“We exist. Don’t forget or overlook us.”: queering the legacies of the 2023 Women’s FIFA World Cup

The popularity for women and non-binary people watching women’s football is unsurprising, given women and gender-diverse fans are reported to be comfortable at family-friendly, community orientated and racially inclusive environments of women’s football (Leslie-Walker et al., 2024; Schallhorn et al., 2024). Recent studies have examined women’s football fans’ motivations, noting the inclusion and openness of players and fan communities that are welcoming to women and gender-diverse fans (Allison and Pope, 2021). In contrast, men’s football is often perceived as hostile towards women (Kossakowski et al., 2022) and LGBTQ+ people (Cleland et al., 2022; Storr et al., 2022) and demands a highly feminised gender performativity from women fans (Martins et al., 2022). Collectively, these studies provide researchers with an in-depth analysis of fans’ motivations to attend women’s football games and their experiences therein.

In this study, we build upon the previous fan research by examining legacy through the lens of the experiences and perspectives of LGBTQ + women and non-binary fans. In so doing, we respond to Schallhorn et al.'s (2024) and Leslie-Walker et al.’s (2024) call for intersectional analysis in fan research by examining the legacy and its impact from the intersection of gender and sexuality. In order to lay a foundation, we turn to our conceptual framework: queer theory, an approach that explores sexuality and gender through multiple identities, perspectives and desires for change.

Queer theory emerged out of a critique of sexual identities as stable categories as scholars examined the sociohistorical production of knowledge through which homosexuality became intelligible (King, 2008). Queer theory is also a term to describe multiple theoretical perspectives that “operate as a set of intellectual claims, practices and political actions which — broadly speaking — challenge normative knowledges and identities” (Rumens et al., 2019, p. 597). It has been used in the sport sociology literature since the early 2000s to analyse various inequities produced by dominant power relations, including, but not limited to, race, disability, ethnicity, sexuality and gender identity (Caudwell, 2022; Waldron, 2018). It has gained traction in related areas such as sport psychology (Krane and Waldron, 2021) and sport management (Knoppers, 2022). Queering is used as a verb, rather than a noun or adjective, to describe actions that destabilise normative truths, such as identity, binary formations and dominant sexuality norms (Rumens et al., 2019). Sedgwick suggests that queerness invites us to explore “the open mesh of possibilities, gaps, overlaps, dissonances and resonances, lapses and excesses of meaning when the constituent elements of anyone’s gender, of anyone’s sexuality aren’t made (or can’t be made) to signify monolithically” (2013, p. 8, italics in original). A phenomenon does not have to “be” queer to be analysed through the lens of queer theory (Bendl et al., 2008). Queer theory challenges norms and decentres traditional power relations and dominant discourses which, in this research, articulate knowledge about who is considered in WWC legacies with respect to gender and sexuality (Bendl et al., 2008). Disrupting or queering normative truths works to both reveal exclusionary power relations (such as heteronormativity or whiteness) while also opening up space for marginalised knowledges and practices that respect different modes of being.

Researchers have been limited in their use of queer theory to advance understanding in sport management beyond normative identity categories. Given its focus on “disturbing, dislocating, and deconstructing the infinite normativities by self-identified non-normative individuals” (Caudwell, 2022, p. 342), queer theory provides a compelling framework for rethinking future sport legacies beyond normative assumptions that locate sexuality and gender within binary formations. Sexuality remains invisible, and LGBTQ+ individuals unrecognisable, with respect to the barriers, aspirations and investment in gender equality actions mapped out through WWC 2023 legacy plans. Queer theory makes those things visible in particular ways, not by simply adding or including queer women into existing liberal feminist and heteronormative logics or norms (Caudwell, 2017) underpinning football legacy plans. Rather, the analytic practice of queering legacy discourses operates in two ways: (1) drawing attention to the way heteronormative logics work to silence and exclude LGBTQ + women and non-binary fans, thus failing to address discrimination and (2) exploring what queer alternatives and imagined possibilities exist beyond such logics (Caudwell, 2022). In doing this, queer theory provides a useful approach to examining how LGBTQ+ women and non-binary fans engage with, and reimagine, what a WWC legacy could be.

