WWE women wrestlers have been undervalued for far too long – it's time for them to strike

When World Wrestling Entertainment’s (WWE) first ever all-women’s pay-per-view was announced in July, chief brand officer and on-air wrestling personality Stephanie McMahon gave an interview to WWE.com. She said that Evolution, which streams live on the WWE Network in the early hours of 29 October, is a marker of “equality [that] is happening all over, in business, in sports, in media, and it needs to keep happening.

“It takes everyone’s support…,” she continued. “It takes those brave enough to stand up, like the US women’s hockey team who refused to compete until they were paid equal wages.”

It’s interesting that McMahon praised industrial action when her company has long opposed unionisation. After all, she is the daughter of Vince McMahon – who changed the face of professional wrestling when he moved his product to cable TV and in turn ran smaller, local companies that operated in “territories” out of business in the 1980s – and Linda McMahon, head of the small business administration in the Donald Trump cabinet, who helped her husband do so.

WWE is renowned for treating its wrestlers, like most indie wrestling companies, as independent contractors or freelancers – even though they are not permitted to work for other companies and are required to “make towns” (follow the company around America and the world for its nightly shows) and obtain health insurance at their own cost. And when WWE’s highest-paid women’s wrestler ,Charlotte Flair, is paid 36 times less than the company’s highest-paid male performer (Brock Lesnar, who only wrestled six televised matches last year) while being expected to maintain high-femme trappings such as hair extensions and false eyelashes, women wrestlers are operating at a loss to their male counterparts.

Given this chasmic wage gap, is McMahon actually advocating that the women of WWE strike for equal pay ahead of Evolution? If women wrestlers were ever going to “stand up” for equality, now’s the time to do it. WWE has invested a lot in its “Women’s Evolution”, a multi-year branding effort from which October’s pay-per-view gets its name. It’s mostly been a stop-start effort, but it seems WWE is finally investing in the marketing power of its women wrestlers, with the first ever women’s Royal Rumble and Elimination Chamber matches, Evolution, and the acquisition of former Ultimate Fighting Champion fighter, Ronda Rousey, all occurring this year. It seems only right that if WWE is going to make a profit on feminism and women’s empowerment, the women in question should see some of that capital.

Furthermore, WWE’s women wrestlers are uniquely positioned to strike now. WWE’s said reliance on positioning Evolution and all their other “first ever” matches and events as “history making” has garnered mainstream attention. By forming a union and refusing to wrestle until they receive pay parity, women wrestlers will put the “Women’s Evolution” in jeopardy, forcing WWE to agree to their terms if it wishes to continue to appear as if it is breaking the barriers WWE itself erected.

The counterpoint to this argument is that if women wrestlers really wanted to be equal to male wrestlers, they would be content to be integrated into the existing product instead of segregated on their own show. But WWE’s male wrestlers already got their own all-male production in April, when the company visited Saudi Arabia for The Greatest Royal Rumble as part of their 10-year, close to £350m deal with a country in which women were only able to attend the show with a male chaperone.

This is not to mention the numerous events throughout not-so-distant history that had no women’s matches, or else portrayed them as nothing more than eye candy. (WWE will return to Saudi Arabia less than a week after Evolution, for a show that again will presumably not feature women’s wrestling).

Naysayers are also dwelling on rumours that ticket sales are low for Evolution. If that is true, it is to be expected, with only three matches confirmed. But it’s also another way women wrestlers can leverage their pay cheques: pay them more, or WWE will continue to lose money, reputation and viewers. And in light of the aforementioned Saudi Arabia bankroll, as well as recent TV deals that could result in a £1.54bn profit, they would be “insane not to unionise”, as a Forbes article similarly asserts.

So, WWE’s women wrestlers should heed their company’s most prominent women executive’s advice: “What did [the US women’s hockey team] do when finally they got what they wanted? They went on to win the gold. Because that’s what it’s about. It’s about taking a stand and using your voice. And I cannot wait to see what our women are going to do at Evolution.”

WWE’s women wrestlers will no doubt tear the house down, as they routinely do. Hopefully they’ll be doing so with enough money to buy one – or several – outright.