The compelling issue here is not any purported inequity in funding between men's and women's sports. For all of its egalitarian inclinations, the staff cannot point to any convincing statistical evidence of any such unfairness.

What the staff should decry is the fact that men's and women's intercollegiate athletics at Harvard both consume so much money already. And every argument about the relationship between team support and alumni contributions shows that intercollegiate sports are a Faustian bargain; The University goes out of its way to recruit academically underqualified candidates because of their revenue-earning potential.

The staff suggests that more time and energy should be poured into women's sports for the sake of fairness. Reordering the current system would not make it any less disgraceful.

Seriously, what should an equitable academic institution support: more hockey coaches or smaller discussion sections for courses? Limited Harvard resources should be directed toward the fundamental goal of our institution: education.

So, if the staff really wants fairness, it should not haggle over whether funds should be split between men's and women's sports 50-50 or 60-40. It should instead call for the only truly equitable formula: 0-0.