Queer theory provides the conceptual space to directly challenge the assimilation of diversity into conventional organisational norms (Vitry, 2021), including sport (Knoppers, 2022), such as those described in FIFA 2.0. Alongside queer theory, intersectionality is an analytical approach used by queer and feminist theorists to challenge these dominant, historically masculine norms. This recognises the fluidity of identities, cumulative effect of multiple power relations and the overlap of oppressive experiences of people from diverse communities. For example, as King (2008) noted in her critical review of the limitations of queer theory’s use in sport, a white LGBTQ+ cis-woman’s experiences of exclusion from sport are likely to be very different to a transwoman of colour’s experience. Both experiences are influenced by gendered, heteronormative assumptions; however, the exclusion of a transwoman of colour from sport is likely to also be informed by racism and transphobia (Knoppers, 2022). For Vitry (2021) and Ahmed (2006) queer theory also enables researchers to analyse the sociocultural forces that shape the experiences of individual bodies (fans, players, administrators, coaches) that do not fit organisational norms and the cultural formation of organisational bodies (disrupting heteronormativity).

In this research, moments of disruption may be at the individual level, for example a fan’s actions, or at the group level, such as supporters’ groups that identify as LGBTQ + friendly, and/or national and global organisations such as NZF, FA or FIFA. Knoppers (2022) argue that such disruption is also possible in sport policies and programmes because of the challenges queer theory presents to a strict adherence to normative identity characteristics and binary thinking. In a queered world, people are not constrained by the age-old assumptions about gender, race or sexuality, rather, the interaction of multiple, fluid identities creates new pleasures and connections (Caudwell, 2022). Yet, football organisations, such as those in Aotearoa/NZ and Australia who position themselves as leading change for gender equity, appear to be either wilfully ignorant or deliberately excluding queer fans in their legacy plans. At the same time, queer fan communities are queering the stadiums and being visible in representations that celebrate the pleasures and joys of football in ways that exceed narrow organisational claims about the sport.

Queering occurs in the relational dynamics that individuals, groups and organisations experience in terms of how the strategies, words and images of FIFA’s legacy documents resonate with their experiences and logics. Paying attention to these tensions and relations that sustain and disrupt heteronormativity, queer theory provides a “starting point to begin imagining queer organizing as a practice of resistance against these spaces” (Vitry, 2021, p. 936). Queer theory enables researchers to understand the dynamic relations of a highly mediated global women’s sport event that shapes both individual and organisational norms, and question them queerly. From this perspective, we ask “how might we begin to imagine a queer future for football?”

Legacy is typically associated with outputs after a SME (Weed et al., 2015); however, in this case, both NZF and FA were committed to activating legacy outcomes before the WWC started in 2023. The documents Legacy Starts Now (NZF, 2019) and Legacy ’23 (FA, 2023) outline the social, economic and participation legacy outcomes that were achieved before the start of the tournament, including increasing access to funding (FA, 2023) and the development and implementation of community football programmes such as the Fantails/Kotuitui (NZF, 2019). Consequently, timing the research to investigate participants’ experiences of WWC legacies during the tournament was appropriate, providing the opportunity for respondents to reflect on evidence of legacy that they may have witnessed.

To solicit LGBTQ + women and non-binary fans’ perceptions of the WWC 2023 legacies, we designed a mixed-methods Qualtrics survey that was distributed online, using Instagram, X/Twitter and email. The online survey enabled broad participation for fans while maintaining their anonymity, an important ethical consideration given the marginalised identities of our target demographic. This method also allowed us to provide participants with access to the exact legacy wording. In designing the survey, we recognised that football fans were likely to be unfamiliar with the legacies that we hoped to ask them about—a result of the novelty and abstract quality of SME legacies. To generate in-depth and meaningful responses to questions like “Should this legacy include specific actions for LGBTQ+ communities?”, we provided participants with key quotes and summaries from the official legacy documents to which they were able to refer. We asked open-ended questions, such as “What kinds of specific actions should be included for LGBTQ+ communities within this legacy?” Finally, an online survey medium was most functional given the rapid-pace, geographically dispersed nature of the tournament. By advertising the survey over multiple social media sites, we were able to generate responses during and after the tournament, within and beyond the geographical boundaries of the host nations. Ethical approval was gained from the University of Otago, NZ, reference number D23/051.

