Has Sports Fanaticism Fostered Abusive Behavior Toward Women?

October is National Domestic Violence Awareness Month, and hopefully the sports world is taking heed. From colleges to the pros, from overwrought coaches to spoiled athletes, brutal treatment of women is alarmingly prevalent among the jock set.

Researchers are not prepared to say that male athletes and coaches are disproportionately involved in assaults against women. Data is inconclusive.

But common sense says our fanaticism has created a breed of filthy-rich, on-the-edge athletes and coaches with the social instincts of cave men.

As evidence, I submit my file on assault cases. During the past 16 months, since hearing those harrowing 911 tapes of Nicole Brown Simpson, I have saved stories about sports figures accused of violence against women.

It is a thick file. There are more than 30 names, some famous, some obscure. There are athletes and coaches, college and pro.

Perhaps some of the charges are bogus. But here are some facts.

Boxer Mike Tyson did time for rape. Nebraska running back Lawrence Phillips has not denied allegations that he dragged his ex-girlfriend by her hair down three flights of stairs.

Jimmy Black resigned as an assistant basketball coach at Notre Dame because of domestic violence charges against him. The wife of Atlanta Braves manager Bobby Cox called police to their home, but later recanted her charge that Cox struck her in the face with his fist.

The estranged wife of Miami Dolphins fullback Irving Spikes claims he hit her while she was pregnant. Former Kansas City Chiefs receiver Tim Barnett was convicted of second-degree sexual assault for grabbing a 14-year-old hotel maid and exposing himself.

But a collection of newspaper accounts is not scientific data, especially given the overzealous media attention athletes endure. For scientific data, we turn to researchers at the University of Massachusetts and Northeastern University. Northeastern is home to the Center for the Study of Sport in Society.

The study used two sets of data, one from campus police reports at 20 major colleges, one from the judicial affairs office reports at 10 major colleges. The study did not address eventual court findings of guilt or innocence.

At the 20 schools, athletes comprised 3.7 percent of the male student population and were named in 5.2 percent (two of 38) of the sexual assaults. Researchers called the results inconclusive.

At the 10 schools, athletes comprised 3.3 percent of the male population and were involved in 18.8 percent (13 of 69) of the sexual assaults. Since the judicial affairs offices had broader definitions of sexual assault, the data was again called inconclusive. Researchers said alcohol abuse was a far greater predictor of violence than being an athlete.

The study did not address professional athletes and coaches, and of the millions of assaults committed against women, reported and unreported, it is impossible to determine how many involve sports figures.

But the Massachusetts-Northeastern study forwarded a hunch: “Although the sample size was small, the data hinted that sexual assault was not endemic to all sports. Contact sports like football and basketball were overrepresented, raising the possibility that athletes trained to use physical dominance on the field are more likely to carry these lessons into their relationships.”

It makes sense. And consider this, too: Football and basketball are our glamour sports. Young stars in those games are more likely to be coddled, to get away with poor grades and truancy. Young stars in those games are more likely to believe they are above the rules.

But violence is not about the rules. Violence is about the law, and no one should be above the law.