#SpeakingOut: Industry-wide sexual misconduct (assault/harrassment/grooming/etc) accusations and their repercussions

[KawadaSmile]

pro wrestling is just the fucking worst

[Tim Evans]

People would be surprised how many current wrestlers that appear on tv Monday and Wednesday nights do secret "Seminars" at Rance's school and his other school that is owned by another guy during the week. Moose doubling down on his defense of Rance was not shocking.

[WingedEagle]

4 minutes ago, Tim Evans said:

People would be surprised how many current wrestlers that appear on tv Monday and Wednesday nights do secret "Seminars" at Rance's school and his other school that is owned by another guy during the week. Moose doubling down on his defense of Rance was not shocking.

Is there some reason these wrestlers won't stay away beyond stupidity?

[KawadaSmile]

4 minutes ago, WingedEagle said:

Is there some reason these wrestlers won't stay away beyond stupidity?

Based on someone's burner account, there's free weed and a free ring

[kas]

Maybe worth taking with a grain of salt since this is a new twitter account 

 

[WingedEagle]

47 minutes ago, KawadaSmile said:

Based on someone's burner account, there's free weed and a free ring

So we're talking about high school logic here.  Got it.  Amazing.

[sek69]

The best part is when called out about it, Moose's reaction was to get upset at the people pointing out the negative and not focusing on the people training in the ring. It's really amazing the knack he has to be the most wrong possible in any discussion.

[KawadaSmile]

1 hour ago, WingedEagle said:

So we're talking about high school logic here.  Got it.  Amazing.

People mentioned that weed is pretty much legal in Florida so if true, it's not only just dumb, but it shows how those wrestlers don't give a single fuck.

[sek69]

So we're going to have to deal with Dave's reactions to sexual assault accusations when it comes to people he's a fan of. On yesterday's show he compared Will Ospreay to Hana Kimura in terms of being bulled on the internet. If you recall, Will got a woman blackballed after accusing his friend of raping her. It's not even a he said/she said deal as the promoter in question came forward and said "yeah we didn't want to pull her booking but we wouldn't have a show without Will".  Yet Dave wants to equate it with assholes bullying Hana over a bullshit reality TV show.

To be somewhat fair, Will has had depression issues and it's been a rough couple months for him, but Jesus Christ the audacity to compare the two in any aspect is just unbelievable.

[Coffey]

I would be all aboard any train that would lead to Meltzer's voice disappearing from the wrestling scene entirely, to be honest. All of his bullshit reviews, ratings & opinions going with him. Um, oh, y'know, I mean... just, y'know, I dunno.

[El-P]

2 hours ago, sek69 said:

So we're going to have to deal with Dave's reactions to sexual assault accusations when it comes to people he's a fan of. On yesterday's show he compared Will Ospreay to Hana Kimura in terms of being bulled on the internet. If you recall, Will got a woman blackballed after accusing his friend of raping her. It's not even a he said/she said deal as the promoter in question came forward and said "yeah we didn't want to pull her booking but we wouldn't have a show without Will".  Yet Dave wants to equate it with assholes bullying Hana over a bullshit reality TV show.

To be somewhat fair, Will has had depression issues and it's been a rough couple months for him, but Jesus Christ the audacity to compare the two in any aspect is just unbelievable.

I reserve more comments before I actually hear what Dave said, because he had done a fair job on the issue thus far. The Ospreay case itself is not exactly clear cut either. But that's neither here nor there.

I'll only say this : online bullying is online bullying. People are doing it because they hide behind keyboards and feel justified to do so, because they feel they are on the "right side", whatever the side be. You can't draw a line between "good victims" and "bad victims", because if you do, then it becomes ok if the person being bullied is being bullied "for good reasons". Except it's not. That's why the SJW acronym is so problematic, because it does comes of the alt-right spheres and is used mostly by those people, but it is actually pretty accurate in describing the actual phenomenon. So you can't really use it (unless you're alt-right), but you have to tiptoe around the notion because it is actually a really fair one in many cases.

Again, not heard what Meltz *actually* said yet. I would be surprised he said both were "the same thing" without adding layers of complexity to the whole thing, because that's what he has done thus far on the matter (which some people don't like, because complexity is the enemy of social medias, who can't tweet in complexity). Once I do listen, I'll see.

On this topic, everyone should watch M, by Fritz Lang. Still as accurate today as it ever was.

[MoS]

Oh come on. Calling out Will Osperey and demanding answers for accusations of him blacklisting an alleged sexual assault victim is several universes removed from telling Hana Kimura to kill herself cuz of, amongst other reasons, her being mixed-race. Flattening any and all severe online interaction into "online bullying" does nothing but give potential abusers the chance to deflect any scrutiny or demands of accountability. 

What Meltzer said was honestly overblown on Twitter, with some people calling him an enabler of abuse and a toxic personality who needs to be cancelled or whatever, but him trying to compare the Osperey and Kimura situations the way he did was really stupid, and is a clear instance of him getting worked by the people he likes. Not to mention, casually dismissing the allegations themselves.

