh excitement in my work after our discussions. In addition, several professors served on my exam and proposal committees and gave me feedback on the direction of this project. Melvin Adelman, and Sue Sutherland offered me valuable initial insights; Susan Bandy, who is generous with her time, was an important presence during this transitional period. Of course, this dissertation would not have been possible without those whom I interviewed. Their willingness to make time to meet with me in their busy lacrosse schedules and to share their stories was invaluable. Their contributions were absolutely critical to this project. Without them there would have been no dissertation. iv My friendships have been extremely important to me in this lengthy process. Those whose time in Sport Humanities overlapped with mine were great friends. Claire Williams, in particular, was also a mentor and helped guide me through many steps. Lindsay Pieper, Dain TePoel, Andrew Linden, and Lauren Brown are friends who aided me on numerous occasions and made challenging my thinking enjoyable. Outside of Ohio State, Elaine Stowell has been wonderful. She generated the field diagrams in Chapter 2; whenever I need assistance, Elaine is there—on the field and off. Without the frequent phone calls with Jennifer Hansen-Glucklich, a dear friend who is always so far away, I never would have been able to face this process let alone write it all down. In addition, perhaps a practical matter, but no list of thanks would be complete without some acknowledgment for the undo feature in Microsoft Word. In a house full of cats, this function has proven to be invaluable on numerous occasions. Over the entire grad school experience, my family has demonstrated amazing patience as well as love and support. My parents, Alan and Susan, have each developed the unique skill set of composing pep talks on demand. And my two older brothers, Jeff and Scott, thankfully cut back on the sisterly teasing the last few months, so I could focus. Now, I look forward to being able to travel east again to see them, and my sister- in-law Gina Tesauro and my nieces Sydney and Noelle, more often. Towards the end I could hear, “it’s twelve moves away but it’s there.” It kept me going. Mom, kkccbbbbb. Finally, I would like to thank Linda Strapp, who has had to live with this dissertation almost as much as I have. I needed her to be there whenever I hit “send,” and she always was. v Vita June 2000 . .. Upper Dublin High School, Pennsylvania December 2004. .B.A. Women’s Studies, University of Maryland December 2004 . B.A. German Studies, University of Maryland June 2008 . .M.A. Women’s Studies, The Ohio State University Publications Wiser, Melissa C. “Sports Clothing.” In American Sports: A History of Icons, Idols and Ideas, edited by Murray Nelson. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2013. Wiser, Melissa C. “What is Discourse? A Discussion on Discourse, Social Norms, and Physical Education.” In The Dimensions of Physical Education and Health Education, edited by Lori E. Ciccomascolo and Eileen C. Sullivan, 269-76. Boston: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2013. Fields of Study Major Field: Education Specialization: Sexuality Studies vi Table of Contents Abstract……………………………………………………………………...ii Dedication…………………………………………………………………...iii Acknowledgements………………………………………………………….iv Vita…………………………………………………………………………..vi List of Figures………………………………………………………………..viii List of Abbreviations…………………………………………………………ix Introduction………………………………………………………………… .1 Chapter 1: Trust and Responsibility………………………………………....18 Chapter 2: Lacrosse History………………………………………………....38 Chapter 3: Inside, Outside, Outside, Inside…………………………………70 Chapter 4: A Tale of Two Presidents………………………………………. .112 Chapter 5: Here We Go Again………………………………………………147 Chapter 6: One Name, Two Sports………………………………………….185 Conclusion…………………………………………………………………...213 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………225 vii List of Figures Figure 1 Women’s Lacrosse Field with Positions………………………….63 Figure 2 Men’s Lacrosse Field……………………………………………..64 Figure 3 Women’s Lacrosse Field………………………………………….64 viii List of Abbreviations AAHPER American Alliance of Heath, Physical Education, and Recreation AAU Amateur Athletic Union AIAW Association for Intercollegiate Athletics for Women CALL Central Atlantic Lacrosse League CIAW Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics for Women DGWS Division for Girls’ and Women’s Sports FIL Federation of International Lacrosse IFWLA International Federation of Women’s Lacrosse Associations ILF International Lacrosse Federation IWLCA Intercollegiate Women’s Lacrosse Coaches Association IOC International Olympic Committee NCAA National Collegiate Athletic Association NILOA National Intercollegiate Lacrosse Officials Association NJLA National Junior Lacrosse Association NGB National Governing Body NOC National Olympic Committee NUC National Umpiring Committee ix PCOS President’s Commission on Olympic Sports USCLA United States Club Lacrosse Association USILA United States Intercollegiate Lacrosse Association USL US Lacrosse USLCA United State Lacrosse Coaches Association USLOA United States Lacrosse Officials Association USOC United States Olympic Committee USWLA United States Women’s Lacrosse Association x Introduction In 2008 the New York State Public High School Athletic Association voted to require helmets in girls’ lacrosse. The organization rescinded the decision shortly thereafter, but subsequent to this initial vote, leaders in the women’s lacrosse community scrambled to resist the pro-helmet momentum the vote ignited. In February 2011, the New York Times published an article “A Case against Helmets in Lacrosse” that articulated an anti-helmet stance and highlighted key issues of safety in the contentious debate, namely whether or not increased equipment would help prevent concussions and other head and face injuries.1 The potential inclusion of helmets incited a heated dialogue that articulated notions of how lacrosse should be played. This dissertation is not about helmets. Nevertheless, helmets serve as a symbol within the sport of women’s lacrosse and frame my entrance into the story of the organizational merger that created US Lacrosse. In 1998, eight separate associations joined to form one national governing body for lacrosse; this administrative shift was the first time that the sports of men’s lacrosse and women’s lacrosse in the United States were unified under one broad-based governance structure. The change was significant in that two disparate games coalesced into one system of governance. This dissertation is about the process of shifting into that system. 1 Alan Schwarz, “A Case Against Helmets in Lacrosse,” New York