WWE Reportedly Replacing Divas Championship - and Retiring "Divas" Name?

[Uncle Sam]

Say goodbye to WWE’s “Divas” division and the purple butterfly belt.

WWE finally caved and the decision has been made to rebrand Divas division as the Women’s division. The official announcement will be made on Monday’s WWE RAW from Dallas, the night after WrestleMania. The news was first reported by PWInsider and we’ve since verified it independently.

A new WWE Women’s Championship belt has already commissioned. From what we’ve been told, the new Women’s Championship bares a strong similarity to the WWE World Heavyweight championship belt – but it’s mounted on a white leather strap and is smaller.

http://www.sescoops.com/wwe-rebranding-the-divas-division-new-womens-championship-commissioned/

I was unable to find the original article from PWInsider, from twenty seconds of intense Googling, nor could I find another source, from a further twenty seconds of thoroughly looking at the tear in my trousers. As with anything published by a wrestling news site, take this with a pinch of salt.

On the assumption that this is true, halle-fucking-lujah.

While I'm willing to buy the idea that the next champion will get a new belt, one that doesn't look like something a four-year-old would vomit up after a fruit juice bender, I'm more reluctant to believe that they're scrapping the "diva" name. You don't spend nearly two decades on branding only to erase all your hard work over night, no matter how mindless and condescending said branding is. The article seems very presumptuous in that regard. At most, and this would be a compromise that I'd be OK with, I can see "divas" becoming a term to exclusively describe the reality TV stars. While my dream of female wrestlers being referred to as "superstars" might still be out of reach, "woman" or "woman wrestler" is much easier on the ear.

 

[OYDK]

Oh no, hopes going up. That's never a good thing when it comes to the WWE.

If true, I have to hope that this has something to do with Bailey's promotion. Debuting her as the next face of the "Women's Division" would make me very happy. Very happy indeed.

 

[Dave]

Good decision. I've always hated the term Diva and I've always hated that stupid butterfly belt since the moment it made its first appearance. To that end, I'm staying positive about the changes that the WWE want to implement; mysterious as they are.

I'm just wondering what this means for the Divas Championship match at Wrestlemania? Surely, a new champion would be the one to debut a new Championship belt. And with that in mind, I have to believe that the WWE will be giving the strap to Becky or Sasha at Mania. Right? Right?

 

[Tastycles]

They definitely won't get rid of the term diva. I imagine total divas is probably the second or third most watched WWE programming. What I envisage they will do is separate divas from the women wrestlers.

 

[rbv13]

I personally don't get the distaste for the term Diva. They could've been calling it the Ladie's, Women's or Super Awesome Clam Jam's Division and it would still be exactly what it is today. What is in a name? I find this story hard to believe with the effort, time and financials WWE has put behind the Diva's Brand. Such a change requires time as it involves much more than a shiny new title.

 

[enviousdominous]

The WWE tends to be very stubborn when it comes to how they present themselves. It's promising that this is being reported as happening after WrestleMania because they seem to like to overhaul their creative direction toward anything that doesn't need further resolution.

I've never liked the term Diva, I think we should be recognizing these athletes as women first and their gimmick second. Diva just sounds like a gimmick to me that every female athlete had to embrace. The pinnacle of women's wrestling was early 1990's Joshi wrestling, and I would never call any of those women a Diva.

If they call Bayley up to the main show, I don't think that fans would accept her wanting to be a Diva's Champion. Her gimmick is that of someone with impeccable sportsmanship and a heart of gold. Maybe give the Diva gimmick solely to Alexa Bliss and have her play a role similar to Hollywood Hogan where she would rebrand the Women's Championship as the Diva's Championship when she's the champion.

Great idea, but I won't hold my breath on this one.

 

[The Bearded One]

I've never had much of a problem with the label "Diva." It was just a marketing ploy much like the word "Superstars." I wasn't aware of the negative connotations of it when I was younger, so that obviously affected my view. But I feel like the WWE in a way redefined the term to fit their current product.

