Maisy Pallister
The Women’s World Cup final has generated plenty of debate, including around the absence of Prince William and Rishi Sunak.
After 90 minutes of intense play, Spain took home the Women’s World Cup trophy, shattering England’s dreams in the process. Newspaper headlines have generally praised the Lionesses and proclaimed English pride. One topic which has generated some less-than-positive press? The absence of Prince William and Prime Minister Rishi Sunak.
Their non-appearance has raised questions regarding why they felt it appropriate to miss the game, and whether sexist reasoning underpins the decision.
Justifying their absence
Prince William has claimed that his absence was due to environmental reasons, explaining that he could not justify the environmental impact of travelling to Australia for such a short period of time. Of course, this is valid logic. William is either consciously trying to lessen his carbon footprint, or, perhaps more likely, avoiding environmentalist criticism in a well-thought-out publicity stunt.
Less convincingly, it has also been reported that William was concerned about the diplomatic implications of visiting Australia before his father.
The exact reason Rishi Sunak for Sunak’s absence is unknown, although he has claimed that a “huge amount of work” prevented him from attending the game in person.
A Question of Priorities
“It is easy to forget that this is a monumental national event”
I cannot help but think that William’s environmental obligations would have been forgotten, at least temorarily, had the men’s team reached the World Cup final. Whereas his status as President of the English FA only adds further salt to the wound. The President of the FA should care equally for men and women’s football.
It is easy to forget that this is a monumental national event – the last time England reached a World Cup final was when the male squad took home the trophy almost six decades ago in 1966. To have two of the most prominent figures in Britain missing from such an event sends the message that women’s football is lesser than and should not be taken seriously.
Such a message risks discouraging a younger generation of female athletes, perpetuating the idea that women’s sport, and football in particular, can never live up to the fame and notoriety of its male equivalent.
Lad Culture in Football
In addition to affirming gendered divisions in football, the absence of both Prince William and the Prime Minister reminds us of how much football is bound up with a particular version of English sporting nationalism that is upheld through toxic masculinity.
“it remains more important than ever to dismantle the gender stereotypes that pollute football”
Had the men’s team reached the final, Prince William and Rishi Sunak would feel compelled to be there – not only because of their status as public figures – but because of the “lad culture” which surrounds male football, making attendance mandatory for men.
The Future of Women’s Football
The Lionesses have gained legendary status across England and have been widely commended for their excellent efforts in reaching the World Cup final.
With the absence of the Prince and Prime Minister, it remains more important than ever to dismantle the gender stereotypes that pollute football, encourage young girls to participate in sport and remind them that they are just as worthy as their male counterparts.
READ MORE:
-
THE WOMEN’S WORLD CUP IS TACKLING PERIOD SHAME
-
HOW FOOTBALL PLAYERS HARNESS THE POWER OF YOGA AND BALLET
-
A FEMINIST FAN’S REACTION TO RONALDO’S HOMECOMING: WHY WOMEN STILL AREN’T SAFE IN FOOTBALL
Featured image courtesy of Jeffrey F Lin via Unsplash. No changes were made to this image. Image license found here.
