Memo to the media: please don’t use the term WAGs
By Melanie Dinjaski, 23 Jun 2011 Melanie Dinjaski is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- 2006 World Cup, WAGs, women in sport
“WAGs” is the acronym and collective term for the wives and girlfriends of sportsmen. Sure, these women have an important role in the private lives of our most admired sportsmen. But is it really necessary for them to be showcased in the media under this sexist and offensive term?
Whether it was simply a case of lazy journalism – god knows how long it takes to type out ‘wives and girlfriends of sportsmen’ – or a deliberate attempt to insult and degrade these women, the media is now obsessed with the term “WAGs.”
Born out of the British tabloids during the 2006 FIFA World Cup it has quickly become a part of the sporting lexicon around the world. The women behind the biggest stars of Rugby League, Union, Aussie Rules, Cricket, Football, Motor Sports, whether they want it or not, get tagged as a “WAG.”
Not only does it demean women by subjecting the wives and girlfriends to public scrutiny based exclusively on looks, but the acronym not-so-subtly implies a link between women and dogs, happily wagging their tails at their owner’s (player’s) side.
The presentation of these women is almost always in a mocking fashion and encourages persisting stereotypes about females.
These “WAGs” are hardly ever recognised for anything but their sexual attributes, or other superficial qualities (fashion, hair, etc) with their personality, achievements, careers and ideas, completely ignored.
They are presented as trophies, and nothing more.
Despite the United Kingdom’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission officially criticizing the term as “offensive” it still consistently finds its way into major media content.
But not just in the UK.
Australian media outlets are just as quick to put “WAGs” in the headlines.
Ninemsn still names a “WAG of the Week”, the Courier Mail and Herald Sun have both made an image gallery of “Sports Sexiest WAGS”, Triple M frequently list the “World’s Hottest WAGs” on their website, and less surprisingly, but no less offensively, FHM, Zoo and other magazines of the same persuasion all contain regular features on “WAGs.”
On the web, I even found a site solely dedicated to comparing the appearance of “WAGs” from around the world.
The interest in the women behind famous and influential men is nothing new. But the way the sporting world have exploited it, is totally unacceptable. They’ve turned what used to be harmless curiosity of “the woman behind the man,” into total smut.
It’s difficult to escape, too. When navigating a sports website, on television, in a magazine, a newspaper, it’s there.
It carries on society’s need to categorise women in terms that men will never have imposed on them.
When I fill out an official form, I always have to indicate whether I am, “Miss, Mrs, or Ms,” while men, no matter what their marital history is, will always be “Mr.”
Many Australian sports are making a conscious effort to breach the onslaught of negative stereotyping imposed on the women associated with these professional male athletes.
On Tuesday night a tearful Petero Civoniceva was named the 2011 Women in League Favourite Son. He thanked his wife and his mother, for their sacrifices that led to his success in the rugby league.
Recently, Women’s Week in the AFL similarly tried to highlight the positive contribution of women to the sport.
However, I did cringe when a question sent out on the Gold Coast Suns Twitter account read,
“It’s Womens Week in the @AFL! We are celebrating the women of the AFL all week. Ladies we want to know why you love AFL?”
As if women would answer any differently to men on what they like about the sport! What answer did they expect?!
Airing soon on FOX8 will be a documentary into the lives of Australian “WAGs,” in a series called “WAG Nation.”
The show will feature Anthony Minichiello’s fiancé, shoe designer Terry Biviano, and Jude Bolton’s event planning wife Lynette, as well as a host of other partners of professional sportsmen.
From all reports it appears the show will be less about their bikini bodies and more about “the highs and lows of supporting a professional sporting career and the daily pressures of maintaining a successful relationship, to the stress of managing their own careers, not to mention the demands of a hectic social life.”
It sounds great.
But I still take issue with the inflammatory use of the term “WAG.” Maybe we’ve turned a corner, and now women are owning this offensive acronym?
Either way, the public are getting mixed messages when it comes to women and their role in professional male sport. Yes there are some fantastic programs happening, but the world-wide acceptance of “WAG” as a legitimate and respectable term for the partners of sportsmen, is not helping change attitudes towards women.
For as long as “WAGs” is used by major media outlets, there is still a long way to go before you can say women have been completely accepted and appreciated for their role in professional male sport.
Recommend this story.