Drawing upon the experiences of other scholars conducting research on LGBTQ+ communities (Brim and Ghaziani, 2016), we reduced the likelihood of trolling by creating Instagram and X/Twitter accounts to advertise the study that were not linked to our personal identities. The survey opened to participation on July 26th, 2023, and closed on September 4th, two weeks after the end of the WWC, garnering 88 complete responses out of 179 total instances. Upon entering the survey, respondents were asked a series of demographic and screening questions. Potential respondents were allowed to complete the full survey if they identified as a cis/transwoman or as a non-binary person, a member of the LGBTQ+ community and had attended the WWC in person. Respondents were also asked whether they had attended more WWC matches in Aotearoa/NZ or Australia. Survey-takers were then sorted into a version of the survey that would ask them to evaluate the SME legacies of the country where they watched most matches, regardless of their status as national residents or visiting fans. While it is possible that Australian and Aotearoa/NZ residents could have perceived or experienced the legacies differently from visitors, results from the survey consistently indicated low rates of awareness of the legacies and low visibility of legacy-related actions for LGBTQ+ communities. Of the 88 completed surveys, 47 were completed by individuals primarily attending the tournament in Aotearoa/NZ, while the remaining 41 were completed by fans in Australia. Further participant demographics (such as participant gender, nationality, age and ability) are detailed in Table 2.

The emphasis on identity as multiple required a careful engagement with categories (e.g. women or lesbian or queer) to avoid reifying or generalising, given dynamic and diverse lived experiences (Brim and Ghaziani, 2016, p. 16). We agreed that it was important for respondents to self-identify their ethnicity through an open-text answer, which revealed 53 different ethnicities. In keeping with our queer approach that recognises the intersection of power relations and compounding effects of inequities across race, gender, sexuality and disability without reducing experience to “identity”, we do not break down our analysis into discrete identity categories. Rather, we examined how gender and sexuality played out in the diverse experiences of respondents to draw out the effects of racism, sexism and homophobia.

Our approach to research design, method and analysis was informed by Braun and Clarke’s (2021a) reflexive thematic analysis (RTA), an approach underpinned by a critical awareness of researcher positionality and its impact on the research process and product. We found RTA to be complementary with queer theory’s emphasis on the fluid and intersectional multiplicity of identity. RTA and queer theory both require the researcher to open space to recognise the multiplicity of their own and their respondents’ identities, a process that can make visible the normativity that marginalises diverse sexualities and open up ways of imagining change at multiple levels. As first author, Sally identifies as a cisgender, lesbian, Pakēha (non-Māori) woman who lives in Aotearoa/NZ. I have an interest in football and have been involved in various recreational and competitive sports. Monica is a cisgender, White American woman (living in Aotearoa/NZ) with limited exposure to football but an overarching desire to make sport welcoming to all identities. Simone identifies as cisgender, queer, White woman with a history of community participation in football who lives on the unceded lands of the Yugambeh and Kombumerri people on the Gold Coast, Australia. While our queer and queer-allied positionalities drove this project, we also recognise the power-knowledge relations that inform the limitations of this research and any representational claims about queer intersectionalities.

Our approach also offered unique challenges for our use of survey methodology, which is often aimed at closing down—not opening up—space for participants to respond differently. Having previously worked extensively with Qualtrics to create and implement surveys on behalf of behavioural psychology researchers, Monica, who took the lead on survey design in this study, was pushed to unlearn many of the rules of survey method. For example, could a qualitative survey have more than one or two free-response questions while retaining participant engagement? How could we ask fans to evaluate their experiences of specific legacies without forcing them to choose a number on a 1–10 scale? In considering these questions, informed by queer theory, we aligned with a view of a mixed-method approach that can be “both a queering of the methods … and a queering of the methodology” (Shannon-Baker, 2021, p. 590).

