A couple of weeks ago I met someone at a function. From the outset it was clear that we both had a mutual interest in sport, particularly cricket.
He asked me who my favourite Australian cricketer was.
I said, “Alex Blackwell”.
He said, “I’ve never heard of him before”.
And I said, “Alex is a woman. She is Australia’s most capped female player and has represented her country, her state and played in the Women’s Big Bash League, captaining the Sydney Thunder for many, many years. After retiring from international cricket a couple of years ago Alex has also dabbled in coaching in Australia and overseas and now also sits on the board of Cricket NSW”.
My new friend was slightly embarrassed, particularly since he had professed himself to be an expert in Australian cricket at the start of the conversation. But I took the opportunity to tell him a bit more about one of my favourite athletes.
The situation that evening is one that has played out for me on several occasions now. I was once having a conversation with someone who knew a member of the Aussie 7s side. I professed that I did too. Turns out I assumed he meant the women’s team and vice versa.
As we continue to see the growth of women’s sport it will become harder and harder to make assumptions about which team or competition a person is talking about.
Until now the default in Australian sport has been to think of the men first – or, in some cases, only the men – but that assumption has started to shift for plenty of women and girls.
There is increasing recognition, particularly at the national level, that Australia has more than one team and that people may support one of those national teams more avidly than the others.
If I’m right and that shift has started happening, then one thing our sports will need to increasingly think critically about is language, because language matters and how we talk about our national teams and our competitions is important.
Some changes are small and easy to make. It just takes some time to train your brain. Good examples are the shift from batsmen to batter. Or from third man to third. Fieldsman to fielder. Or chairman to chair or chairperson. Eventually the more gender-neutral term becomes the norm.
(AP Photo/Rafiq Maqbool)
There’s also evidence of sports taking the initiative themselves.
In 2017 Cricket Australia made the decision to formally change the name of the Southern Stars to the Australian women’s cricket team. That shift meant that at a national level we had (among other teams) the Australian men’s cricket team and Australian women’s cricket team.
The Australian women are still at times colloquially referred to as the Southern Stars, but formally our two teams are the same from a naming perspective. At the time many women playing in the team felt that this was a big step toward gender equality for Australian cricket and celebrated the change.
On the flip side, some people blew up about it and questioned why the change needed to happen. But here we are almost a year and a half later and the sky hasn’t fallen in and women’s cricket has continued to go from strength to strength.
But in the coming years I feel like there are going to be some challenging conversations, particularly when it comes to our domestic sporting leagues, because of the introduction of women’s competitions like the WBBL, W-League, WNRL and AFLW.
When these competitions were announced, there was a preference to add the letter ‘W’ to the name of the league to signify that it was the women’s competition.
While the women’s competitions are in their infancy, perhaps this was seen as a safer strategy so not too much change happened at once. Or perhaps no-one thought about it properly. But I wonder whether over the next decade there will be increased pressure to change the name of the men’s competitions so they are simply not called the name of the league.
It is becoming increasingly popular in some AFL circles to differentiate between the two competitions by calling one AFLM and one AFLW.
To me this actually makes sense because both competitions fall under the banner of the AFL, which is the domestic league, and it’s clear whether a fan or commentator is talking about the men’s competition or the women’s competition.
In ten years could we have the MBBL and the WBBL? The WNRL and the MNRL? The Super M and the Super W?
For each of NRL, BBL, AFL and Super Rugby there is now a men’s and women’s competition. Each of these competitions should be reflected. It doesn’t change much else given that the sport and the league stay the same.
The only thing that changes is that we make a clear differentiation between the women’s competition and men’s competition and don’t simply make the women’s competition an afterthought.
Keeping the status quo will over time devalue the women’s competition, even if that is not the intention.
Who knew that one small letter could make such a significant difference?
Munro Mike
Roar Rookie
"Batter" is more of an Americanization - - "Batter up" in baseball parlance. Be careful about trying too look too hard to be offended by 'pc bs'!!!
Spinosum
Roar Rookie
I am not sure that I actually chuckled at all the above comments - the article was about women playing cricket at the top level. A bit different from my first game at Nundle (NSW) Public School in 1956 when the Big Boys sent me and my book of poetry down to the willow tree by the creek with instructions to say only which way the ball went. Occasionally I was given last bat with some of the kinder big boys to guide my hands. I played cricket with my children in our back yard in Canberra as they grew up. But the best thing I have achieved sports wise was help set up a cricket club at the China University of Geosciences, we had a Pakistani Captain, an Indian (female) umpire, two Bangladeshi players, a Sri Lankan batter, me (Australian) and a bunch of Chinese girls one of whom was our wicket keeper. Girls can play cricket and the women's team deserve all the credit they have, and then some. So please, remember their names.
VivGilchrist
Roar Rookie
Is this about sport or gender politics?
Maximus insight
Guest
You got me, I disingenuosly omitted I was referring to metro FTA figures Still....
