Identity politics and wrestling

[JerryvonKramer]

I am really weary of this topic because I don't really wish to discuss any political issues at all -- not that I don't care about them, just that it's not the sort of thing I want to talk about.

 

I have my reasons for my views and they are tied to what the form is.

 

Dylan put it best when he said that wrestling has violence at its heart. Like I said above though, if society changes, wrestling will change. It reflects its audiences, the audience doesn't reflect it. Crowds will not cheer things they don't want to and they won't boo things they don't want to. But since it's almost always been a male-dominated, blue-collar world, you might be waiting a long time before you get your socially progressive angles. Think about it, do you really want to look to a guy like Vince for social change?

 

With hip-hop I think the form is primarily a form of showing off lyrical dexterity. If you study the roots, it goes back to the battle MCs. It has -- as an intrinsic part of the form -- a built-in form of one-up-man-ship whether it's the Wu-Tang telling you how dope their rhymes are or Slick Rick bragging about some broad he's banged. It's part of the genre. It's not ALL it is, but it's built-in. You can't try to lop it off. It's as part of it as faces and heels are part of wrestling. I strongly believe that attacks on hip-hop for its misogyny don't "get it" and are misplaced for that reason. But hell, I've argued with people in much more heated terms than this before and been called everything under the sun for my stance, but I don't think you can even be into hip-hop period if you're the sort of person who is going to be worrying about gender politics. Like seriously, just listen to Radiohead or something. It's like going to a boxing match and crying about the fact someone is getting punched in the face.

[anarchistxx]

I'm going to split this off into its own thread, but I have to ask this question - if you take every controversial topic off the table *and* rules are not really enforced very much, what avenue does a heel have left to get heat? Are heels that don't offend anyone really heels?

 

The problem with this particular scenario is the audiences. The rational and progressive minded woman would be getting heat, whereas the misogynistic woman beating lunatic would be getting widely cheered for shutting the feminist up and/or humiliating her. It would be the faces being controversial and offensive.

 

The WWE audience has been shown to be pretty misogynistic at times and certainly dismissive of female wrestling. They also have a habit of cheering for the antihero. So it makes no sense going down the path of angles about current social and cultural issues because the fanbase and through them the company will seem like a backwards, hick organisation.

 

The way to get heel heat now [at least in mainstream US wrestling] is to be a bland nice guy, or a poor, boring worker. The old tropes like tedious authority figures and foreign heels work to a certain extent, but their promos are no more or less offensive than those of the 'good guys' who are getting cheered. It has very little to do with being pushed as a stereotypical villain, because the audience likes to go against the status quo.

 

A heel in 2014 can be nice, friendly, rational and offend nobody. It really makes no difference, except possibly to the young audience. Look at Sheamus - pushed as a smiling, happy go lucky face and the fans shit all over him and he gets loud boos at most venues.

[anarchistxx]

Also, on the hip hop analogy: guys who rap merely about fucking bitches don't tend to last very long these days, certainly not unless they have someone outrageously talented behind the production desk. The rap records that get commercial success and critical acclaim these days usually have a little more substance - storytelling concept albums like Good Kid MAAD City, or sonic masterpieces like Yeezus, or politically aware records like R.A.P Music, or albums about the complexities of fame and love like Take Care, or humurous conscious backpack rap like Acid Rap.

 

Even those who continue to rap about the age old topics of fucking women and murdering men do it in a semi-ironic way or as a shock tactic like Tyler the Creator, and have more strings to their repertoire. The age of gangster rap albums ruling the roost and long gone. As should the days be of treating wrestling so simplistically and not holding it up to the standards of both moral analysis and quality expectation that we judge other art on.

[JerryvonKramer]

Final final point: I'll agree that Killer Mike and El-P are making the best rap records right now but it's because they hit hard and are uncompromising like many of the old-school acts, not because they are socially progressive in any way. It's because they are awesome. Great lyrics and fat beats just like any other MC / producer duo who ever rocked it. I would hate to think anyone was pretending otherwise. I mean shit, I just put on Run the Jewels 2 and the very first line of the album is "I'm gonna bang this bitch the fuck out". In many ways they are a retrograde act.