The process of creating and analysing themes was informed by our researcher subjectivities as “analytic resource” and our “reflexive engagement with theory, data and interpretation” (Braun and Clarke, 2021a, p. 330). We broadly followed Braun and Clarke’s (2021a) six-phase process in which we familiarised ourselves with the data, brought different perspectives to the initial coding undertaken by the first and second authors, generated initial themes, reviewed and discussed themes that resonated with our major concepts, and engaged in writing practices that sought to explore participants’ responses with queer insights in mind. For example: as we began data analysis, the underlying ethos of flexibility and disruption inherent in queer methodology alerted us to a wonderful diversity in free-response answers. Some directly responded to each legacy and incorporated the official wording; others wrote about personal experiences of the tournament that they felt corresponded to the legacy; yet others wrote about overarching issues with the tournament and sports organisations that carried throughout all of their responses, contrary to our intentions. We did not seek rigor or saturation as these concepts are at odds with RTA, but the above signifies that our analysis was rigorous (Braun and Clarke, 2021b). To be responsive to the diversity of our findings, and respectful of these methodological disruptions, our analysis of qualitative data focuses on the overarching themes rather than report on specific legacies. This helps us to tell the story of the kinds of queer futures that these football fans imagined for the sport.

As with any research, there are possible limitations in this study. More participants, face-to-face interviews, or a longitudinal approach could have provided greater insight into the legacy experiences of FIFA WWC fans. On balance, we feel that these limitations were balanced by the immediacy of our research through a digital platform that was designed to be accessible and easy to use captured insights from passionate fans. As the following findings and discussion show, this format provided an opportunity for thoughtful and reflective commentary, along with ensuring participant anonymity.

We begin by providing a descriptive statistical overview of the respondents’ understanding and responses to WWC 2023 legacy plans. Quantitative results are unusual in a queer analysis; however, they allow us to report initial responses to the legacies’ content and respondents’ queered connection to them (Shannon-Baker, 2021). The open text responses are examined in our queer analysis of three themes. These are: who is football for?, queering inclusion and queer visibility: language and symbols.

We anticipated that respondents might not be aware of the SME legacies. Responses shown in Table 3 confirmed that the WWC legacies were largely invisible to our participants, more so among fans attending games in Aotearoa/NZ than Australia. One potential explanation might be the level of national fervour for football in the two countries, which is possibly greater in Australia than Aotearoa/NZ. Table 3 also illustrates that fans taking part in this study consistently perceived that LGBTQ + individuals and communities were not addressed by the legacies of both countries, once they were aware of them.

We sought to gauge whether our respondents believed that the legacy plans might have space within them to address the needs of LGBTQ+ individuals and communities. After providing extracts of the official legacy text and links to the full text, we asked whether each legacy should include actions targeted at LGBTQ + communities, what those actions might be (a free-response question which serves as the basis for the remainder of this analysis), and whether those actions were visible to the respondents during the WWC 2023. Table 3 demonstrates that all nine legacies were perceived by the majority of respondents as being potentially applicable to LGBTQ+ populations. Yet with just one exception—“Leadership and Development”—the majority of respondents indicated that they did not observe any legacy-related actions directed towards the LGBTQ + community (see Table 3). The future of women’s football produced by the NZF and FA legacies was broad enough to include the needs of LGBTQ + individuals within its remit, yet in practice overlooked them entirely. With this in mind, we move to the analysis of open text responses.

While describing their experiences of the WWC 2023, some respondents expressed appreciation for the sport’s progressive ethos and positive expectations for the future. As one respondent noted, “to me, women’s football is extremely inclusive, I would say one of the most inclusive sports for female athletes in the world, right now.” Football’s perceived safety was noted by another, “the events around the WWC felt very welcoming of the queer communities as fans and promoted our lesbian/bisexual/queer athletes.” Others shared this celebratory response, saying “it was so positive to see out and proud LGBTQ+ members of the football community. I can’t wait to see more celebrations in the future.”

