THIS WEEK’S GUEST on Behind the Lines is Anna Kessel, women’s sport editor at the Telegraph and author of Eat, Sweat, Play: How Sport Can Change Your Life.
Behind the Lines is our weekly sportswriting podcast here on The42, in which we speak with sportswriters about their career and their favourite pieces of writing. To subscribe, go to members.the42.ie.
Over the course of the podcast we discussed the phrase women’s sport, and whether the the ambition is to reach a point at which there is no need for a prefacing word, where women’s sport is marketed and understood solely as sport?
Canoeist and 20×20 ambassador Jenny Egan raised that point in an interview with Emma Duffy of this website over the weekend: “Two, three, four-year-olds need to grow up knowing it’s not women’s sport, it’s just sport. That’s what’s really important. It will take a few years and it is a culture shift but it’s moving in the right direction, we just need to keep the momentum up.”
Kessel has a different view.
“I always feel quite conflicted on this question. In some ways I think, ‘Yeah, that would be great, we should be seen as just sport.’ In other ways I think, what if it was women’s sport and men’s sport?
“If it wasn’t just ‘sport’, and we acknowledge the differences and celebrate the differences. Because they are different, and that’s okay.
“I think if we pretend we are the same as men’s sport then that will never really work, and all those idiots will never be convinced. They’ll probably never be convinced anyway.
“I think there’s something important about remembering what the differences are, and recognising that for the most part men’s sport has had so much investment and privilege that most of women’s sport has never had, and to recognise those differences you have to call it out and name it, and I think that’s a helpful way of doing it.”
Kessel edits a monthly supplement on women’s sport for the Telegraph in the UK, and while she recognises the strides made by women’s sport over the last few years – particularly by football – she worries the cost-cutting wrought by the Covid-19 pandemic may reverse that progress.
“I think that’s a wider question for the whole of women’s sport, and equality generally. There’s a feeling that commitments to equality are being rowed back on as we’re in a state of crisis and quality is now being rebranded as a luxury, but you can’t allow it to affect your bottom line.
For example, Claire Connor of the ECB [English Cricket Board] – who I respect a lot – said at a press conference two weeks ago that because of a revenue loss of €380 million, men’s international cricket has got to come first and women’s international cricket will probably have to wait. That’s a classic example of women coming second. It doesn’t have to be that way. If you look to Germany, they have created a system where women can return to play, they have a date, 29 May, when they’ll be returning. There are subsidies to help women with testing and getting the games back on. They are trying to have parity but in England we haven’t seen enough of that.”
In contrast to German football, the Women’s Super League in England has been curtailed, with a decision on how to conclude the league season off the pitch yet to be agreed.
“It was a hugely exciting title race, unfortunately, there was so little in it at the top”, says Kessel.
“How on earth can you decide it fairly without playing it, but how do you play it if you’re not prepared to invest money for testing? What it means is how long will it be before women’s football comes back into visibility, and coming back on our screens?
“Those are the ramifications, at a time we were building crowds, we were trying to get the point domestic broadcast deal: what is this going to mean? Does it mean women will again take a second place to men? That’s deeply troubling.
“Women’s sport and women are so bloody resilient. We’ve been banned, we’ve been given no money, all the rest of it. Women’s sport has been through all of that and it can go through it again if it needs to, it’s not going to go away. It’s not going to disappear.
What makes me worried and what makes me cross is we might have to do it all over again. We’ve made all this progress and then we’ll have to climb back up the wall. Is this really what we’re going to have to do, just because somebody looks at the spreadsheet ad says, ‘Actually, the women’s team is going to cost me, I don’t know, a couple of percent of the overall budget, so let’s strip it away and save a bit of cash?’
“That fundamentally bothers me, I think it’s such a terrible decision to make.”
You can listen to the full interview with Anna by subscribing at this link.
This topic is getting really old now. Women themselves don’t support women’s sport either. For example, the number of women at a women’s rugby or GAA match is practically zero, but they will turn up in their thousands to a mens Munster rugby match or inter county GAA game.
@James Smart: Don’t forget men’s
Leinster and Ireland International games too.
@Ron: Exactly. Thousands of women at the Aviva for the men’s 6 nations and 50 women spectators at the women’s 6 nations
@James Smart: An exception is men’s soccer matches were very few women attend, I wonder why?
@Ron: there’s no prestige in attending a soccer match
@James Smart: sad but true
@James Smart: not much entertainment either
@Chris Mc: you on about rugby? Ye totally agree.
Look, forget about sports gender equality in relation to pay, investment and quality. The inequality isn’t an investment issue, it’s a physiological and psychological divide that will never be bridged.