 

Just like if Magnum vs. Tully happened tomorrow it would still be awesome.

[jushin muta liger]

Hip hop's roots are from the park jams and DJs rocking the local party like Kool Herc. It progressed into the MCs helping out with the DJs rock the party. Then the battle MCs came cause one guy thought he was better on the mic than the other that was doing it.

 

You're right Parv, the battle is essential in hip hop but it progressed from the party days but nobody really battles like today unless you are a battle rapper. The misogyny in rap is something that we can't take away from it either but the misogyny wasn't one of the basic principles of the music genre in the 70s. It progressed from that, it reached a peak and now misogyny is getting less in the music (even though it's very there). Rick Ross got dropped from his Reebok deal for a rhyme talking about slipping a date rape drug in a girl's drink. It's not that fans are worried about gender politics in the music, it's that the people are getting smarter and growing up. Jay Z is my favorite and he said he wouldn't do another Big Pimpin type song again.

 

You and Dylan are right cause the premise of wrestling of two people settling their differences in violence. But so is boxing and MMA. The thing with wrestling is that you can control every aspect of a storyline.

 

Scripted TV shows have a basic premise of one person vs another person but it is layered in nuance and keeps up with the world. Why can't wrestling?

[jushin muta liger]

Final final point: I'll agree that Killer Mike and El-P are making the best rap records right now but it's because they hit hard and are uncompromising like many of the old-school acts, not because they are socially progressive in any way. It's because they are awesome. Great lyrics and fat beats just like any other MC / producer duo who ever rocked it. I would hate to think anyone was pretending otherwise. I mean shit, I just put on Run the Jewels 2 and the very first line of the album is "I'm gonna bang this bitch the fuck out". In many ways they are a retrograde act.

 

Just like if Magnum vs. Tully happened tomorrow it would still be awesome.

The Run the Jewels albums work cause Killer Mike and El P are anarchists on the record and it's awesome. But there is some cleverness on there like the Gangsta Boo track on RTJ2 where she ups the vulgarity on both of them.

 

People in wrestling can run a Tully vs Magnum feud but they have to modify it. Hell, they can run that angle with Tully slapping Baby Doll and Dusty coming out to defend her in 2014 with the stuff with Ray Rice going on. They would have to modify or get rid of Dusty saying "She's mine now!" but that line doesn't make or break the storyline.

[Shining Wiz]

Wrestling is a form for telling simple stories. You have the title and I want it. You cheated and I’m mad. You injured/disrespected/otherwise offended me and I want revenge. Just about all angles boil down to this. Quality tends to come from how well you can dress that all up.

 

The fact that wrestling is a vehicle for simple storytelling is why when someone goes for something slightly less simple – Raven had a rough childhood; CM Punk is a real person with moods – they’re hailed as being revolutionary, or at least that they stand out from the pack as a “complex character”.

 

This simplicity is reflected in the lack of social or cultural awareness of the milieu the product takes place in. I’m not saying anything about being politically correct, I’m talking about being socially and culturally aware of your surroundings. In a business designed to make money from fans, not exploiting that is just leaving money on a table. I think most of it comes from the fact that, for the most part, wrestling companies are run by 40+ year old, middle class white guys. That results in the end product generally being focused through a cultural pinhole.

 

Which is a shame. A lot of us have grown up with pro wrestling as a go to entertainment product, and what worked for us 10 doesn’t work at 15 which doesn’t work at 20 which is different than what we want at 30 which seems ridiculous at 40.

 

To cite back to earlier references, Bill Watts calling Jim Cornette a sissy would have been the height of wit when I was 10. Now that I actually know what that means, it makes Watts a bully and Cornette sympathetic. I need something a little bit more than the big oversized jock picking on the unathletic nerd to stir my drink these days. Unfortunately, that’s a lot of what we get though. Through the pinhole, this is what THEY (being those who decide who does what when and how) think a good guy should do. That pinhole is why the nominal “good guys” are almost always dicks – Hogan, Rhodes, Cena, Warrior, Michaels..... Its particularly a WWF/E problem, but like all things North American wrestling, their influence spreads. The biggest good guy is almost always the character I find the most morally detestable. The era of the big bully is over socially and culturally, which is partly why the timing was right for someone like Bryan to get over as he did last year. It’s why someone like Punk was the most consistently over guy on the roster for several years. But.....we get what comes through the pinhole.