These comments reinforced previous research about the inclusivity of women’s football (Schallhorn et al., 2024). This normative knowledge about football was also challenged and queered (Knoppers, 2022) as respondents questioned the depth of engagement with queer footballers and the level of disruption possible by the legacy plans, thus questioning of LGBTQ+ inclusion in the future. For example, one respondent commented that “the legacy plan from NZ Football is largely symbolic.” Another spoke to the lack of direct action from governing bodies, stating:

Others spoke about ongoing absences and exclusions; 25 respondents mentioned the need to address gender-identity bias, described by one as “removing stigma for trans-women and non-binary people playing in women’s leagues.” Others commented on administrative silences and needing to give “more openly visible recognition and acknowledgement to the contribution [that] the LGBTQ+ community has already made to the development of women’s football.” One respondent recalled inappropriate media coverage of LGBTQ+ individuals, noting “the ignorant journalist comments about ‘how many lesbians on your team.’” This response referred to a media question to the Morocco team captain in the full knowledge that homosexuality is illegal in her home country, thereby putting the team’s safety at risk.

These comments provide insight into our first research question, in which we seek to examine the experiences and tensions in WWC 2023 legacy. While enjoying the atmosphere of women’s football (Leslie-Walker et al., 2024), the respondents’ in-depth knowledge of the game and its coverage meant that they could queer legacy claims by FIFA. They recognised that queerness was not recognised within the vision of football produced by official organisational bodies (FIFA, NZF and FA) or were an object of curiosity for the media (Ahmed, 2006).

In suggesting legacy actions supportive of LGBTQ+ women and non-binary footballers and fans, respondents imagined a queer future for football that expanded upon the limited vision of organisational (and FIFA-approved) legacies, thus queering inclusion (Rumens et al., 2019). Questioning FIFA’s (2016) call for “togetherness” as homogeneity amongst women (Football Australia and New Zealand Football, n.d.), the respondents called for a recognition of the intersection of identities in football. One noted “not all queer people are White, or out, and those people should be supported and given good space to be”, pushing for an expanded understanding of identities in women’s football. Similarly, more than one participant commented that the cultural ceremonies held at the opening of each match could be intersectional. For example, “queer Australians are part of all Australians. Any specific actions which are keen to include certain demographics should also be done to target queer Australians.” They added that “children are watching and noticing what messages are being told and what ones are being [a]voided.” Others called for efforts towards inclusion based on age and ability, such as by “[reducing] costs of participation for women especially BME [Black and Minority Ethnic] and/or disabled [people].”

Respondents therefore queered organisational definitions of inclusion by making visible the intersectionality of identities and bringing into view the multiplicity of power relations (Bell et al., 2019). While FIFA and national organisations neatly captured the term “women” as a target for their legacies, the respondents noted that those organisations implied a boundary around which women they sought to include, to the detriment of fans and the sport (Leslie-Walker et al., 2024). Respondents identified this omission and, as Knoppers (2022) has argued, provided an initial step towards questioning identity boundaries that govern and constrain how individuals may act in order to be included in the normative category of woman. For example, a White, LGBTQ+ cis-woman may be “unmarked” (Knoppers, 2022, p. 7) or normalised within a sport organisation that has worked on gender inclusion. Women who do not identify in this way remain other, either excluded by the organisation, or performing in very specific ways to be accepted within the normative version of woman. As in Leslie-Walker et al.’s (2024) research, the respondents destabilised organisational definitions of women through an intersectional lens. As King (2018) argues, the normative assumptions evident in organisational documents (FA, 2019; NZF, 2019) that underpinned the tournament were disrupted.

Respondents questioned the use of language by FIFA and the host communities, drawing attention to the ongoing question of which women were included in legacy. In particular, they mentioned the exclusion of transwomen and non-binary people. Respondents noted “there needs to be more work done by FIFA, PFA (Professional Footballers Australia), and FA to address the slippage between female and women, these are two different terms and can be exclusionary to LGBTQ+ women” and “I hate the word female, when women works just as well. If it has to be female, it might be useful to include the modifier ‘those who self-identify as female’ to ensure it was inclusive” [²]. More generally, respondents called for “being far more inclusive on who wāhine, girls, and women are” and “making sure to include language that includes non-binary and trans people.”

