'I looked at the circle of players around me and every single one cringed'
I distinctively remember the chairman of a previous rugby club walking over to our team and saying “Ladies, I just wanted to introduce myself …” – I looked at the circle of players around me and every single one of them cringed; some rolled eyes, some raised eyebrows and others looked to me as if to say, “Is he serious?”.
After Premiership team Wasps Ladies made the decision to rebrand to Wasps Women, I think it’s about time that we explore how the word ‘ladies’ is used in women’s rugby, and why it’s important that we leave that term behind.
The Evolution ??
An evolution of the entire club brand, now all under the same logo.
An evolution of our title :
Wasps Ladies ?? Wasps Women ?
Read full article New logo will represent the entire club & Wasps Ladies evolve to Wasps Women. https://t.co/LfZWdkJkZR pic.twitter.com/GAkpa0XA0b
— Wasps Women (@waspswomen) July 19, 2021
My specific gripe with the word stems from the associations which come with it. When you say the word out loud, what comes to mind?
For me, it is a specific set of behaviours which women were previously, and are still to some extent, expected to demonstrate. They revolve around an idealised image of a woman, behaving in a ‘proper’ manner whilst being polite, graceful, and adhering to the general status quo. Basically, ‘ladies’ are to be seen and not heard.
The irony comes in the fact that those behaviours are worlds apart from traits which we as rugby player’s exhibit.
When I plough into someone with the brute force and strength I bring to the pitch, the word ‘lady’ is so far from my mind, it essentially does not exist in my vocabulary. Every time I see a strong, fearless woman work relentlessly to counter ruck and win back possession of the ball the last possible word I would use to describe her is “ladylike”.
So why is it that we still use the term “ladies” to describe women’s rugby teams? With a few notable exceptions, the term ‘gentlemen’s’ team has been dropped at rugby clubs the world over.
Before you brand me as a snowflake, just remember that language such as this carries a lot of weight behind it. The language we use is not supposed to be static. Like all things, it is supposed to evolve and change with us.
Language plays a considerable part in how we view and frame things in society. If we describe women’s rugby as ‘ladies rugby’, we automatically frame the sport as something which it is not.
Speaking on this, Flo Williams, founder of the Perception Agency, said: “Language is so important in sport, and in a sport like women’s rugby when the title leads you to think of being ladylike or feminine before your ability, I think using the word ladies holds us back.”
Looking ahead to the future of the sport, Williams went one step further to say she would like to see the use of gender dropped from rugby, unless it is absolutely necessary: “When talking about the Gallagher Premiership, pundits don’t have to use the prefix of “men’s” so why can’t we do that in the women’s game? I would love to see just the use of the club’s name when people talk about women’s rugby. People know players in the Prem 15s are women and men don’t play in that league, so why do we constantly need to refer to this?”
She so rightly pointed out that when fans are shown a reel of Emily Scarratt running with a ball in an England kit, you don’t need to point out she is on the England Women’s rugby team:
“People have eyes, they can see it’s not Owen Farrell”
On the surface the name change for Wasps might seem small, but in my opinion, it is long overdue and a much-needed change. A change which I hope other grassroots clubs might seek to adopt themselves.
In the words of my good friend Matt Merritt “It costs very little but achieves so much”
Oh definitely. It's minor in that it's one word rather than a full rebrand/name change across the club… it costs very little but achieves so much.
The connotations are so much better, a serious sport rather than a leisure activity…— Matt Merritt (he/him) (@MattMerritt) July 19, 2021
The move sees Wasps become the last Premier 15s side to rebrand into a women’s team, leaving the old-fashioned term firmly in the past. The decision has been welcomed by the women’s rugby community, with many praising the club for its efforts:
About time the women were called women! Best wishes for the Prem season ahead @waspswomen ??
— Clare Brophy (@brophy_clare) July 19, 2021
Looking at this from a comms perspective, it’s a simple fix. Continuing to use words which possess connotations and are non-progressive, restricts your brand (or team in this instance) from moving with the times. The team’s name is the first thing people use when having a conversation about that team. Right from the off, we must ensure that we are portraying women’s rugby as a serious sport, and this starts with dropping the term ladies from our vocabulary.
Some might say that the chairman described at the start of this column may have had good intentions, as often the word ladies is assumed to be a polite greeting when addressing a group of women. To that I would say we are not stuck in the 50s anymore, times have (thankfully) moved on, and with that our language needs to evolve to reflect that.
It isn’t modern or progressive to be using the word in the context of a serious sporting environment. By doing so you instantly box the sport in as a hobby, rather than a high profile, elite game.
According to the Cambridge Dictionary, the word lady is defined as: “A polite or old-fashioned way of referring to or talking to a woman”.
To me, that says it all. It is an old-fashioned term, an outdated phrase which isn’t fit for purpose in the women’s sport’s world, especially given the male equivalent was dropped years ago.
The words we use matter, so start framing my sport as a serious one and stop using the word lady.
Comments on RugbyPass
Good Luck Sam, enjoy Japan.
1 Go to commentsWhen Sth Africa had Joost and Honiball at 9 and 10 they were almost impenetrable in and around the ruck. Even Jonah couldn't make headway in those channels so they were very hard to get in behind. They had a fantastic side who played a fast, rugged style which won them the Tri Nations during that period. That side would beat their current mob of which I have no doubt.
