What does a joke reveal about the person who tells it? Freud had a lot to say on this and wrote a book exploring his views, and many others have added to his body of work this week. While there are several theoretical approaches to take when exploring humour and wit, it seems there is little appetite these days for such a discussion. A joke, no matter the context, is never just a joke.
Phil Neville was named as the new manager of the England women's team on Tuesday. He was a surprising appointment to some, an underwhelming choice for others, while many saw it as an affront to women and the campaign for equality.
It emerged he had sent some tweets several years ago which could be read as sexist and misogynistic, so many felt he shouldn’t have been considered for such a high-profile role. They claim it revealed an attitude to women which should have ruled him out of the running, and that it shows the English FA still doesn’t get the seriousness of these issues. Another slap in the face for the development of the women’s game.
Here’s what he actually said. In one exchange with his sister Tracey in 2012, Neville tweeted “U women of [sic] always wanted equality until it comes to paying the bills #hypocrites”. Another tweet from the same year said “Relax I’m back chilled - just battered the wife!!! Feel better now!”
He began another tweet with “Morning men” before saying he was looking forward to watching cricket. When asked why he only referred to men, Neville replied: “When I said morning men I thought the women would of [sic] been busy preparing breakfast/getting kids ready/making the beds-sorry morning women!”
Backlash
Neville was quick to release a statement in response to the backlash, saying the comments "were not and are not a true and genuine reflection of either my character or beliefs" and apologised. The FA, too, did its best to defend itself. Chief executive Martin Glenn explained their decision and the process that lead to Neville's appointment.
He was responding to a letter of complaint from anti-discrimination group Kick It Out and wider calls for action to be taken against Neville for the offensive tweets. In addition to a rigorous interview, apparently Neville was subjected to extensive background checks and psychometric testing. Glenn said they knew of “some, but not all” of his historic tweets, adding how impressed he was by Neville’s determination, integrity and values.
The judgment of the FA is once again in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. Quite apart from their oversight on Neville’s social media activity, you’d wonder how a process of any kind could have resulted in his appointment.
He is without any managerial experience of his own, unless you count his one-game stint as stand-in boss of Salford FC alongside Paul Scholes in a 2-1 win over Kendal Town.
He has no track record in women’s football and the period he spent coaching at both Manchester United and Valencia could hardly be described as successful for either club. As has been pointed out already this week, a woman this under-qualified would never be given such a role.
There are serious issues in the women’s game the FA need to address. A recent survey by Fifpro, the World Players’ Union, revealed the extent of the gender inequality at the highest levels in the UK. 88 per cent of women in the top tier earn less than £18,000 per year, with 58 per cent of those surveyed thinking of quitting for financial reasons. 11 per cent operate without a written contract. 88 per cent had no health insurance paid for by their teams and 61 per cent don’t even have gym membership included in their contracts. Add in commercial and broadcasting revenues and levels of media coverage and you see the size of the task facing the FA.
It hardly inspires confidence that they would fail to spot a tweet on the public social media account of a candidate they said they thoroughly vetted for the top managerial post. It’s been a PR disaster for them.
Boxed in a corner
In choosing not to charge Neville for making those comments, the FA has boxed itself into a corner for all future cases. Those with a passion for progress and change would be right to feel dismayed, but I don’t agree with some of the commentary on Neville himself.
Three tweets sent with presumably humorous intent aren’t the full picture when it comes to a person’s character. This is particularly the case if they were sent six years ago.
In other words, maybe all he's guilty of is having a shit sense of humour
It’s very possible he considers his tweets to have been harmless fun at the expense of his sister or others. Maybe he doesn’t hold any of the beliefs that his tweets suggest he does around women’s domestic roles and violence towards them.
It’s also possible the exchange with his sister was part of a long-running family in-joke we know nothing about. In other words, maybe all he’s guilty of is having a shit sense of humour.
If Neville’s integrity is on trial here more evidence is needed. I heard some people dismiss that he’s a devoted father and husband as if it was irrelevant.
His sister Tracey, who is the head coach of the England netball team, tweeted her support, saying she had the most caring, thoughtful and most generous brothers ever. She said Phil “has spent his life showing his support to me as a sister, athlete and coach” but that didn’t cut it with some. I wonder had she tweeted the opposite would people be as quick to ignore her.
Sneered
Glowing testimony from others that know him was sneered at too, but if you’re putting yourself in the position of judging another person’s character, you can’t be selective with what details you choose to consider. We’re far more complex than what can be revealed by sending the occasional tweet, though it’s hard to understand what the hell he was doing sending those.
Obviously, there’s a wider debate to be had about what constitutes a funny remark and about the timing, context and grounds for attempts at humour. These are questions to be explored on a subjective and personal basis. It’s my view that he’s a poor appointment and his tweets weren’t funny at all, but lay off on the character assassinations based solely on them.
His jokes were naïve, offensive, old-fashioned and certainly ill-advised, but that doesn’t make him unemployable as England’s national team manager. It’s his managerial inexperience and his coaching CVthat should have ruled him out.