You can follow Melanie Dinjaski on Twitter @MelanieDinjaski.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Other Sports articles
- My top 10 Australian sporting stars over 50 years (81)
- Frankel, 2012 Lockinge Stakes: Live race updates, blog (70)
- Miami Heat level NBA playoffs with Pacers at 2-2 (43)
- Frankel sounds warning to Black Caviar with resounding win (26)
- How to like LeBron James, despite it all (26)
- Black Caviar ready to travel after celebrating her 21st (16)
- London Olympics: How will Nine and Foxtel go? (13)
- Netball champs look for first Aussie win
- The Roar: UFC 146 previews and predictions
- Australians face tough draws at Roland Garros
- King Novak chases record Grand Slam tally
- Frank Mir out to cement his place amongst the greats at UFC 146 (4)
- Sixers claw their way back into NBA series
- The great UFC 146 shake up: who has missed out?
- The Roar: UFC 146 previews and predictions (0)
- Australians face tough draws at Roland Garros (0)
- King Novak chases record Grand Slam tally (1)
- Frank Mir out to cement his place amongst the greats at UFC 146 (4)
- The great UFC 146 shake up: who has missed out? (1)
- UFC 146: Heavyweight main card should pack a punch (1)
- Federer back in game to grab world’s number one spot (3)
- Explore:
- 2006 World Cup, WAGs, women in sport



June 23rd 2011 @ 7:50am
Tortion said | June 23rd 2011 @ 7:50am | Report comment
If you really find the abreviation of wives and girlfriends to WAGS offensive you need to relax. The abbreviation has been around long before 2010 in the press.
Are Australians now the most overly sensitive people on the planet?
June 23rd 2011 @ 4:43pm
jokerman said | June 23rd 2011 @ 4:43pm | Report comment
I’m on your side Melanie! The lack of support on your article shows me the issue is real.
To bring this issue up, shows courage on your part, and with courage, you need to continue with the strength and not to take on another’s opinion, especially a red neck one!
It‘s a changing time in this world. In the last 10 years there has been a lot of female energy coming through. For so long it has been male dominant, and out of balance. Centuries ago, in certain areas, was it the Celtics? Woman were praised and adored, for their goddess qualities. Though later they have been supressed. Supressed out of fear and from the ego, the male ego.
The WAGS remain in a past time in my eyes. A rather 80/90′s period where men truly felt they were superior. Truth is woman are more in tune with the cycles and rhythms of life. More in touch with their intuition, and for so long the ego in men, have countered this, with suppression.
The world needs this new feminine energy that is coming in, and as it comes through, it touches each field. The response in this forum is out of fear and also being stuck in the old.
I like your article…a lot! You show depth and intelligents, and I always like your female slant on sport, as it has deeper levels, and the world needs this.
June 23rd 2011 @ 6:10pm
Tortion said | June 23rd 2011 @ 6:10pm | Report comment
The fear here isn’t the changing role of women in society but the utter rubbish we have to put up with to protect petty sensitivities.
This kind of pettiness gets society nowhere.
June 23rd 2011 @ 7:32pm
jokerman said | June 23rd 2011 @ 7:32pm | Report comment
Tortion…it’s about evolving. Evolving to the next level. On one prospective a “WAG” is just a name, referring to the name of a sportsman’s partner. As a female, Melanie sees the connotations, and representations of this, and chooses to talk about it.
It’s the general sense that woman are less, even if it’s unconsciously, that bugs woman. Having a sportsman with his title WAG partner implies this. The subject is not about being PC, if anything it is about open mindedness, open heart.
Melanie has every right to try and open up the female prospective. A female quality is to listen and receive…and that is what is lacking here, as opposed to seeing her view, you dam it, and when there is 95% males on this site, there should be more support and understanding, and an openness to how she feels on a particular subject.
June 24th 2011 @ 12:28am
Tortion said | June 24th 2011 @ 12:28am | Report comment
The problem with all this is that you can call them whatever you want but at the end of the day whatever acronym you use is going to develop the same connotations.
Perhaps they should really just stay in the background out of view. Ah but you can’t build a profile that way can you.
June 23rd 2011 @ 8:26am
jamesb said | June 23rd 2011 @ 8:26am | Report comment
the term WAGS has been around long before 2010. maybe the last 10 years.
June 23rd 2011 @ 8:37am
Willy said | June 23rd 2011 @ 8:37am | Report comment
“Born out of the British tabloids during the 2010 FIFA World Cup it has quickly become a part of the sporting lexicon around the world.”
