Cricket Witness No 4 - Women at the WIcket

51 It’s not Cricket? Public Hostility and Apathy captain Betty Archdale wrote of crowd ‘barracking’ as a common feature of the 1934/5 tour, including in Australia where ‘one man, having lunched rather too well, made a long speech on the theme that woman’s place was in the home.’ 12 Male commentators argued cricket should remain a ‘masculine citadel’, and women’s inclusion challenged male hegemony over the game: ‘men will not invade the work-basket and the feminine dominion of the kitchen, but, we beseech you – let us have this one sport to ourselves!’ Other critics mocked their efforts, for example by claiming the only advantage of women’s cricket was ‘a girl who plays it can find plenty of time during a match to get on with her sewing.’ 13 Some women, usually older with self-confessed ‘Victorian’ ideals, were also antagonistic. One such woman wrote to the Women’s Cricket Association (WCA) to voice her disapproval: ‘As a lady I very strongly resent the intrusion of members of my own fair sex into the realms of a man’s game. I am proud to think that I belong to an age when ladies did what became them, and were not always rushing about madly in pursuit of new excitement. Cricket is no game for women, they should prepare themselves for the dignified position of homemakers. This they cannot do on the playing field… women and girls [should] realise how charming their ancestors were when they were so happily and quietly engaged at home.’ 14 This response was symptomatic of the unease many felt over women’s social freedoms. Both men and women expressed concern these pursuits challenged their primary function as wives and mothers, and playing for personal fulfilment was a selfish act detrimental to the nation. As some young women traded in their wartime overall for short skirts, bobbed hair and makeup, the ‘flapper girl’ of the Roaring Twenties embodied how life was simply moving too fast for large segments of English society. A woman in pads, whites and gloves was just another assault on gendered social values already in flux. Out of sight, out of mind; this was the attitude adopted by most cricket supporters. Provided women towed the party line, most men in cricket governance and journalism stayed silent, seemingly apathetic. Why give them more headlines? For example, The Cricketer magazine, founded in 1921 and aimed at upper- and upper-middle class readers, offered only anecdotal coverage until 1938. A regular page was not introduced until 1939, but did not last after the Second World War. Wisden Cricketers’ Almanack , ‘the Bible of Cricket’, failed to mention women’s cricket until 1938, when eight pages were allocated in the 991-page volume. Others, however, sought to exploit women’s cricket for their own gain. When mentioned it was usually regarding how it could aid men’s cricket, such as through educating mothers on how to teach their sons the game, or enabling women to ‘watch the game with intelligent interest instead of boredom.’ It promised not more players, but more spectators and wider public interest for the men’s game. 15