Two months ago, The Crimson reported discrepancies in the treatment of men's and women's athletics teams. Women athletes and coaches complained that their teams received less funding than their male counterparts, and were granted unequal use of equipment and facilities. We called those discrepancies unfair--and we called for the Department of Athletics to level the field.

Last week, The Crimson obtained an athletics department report that detailed--and quantified--that unfairness. Now, our call for equity seems even more urgent.

In the report, which was prepared last fall, the department found that it plays about twice as much in salaries, equipment, travel, uniforms and other expenses for men's teams as for women's teams. The report also details discrepancies from alumni donations to practice time at Bright Hockey Center.

In an interview last week, President Neil L. Rudenstine defended the department on the basis of arguments we've heard before. Harvard contends that the percentage of participation by women approximates the percentage of funds women's teams receive. Harvard has always contended that it has more women's teams--and more women athletes--than most other schools. For these reasons, athletics officials and University leaders maintain that Harvard treats its women's teams fairly--and that Harvard's athletics department remains in full compliance with Title IX, part of a 1972 law that mandates "equal opportunity" for male and female athletes.

Harvard isn't the first to make this case. Brown University officials said the same thing when they cut two women's sports teams. The teams disagreed, sued under title IX, and won. The case is now on appeal--and is being followed closely by some of Harvard's women athletes.

We're not saying that Harvard should fund its teams absolutely equally. Certain sports draw more crowds--and, quite possibly, more alumni donations that fund such programs as financial aid. And fewer women than men are enrolled in the College.

But, Harvard's argument doesn't address a fundamental problem with athletics funding here: It all but ensures stagnation. If Harvard doesn't put as much money into its women's teams, it discourages further sports participation among women. Clearly, Harvard needs to find a better balance.

Right now, women receive 32 percent of the athletics department's budget. They make up 35 percent of College athletes. While these numbers may seem in line with each other, making women's athletics a priority would certainly encourage greater participation and a high level of play. That men's hockey is designated a top-level sport and that women's hockey is Level II has a large impact on these programs' development.

Plus, the department's participation argument is disingenous. The athletics department is not a recreational program; you don't play hockey for Harvard just by showing up at Bright with skates and a stick. In fact, recruiting efforts largely determine participation. And the department's own report acknowledges disproportionate funds spent on recruiting for four sports: men's hockey, football and men's and women's basketball.

Director of Athletics William J. Cleary '56 has told women's coaches that it will be difficult to give women's teams more funding unless the Faculty allocates more money to the athletics department. But in times of overall Faculty budget cuts, that's an unrealistic solution. Cleary and Senior Associate Director of Athletics Francis J. Toland, who manages the budget, will have to make some hard choices, or women's teams will continue to face discrimination.

We'd like to see athletics department officials work with coaches, athletes and the faculty committee that oversees the department--and find ways to redress this imbalance by redistributing funds. Of course, that won't happen unless Toland and Cleary reveal the closely guarded details of their budget.

Harvard needs to make these choices now, before tough financial times make, those choices even tougher. Bold action by Harvard would help raise women's participation levels to the level of women's enrollment. And Harvard's actions could touch off similar changes at other schools, leaving a generation of female athletes in better shape.

Harvard shouldn't underestimate the importance of Title 1X. Until the athletic department makes a serious commitment to equal funding and access, Harvard women's athletes and coaches should be vigilant about their rights--and willing to take a stand.