 

Just look at that Slaughter/Lana/Rusev angle from the last night, or the Rusev character in general. He’s a heel for saying he’s proud of his adopted country. If his adopted country was the US, he’d be a huge face. But because it’s not, he’s the bad guy. And seriously....you could book him exactly the same, but if he had adopted the USA, he’d be a huge face. The guy gets bullied, double teamed, insulted, etc....but he doesn’t back down and he stands up for the one person who helps him. Sounds like a good guy to me. But through the pinhole.....he’s evil because he’s foreign. It simplistic and kind of boring.

 

And don’t get me started on the plight of the wrestling black man.....I honestly don’t think that’s improved all that much, other than the stereotype being mildly adjusted.

 

All of which to say is that wrestling is, as always, woefully behind the times. Minorities’ gimmicks are that they are minorities, and stories can’t get past their simplistic basis.

[NintendoLogic]

This might be a controversial point of view, but I actually don't want wrestling to be more progressive. I like the fact that it is a hermetically-sealed all-macho environment with its own warped morality system. It's more entertaining that way.

 

I see no point in complaining about gender politics in wrestling, just as I see no point in complaining about gender politics in rap. Hip-hop wouldn't be the same without dudes bragging about how many bitches they've fucked, and wrestling wouldn't be the same if it wasn't ridiculous in the ways you've outlined. I already hate the modern product, but a PC-approved modern product would be even worse.

 

I genuinely 100% think this. I guess a love of kitsch and amorality kinda go hand-in-hand.

 

"But what about your hatred of Kamala?" Yeah that's different.

 

I want to disagree with this, but I really can't. As bad as the bitches-and-bling school of hip-hop is, it's not nearly as bad as the so-called "socially conscious" rappers who spout dumb shit like 9/11 conspiracy theories and calling Louis Farrakhan a prophet. By the same token, trying to make wrestling "progressive" results in shit like Chikara. What it comes down to is that wrestling and hip-hop are both degenerate art forms that appeal primarily to man's worst instincts. No one's quite figured out how to disentangle the awesome elements from the degenerate ones.

 

American society is a bit different. American heroes are cowboys, and renegades and outlaws. They don't mind breaking the rules if it achieves a goal for the greater good. It's a different value system and from Bruno to Hogan to Austin you see it reflected in the babyfaces.

 

Setting aside the fact that you're overstating the role of the outlaw in American culture, WWE babyfaces don't really pursue the greater good so much as their own self-interest. It's more a reflection of Vince McMahon's worldview than of American society as a whole. There was a recent comment on the F4W boards that I think was spot-on:

 

I'm not trying to make any political judgements. Seriously.

 

HOWEVER you can tell there's a lot of Ayn Rand koolaid in the booking, and the average person isn't going to connect to that.

 

I think WWE babyfaces make a lot more sense when you view them as Randian supermen.

[Matt D]

NWA babyfaces were men of the people and WWF babyfaces are out for themselves?

[Shining Wiz]

NWA babyfaces were men of the people and WWF babyfaces are out for themselves?

 

Dusty the character wasn't beyond self-importance.

[sek69]

 

Oh come on, this could be one of the all-time great angles!

 

Entertaining in all the wrong ways probably. WWE already struggles with the idea that the only adults they appeal to are misogynistic, misanthropic, backwards, socially awkward nerds. Having an angle where a liberal, progressive minded young woman gets booed for talking about institutionalized sexism in the wrestling industry would only contribute to that perception.

 

WWE still hasn't had a gay character where their homosexuality wasn't used for comedy value or as a brow for commentators and performers to snidely insult them over. Even an openly effeminate character like Fandango has to be accompanied by a woman to prevent any suggestion he is 'that way inclined'. That is a problem with all male sports, not just wrestling - but it is a lot easier for WWE to do something about it rather than soccer, as it controls the product.

