Banter and the rise of LGBTQ+ awareness in football cultures: a bourdieusian approach

ABSTRACT

Using data from a 2020 survey of 2,663 football fans, this paper explores their perspectives on LGBTQ+ language at UK men's football matches. Results revealed that 95 percent of participants expressed their support for LGBTQ+ players, challenging the assumption that football fans are homophobic. Paradoxically, 78 percent acknowledged encountering language with LGBTQ+ themes when attending stadiums but interpret this in contrasting ways: 41 percent as homophobic and 37 percent as playful, humorous ‘banter’, acknowledging the fine line between humor and offense. Additionally, 22 percent reported not hearing any such language. In this paper, we attempt to make sense of the inconsistency between the presence of seemingly liberal attitudes and the partial acceptance of illiberal banter from this sample. To reconcile this paradoxical position, we find utility in the work of Pierre Bourdieu and his theory of practice, with particular emphasis on the aspect of social transformation.

Acknowledgement

This paper incorporates a limited portion of content previously published in the following scholarly article: Cashmore, E., K. Dixon, and J. Cleland. ‘Why are there still no gay professional association football players in men’s major leagues? Revisiting the views of football fans in the United Kingdom’. Journal of Homosexuality, 70 no.8 (2023): 1653-1673.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Professional Leagues were established across the UK in: England 1888, Scotland 1890, Wales 1904, Northern Ireland 1890.

2. Edensor, ‘Producing atmospheres at the match’.

3. Dixon, ‘A “Third Way” for football fandom research’.

4. Betts and Spenser, ‘“People think it’s a harmless joke”’.

5. Dixon, ‘Consuming football in late modern life’.

6. Redhead, ‘Football Attitude’ p.19.

7. Taylor, ‘The Association Game’; Gibbons et al., ‘The way it was’; Armstrong, ‘Football Hooligans’.

8. Robertson, ‘If I let a goal in, I’ll get beat up’; Rowe and McKay, ‘Is sport still a man’s game?’.

9. Clements and Field, ‘Public opinion towards homosexuality and gay rights in Great Britain’; Watt and Elliot, ‘Homonegativity in Britain: changing attitudes towards same sex relationships’.

10. Cleland et al., ‘Analyzing the presence of homosexually-themed language amongst association football fans in the United Kingdom’.

11. Krane, ‘Inclusion to Exclusion: Sport for LGBT Athletes’.

12. Magrath et al., ‘On the door-step of equality’.

13. Anderson and McGuire, ‘Inclusive masculinity theory and the politics of men’s rugby’.

14. Magrath, ‘“To try and gain an advantage for my team”’.

15. Roberts “There’s nothing homophobic about the word homosexual’.

16. Cashmore et al., ‘Why are there still no gay professional association football players in men’s major leagues?’.

17. Cashmore et al., ‘Why are there still no gay professional association football players in men’s major leagues?’.

18. Bourdieu, ‘The Logic of Practice’, p.67.

19. Wacquant, ‘Pierre Bourdieu’.

20. Bourdieu, ‘Outline of a Theory of Practice’, p.72.

21. Bourdieu, ‘Habitus’, p.45.

22. Fowler, ‘Pierre Bourdieu on social transformation’.

23. Bourdieu,‘Pascalian Meditations’, p.161.

24. Ibid.

25. Yang, ‘Bourdieu, Practice and Change’.

26. Murray, ‘Survey design: using internet-based surveys for hard-to-reach populations’, p.3.

27. Cleland et al., ‘Online Research Methods in Sports Studies’.

28. Cleland et al., ‘Why do sports fans support or oppose the inclusion of transwomen in women’s sports?’; Cleland et al., ‘Analyzing the presence of homosexually-themed language amongst association football fans in the United Kingdom’; Cleland et al., ‘Fan reflections on sexuality in Women’s Football in the United Kingdom’.

29. Cleland et al., ‘Online Research Methods in Sports Studies’.

30. Hesse-Biber, ‘Mixed methods research merging theory with practice’.

31. Cashmore et al., ‘Screen Society’; Walser et al., ‘Fan attitudes towards sexual minorities in German men’s football’.

32. Gibbons and Dixon, ‘Surfs up!’.

33. Bryman, ‘Social research methods (5th Edition)’.

34. Hein and O’Donohoe, ‘Practicing Gender’.

35. King, ‘The End of Terraces’.

36. Dixon, ‘A “Third Way” for football fandom research’’; Dixon, ‘Learning the game’; Dixon, ‘Sports Fandom’.

37. Bourdieu and Wacquant, ‘An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology’, p.127–28.

38. Plester and Sayers, Taking the piss: the functions of banter in three IT companies.

39. Bourdieu and Wacquant, ‘An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology’, p.133.

40. SRTRC, ‘Anti-racism Educational Pack’; Dixon et al., ‘Show Racism the Red Card’.

41. Bourdieu and Wacquant, ‘An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology’, p.131.

42. Sandvoss, ‘A Game of Two Halves’.

43. Dixon, ‘Sport, Spectatorship, and Fandom’.

44. Lawless and Magrath, ‘Inclusionary and exclusionary banter’; Lampert and Irvin-Trip, ‘Risky laughter’; Buglass et al., ‘Banter Versus Bullying’.

45. Rivers and Ross, ‘This channel has more subs from rival fans than Arsenal fans’.

46. Bourdieu and Passeron, ‘Reproduction in education, society, and culture’.

47. Bourdieu, ‘Pascalian Meditations’.

48. Yang, ‘Bourdieu, Practice and Change’, p.1532.

49. Dixon, ‘Sport, Spectatorship, and Fandom’.

50. King, ‘The End of Terraces’; Giulianotti, ‘Sport spectators and the social consequences of commodification’; Sandvoss, ‘A Game of Two Halves’; Dixon, ‘Football fandom and Disneyisation’.

51. Bulman, ‘Acceptance of same-sex relationships UK’.