[World's Worst Man]

5 hours ago, El-P said:

I reserve more comments before I actually hear what Dave said, because he had done a fair job on the issue thus far. The Ospreay case itself is not exactly clear cut either. But that's neither here nor there.

I'll only say this : online bullying is online bullying. People are doing it because they hide behind keyboards and feel justified to do so, because they feel they are on the "right side", whatever the side be. You can't draw a line between "good victims" and "bad victims", because if you do, then it becomes ok if the person being bullied is being bullied "for good reasons". Except it's not. That's why the SJW acronym is so problematic, because it does comes of the alt-right spheres and is used mostly by those people, but it is actually pretty accurate in describing the actual phenomenon. So you can't really use it (unless you're alt-right), but you have to tiptoe around the notion because it is actually a really fair one in many cases.

Again, not heard what Meltz *actually* said yet. I would be surprised he said both were "the same thing" without adding layers of complexity to the whole thing, because that's what he has done thus far on the matter (which some people don't like, because complexity is the enemy of social medias, who can't tweet in complexity). Once I do listen, I'll see.

On this topic, everyone should watch M, by Fritz Lang. Still as accurate today as it ever was.

SJW is a perfectly fine way to label the neo-Robespierreist nutjobs. I think the people who dislike that term protest too much so to speak, because it was only ever meant to be derogatory towards those who are bullies, coercive, and grossly intolerant of anything that doesn't 100% match their own views, not simply those who care about social issues. If the alt-right have co-opted the term, whatever, fuck them too while we're at it. The term "regressive left" also went through something similar despite it being a fantastically accurate description of that sort, although the impetus behind the creation of the term was different. And quite frankly, as a left leaning person myself, I don't want to be lumped in with those people as "the left" or "liberals" so I think it's important to differentiate them from those who actually care about égalité et liberté. Whatever you want to call it, it's something that should be given attention.

Anyway, these things seem to all be about a few issues: Does one know the full story? How heinous is it really? If the full story (or thereabouts) is known, how harsh should one be to another human being who has done something heinous? Is there any utility whatsoever in treating people this way? In my opinion, personally bullying someone, even if they are an unsavory sort, is at best a waste of time, at worst incredibly unethical and mean-spirited. If these people are so upset by the purported actions, how about simply concocting an argument that attempts to show the person, and the world, why their actions were wrong? Even using strong language, this would be a perfectly acceptable way of dealing with things without devolving to atavistic personal attacks in an attempt to do nothing except harm the person.

Edit: Oh and to get back to Ospreay vs. Kimura, I would agree that one situation was worse than the other due to the circumstances surrounding each of them. I'm just not sure it matters much in a practical sense, since as I alluded to above, bullying is never the proper path.

[NintendoLogic]

5 hours ago, MoS said:

Oh come on. Calling out Will Osperey and demanding answers for accusations of him blacklisting an alleged sexual assault victim is several universes removed from telling Hana Kimura to kill herself cuz of, amongst other reasons, her being mixed-race. Flattening any and all severe online interaction into "online bullying" does nothing but give potential abusers the chance to deflect any scrutiny or demands of accountability. 

What Meltzer said was honestly overblown on Twitter, with some people calling him an enabler of abuse and a toxic personality who needs to be cancelled or whatever, but him trying to compare the Osperey and Kimura situations the way he did was really stupid, and is a clear instance of him getting worked by the people he likes. Not to mention, casually dismissing the allegations themselves.

What is your basis for thinking that Ospreay only had to deal with people calling him out and demanding answers?

[sek69]

It should be mentioned that in addition to comparing Will's situation to Hana's, he also said Will's case is a matter of people wanting to be angry and not wanting to investigate. Okay then, it sounds like maybe Dave knows something the rest of us don't since all the available information points at Ospreay blackballing a woman because she accused his friend of rape. If there's some exculpatory information out there it would be far more useful to, oh I don't know, REPORT IT instead of trying to handwave it away or try to compare it to someone being bulled to suicide. Tut-tutting people who are upset at a guy for shithead behavior because they don't know some mystery info is some "I know something you don't know and I'm going to lord it over you" bullshit.

 

I will say probably 99.9% of the people go after Dave about is either made up or just BS spread by carnies getting paid off it, but this has long been a weak spot of his. It wasn't that long ago that he was being all "women be crazy, right?" when Elgin had allegations against him a while back, and lo and behold it seems looking back that accuser was telling the truth since it's come out he has a pattern of behavior.  Perhaps it comes from decades of listening to wrestlers talk about banging rats, but the tone he's taken with sexual assault accusers in the past has been clearly skeptical, and it wasn't until damn near the entire UK scene got called out did he seemingly realize that perhaps this is some shit that really happens.

[NintendoLogic]

Dave has been saying on the F4W board that he's been putting in work but it'll take more time to get to the truth, so he apparently is trying to do a thorough investigation. To that end, he's dropped cryptic hints about emails and messages he's seen that indicate there's more to the story than meets the eye. But the point remains that even if Ospreay is guilty as sin, he doesn't deserve to be driven to suicide by online harassment.