@Almight Joe: why forget about it? Why not invest in it and see how good you can make it. Tennis has two I’d say equally popular men’s and women’s formats and both are heavily invested in and promoted.
@Almight Joe: Would you spout that “it’s physiological and psychological” pseudo-claptrap to Katie Taylor, or maybe Rachel Blackmore or other great female sports stars?
Or if you had a daughter who was training for her dream professional sports career, would you tell her “I don’t know why you bother, you don’t deserve the same funding as the boys – it’s a physiological and psychological thingamajig – now run off and wash the dishes quickly … LOL!”.
@Daithi O’Hakaman: You claim the physiological divide between men and women is “claptrap”?
@Dermot Dooley: do some research, men’s tennis is a lot more popular. Just because Wimbledon pays the same prize money doesn’t make them equal.
@Dermot Dooley: you are incorrect Dermot. Mens tennis creates the majority of the revenue. Also at the grand slams the men have to play 5 set matches & the ladies play 3 set matches but the price money is the same. Not much equality there.
@Daithi O’Hakaman: investors will invest where there is more money to be made. Or is that ‘pseudo claptrap’ to? Honestly i wouldn’t want my daughter involved in any sport if the organisers don’t understand that males & females are different.
@Almight Joe: your correct about the physiological difference. But I think you are missing the point. It’s about an aspiration that men can have but your saying that women can’t. They should have similar opportunities as men’s sports. However I believe the expectation there by women to be equal to a men’s game is unrealistic in most but not all sports. Where men and women can compete at the same level by all means but just because women want to be equal it just can’t be so. Men have physiologically better dexterity and physicality that you can’t argue with which lends itself to a more skillful spectacle in a lot of sports we watch. I’m not sexist but this is just why men and women don’t compete together at most activities.
@John Buckley: Is it really more popular? Viewing figures for grand slam finals show that the women’s final regularly beat the men’s finals. Tennis fans follow the most popular players rather than the men’s or women’s games. And the difference between tennis and football is that women have always been encouraged to play. As opposed to the FA in the UK who actually banned women from playing for 50 odd years. It’s no wonder the game is still playing catch up. Matches in Europe and international games show that crowds will turn up and support women’s football if it’s marketed and invested in properly.
@Dermot Dooley: disagree Dermot. Encouragement can’t not compensate for the physiological differences between men and women. Let the women and men play together in a tennis tournament. See what happens…
@Daithi O’Hakaman: But hes right. Statistically speaking, women have flip all interest in female team sports. Katie Taylor is an individual who has done very well for herself on an international level, but id wager more men are interested in watching her compete than women are.
@Pauline Gallagher: I think your right . Katie is an unbelievable athlete and roll model but how many girls given a choice would know Katie over Kim Kardashian.
@Caoimhín O’Cheallacháin: They do it’s called mixed doubles. And so what about differences? I’m not advocating getting rid of men’s and women’s sport and combining them. I’m saying that proper investment in women’s sport will increase both the quality and participation rates of that sport. It’s been proven already that with proper marketing large crowds will attend (see women’s GAA football finals attendance growing every year plus 68000 people at Atletico women’s team v Barcelona women’s team earlier this year). More investment from the grass roots up increase quality and participation. Just because it’s women playing doesn’t mean they should less infrastructure and facilities. And that doesn’t mean taking money away from mens sport either. The same facilities can be used for both.
@Dermot Dooley: the viewing figures for grand slam finals show that the men’s finals regularly get about double the viewers of the womens final. Are you just making up your posts
@John Buckley: In 2018 the US open and Wimbledon women’s finals were both watched by more people than the men’s. Between 2010 and 2016 at least 5 of the women’s finals in the US open had higher viewership than the men’s. That’s regularly beating the men on tv. And sometimes it’s the other way round. My point was that if you invest in a sport, then the support for that sport increases as does the quality. The people watching those finals where watching for the players involved, not because they chose between men and women’s sport. And that’s why investment is needed in women’s sport generally to increase both participation and also quality.
@Dermot Dooley: you do know that ticket prices are less than €15 for an adult and €5 for a kid sometimes free for ladies finals in Croke Park. If the ticket prices were on par with the men’s final what numbers would you see?
As a matter of fact, a group of ten under a certain age get in free with an adult. I may be wrong on that but it’s certainly the case at adult club level anyway.
@Daithi O’Hakaman: ‘pseudo-claptrap’? Does that not imply it’s true?
