TECH2

The “Wife Acceptance Factor” has to go. It’s archaic, misogynistic, and the wrong way to think about our hobby.

As enthusiasts, we need to abolish the acronym “WAF.” Here’s why.

For those of you who have no idea what I’m talking about, in reviews and casual discussions about AV gear (usually speakers or big TVs), there’s a concern that “The Wife” won’t accept whatever it is into the home.

This is, unquestionably, sexist. I mean, duh, of course it is.

It’s one thing to say that your wife wouldn't like something, but for there to be an acronym assuming all women think the same, that’s just stupid.

I know many women who love AV as much, if not more, than their male spouses. As anecdotal as that is, it proves the stupidity of “WAF.”

It’s also the wrong way to think about this hobby. It’s dismissive and exclusionary. Instead of coming up with “witty” over-simplistic terms, maybe we should talk about why there’s such a term in the first place.

Because as I see it, “WAF” isn’t a discussion about gender, it’s a discussion about marketing. Specifically, the failure of.

Let me explain. Let’s say my future wife wants to tear out the backyard and build a temple to her favorite pastime: basketball (not farfetched, most of the women I know are far more into sports than the guys I know). She wants to build a court, bleachers, lights, everything.

I would see this as insane for myriad reasons, not least because basketball is godawful boring, the project sounds like a tremendous amount of money, and while she’d love it, I’d get nothing from it (other than her enjoyment, which is something).

This analogy sound familiar yet?

But instead of being dismissive and saying the idea doesn’t have GAF (obviously, Geoff Acceptance Factor), let’s say she tries to sell me on it. She explains that we’d save money by not going to games (stay with me here), we’d have a place to have fun with future mini Geoff and Geoffettes, and we can give back to the community by giving the local youths a place to hang out instead of creating mischief or whatever.

Look, the point is, I don’t understand sports. The real point is, future Mrs. Morrison knows I don’t give shart about sports, so she’s trying to show how this stupid basketball idea works for me too.

WAF-be-gone
The deeper issue, as we keep going down this rabbit hole, is that many who espouse the idea of “WAF” are (consciously or not) putting a sexist moniker while obfuscating two perfectly legitimate issues. These issues have nothing to do with gender, though often women are often on one side, and men the other.

1) A/V gear looks like crap. All of it. No, seriously.
I have the style sense of plaid shirts and a rusty 914, and even I can look at a pair of 6 foot speakers and monoblocks and go, yeah, those are stupid looking. They may sound incredible, but come on.

Many people (again, not me), like to have a presentable, attractive house. BigStupidAVGear does not lend itself to a presentable, attractive house. I live in gear squalor and even I thought a 90-inch TV was a bridge too far (120-inch screen though, no problem).

Wanting to have a presentable house is perfectly reasonable, and it’s possible that many who use “WAF” aren’t knowingly being sexist, they’re just using shorthand for gear that’s ugly.

But why does it have to be ugly? There are lots of products that are at least less ugly than others. Why not more of that?

I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss a reasonable complaint with a stupid acronym because it’s entirely possible the spouse who wants a beautiful house wants that as much (if not more) than the other spouse wants gear, frivolous as it may seem to the other.

And again, assuming it’s always the woman in the relationship that cares about aesthetics is stupid. If you don’t think so, I think you need to meet more people. Some relationships (brace yourself) don’t even have women.

2) Money
This is probably the uglier of the two options. If the gear in question is given a “WAF” label because it’s too expensive, you know what, it is. This is a hobby. Don’t go into debt for it. It’s not worth it.

If you can afford it, but one half doesn’t want to spend it, that’s different. Now we’re back to the marketing issue. I’ve written about this before, but the key here is that even the women I know who are as into tech as much as your average tech-head guy, they’re not into it in the same way. This is key.

Generally speaking, guys are into the nuts and sprockets: lumens, watts, contrast ratios, HDR, THD, DLP, and P3. Women, for the most part, are more interested in the experience. Not “what it is” but “what can it do for me.” This is huge, because both sides can be equally fanatical, but since it’s a different kind of fanaticism, it’s hard for the other person to understand.

So don’t sell the watts sell the emotion, if you sense your spouse isn’t into the gear the same way you are.

Or, better yet, read It's Complicated: Understanding a Woman's Relationship with A/V Gear by Home Theater alum Adrienne Maxwell.

Bottom Line
Words, or specifically, the meaning behind words, mean something. WAF is a stupid and sexist acronym, implying it’s the wives that “don’t get it,” and are the gatekeepers to true enjoyment in this hobby.

So let’s kill it. Kill the acronym. Because once we take a look at why people use it, why they might feel that way, perhaps we can get a better idea why others don’t feel included in this hobby.

Because isn’t getting more people into loving AV a good thing?