2 Go to commentsAwesome win by the NZ U20s. They were excellent in the 2nd half with some very patient and accurate phase play, a dominant scrum and decent lineout. Simpson controlled things very well at 10 and it was amazing to see the team maintain their composure and score points when he was in the sin bin for a very harsh yellow card.
2 Go to commentscome on Toulouse
1 Go to commentsNot unless the cartels get interested in rugby like they did w football
1 Go to commentsYes Dobbo, you were absolute crap. Start respecting the ball and possession. If you played rugby instead of basketball against the Ospreys, you would have been n the top two now, not fifth! If you attractively and entertainingly throw the ball around for 80 minutes and lose, WE DON’T FKN ENJOY IT!
1 Go to commentsWe need a system of transfer fees. A club shouldn’t just get to sign Will Harrison when he’s been funded in NSW his entire rugby life because they have more money.
89 Go to commentsThat the pain experienced by SH clubs poached mercilessly by NH friends being now felt by the non-elite NH clubs delivers me an element of schadenfreude but if it expands the amount of poachees and opens the eyes of those new to the group then it serves a purpose. In my pessimistic (realistic?) moments I see Oz clubs in the future acting solely as feeders for France and Japan. It’s a real possibility without change
89 Go to commentswhy is this garbage rival sport that’s poaching rugby talents being promoted on a rugby website backed by world rugby again?
5 Go to comments“Ou Lem” leading that ‘98 team to a 13-3 victory was the stuff of legend! Especially since we hadn’t beaten them for many years. 10/12/13 combo of Honiball, Pieter Muller & Andre Snyman were tough as nails! I remember screaming my head off in the early hours of the morning & my brother hitting a hole through one of the bedroom doors🤭😂
2 Go to commentsWhatever about 2017 - it's seven years ago and irrelevant now. In 2021 New Zealand needed a numerical advantage for 75% of the game and what was then the largest home advantage crowd in the history of the sport in order to just _barely_ beat England.
3 Go to commentsBoth cards were harsh. Yet again highlighting rugby's inconsistencies and the absurd effect of cards
3 Go to commentsExcellent game management in the last 15 or so minutes to close it out. Aussie got a bit panicky.
3 Go to commentsWhile all this is going on… I’ve been thinking more about the NFL draft system and how to make the commercial elements of the game more sustainable for SA teams who precariously live on the fringe of these developments. SA teams play in Europe now, and are welcome, because there’s a novelty to it. SA certainly doesn’t bring the bucks (like a Japan would to SR) but they bring eyes to it. But if they don’t perform (because they don’t have the money like the big clubs) - it’s easy come easy go… I think there is an element of strategic drafting going on in SA. Where the best players (assets) are sort of distributed amongst the major teams. It’s why we’re seeing Moodie at the Bulls for example and not at his homegrown Western Province. 20-30 years ago, it was all about playing for your province of birth. That has clearly changed in the modern era. Maybe Moodie couldn’t stay in the cape because at the time the Stormers were broke? Or had too many good players to fit him in? Kistchoff’s sabbatical to Ireland and back had financial benefits. Now they can afford him again (I would guess). What I am getting at is - I think SA Rugby needs to have a very strong strategy around how teams equitably share good youth players out of the youth structures. That is SA’s strong point - a good supply of good players out of our schools and varsities. It doesn’t need to be the spectacle we see out of the states, but a system where SA teams and SA rugby decide on where to draft youth, how to fund this and how to make it that it were possible for a team like the Cheetahs (for example) to end up with a team of young stars and win! This is the investment and thinking that needs to be happening at grassroots to sustain the monster meanwhile being created at the top.
89 Go to commentsGreat win - but very poor officiating yet again. Even the Aussie commentators slammed the YC decisions.
2 Go to commentsThe game where it felt like RSA was going to lose the most was the England game in my view. Heart in throat after the Farrell drop-goal…Amazing that the boks overcame 3 times in a row…not likely to be repeated ever in my view Also the boys looked emotionally spent in the England game in the 1st half That said, why was World Rugby and Beaumont allowed to stack the pools in England’s favour? Toughest opponents on that side of the draw were Fiji, Argentina (implode central) and Auckland Girls 2nd team
58 Go to commentsOnline trolls - the only ppl who the Crusaders can beat
2 Go to commentsDefinitely some greater nous by the Walleroos and it will take a bit of time for Jo Yapp to have a lasting affect. Canada are a forward dominated physical team and only the top 3 teams can match them, though not so sure about BF’s forwards. Many of Canada’s forwards earn their living in the English PWR, the breeding ground for the Red Roses amazing strength in depth. The next PAC4 matches will be interesting.
1 Go to commentsIs the Club World Cup and the World League, in combination, going to make or break world Rugby? I personally think it’s too much. Established tournaments and competitions’s significance is going to be drowned out by “the new shiney Mall built just down the street”.
89 Go to commentsLoved Carr‘s post match interview. “No, I don’t think so Jean. But thank you.” Good kid. Louw a certain feature for the Boks this year.
1 Go to comments