@Dermot Dooley: the men’s Wimbledon final in 2018 clashed with the world cup final. Anytime the women’s us final gets more viewers is down to the popularity of Serena William in the US. Men’s grand slam finals gets a lot more viewers more regularly than the women’s finals.
@Dermot Dooley: yes I agree. But standard wise. Men’s sports are higher. Yes women’s sports need investment etc etc but they can’t be on a par with men’s. They don’t have the fan base. You have to be realistic. Live within your means. I remember growing up with no dressing rooms and getting charged at the side of the field in cars all over the county and country. Its not going to be handed to women’s sports. They need to earn it fund raise and grow.
@John Buckley: plus men’s final is on a Sunday and generally does brilliant even though it has to compete with a lot of other popular men’s sports like football etc etc
@Almight Joe: how is it you never see young girls kick a ball in the streets like masses of boys do.. My guess is that girls who do play take it up a college at around 18..men play from about 6..
Also in general when you discuss soccer to women it goes down like a lead balloon… Its obvious that the vast majority of women are not interested in sport..
@Daithi O’Hakaman: aw but even Katie is not equal. She doesn’t get the money. Women don’t get the money etc because their sports don’t attract the crowds. Economics.
I’m a male Super model and never get paid the same amount as my female counterparts Naomi and Kate and Gisele. I feel their pain. #metoo
@Lee Mac Eoghain: The same can be said for the adult film industry. Men earn peanuts compared to the female performers.
male privilege!! Lol Boys and men have been playing all forms of sports long before they became organised and financially rewarding . Money and investment took hundreds of years to manifest itself in football. For the vast majority of time men had to play and train in the worst of conditions no training facility’s mud pitches with no remuneration. It’s only since the premiership came into existance crazy money has entered the men’s game . In 1961 the average wage of a footballer was 20 pounds. The vast majority of boys play sport for the competitiveness nature of it . They don’t need to be organised just 4 jumpers and a bit of space . When was the last time you seen a group of girls just all girls playing sports out in the street. I’ve never!! investors invest in investible things.
@Jason Fogarty: Women don’t want men to have nice things. Jealous bunch.
@Jason Fogarty: I wonder if the lawsuit in the US brought by Alex Morgan and Megan Rapinoe in which they asked for equal pay, the judge ruled against them last week. He said they did not suffer discriminatory compensation because they earned more than the men. During the contested period, the women’s team played 111 games and earned $24.5 million while the men played 87 games and made $18.5 million.
The women negotiated a safer contract which ensured they had such things as health insurance and child care while the men’s contract was negotiated on a no-win, no pay basis.
@Arch Angel: and that usa women’s soccer team were beaten 5-2 by an under 14 boys team..
She shot herself in the foot when she mentioned the Women’s Premier League and the unfairness of not finishing the season. That’s the way it is for the lower leagues in the men’s game too. Nothing to do with gender, everything to do with quality and/or cash money.
@The Grumpy Pundit: The author made it clear by saying that men and women are not the same, and they’re not. She then complains that they’re not being treated the same either, huh?
The fact is most of the male sports bring in the highest revenues, and their contracts negotiate a higher percentage of this. That “investment and privilege”, as she puts it, didn’t just occur overnight but in some cases took generations where men competed as unpaid amateurs or for a pittance compared to the salaries earned today.
What she’s demanding however is for women to earn comparative sports salaries, no negotiation, overnight, if they don’t have the same audience attendance or advertising revenue she wants these to be subsidised. Who’s really entitled here?
@Arch Anqgel: women want to be treated like men up until the day that they get treated like men then we’re sexist lol.
I don’t think it’s a gender thing at all, it’s a popularity thing. Men’s football gets more investment than men’s swimming because it’s more popular. Similarly men’s swimming gets more investment than female basketball because it’s more popular, not because of gender. I say this as someone who’s a huge fan of female basketball btw. My daughter started playing a few years ago and I’ve become a huge supporter from a base of knowing nothing. It’s fantastic I’d love to see it get more funding but am realistic that it’s a minority sport so needs to show it’s growing to justify more investment.
Anna isn’t telling us something that isn’t already known but there’s no way that women’s sport (say football) is going to be invested in to a significant degree overnight. It won’t be rushed into simply because financial returns aren’t guaranteed….that’s just the way it currently is. I hope there comes a point when women’s football is a lot bigger than it is but I’ll not be holding my breath. On another note, are 2 – 4 year-olds really that aware that they are playing sports from a female vantage, or are they just playing sports?
I’m not sure if using incendiary terms like “idiots” is the best way to go about this by Anna. Some of her comments here read with a tinge of anger. I could be wrong but I thought, in Ireland anyway, that the narrative of dissent and objection had left this discussion.