 

 

 

Not only does Fandango have to be accompanied by a woman, he has to be put into angles where two women fight over him to prove how hetero he is. Of course they end up turning into a pseudo lesbian duo, because pro wrestling.

 

I'm not expecting WWE or any wrestling company to be socially progressive or cutting edge, but in 2014 there's no reason not to have characters that are gay/black/Asian/Hispanic and that doesn't compromise their entire gimmick. I think Big E is one of the most charismatic people on the roster, and watching those New Day promos make me cringe at how badly he's being wasted. Maybe the gimmick will work, but seeing black guys shucking and jiving on WWE TV doesn't usually bode well.

 

Also it was touched on before, but one of the main reasons heels have a hard time getting heat in WWE is how the babyfaces tend to be bigger assholes than the heels. John Cena's character was booked so poorly leading up to Survivor Series he made 80s Hogan look like a nice guy. They established he was in the building, yet he did nothing to prevent his entire team from getting destroyed on the go home show. The crowd (who at least half of them hate his guts) was chanting for him to come out and save Show and Sheamus, and he did nothing to help his guys. When Show knocked him out it made perfect sense in storyline since Cena hung him out to dry.

[fxnj]

 

1. lack of attention to diversity means the promotions aren't tapping into issues their audience genuinely cares about. imagine if you had a woman asking the fans for money to make a documentary on sexism in wrestling - you don't think that would get NUCLEAR heat if done decently?

 

Don't know what you are getting at here. Because this was not be a good idea at all. The male dominated WWE audience would boo a woman out of the building for such a promo, if she started talking about equal pay and how women are treated as sex objects to be gaped at for their tits rather than admired for their wrestling ability. It would be pretty embarrassing to WWE that their fans are exposed as sexist misogynists with archaic attitudes, and probably damaging in terms of advertisers.

 

So basically it would be reaffirm how idiotic feminists (and their sympathizers) are for trying to guilt trip men for enjoying what men enjoy. Sounds like a great angle idea to me.

[Cobra Commander]

would having a male wrestler in the feminist gimmick change any expectations for crowd heat or storyline ideas.

 

Granted, they'd probably just book the Male Feminist into being effeminate instead of maybe having him be Steve Rhodes from MWC. And the lack of on-screen social interaction between superstars and divas might diminish the point a bit.

 

New Day looks like a gimmick that might get hamstrung a bit by current events. It's not like a WWE heel is gonna start praising Darren Wilson while heeling on New Day. How far could New Day go until it's a 3 man version of Makin A Difference Fatu?

 

New Day is one Mini in a Sunday Suit away from an endless 3-way feud with Los Matadores/Torito and whoever Hornswoggle is with these days.

[sek69]

Well having all the Divas repeat the "we're all strong and powerful women" mantra when they're usually (only?) presented as something fuckable and nothing more would make any feminist type gimmick pretty awkward. We bemoan the state of women's matches in WWE when the hard truth is they are only purpose they serve is to be eye candy and to give fans a chance to go to the bathroom between big PPV matches.

[fakeplastictrees]

The majority of WWE heels come off as 'evil' and are one demensional in his/her evilness. One thing I hate are extreme feminist. You know the ones who thinkg saying 'hello!' is a crime and should be stopped at all costs. WWE should looks at REAL HEELS in real life and copy them. Kim Kardashian is a huge heel. She is a woman who has made a career out of who she sleeps with. She has made millions and will continue getting paid. A lot of people don't like her because she wakes up in the morning and gets a big fat check just to live her life. Eva Marie is someone who gets the Kim Heat in WWE. Eva Marie looks good and everyone knows that she is ONLY in WWE because of her looks and nothing else. Now Eva Marie is on a hot reality show where she is in a constant week-to-week battle on being the worse Diva in the company.

 

Who else is a heel? Who else is just NOT over at all? People like Darren Wilson and George Zimmerman. WWE needs to have a character like that. Someone who claims 'self-defense' or some bullshit like that but all of what this person does can be labeled as racist, homophobic, etc. However the actions will need to be kept vauge enough that WWE fans (and media like) will debate who-is-who and what-is-what. I think those are the three biggest heel characters WWE can have. WWE is afraid of REALLY touching nerves and really getting people invested. I know I would LOVE to see George Zimmerman, Darren Wilson, Kim Kardashian, and other famous people get their shit kicked in due to the type of person they are. What about someone an abuse relationship angle that has multiple violent beatings and all white knights are eliminated nice and easy and there is no happy ending with the woman being stretched out and never to return?