As for the belt, good riddance. It is the only belt I've really ever had a negative opinion on. I even found redeeming qualities about the spinner belt at the time. It's about time the women wrestlers actually compete for a title that would be (hopefully) worthy of holding. And the night after WrestleMania would be the perfect time to do it since many in the crowd would feel the same way I do about it. Any of the three women in the triple threat match are more than worthy of ushering in the new era, and hopefully it comes after a great match at Mania.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I also don't see them retiring the term "Diva", though it's not impossible. This might be another example of NXT influence as I haven't heard the term "Diva" applied to the female wrestlers in NXT for quite a while. I'd hear it occasionally during an interview or one of the commentators would say it every so often, but I can't recall the last time I heard it. Whenever a women's match goes down in NXT now, it's simply called a match for the "women's division" with the word "Diva" nowhere to be seen or heard.

Still, I think a different title design is more likely for the main roster because we know how much Vince loves his buzzwords like Sports Entertainment, Superstars and Divas.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

Keep Diva as heel terminology for those heels I can't name. Eva Marie and such.

 

[nwocongo]

I don't really have a problem with the name either, but some people focus on the negative connotation of the word, a prima donna, moody, temperamental or whatever and that directly conflicts with this "Diva's revolution" and all Steph's give the Diva's a chance schtick. For some it may seem that Vince and the other men in high positions still don't see the women on an equal plane as sports entertainers and they are still a novelty act.
I dont really feel this way so I may be reading too much in to it, but people seem to be overly sensitive to these kind of issues today.. WWE is wrasslin' not a beacon of Women's rights and Political correctness.

As for the belt, it's heinous. Good riddance.

 

[MERPER]

I can't take WWE seriously when they do things to get more "PC" yet still have ties to Donald Trump.

 

[Uncle Sam]

I can't take WWE seriously when they do things to get more "PC" yet still have ties to Donald Trump.

As much disdain as I have for using "PC" as a synonym for "respectful," just out of curiosity, what's the alternative? Build a wall around Alberto Del Rio? Suspend Sami Zayn? Have Cesaro re-debut with a ridiculous combover?

Is it not a good thing that, if you consider him a bigot, WWE walks a different path to Donald Trump? Is it not Vince McMahon's prerogative both whose company he keeps and how he runs his company?

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I can't take WWE seriously when they do things to get more "PC" yet still have ties to Donald Trump.

Nobody's perfect. Just because Vince prefers him as a candidate doesn't mean that he embraces or agrees with everything Trump says. For instance, the reporter whom AJ mistakenly trashed about 2.5 years back at the Tribute to the Troops taping, I can't remember her name, severed ties with WWE for a while because of WWE's association with Floyd Mayweather. I can't remember he name but she touched on the fact that Mayweather has a history of domestic abuse and while I personally find the guy to be an obnoxious ass, he's still going to be considered one of the greatest boxers of all time. Triple H is reportedly friends with him, but just because Trips is his friend doesn't mean that he approves of or agrees with every single little detail of Mayweather's life or how he conducts it. I think it's a good example of PC being pushed too far as a means of applying a guilt by association stigma. Just because Floyd Mayweather has done business with WWE and/or has friends on the WWE roster doesn't somehow equal that they endorse male on female violence or domestic abuse. I'm almost sure that my great, great, great grandfather probably used the N-word at some point, but that doesn't make me racist by default.

Besides, the vague references to Donald Trump and WWE have been made by various political pundits and some of Trump's opponents, it's not something that Trump or WWE itself has endorsed or encouraged. Again, it just seems more like that guilt by association stigma of political correctness being stretch to an absurd degree.

 

[MERPER]

Sorry but if you align yourself with Trump you don't get to pick and choose where and when you agree with him.

If you support Trump, as Vince McMahon and his company does, I interpret that to mean you're a racist, sexist, bigoted islamophobe who hates and wishes harm on anyone who is not a white male christian person.

It's for this reason that I won't give WWE another penny of my money.

and yes, Triple H being friends with Mayweather leads me to be disgusted by him because he supports a person who enjoys beating up women.

There are repercussions for your actions. He can choose not to support Mayweather and speak out AGAINST his domestic abuse issues, but he chooses not to or the additional fame and money that comes with being on Floyd's "team."