Pope Paul VII
Roar Rookie
Jonesy cited history. Nuh I am genuinely puzzled by yourself and JJ's deep fears. Must be because I don't wake up every morning and seek reassurance in the mirror that I am white and male.
Bartparteeoo
Guest
As I said , history , a long time ago . Comprenhey ?
Pope Paul VII
Roar Rookie
Yep that's what the Irish, Welsh, Scots and many more asians, africans and antipodeans used to say when the English appeared on their doorstep armed to the back teeth "You know, at least anglo saxon culture has advanced".
Ouch
Roar Rookie
Nah, it's called respect with dash of plain old human decency. Something you guys just don't get.......... I found out the other day that the most sensitive human appendage has 8000 nerve endings yet unbelievably, it still isn't as sensitive as an offended, conservative white guy. This comment has been edited by The Roar's moderators.
BigGordy73
Roar Rookie
Are you sure on AFLW out rating NRL? These articles would suggest that is incorrect: https://mediaweek.com.au/tv-week-13-nine-almost-unstoppable-seven-again-closes-the-gap/ https://mediaweek.com.au/sports-week-record-game-attendance-and-tv-ratings-for-aflw-gf/ They have AFLW with: National FTA: 409K Capitals FTA: 321K Fox: 73K For 482K national. They have NRL (Tigers vs Bulldogs): National FTA: not listed Capitals FTA: 262K Fox: 212K For 480K Capitals + Fox So NRL Capitals + Fox is 2K short of AFLW National + Fox BUT AFLW National includes 88K regional, and NRL figure shows no regional and would comfortably have > 3K for the win seeing as NSW/Qld are far more decentralized than other states and are far more likely to have people watching NRL. AFL often touts its national ratings as capital cities only as it knows when it factors in regional that NRL is usually ahead. VIC/SA/WA: Capital city population ~7.0million, regional ~2.4million QLD/NSW: Capital city population ~7.4million, regional ~5.2million https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Australian_capital_cities It's great that AFLW is doing well, particularly considering all the other sports the AFL has had to recruit players from to get it going, and good for women's sport in general, but please stick to the facts. WBBL final rated well too, and even though it only had around 10,000 people at the final, they all had to book tickets and pay money to be there, and people were still turned away.
JimboJones
Guest
Its called history , and at least anglo saxon culture has advanced , unlike some you've taken the time to mention. Looks like the Raiders might have to have a re think ,,,Oh and the Tigers, Panthers, ,,,Cant have a carnivorous beast as a mascot ,,,, Where does it end with clowns like you ?
Paul
Roar Guru
"While the women’s competitions are in their infancy, perhaps this was seen as a safer strategy so not too much change happened at once. Or perhaps no-one thought about it properly. But I wonder whether over the next decade there will be increased pressure to change the name of the men’s competitions so they are simply not called the name of the league" Exactly where is this pressure going to come from Mary? Do you genuinely believe, hand on heart, male and female sports will be so equal by then in ALL aspects, that genuine pressure will occur to make the changes you suggest? Recognition of women's sports in this country, particularly where women are playing traditional male sports, has obviously increased significantly - but is still years away from equality. Have these types of discussions by all means, but don't be disappointed if the current situation remains in place for quite a while.
dungerBob
Roar Rookie
These things take time, and let's face it, the mens versions of the sports have much longer histories than the womens. As you said, our brains need to be trained. If there was to be a national mens netball competition I'm betting it would take a while for both comps to spring to mind equally.
JimboJones
Guest
Bart paid the ultimate price for pointing that out a little earlier this morning.
Ouch
Roar Rookie
I see the crusaders are still playing straight from the NRA handbook when asked about any potential name change of the club - "it's not the appropriate time/we're having discussions with the community/ blah blah blah. They've belatedly realised that it might not be appropriate to have their Muslim and Jew slaying mascots riding around the stadium this week.
E-Meter
Roar Rookie
So does Lehmann. It sounds stupid. Nothing wrong with batsman and batswoman.
Jack Russell
Roar Guru
You're making the misguided assumption that Mary's articles are about sport. They're about identity politics. Sport is just the vehicle for it.
Maximus Insight
Guest
Of course....I'm just suggesting that one may have thought that a domestic women's sporting event pulling 53K and out-rating the second most popular football code might have inspired a dedicated women's sports journo in to mentioning it! Particular one who expressed her outrage about the failure of the AFL to market is at the start of the season Just my thoughts. Mary can write about whatever she likes (and not implying she needs my permission either)
Pope Paul VII
Roar Rookie
Justin Clanger also uses the term. I realise now he is referring to Haydos' tempura.
JamesH
Roar Guru
"I hate the terms Batter and Fielder being used in the men’s game" Then don't use them. But if other people want to use those terms then that's their prerogative. Maybe you should be asking yourself why a couple of completely harmless words - which affect you (and the actual cricket) in absolutely no way - upset you so much.
JimboJones
Guest
Your don't still think these articles are about sport ?