[sek69]

1 minute ago, NintendoLogic said:

Dave has been saying on the F4W board that he's been putting in work but it'll take more time to get to the truth, so he apparently is trying to do a thorough investigation. To that end, he's dropped cryptic hints about emails and messages he's seen that indicate there's more to the story than meets the eye. But the point remains that even if Ospreay is guilty as sin, he doesn't deserve to be driven to suicide by online harassment.

 

No one deserves to be driven to suicide, but a cynic might point out that it's also a popular technique used by abusers to make their victims feel guilty about reporting what they've done. 

 

[El-P]

26 minutes ago, NintendoLogic said:

Dave has been saying on the F4W board that he's been putting in work but it'll take more time to get to the truth, so he apparently is trying to do a thorough investigation.

What ? Thorough investigation that is taking actual time and work ? WTF is that ? Can't he just tweet something like NOW and point fingers at someone instead ?!

[Coffey]

51 minutes ago, NintendoLogic said:

...even if Ospreay is guilty as sin, he doesn't deserve to be driven to suicide by online harassment.

This is a very valid - short & to the point - statement that shouldn't get lost in all the hoopla, admittedly.

[sek69]

21 minutes ago, El-P said:

What ? Thorough investigation that is taking actual time and work ? WTF is that ? Can't he just tweet something like NOW and point fingers at someone instead ?!

The way he's handled this and other cases, he's kind of pointing the finger at the accusers. Just like how he did with the Matt Riddle deal until the woman involved pulled out the receipts showing his first version of his story was BS, and AFAIK Dave hasn't mentioned it since (I'll admit I go to the WON board but perusing that place is like dunking your head in acid at times).

It just seems that Dave's default in these cases is to give the men involved the benefit of the doubt even if it gets to the point there's no other way to look at what could possibly have happened. 

[GSR]

24 minutes ago, sek69 said:

The way he's handled this and other cases, he's kind of pointing the finger at the accusers. Just like how he did with the Matt Riddle deal until the woman involved pulled out the receipts showing his first version of his story was BS, and AFAIK Dave hasn't mentioned it since (I'll admit I go to the WON board but perusing that place is like dunking your head in acid at times).

It just seems that Dave's default in these cases is to give the men involved the benefit of the doubt even if it gets to the point there's no other way to look at what could possibly have happened. 

He wrote about it in detail in last week's issue of the Observer.

[El-P]

45 minutes ago, sek69 said:

The way he's handled this and other cases, he's kind of pointing the finger at the accusers.

I've followed how Dave has handled the various cases he talked about on WOR over the weeks and it is not the case at all.

[sek69]

1 hour ago, El-P said:

I've followed how Dave has handled the various cases he talked about on WOR over the weeks and it is not the case at all.

Maybe it's just how I'm hearing it, but he always sounded dismissive of women making any claims. Perhaps it's just an overabundance of caution on his part not wanting to say anything actionable one way or another, but I just always got an undertone of "women be crazy, am I right?" when he talks. 

At the very least Dave at times painfully unaware of how he sounds when the culture is all about believing women when they come forward and his approach is more "there's very fine people on both sides" and it comes off sounding very tone deaf in 2020.

And yes, in recent weeks with the Speaking Out movement, he has handled it very well for the most part (except for the Ospreay stuff arguably), but like I said before it took for almost all of England getting called out for being shitty to get to that point. Also the show he did with April Hunter seemed to be very  eye opening for him in terms of the amount of garbage women just put up with to be able to work on a regular basis.  I hope that gave him an understanding of where these women are coming from and how even speaking up is an act of courage in itself. 

Again, if Will Ospreay is getting assholes telling him to kill himself or other sorts of bullying that is also not acceptable. However if he's just being confronted with his shitty behavior, then I would not consider that bullying and I would hope he's getting the mental health he needs to help get things sorted. 

[MoS]

In respect of the Osperey allegation at least, he has seemed dismissive every time he's referenced it. If he is waiting until making a thorough investigation to speak, fair enough, but then don't comment on the thing at all, instead of coy remarks. 

[cheapshot]

Meltzer comparing Ospreay with Hana was bullshit. Hana did nothing wrong at all, she was co-opted in to bullshit by the reality company and the fans went for her. Ospreay is people holding him to account. He badmouthed Pollyanna when promotions tried to book her, at the time he was a promoter, that went out of business owing talent, venues and fans a ton of money. Thousands. He booked the guy who Pollyanna accused of raping her. What Dave did is compare someone who did nothing wrong with some who blacklisted a sexual assault victim. He compared reality fans of a TV show telling someone to kill themselves to wrestling fans, to Ospreay who has adulation. He said the people who make the most noise care the least. There are a ton of fans who want promotions to do well and spend a ton of money complaining. You don't have to believe Scotty Wainwright sexual assaulted her or will Ospreay blackballed her, but you can't just dismiss those allegations like Dave did. There is so much circumstancual available, and this wasn't years ago either. It's so frustrating from a journalistic perspective. If we say you're good enough and you don't face consequences that encourages bad behaviour. The media shouldn't make exceptions. It's very enabling from people who should know better should t make exceptions for your friends. That's the issue here.