The respondents noted that slippage in language can be exclusionary to transwomen and non-binary people. While research with non-binary and transwomen in sport management has been limited in scope, Caudwell (2017, 2022) has shown how sport organisations can benefit from a queered perspective on inclusion, placing the needs of trans and non-binary people at the centre of decision making about their inclusion. We support this call, arguing that more research is needed in this area to examine non-binary and trans people’s experiences of sport and with organisations to see how decision makers can change their policies and actions to be truly inclusive.

Respondents also indicated the importance of being able to express identities through symbols: for example, rainbow-themed captain’s armbands. Women have worn rainbow armbands, sweatbands and bandanas at the WWC for many years, as have some men’s international teams (Panja, 2023). While FIFA had endorsed these “One Love” armbands in previous international matches, their ban at the 2022 men’s FIFA World Cup in Qatar was largely seen as a compromise to the host, contravening FIFA’s own human rights claims (King-Hill, 2022). It was expected that FIFA would allow the armbands to be worn at FIFA WWC 2023; however, they were banned (Wrack, 2023). Given the high profile of LGBTQ + players in the tournament, and their marketing potential, respondents were perplexed, noting “FIFA [should] allow fan players and Allies to express their pride through wearing rainbows at games”; “participants [should be] free to wear rainbow armbands, carry flags, or display symbols of LGBTQ+ support as they wish to”; “FIFA should have enabled an arm band to recognise the rainbow community and it’s shameful that it didn’t.”; “deeply concerned about sexism at World Cup also refusal to include LGBTQ visibility, i.e. arm bands.”

The armband discussion reflected a deeper concern with the expression of identity and regulation of football symbolism. In Qatar, players at the men’s FIFA World Cup were threatened with a yellow card if they wore the armband, potentially jeopardising their further involvement in the tournament (King-Hill, 2022). This threat was repeated at FIFA WWC 2023 with a much larger fine than would usually punish a uniform breach, revealing FIFA’s exercise of power over symbolism. As a concession, players at both FIFA World Cups were allowed to wear one of eight approved “Unite the World” armbands, one of which included rainbow colours and the logo “Unite for Inclusion”. Respondents in this research were concerned about FIFA’s revision of its regulations for the WWC 2023, possibly in light of its greater commercial value than previous iterations, and to avoid offending conservative member nations. This action led to an interesting position: when most organisations engage in LGBTQ+ friendly practices, there is an element of control that is designed to help the organisation achieve a financial or social goal by being perceived as gay friendly (Burchiellaro, 2021). In this research, the respondents identified that FIFA doubled its failure: LGBTQ+ players were not just being controlled by the careful use of the authorised armband, their identities as LGBTQ + protestors, allies and community representatives were diluted by the allowable armband being one of eight social causes emblazoned with a FIFA logo. The passionate responses on this topic indicate strong feelings and resistance to control over this powerful symbol.

In summary, these findings highlight the views of our respondents calling for an openness for LGBTQ+ women and non-binary fans and athletes, an understanding of intersectionality and language and symbols that reflect the realities of the sport. These findings build on the insights that Caudwell (2017, 2022) has given the field in her research on queer sport fandom and participation and lay the framework for future research, which can examine a queer future for football.

Our research sought to investigate how SME legacies were experienced by LGBTQ + women and non-binary fans at the FIFA WWC 2023 and to examine their initial perspectives about queering football. Informed by queer theory and guided by the voices of LGBTQ+ women and non-binary football fans, this article has demonstrated the potential for critically reimagining sporting mega-event legacies, such as those put forward by NZF and FA as organisational leaders of the WWC 2023. While the abstract quality of SME legacies as well as their minimal advertising contributed to respondents’ initial lack of awareness with the legacy statements, respondents’ engagement with the legacies both in the quantitative and open-comment responses demonstrates that LGBTQ+ focused legacy is an important part of LGBTQ+ women and non-binary fans’ experiences, hopes and expectations of a SME. Drawing from their embodied experiences of exclusion from an undeniably heteronormative sporting system and engaging with the key pillars of the WWC 2023 legacies through this research, these LGBTQ + women and non-binary fans articulated ideas for a more visible and intersectional queer future for football.