 

[Navi]

Sorry but if you align yourself with Trump you don't get to pick and choose where and when you agree with him.

If you support Trump, as Vince McMahon and his company does, I interpret that to mean you're a racist, sexist, bigoted islamophobe who hates and wishes harm on anyone who is not a white male christian person.

It's for this reason that I won't give WWE another penny of my money.

I find Trump more of a circus performer than anything else, and I watch the Apprentice, but that doesn't mean I'm any of the things you said he is.

Just because someone is friends doesn't mean they follow the same belief system. People are individuals and have their own likes and dislikes.

Jack-hammer that was Michelle Beadle the ESPN reporter that cut ties with the WWE over Mayweather. She's since come back into the fold apparently.

 

[JJYanks121]

William Shakespeare said "what's in a name?" and from what I hear, he was a pretty smart dude.

For me, it's about presentation. You could call it the ****s division, but if you're getting great storylines capped off by great matches, nobody will pay attention to what the women are called. It's not as though the 3 horsewomen that came up were all of a sudden seen in a negative light because they were "Divas" instead of "women". They were judged on their performance, so let's keep it that way.

As for the belt, I refer to my friend Bill again and say "what's in a belt?" I never hated the Divas title as it actually was an upgrade from the diarrhea in belt form that was the women's title. Yes, maybe it represented some top champions to some, but it was a belt that started with Jacqueline and Sable and made its way through the old, the talentless, and the Jazz. Thankfully, WWE has the foresight to move forward, not backwards and create a new title. I'm cool with that but again, doesn't make a difference to me. If a champion holds their title up high and defends it proudly, I really don't care what it looks like. Again, put on good TV with the women involved and you won't have a worry with what to call them or what the belt looks like.

 

[dsotm5150]

With influx of women wrestlers instead of models turned wrestlers coming up through NXT we might be seeing an expansion of the women's division. Could always be WWE trying to become more "politically correct" too.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

William Shakespeare said "what's in a name?" and from what I hear, he was a pretty smart dude.

For me, it's about presentation. You could call it the ****s division, but if you're getting great storylines capped off by great matches, nobody will pay attention to what the women are called. It's not as though the 3 horsewomen that came up were all of a sudden seen in a negative light because they were "Divas" instead of "women". They were judged on their performance, so let's keep it that way.

As for the belt, I refer to my friend Bill again and say "what's in a belt?" I never hated the Divas title as it actually was an upgrade from the diarrhea in belt form that was the women's title. Yes, maybe it represented some top champions to some, but it was a belt that started with Jacqueline and Sable and made its way through the old, the talentless, and the Jazz. Thankfully, WWE has the foresight to move forward, not backwards and create a new title. I'm cool with that but again, doesn't make a difference to me. If a champion holds their title up high and defends it proudly, I really don't care what it looks like. Again, put on good TV with the women involved and you won't have a worry with what to call them or what the belt looks like.

Ideally, that's the way it probably should be but, as we all know, what's ideal and what's real don't always go hand in hand, especially in pro wrestling. I think that's especially true these days where so many fans are more interested than being as negative as they can be in regards to certain aspects of the product, whether it's genuinely bad or doesn't fit some fantasy scenario they've worked out in their heads.

Women's wrestling in WWE has been a joke for the vast majority of its existence, and that includes the days of the Attitude Era. Because of how women's wrestling has been portrayed in NXT, the main roster has followed suit, to a large degree, and women's wrestling has become relevant; there are still some holdovers from the old days, and by holdovers I mean reminders in the form of some of the female veterans on the main roster, but the arrival of Charlotte, Becky and Sasha has signaled the beginning of something different and, at long last, better. Perception can often be reality and the term "Diva" just has too many negative connotations associated with it. Many fans want any and all this "Diva" labeled done away with as part of the rebranding and that includes the name and the championship. According to the latest, this is supposed to begin after WrestleMania XXXII and the new title is reportedly similar to the WWE WHC, only smaller.

