Abusive terrace songs aimed at women are generally ignored, but the football authorities need to take action • Campaign against sexism in football focuses on abuse of Chelsea doctor

You can hear them now. The “banter” apologists. The “PC gone mad” brigade. The callers to radio phone-ins and the commenters underneath this article. Sexist chanting in grounds? Don’t take it so seriously. It’s only a bit of fun. Take it as a compliment. Lighten up. All the things, or variants thereof, that some used to say 25 years ago when black players were similarly targeted.

While events on the Paris Métro last month were a jolting reminder that base racism festers in football and society, overt chanting has mercifully become largely socially unacceptable within football grounds within the past two decades.

As figures released earlier this week by Kick It Out show, fans feel increasingly empowered to report racist abuse. If someone uses derogatory language or tries to start a monkey chant in 2015, he or she will often be rounded upon by those seated nearby.

Campaign against sexism in football focuses on abuse of Chelsea doctor Read more

There is every chance that a steward will intervene and the offender will be instantly and anonymously reported via Kick It Out’s mobile app. The club can then use CCTV to track them down and may well ban them or cancel their season ticket.

If the horrific abuse and the crude songs are aimed at women such as Chelsea’s first-team doctor, Eva Carneiro, on the other hand, the standard response is too often an outbreak of nervous playground giggling and a depressing chorus of “Get your tits out for the lads”. Sexist “banter” has become so much part of the aural wallpaper that it goes all but ignored.

Worse, clubs seem reluctant to deal with the issue. Partly this feels like fatigue in having another “ism” to deal with and partly nervousness among stewards over when and why to intervene. When the incidents at Old Trafford and the Emirates Stadium were first reported, those who did so were told that there was no evidence or that they must have misheard.

It is only when video footage came to light months later that it was impossible to argue otherwise. In turn, lack of action feeds apathy. Why report an incident if you are sure that nothing will be done about it?

The low number of reported incidents – two last season, 13 this – should be cause for alarm rather than comfort when set against the backdrop of the typical matchday experience. It also feeds into wider attitudes – if you don’t fear rebuke or social censure for your words or actions, then what’s to stop you repeating them?

Just as Laura Bates’ Everyday Sexism project has caused society in general to look again at the exent to which abuse, both subtle and overt, remains part of the patchwork of everyday life for many women so it is time for a recalibration of what constitutes acceptable behaviour in a football stadium.

That attitudes in this area have scarcely moved on since the 1970s should be a cause for concern, for all sorts of reasons. The first, and most obvious, is simply on a human level.

To reach for a cliche: how would those who spout foul abuse at Carneiro or the journalists, match officials, administrators and cheerleaders similarly targeted feel if it was their mother, wife, sister or girlfriend on the receiving end?

It is also one of the curiosities of modern football that the closer to the top of the game you travel, the more toxic the atmosphere in the stands. Whether it is a simple question of perceived safety in numbers or the anonymity of crowds, it feels increasingly the case that fans streaming into sanitised, seated Premier League stands are quicker to tip from humour to bile than those in their more ramshackle lower-league equivalents.

Yet according to the Premier League’s own figures, 23% of those who attend top-flight matches are female. Its research shows that 4.5m women were actively engaged with the Premier League during the 2013-14 season.

If clubs and the authorities do nothing to challenge overt sexist chanting then it is hardly conducive to a welcoming atmosphere for one in four of those packing stadiums in the top flight.

But beyond that, it feeds a wider atmosphere of sexism from the dressing room to the boardroom. Study after study has found that the more diverse an organisation’s staff are, the more effective it is.

At the top end, modern football likes to present the airbrushed image of an international superbrand. But beneath the superficial gloss, too often attitudes remain trapped in an earlier age.

How are the next generation of female match officials, administrators, physios, scouts, coaches, players and commercial staff supposed to be attracted to the sport if it fails to get a grip of the issue? Not to mention journalists and broadcasters.

Carneiro herself last year highlighted the importance of female role models.

“As a male you can aspire to having a successful professional life and a fulfilling personal life,” she said, speaking at a medical conference in Sweden. “Women are told that if they want to have both, at best it’s going to be difficult and at worse it’s going to be a disaster.

“Ninety per cent of the mail I receive is from young women wanting to perform the same role. We need to tell them it’s possible and that their presence will improve results.”

Yet evidence collected by Women in Football suggests many able women are put off careers in football by the prevailing atmosphere of sexism. Their survey last year found that more than eight in 10 women in the game had witnessed sexism and more than two‑thirds had experienced it.

Add the FA’s emphasis on the growth of the women’s game and the potential for it to be part of the answer to an inactivity crisis among teenage girls and it becomes all the more incredible that this is not more of a pressing priority for the game.