 

WWE can/should tap into some really dark stuff because again...who wouldn't want to see the wrestling version of Ray Rice get the shit beat out of him and powerbombed through 3 tables and not seen again until 6 months later?

[EvenStevenBooking]

Some of these responses are a great example of why wrestling audiences are terrible today. If a guy is taking cheap shots at me with a loaded tennis racket and hiding behind his two weightlifting friends, then yes, he is a sissy. If two people who are xenophobic come out and insult me just for living in a country, then yes, they are heels. No one is going on about how the Swagger/Colter heel act were really faces just because they were standing up for what they believed in and rightly so. It was because they acted like instigating idiots. Were the Russians in JCP really just proud country men or were they antagonistic braggarts who also happened to be able to somewhat back up their claims of superiority?

My issue with the average audience is how meta they are. Chanting "this is awesome" takes me out the moment of watching what is supposedly an athletic contest and reminds me this is a show where these combatants are actually performing an intricate dance. The WWE writer is now the biggest heel in the business. People don't boo because their favorite was cheated out of a victory by the nasty heel, but because he's being buried, misused or whatever. Cesaro is an example. He's fun to watch and has a ton a ton of impressive spots. He's a heel though and wrestles like a face. Why should I boo this guy who's doing all of this awesome stuff? He's in the spot he's in because of this. Taking away the giant swing got people upset because he got a pop for it. Why should a heel be doing moves that outshine the babyface though? I'm not saying all heels should be grounded and do nothing, but chinlocks, but they certainly shouldn't be making the babyface look inferior. Meltzer had a great point on a podcast a little while ago about a Cesaro and Ryback match. It was awful because Cesaro tossed Ryback, the muscled-up babyface, around like he was nothing. I know certain people will say blame the agents or bookers, but considering they allegedly took away the swing because it was getting cheers, I'd imagine it's more on Cesaro calling the match as he's the vet of the two.

[Shining Wiz]

The majority of WWE heels come off as 'evil' and are one demensional in his/her evilness. One thing I hate are extreme feminist. You know the ones who thinkg saying 'hello!' is a crime and should be stopped at all costs. WWE should looks at REAL HEELS in real life and copy them. Kim Kardashian is a huge heel. She is a woman who has made a career out of who she sleeps with. She has made millions and will continue getting paid. A lot of people don't like her because she wakes up in the morning and gets a big fat check just to live her life. Eva Marie is someone who gets the Kim Heat in WWE. Eva Marie looks good and everyone knows that she is ONLY in WWE because of her looks and nothing else. Now Eva Marie is on a hot reality show where she is in a constant week-to-week battle on being the worse Diva in the company.

 

Who else is a heel? Who else is just NOT over at all? People like Darren Wilson and George Zimmerman. WWE needs to have a character like that. Someone who claims 'self-defense' or some bullshit like that but all of what this person does can be labeled as racist, homophobic, etc. However the actions will need to be kept vauge enough that WWE fans (and media like) will debate who-is-who and what-is-what. I think those are the three biggest heel characters WWE can have. WWE is afraid of REALLY touching nerves and really getting people invested. I know I would LOVE to see George Zimmerman, Darren Wilson, Kim Kardashian, and other famous people get their shit kicked in due to the type of person they are. What about someone an abuse relationship angle that has multiple violent beatings and all white knights are eliminated nice and easy and there is no happy ending with the woman being stretched out and never to return?

 

WWE can/should tap into some really dark stuff because again...who wouldn't want to see the wrestling version of Ray Rice get the shit beat out of him and powerbombed through 3 tables and not seen again until 6 months later?

This all sounds......awful?

 

 

Here's an idea - how about they let characters be a touch more realistic and have, you know, feelings and moods. How about letting a heel be a compelling character who, if he starts to get cheers, DOESNT CHANGE THE THINGS THAT PEOPLE ARE CHEERING IN ORDER TO TURN FACE?!?!