@EnKy: I thought the same when I read the line, “all those idiots will never be convinced”. Without knowing who she was referring to it stands out as a bit childish.
Women’s sport has a mountain to climb, especially with popular sports like football. They don’t generate anywhere near the money of the men’s game and because of that simple fact they will always be an afterthought to those who govern.
@EnKy: At under age level in most sports, kids are divided into groups of similar abilities and physical attributes. At adult level that translates into men’s sports and momen’s sports. If there was only football as opposed to women’s or men’s football, very few women would play at a competitive level.
The problem with women’s football, women’s rugby, camogie, etc is that they are a poor ‘product offering’ compared to men’s equivalent. So unfortunately in the world we live in they don’t get the money.
The administrators need to look at the way these women’s sports are played and market them differently so that they are not just a poor relation of their men’s version
@Feardorcha Ó Maolomhnaigh: : correct , I would also add women don’t support female sports stars to the degree they support female television personalities ie. The Kardashians and so forth . There’s a reason Kylie
Kardashians is worth 1 Billion and Kim Alison Little is on an average wage at Arsenal . Women buy into the Kardashians brand and are willing to part with their hard earned cash in exchange for products and information. Women like to have Eurovision parties, Big Brother parties, Love Island parties but would they meet up to watch a game in the WSL . Doubt it . Maybe these are idiots Anna is referring to in her piece but somehow i doubt it also. She used male privilege which I found odd because no doubt she’s employed due to gender quotas laws.
@Jason Fogarty: I am not as brave as you, so I am not going to get into the dangerous territory of generalising about women’s likes and dislikes
The thing with the Kardashian’s and Love Island etc is that they know who their demographic are, and they tailor their product, and market accordingly
I could be wrong but I would guess that administrators from many women’s sports think that just because someone enjoys men’s football, they would also enjoy women’s football. Although I don’t have data to back up my claims, I would safely say that is complete bo!!ox.
@Feardorcha Ó Maolomhnaigh: certainly not generalising. I think the data is pretty clear when it comes to participation levels in sports, people attending sporting events, sports subscribers , payers of PPV and people who comment on sporting treads . It’s overwhelmingly male dominated . You only have to look at who’s commenting on all the sports articles on the 42 to see its 90% or more male discussing everything . Yes there is lots of girls very interested who may not comment but by in large males love playing, going and talking about sport more than girls. But having said that I know loads of girls who are serious sports fans and could match any man in their passion and commitment to their team. But unfortunately they are in the minority. We need more girls supporting women in sport.
I grew up just viewing men and women’s sport as “sport”. The difference is advertised and emphasised by organisations coming out now and making a big deal out of it. Nobody ever watched Sonia O’Sullivan in the Olympics and thought “she’s a woman doing sports… WTF”. I find it interesting that Jenny Egan is quoted. Canoeing Ireland hardly promote the sport at all.
This is why this blog isn’t taken seriously.
And never will have
One thing I didn’t mention in my other post as it was getting too long anyway..
One area that does need greater investment in women’s sport in general is encouraging young girls/teenagers to stay in sport. Any sport, at any level. It’s not for everyone, I get that, but it offers such huge benefits for health, fitness, mental well-being, personal growth and development that as a public health issue alone it needs to be focused on more.
I attribute a lot of my current good mental health to playing my sport. The friends, camaraderie, support structure, challenges, fitness and (occasional) triumphs give me a solid, reliable foundation to work from. That can’t be underestimated and needs to be championed in female sport where participation rates are lower.
@Peter McCarthy: Men are different creatures. Why are women (and men) so loathe to acknowledge this? Of course there are plenty of women who feel the same way as you do when playing team sports (camaraderie, bonding ect), but men are much more likely to feel that way than women about it. Women are often competitive within their OWN team, and civil rivalry, jealously, or just plain clique mentality often occurs
@Pauline Gallagher: I’m basing this on what my wife and three daughters have all found, along with their teammates, in the various sports they participated in or used to play; basketball, hockey, surf lifesaving and football being the main ones they’ve been part of. Like I said originally, not for everyone (men or women), and that’s fine, but encouraging and giving an opportunity to everyone to participate in a sport they enjoy, any sport, is fundamentally a good thing.
The P word again, the favourite weapon of the progressive.
Womens sport is muck.
Women’s sport is crap, how d’ya like them apples…
Put all sports together have no womens or mens sports, who ever is the best play simple
Men’s sport has been building it’s brand for over a hundred years women’s sport needs to be patient and build there’s not expect to have an entitlement of a hand out
Whatever your thing of saying, say nothing