I reckon it was first used by the Poms at the 2006 World Cup in Germany.
June 23rd 2011 @ 11:21am
Tristan Rayner said | June 23rd 2011 @ 11:21am | Report comment
Fixed, thanks. Roar Ed.
June 23rd 2011 @ 11:33am
Melanie Dinjaski said | June 23rd 2011 @ 11:33am | Report comment
I admit that was an error. Have no idea why 2010 was written. But I think some are missing the point i’m trying to make as a result of this. It’s the term AND the portrayal of those women who come under the definition of “WAGs” that is offensive. If you don’t agree with me, that’s fine. I’m interested in your opinion. But I think you all know that The Roar is as much about the politics associated with sport as much as its about sport itself. I write about both and as far as I can tell The Roar have no qualms about this. Cheers.
June 23rd 2011 @ 11:49am
Johnno said | June 23rd 2011 @ 11:49am | Report comment
are you a WAG Melanie loll.
June 23rd 2011 @ 8:37am
Darwin Stubbie said | June 23rd 2011 @ 8:37am | Report comment
“Born out of the British tabloids during the 2010 FIFA World Cup ” .. think you’ll find at the very least it was the 2006 version and quite possibly used even earlier
“The presentation of these women is almost always in a mocking fashion …. these “WAGs” are hardly ever recognised for anything but their sexual attributes, or other superficial qualities (fashion, hair, etc)” …. and given the array of airheads the
england football team trotted up with in Germany in ’06 and their behaviour on that trip – it was probably quite an apt reporting viewpoint to take
June 23rd 2011 @ 9:00am
Brett McKay said | June 23rd 2011 @ 9:00am | Report comment
Melanie, you’ll get no argument from me about the need for sexiest/hottest/whatever WAGs, but I’m not sure about the acronym itself. Can an acronym be sexist?
Or is your bigger issue about what the acronym is now deemed to mean? Could it be that WAG no longer just means ‘wives and girlfriends’, but that it actually means sexiest/hottest/whatever wives and girlfriends? Are we now automatically standing the 19yo girlfriend of the GC Suns half-back flank up against the likes of Posh bloody Spice-Beckham, or even the former Mrs Fevola as pictured here? If that’s the case, you may have a point. It’s kind of like how the Southern Cross as a symbol of Australia has now be hijacked by VN Commodore and EF Falcon drivers and stands for something way more sinister…
June 23rd 2011 @ 9:02am
Lol@50uff$ said | June 23rd 2011 @ 9:02am | Report comment
Let’s do a deal. The media will stop using the term WAGs if the WAGs stop parading themselves about like peacocks on their husband’s awards nights.
June 24th 2011 @ 12:12am
The Cattery said | June 24th 2011 @ 12:12am | Report comment
Parading themselves like peacocks??
June 23rd 2011 @ 9:28am
Football United said | June 23rd 2011 @ 9:28am | Report comment
BORING! a complete non issue on the completely wrong website. keep your faux outrage on the herald sun where it belongs.
June 23rd 2011 @ 9:28am
Happy Hooker said | June 23rd 2011 @ 9:28am | Report comment
Come off it Mel. Its just an acronym. Any negativity associated with the term has been as a result of a vacuous and vain small minority of individuals, limited not only to the wives and girlfriends (WAGS!) themselves, but including their sports star husbands and boyfriends.
June 23rd 2011 @ 10:33am
Viscount Crouchback said | June 23rd 2011 @ 10:33am | Report comment
Oh it could be worse.
I’ve heard it suggested that a more fitting term would be: Sports Ladies And Girlfriends.
The WAGs should count their blessings!
June 24th 2011 @ 12:13am
The Cattery said | June 24th 2011 @ 12:13am | Report comment
Ah Viscount – you’ve done it again!
June 23rd 2011 @ 10:50am
Big Steve said | June 23rd 2011 @ 10:50am | Report comment
“Despite the United Kingdom’s Equalities and Human Rights Commission officially criticizing the term as “offensive” it still consistently finds its way into major media content.”
The most worrying thing about this whole article is that the UK Human Rightsa Commisson has time to comment on the rights of the partners of people who make more per week than most make per year for playing sport. surely they have some more important matters to be commenting on.
When we see some of the Wives and Girlfirends complaining about bieng called “Wags” then this might be an actual issue. But in society it seems more and more common for people to hunt around for ways to be offended, even when the item of offence has no relation to them.
The connection between Wags and Dogs is ridiculous.