 

Or, how about looking up the word subtlety and applying a little.

 

WWE should stay far, far, far away from racism angles. Newell, at least the intentional ones.....they seem to make every angle involving a black guy racist unintentionally.

[fakeplastictrees]

How is the stuff awful? Is the goal is to get true heat why not tap into what people REALLY hate? Extreme feminism. Racist/homophobs who get away with bullshit, wife/girlfriend beaters, self-centered Kim Kardashian types. If WWE had wrestlers with these traits and made them characters and not caricatures, I think it would be sucessful. WWE likes to compare itself to other dramas, yet refuse to take any of the risks that these dramas take.

[sek69]

WWE's ability to actually pull any of this off aside, they live in so much fear of upsetting sponsors I doubt we'll ever see anything remotely edgy for that reason alone.

[Shining Wiz]

How is the stuff awful? Is the goal is to get true heat why not tap into what people REALLY hate? Extreme feminism. Racist/homophobs who get away with bullshit, wife/girlfriend beaters, self-centered Kim Kardashian types. If WWE had wrestlers with these traits and made them characters and not caricatures, I think it would be sucessful. WWE likes to compare itself to other dramas, yet refuse to take any of the risks that these dramas take.

Let's see....first, making a heel feminist character would serve to alienate whatever female fan base there is, and draw some pretty bad publicity. That will happen when a company with a horrendous track record regarding treatment and presentation of women takes the time to make a heel out of someone pointing that out.

 

I would guess that George Zimmerman would be cheered by most of the crowd. Kind of like how Zeb turned himself face by being a racist.

 

As for having a wife beating character.....yeah......no. That would not go over well.

 

There is plenty of fertile ground for compelling characters and stories without needing to go for the lowest common denominator of racist and misogynistic bs.

[fakeplastictrees]

 

How is the stuff awful? Is the goal is to get true heat why not tap into what people REALLY hate? Extreme feminism. Racist/homophobs who get away with bullshit, wife/girlfriend beaters, self-centered Kim Kardashian types. If WWE had wrestlers with these traits and made them characters and not caricatures, I think it would be sucessful. WWE likes to compare itself to other dramas, yet refuse to take any of the risks that these dramas take.

Let's see....first, making a heel feminist character would serve to alienate whatever female fan base there is, and draw some pretty bad publicity. That will happen when a company with a horrendous track record regarding treatment and presentation of women takes the time to make a heel out of someone pointing that out.

 

I would guess that George Zimmerman would be cheered by most of the crowd. Kind of like how Zeb turned himself face by being a racist.

 

As for having a wife beating character.....yeah......no. That would not go over well.

 

There is plenty of fertile ground for compelling characters and stories without needing to go for the lowest common denominator of racist and misogynistic bs.

 

 

Okay. Like what? You have presented no alternatives. I am talking about things that will GRAB the audience and actually touch them. Again people would love to see the person who hates men and actually wants to hold back women (by creating false situations with no true end game) be thrown into a garbage truck and driven out of the arena. I think people would love to see the wife beater put through a flaming table and not seen for 6 months. A Kim Kardashian/Paris Hilton type to piss people off and eventually getting what she truly deserves. A dicussion about the lowest common demonitor cannot be had without talking about pro wrestling.

 

So again I ask, what are the SPECIFIC alternatives that will draw more heat then anything I mentioned. The Piggie James angle was one of the most emotionally invested angles of Diva Division history. Why should stuff like that be kept away from pro wrestling?

[Shining Wiz]

You're right. Since I have no alternatives, your ideas win.

[fakeplastictrees]

No. Its not about winning. I am just a firm believer that if you call something stupid then you need to present an alternative. My ideas suck. Okay great. You have made the claim that there are a million other ideas for compelling characters. I am asking you for specific examples as I am actually curious. Are you typing just to type or is there something substantial behind your words?

[Shining Wiz]

You got me. I type just to type. And since I don't have good ideas to replace your bad ones, you win boss.

[fakeplastictrees]

Again, its not about winning. I'm just curious if you have true alternatives or just being a contrarian. But I won't beat a dead horse as I see you have nothing to offer except criticism.