RE: The Problem With Women Football: Conclusion
You are viewing a single comment's thread:
I responded to your last post in this series with a different history about women's football.
Women played football on the same terms as men from at least 1880 and at some stage in the late 1890s and early 1900s there were mixed teams of men and women. I think a stop was put to mixed teams somewhere around 1902 and, as I wrote in my comment in your last post, women's football was effectively banned by the Football Association in 1921.
Women's matches were hugely popular in the early twentieth century and raised a lot of money. Significantly, they were outside the control of the Football Association. The decision of the FA was part of a wider backlash against women and their role outside the home: during the 1914-1918 war women had been doing jobs that men had done, except for reserved occupations. There was also deep concern throughout the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century about anarchism with numerous police spies informing about working class activity including sources of revenue. (Incidentally, many of the records of the payment of police spies remain redacted).
When the ban was first introduced, clubs were required to submit their receipts for every game to the FA. That is exceptionally close surveillance.
It's taken a hundred years for women's football to recover. I agree with you that women's exclusion from football has meant that football has moved on without them. However, my conclusion is that it was as a result of capitalism and patriarchy. As capitalism and patriarchy sustain to this day, women's football will only move forward if the hyper-rich decide to invest in it, or we are able to overcome capitalism. Oh wait, we have crypto!
Great series, I hope you enjoyed writing it.
I am aware of this and I was literally going to respond to your comment there before the notification here popped up.
Yes, we can conclude that women's football was popular before the ban. However, the lack of entertainment outlets at the time creates a point of contention that could have sidetracked the whole series. Plus, as we both seem to agree, football has moved on. And it should be mentioned how it changed to favor men more.
The series was poorly organized here actually as the first point (sexism) would have covered a big segment of why it was dissolved. However, the biggest mistake I made was a technical one that ended up with me somehow missing a whole addition of oversaturation when it comes to football; the main idea being that men's football already has 4 top leagues, domestic cups in those leagues, and 3 European competitions. Those are watched worldwide so you could add domestic and continent titles to those places. That's just on the clubs' level. It would have backed my final conclusion as football with few differences is a much-welcomed change anyway, and it actually has a basis.
I still stand behind my final conclusion which is that the efforts are being wasted in the wrong areas and instead should be focused on developing women's football or sport in general away from men's, that includes studies, and even giving women better presentation in Fifa and regulation associations. It also includes the simple question men had every few years as the game was developing; what do you think should be changed? The lack of research in that area is what prompted my conclusion missing as I didn't have a specific direction.
However, I do concede that this series needed much more polishing and I may have gotten over excited to publish it. Perhaps I should have also stuck to the much longer version which included much of what you mentioned. But, I am never able to find the right way to deal with the attention span on Hive and I already got DMed a couple of times (By people with large votes) stating that I am "milking it" by doing parts.
I may revisit this at a later date as I can't go back and rewrite it now (Especially with those milking claims) I would suggest you check out the link in the sources worded (Why Aren't Women's Sports as Big as Men's? Your Thoughts) as it matches much of my way of thinking about the subject.
I am glad you liked it, at least where we agreed. I enjoy researching and preparing it, the rest is the hell of dividing it into parts without looking like I am milking it, another thing is I can't go as point by point as I would like as that might be "rewording" which both can get me downvoted to hell. It's impossible to explain without sounding whiny about little details but they do add up and it is extremely tiring and annoying.
"Women played football on the same terms as men from at least 1880 and at some stage in the late 1890s and early 1900s there were mixed teams of men and women"
"The decision of the FA was part of a wider backlash against women and their role outside the home.."
"However, my conclusion is that it was as a result of capitalism and patriarchy."
Revealing,I never knew this before.
Thanks for this information and it offers some balance on this topic.
Cheers