Why I’m Thinking About 19th Century Women’s Sports
It’s been one week since the US Women’s National Team won their Olympic gold medal. For all the fun of the Games, I can’t help but feel that a 130-year-old script is about to repeat itself. I’ll share my thoughts in a second. First I’m going to tell you a story about soccer:
The earliest women’s sporting matches of the 1800s were viewed more like novelty burlesque or vaudeville performances rather than actual competition. The athletes were accused of questionable moral character, and to be paid suggested dubiousness. (Of course it was totally acceptable for male event organizers to make a buck and for men to pay to watch.)
These baseball and rugby exhibition matches came through San Fransisco from time to time. Newspapers would write articles, commenting on things like hair-pulling, lack of skill, and whether or not the women were attractive enough to justify attending the match. Local sports organizer Daniel McNeill took note of the financial success of these events.
At that time it was becoming acceptable and even encouraged for women to participate more in recreation at their social clubs. Some sports were considered appropriate for women, like tennis, golf, and shooting. Other sports were considered inappropriate or “manly”, like baseball and rugby. Because soccer was gaining popularity and was considered to be a respectable sport for women, McNeill saw an opportunity to host the first two (documented) women’s association soccer matches ever played in the United States.
The Colleen Bawns and Bonnie Lassies recruited and trained under Captain John Wilson and Dan Hughes, who were involved in San Fransisco’s mens league. The athletes they recruited (and paid two dollars a match) were described as enthusiastic, and some were credited as possessing a great deal of skill. Players even bought their own equipment to practice at home. The women were eager to prove themselves as true competitors, not just a one-off spectacle like the baseball exhibitions that came through town.
The newspaper coverage for the first game was, predictably, focused on the athletes’ appearances. The clothing, hair styles, and “fairy-like” way they moved were all mentioned. But aside from the obvious pandering to male readers and patronizing tone, the paper acknowledged the high level of skill held by many of the players. Adie Beufort and Josie Koster scored the goals that led the Colleen Bawns to a 2-0 victory. One reporter even claimed that the women’s match would help increase the popularity of the sport on the West Coast. General attitudes toward the event indicated that this could really be the start of something.
The second match played one week later received minimal press coverage and less attendance. There is no evidence of formal women’s soccer having continued in the city after those matches. McNeill was not interested in developing the women’s sport, he only wanted a payday.
Stories just like this happened in pockets all around the country. One-off matches by athletic clubs or industrial sides were written about with interest, communities buzzed for a blip—then support died. Although the women were ready and excited, a lack of continuity or social memory meant no meaningful leagues were formed until decades later in collegiate circles.
Cut to today:
This Olympics, watching Ilona Maher block and tackle her way to rugby bronze made one thing very clear to me: my high school Powder Puff Football night was more similar to the 1893 Colleen Bawns and Bonnie Lassies match than I care to admit. I understand that desire to prove myself with the only opportunity I was given to play football in a high school stadium, while also knowing that half the spectators were probably more interested in hair-pulling than touch downs. But watching women’s rugby sevens, I thought just look at the amazing things women can do when you don’t tell them “tackling is too aggressive for girls”. Maybe this time around rugby will make its mainstream breakthrough into the realm of “acceptable for women.”
Questioned skill and morality, gate-kept resources, lauded as heroes and a sudden lack of interest: these are the repeating genre tropes of women’s sports.
At this year’s Olympics a female boxer who was “too strong” was accused of being a man and called a liar. A female breakdancer whose skill level was below her competition was memified and accused of cheating to qualify. As for the “historically acceptable” sport of women’s soccer, our gold-winning USWNT are now tasked with reminding people that women’s soccer exists outside of national tournaments!
Progress in women’s sports—the media’s treatment of athletes, the language we use around them, the level of pay, the amount of resources—is impossible if we continue to let it exist only at the margins of our lives. Otherwise the script is just going to repeat itself with the same old cliches.
So here’s my challenge for you:
If you want to do the least, follow women’s club teams on socials. It takes no money, but keeps the your club team in your feed and the front of your mind.
If you want to do the medium, watch games! I watch on Paramount+, which also is how I get some of my EFL matches.
If you want to do the most, go to a match! Buy tickets, buy merch, heck, even get yourself some season tickets if you’re able.
NWSL is in the middle of their regular season. If you haven’t heard yet, it’s the inaugural year for the USL Super League. This league is designated Division One and will follow a fall-to-summer calendar. If you aren’t into American clubs, that’s fine—I can almost guarantee that your European team has a women’s side.