Pride Game Fallout Exposes the Limits of Corporate Allyship

The Sydney Swans’ decision to move their annual Pride Game away from St Kilda serves as a stark reminder that even well-intentioned corporate partnerships can fall short when it comes to true allyship. The fixture, which has been an AFL highlight since 2016, was meant to be a celebration of LGBTIQA+ inclusivity but has become a cautionary tale about the risks of co-opting social justice causes.

The decision is not just about the Swans or St Kilda; it highlights broader implications for corporate sponsorships and their role in promoting social change. The Pride Game was intended as a genuine gesture of support from the AFL community towards LGBTIQA+ communities, but now it seems tainted by the toxic fallout from Lance Collard’s tribunal case.

The Collard affair is symptomatic of a larger problem: language and culture policing within the sports world. The AFL botched their handling of the case, slapping Collard with a seven-match ban that seemed excessive given his history, then allowing St Kilda to appeal and reducing the penalty to two weeks suspended. Will Houghton KC was subsequently sacked as chair of the appeal board after making a remark about homophobic language being “commonplace” in the game.

This double-speak is not only damaging but also corrosive, sending a message that speaking out against homophobia or racism will have consequences. This is exactly what happened with Collard: despite being found guilty, he was allowed to escape relatively lightly because his club appealed and the AFL backed down.

The Swans’ decision to move their Pride Game acknowledges this reality but raises questions about the limits of corporate allyship. Can companies truly support social justice causes if they’re only willing to do so when it’s convenient? Or are they just trying to burnish their reputations and avoid backlash?

St Kilda’s response has been telling, with chief executive Carl Dilena stating that while they would have liked to continue with the Pride Game designation, they understood and supported the decision given the impact of recent publicity on LGBTIQA+ communities. This raises questions about St Kilda’s commitment to inclusivity in the first place: was it all just a PR exercise from the start?

As the sports world grapples with its own brand of toxic masculinity, we need to ask hard questions about the role that corporate sponsorships play in promoting social change. Can we truly trust companies like the Swans and St Kilda to be true allies to LGBTIQA+ communities when it comes to Pride? Or are they just trying to co-opt social justice causes for their own benefit?

The answer is not as simple as a yes or no. The complexities of corporate allyship demand nuanced thinking – and a willingness to confront the uncomfortable realities of our own complicity in perpetuating toxic cultures.

When companies like the Swans and St Kilda get involved in social justice causes, it’s often with good intentions. But as we’ve seen time and again, good intentions are not enough – especially when they’re driven by self-interest rather than genuine commitment to real change.

The Collard affair has exposed the AFL’s own hypocrisy on this score. They claim to be champions of inclusivity and diversity but their actions speak louder than words. When they fail to take strong stances against racism and homophobia, or botch disciplinary cases that involve marginalized communities, it erodes trust and credibility.

The Pride Game fallout serves as a warning sign for all corporate sponsorships: even the most well-intentioned partnerships can go awry when driven by self-interest rather than genuine commitment to social justice. As we move forward, we need to ask tough questions about what it means to be an ally – and whether corporations like the Swans and St Kilda are truly committed to being part of the solution.

The sports world has a lot to learn from this debacle – but one thing is clear: when it comes to promoting social change, corporate sponsorships can only take us so far. The rest is up to us – as individuals, communities, and organizations – to demand more and push for real progress.