The WWE is a bit like Hollywood, in a way. Not in any glamorous sense, though. Rather, their female performers (AKA Divas) are continuously marginalized and misrepresented in the roles they're given. Unfortunately, this fact is rarely acknowledged outside of women's wrestling circles.
The WWE blissfully exists in a time warp, 10+ years behind the rest of the world. In today's 2015-circa-2005 world, grown men still wear Affliction t-shirts, Larry the Cable guy is relevant and the glass ceiling hangs about six feet off the ground.
Need proof of how bad the WWE is at writing women? Well, the best way to demonstrate the problem is to look at the characters women play. Like female characters in movies and television shows, they often fall into certain tropes. Here, though, there is about 85% less variety. It's like the bargain bin of female archetypes, as seen through the lens of a dozen or so middle-aged men.
Let's be clear, though: this analysis isn't meant to denigrate these women or their performances. Nine times out of ten, the Divas make magic with what little they're given. However, that doesn't mean they wouldn't benefit from being given the chance to play more nuanced, realistic characters.
First, let's break down two simple wrestling terms: babyface and heel. Babyfaces are the good guys. Heels are the bad guys. Simple, right?
When we're talking about WWE Divas, it doesn't get much more complicated than that. When you're a female heel, you typically fall into one or both of two categories: "bitch" or "slut". When you're a babyface, you're lucky if you have a personality at all.
As is the case with most things, there are exceptions to this. Statistically, though, those women are anomalies.
Got it? Good. Let's break down the 10 archetypes:
1. ALPHA BITCH
2. MEAN GIRLS
3. PRUDE
4. TOUGH BITCH
5. BITCH IN POWER
6. CRAZY CHICK
7. MAN EATER
8. GOLD DIGGER
9. JOBBER HEEL
10. BABYFACE
11.
So, why is this happening?
The true reason for the disappointing state of female representation in the WWE has to come down to a lack of motivation on the WWE's part. They, like most media, cater to the coveted 18-49 year old male demographic, which for the most part treats Divas matches as "piss breaks".
The audience didn't come to this conclusion on their own, though: they were taught to think this way. When the stakes are so low that the outcome of a Divas' match is inconsequential, fans have no reason to care about it.
The WWE needs to show fans that the Divas can do serious and exciting stuff. That starts with developing characters that act like living, breathing women instead of cookie cutter archetypes. When fans can distinguish one woman from another, they can start to care about what happens to them.
Here's the bottom line: there's no excuse. There's no reason the WWE can't develop fleshed-out female characters when they manage to make even the most uninteresting male wrestlers unique. Is there something I'm missing? Is there just a "higher degree of difficulty" in being a celebrated man in wrestling? Is the bar set too low for women? That must be it. Hey, I suppose the WWE is more like Hollywood than I thought..
But why does it matter?
Those who don't watch wrestling may say, "Who cares?" upon reading this. Maybe they even think poor representation is to be expected when a woman embarks upon a career in the male-dominated world of fake fighting.
But this is a problem. Young girls watch these programs and find heroes in these women. What do they learn when all they see are a few slightly differentiated stereotypes? Female wrestlers devote the prime years of their lives to training, traveling the world and saving pennies to get to the top. But when the top is the WWE, what's the point?
The truth of the matter is this: equality of the sexes should be strived for everywhere, even in the world of pro wrestling. No arena, no matter how macho, is a lost cause.
After all, the first step is admitting that you have a problem.
Share This Article