Drawing on these findings, we encourage the use of queer theory in sport management research, a practice that would challenge the reach of heteronormative assumptions that have historically shaped sport management knowledge. In this study, queering as an analytic practice enabled normative assumptions about sport fans, managers and organisations to be challenged and more diverse ways of identifying and experiencing both discrimination and enjoyment to be opened up (Knoppers, 2022). Queering the organisation and representation of sport, in this case a major women’s football event via marketing and legacy planning, offers to extend the theory and practice of sport management through an ethical imperative to be more responsive to fans and participants whose diversity has been rendered invisible. The invisibility of queer football fans speaks to the long historical interrelationships between sport, national and heteronormative masculinity where queerness is shameful rather than associated with pride, pleasure and celebration (Probyn, 2000). This is a matter of recognising how ethics and knowledge production are entangled in organisational theories and practices that have historically marginalised gender and sexual difference (Priola et al., 2018). Queer theory points to the organisational and theoretical significance of both pride and shame for sport management in terms of how sport and sexuality/gender expression are addressed in ways that either promote a broader inclusive ethos of football, or unreflexively ignore human rights and the safety, dignity and contribution of queer fans (Probyn, 2000).

We further encourage other researchers to engage with queer theory in new ways given its utility in disrupting the norms of a variety of research methods with which it would not be typically associated. Adopting a (queered) mixed-methods approach allowed us to question many assumptions about the design and functionality of survey research, as well as challenging preconceived ideas about what sorts of responses could be possible (Shannon-Baker, 2021). While generalising from this research is not possible, the following section outlines some implications for sport managers to make football more inclusive for LGBTQ+ women and non-binary fans, players, officials and administrators.

Within this queer vision of the future of football, diversity is foregrounded: rather than condensing the panoply of identities within the football fan community into a monoculture, queer respondents sought inclusion on different terms – queering the terms of inclusion by recognising the impact of exclusion and celebrating difference. As we have discussed in this paper, the perpetuation of homophobia and sexism in the digital worlds that are so entwined with the provision and management of sport events requires more ethical and responsive theoretical approaches to develop strategic and practical solutions to improve safety and belonging for fans, athletes, volunteers, journalists and administrators.

In practical terms, this means a need for more expansive policies, language and symbols, and a recognition of the need for distinct spaces and provisions for LGBTQ+ populations within the broader fan engagement and competitive football apparatus. The need to recognise and act upon the meaning and community that LGBTQ+ women and non-binary people experience through sport also offers sport managers an opportunity to go beyond narrow conceptualisations of womanhood, actively working with intersectional identities, and giving back to populations that have already contributed so much to the sport’s development and popularity. This giving back could take a number of forms, not least LGBTQ+ women and non-binary people’s inclusion in legacy planning, policy and programme development. In claiming to recognise human rights and sport for all, football organisations cannot simply continue to ignore their LGBTQ+ women and non-binary fans and athletes.

This research has shown that LGBTQ+ women and non-binary fans are aware of their exclusion from the “official” future of football that FIFA has outlined. At the global, international or SME level, decision makers must value in visible ways how the queer fan community is significant to the economic and cultural future of football. While FIFA and other football associations use the images of LGBTQ+ individuals in promotional materials, more is needed, namely an investment in developing more strategic approaches to legacy planning that includes LGBTQ+ women and non-binary people – from stakeholder consultation, priority identification and evaluation of impact. Queer organisations need to be included as part of the design and planning processes in the creation of mega-event legacies; language that explicitly excludes who can or cannot be included as women can be changed and gender diversity acknowledged.

We recognise that not all of these changes are easily implemented within existing football structures and cultures. With debates over gender policy raging within global sporting federations, the queered future of football put forward by these fans will continue to be contested. The richness, depth and thoughtfulness of the respondents’ contributions indicate that there is an appetite for queer inclusion, visibility, the football ethos and importantly, the game at all levels. Perhaps the last comment is best left to this powerful statement by a respondent: “we exist. Don’t forget or overlook us. Especially when it’s convenient or to bow down to hatred or fear. Building, growing and nurturing take time, and a lot of trust.” Given the rich responses examined in this research, we believe that fans’ passion and joy for the game provides a source of knowledge for football organisations to proactively consider what a queer future will be.

Funding: This work was supported by a project funded by the University of Otago Research Grant.