 

[Fire Marshall Bill]

Sorry but if you align yourself with Trump you don't get to pick and choose where and when you agree with him.

So if you're friends with someone and they turn out to be a serial killer, are you a serial killer too? Your logic gives no person freedom to their own devices. It's like saying if anyone chooses to befriend anyone, they immediately adopt all their values. Eventually, this world would be filled with a mass of the exact same person in multiple bodies.

Jack-hammer that was Michelle Beadle the ESPN reporter that cut ties with the WWE over Mayweather. She's since come back into the fold apparently.

Which, by MERPER's logic, makes her Donald Trump, VKM, and anyone else associated with WWE all in one. In turn, Trump and VKM are now conglomerates of everyone Beadle is associated with as well. Talk about melting pot

Furthermore, she's now associated with Floyd Mayweather again and she now beats women as well.

Anyway, whether they change the title or not, they're probably not dumping the "Diva" name. Sorry for anyone who really cares.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

Genuinely the most astounding part of this is the fact the WWE stepped back, looked at something, and said "there is a better way we can do this" and then they made wholesale changes.

Stunning, and a very positive sign.


Not much else for me to say that others haven't already.

 

[Good Golly It's Ollie]

diva
/ˈdiːvə/

A person who may be considered or who considers herself (or by extension himself) much more important than others, has high expectations of others and who is extremely demanding and fussy when it comes to personal privileges.

Praise the Gods!

This isn't even about political correctness for me, it's just about logic. Diva has traditionally been a word with negative connotations and in recent times has functioned as a descriptor basically meaning "haughty bitch". It fits a self-aware heel very nicely actually, I'm totally fine with someone like Charlotte branding herself as such, but a whole division, or a cutesy pure face like Bayley? Nah.

Butterfly belt always looked like blingee trash too, good riddance. If the rumour of white strap is true, then that's neat. I love white strap titles.

This is an excellent move.

 

[enviousdominous]

William Shakespeare said "what's in a name?" and from what I hear, he was a pretty smart dude.

*puts on his nerd glasses*

I realize you were being facetious and I also realize that I love being a pretentious ass, so I'll say that Shakespeare didn't come out and say "What's in a name?" as a universal ethos. That was a line written for Juliet in which she exclaims that the two warring families are only really having a war of names, thus she wonders out loud why names have to define the people. They accept their names, and the feuds that come with them.

As it turns out, there's a hell of a lot in a name. If you name them something vulgar and they tolerate it, then they embrace the connotation that they are vulgar. There's a reason why we haven't seen any westerns starring "Marion Morrison" or listen to any gangsta' rap produced by "Marion Knight".

In my opinion; divas are assumed to be arrogant socialites with concerns that barely go beyond their own hedonistic desires. Not every woman on the roster fits that mold, so I think that the name is misleading and inappropriate.

 

[sikkbones]

I've never had much of a problem with the label "Diva." It was just a marketing ploy much like the word "Superstars." I wasn't aware of the negative connotations of it when I was younger, so that obviously affected my view. But I feel like the WWE in a way redefined the term to fit their current product.

As for the belt, good riddance. It is the only belt I've really ever had a negative opinion on. I even found redeeming qualities about the spinner belt at the time. It's about time the women wrestlers actually compete for a title that would be (hopefully) worthy of holding. And the night after WrestleMania would be the perfect time to do it since many in the crowd would feel the same way I do about it. Any of the three women in the triple threat match are more than worthy of ushering in the new era, and hopefully it comes after a great match at Mania.

clearly youve forgotten about this atrocity...

 

[King Patrick Star]

It's not bad, but it's not good either. It's cool, I guess.

 

[ShinChan]

It's not bad, but it's not good either. It's cool, I guess.

It is nice. And way better than Divas Title.

By the way, I am happy about this decision if its really true. Paige, Bayley, Sasha, Becky, Charlotte and Natalya are not suitable as "Divas" and much more viable as women competitors.

It is a nice start for the female division to get more interesting. I would want much strong booking for these women. 2 matches at each ppv with one being for the title and other a personal grudge/No. 1 Contender match.

Fingers Crossed for these women!