Dave Meltzer stuff

[Loss]

I don't buy that wrestlers never knew the difference. I can't recall anyone casually dropping N-bombs when doing a shoot interview the way they would other insider terms. I think the issue is not that Dave simply explains it, but that he explains it in sort of sociopathic way without criticizing it.

[Jmare007]

I think Dylan had an interesting take about this on twitter...if I knew how to embed tweets on this board I'd do it but I can only copy/paste what he wrote.

https://twitter.com/DylanWaco/status/779394612297216000

 

Not sure Meltzer even knows what racism is, and clearly has no historic understanding of it at all.

Meltzer's ignorance and insular thinking on this issue could be a result of his personality, could be other factors at play.

Either way Meltzer comes across as living embodiment of white privilege.

 

 

[MEDIA=twitter]779394612297216000[/MEDIA]

[MEDIA=twitter]779395384099557376[/MEDIA]

[MEDIA=twitter]779395543407599616[/MEDIA]

 

[PeteF3]

I think it's more his personality than anything. What set this thing off initially was someone rather innocently asking Dave if he still "marked out" on occasion. Dave's only response was a rather assholic reminder that "mark" is a stupid term used by people who looked down on fans.

 

There's an *actual* parallel there between "mark" now being appropriated by wrestling fans and the other word being appropriated by the black community, but damned if I'm the one to talk at length about it and damned if this is the place.

[Bix]

He ended up having to issue a tweet specifically saying he didn't see the two words as the same thing, as if him explaining the views of old timers meant that he shared those views. Sad that SJW's are so eager to embarrass themselves the guy can't even explain wrestling history properly.

Ah yes, clearly it's the SJWs!

[BrianB]

Yeah, Dave didn't majorly acquit himself on that controversy. I think, if you read between the lines or maybe are generous, he's essentially said that he didn't respond to the question as fully and accurately as he maybe would be expected to do.

 

Sure, it's enough but if he's going to be on Twitter, I'd prefer that he provide value instead of just fighting with trolls who don't even subscribe.

 

I also like to make demands on people that purely cater to my tastes and expectations, particularly when it comes to their behavior on social media...

[Loss]

It was a preference, not a demand.

[Coffey]

 

Dave is just trying to say that both terms are derogatory & used to demean people. Which is true. I just disagree that both terms were used similarly because you can't remove the history from the n-word & I believe the people that used that word damn well knew what they were saying & doing. Calling someone a mark is never going to have the same impact.

 

I remember in the past something came up with Meltzer talking about the n-word & how it was just accepted in the wrestling business, which I assume is what Brandon is talking about in the bottom of that image. It was never "accepted" by black people, in or out of wrestling. Regardless of what Dave says. I think we had a discussion about that stuff when it happened too, maybe even earlier in this thread. I get what Dave's trying to insinuate here, that it was just a part of the business & how he's acting like in the context of pro-wrestling, the n-word it's not racial... but you CAN NOT disassociate that word from racism. It's not the same thing as mark at all. The history of hate, bigotry & heinous acts is not lost on people. Like Loss said, of course the wrestlers knew the difference. Yes, people within the industry, even today sadly, still casually toss around racial slurs but it was not then, now or ever will be a socially accepted business term & when Dave just acts like "it's a part of the business" he's being exceptionally naive.

 

Now, had Dave in the past not made those comments & remarks, this tweet wouldn't be an issue at all, at least to me. I feel some of this is the wrestling bubble. Nevertheless, come tomorrow, I'm sure this will have all blown over anyway.

[BrianB]

Putting aside the issue of parsing the difference between a demand and a preference worth making a public callout about, which you did, I'd ask a preference with regard to what? Dave's writings specifically, here, or just in general about who he responds to and answers to on twitter?

 

 

I think Dave did some things--not perfect certainly---to distance himself from some of those concerns, Coffey, when he went on to tweet:

 

https://twitter.com/davemeltzerWON/status/779389880489037824

 

and

 

https://twitter.com/davemeltzerWON/status/779399199083274240

[Loss]

Just that I respect Dave and there's so much more I'd rather get his take on than "Why are you biased against TNA?"-type questions mixed in with him responding to accusations that he reported things that he never reported. I also made that post days ago and it has nothing to do with the latest flare up over the N-word remarks.

[sek69]

Dave's pretty much made it clear it amuses him to engage in the trolls so it appears that the idea if him using Twitter for anything useful has sailed.

[Beast]

I think Dylan had an interesting take about this on twitter...if I knew how to embed tweets on this board I'd do it but I can only copy/paste what he wrote.

 

https://twitter.com/DylanWaco/status/779394612297216000

 

Not sure Meltzer even knows what racism is, and clearly has no historic understanding of it at all.

 

Meltzer's ignorance and insular thinking on this issue could be a result of his personality, could be other factors at play.

 

Either way Meltzer comes across as living embodiment of white privilege.

 

 

[MEDIA=twitter]779394612297216000[/MEDIA]

[MEDIA=twitter]779395384099557376[/MEDIA]

[MEDIA=twitter]779395543407599616[/MEDIA]

 

 

Is Dylan serious?

 

That's a pretty large leap from "Dave makes misguided comparison between two derogatory terms/doesn't add a n-word is the worst word ever disclaimer" to "Dave is the living embodiment of white privilege".

 

WTF?

[El McKell]

Of course he's serious. By comparing the two words and talking about them like they're on a similar level shows a real ignorance of how the n word affects/affected people, it's a pretty clear example of white privilege.

[Beast]

Except he didn't do that.

 

This is a total "let's be outraged" controversy.

 

He went on to admit that he should have clarified that they were not comparable but were used with similar vitriol.

 

He made a mistake even bringing it up, but let's not act like it's an example of him being "the living embodiment of white privilege."

[Dylan Waco]

I wasn't outaged. To me it's typical in the bubble Dave. That bubble is noticeably insular when it comes to social issues, race, et. This is another example. Feels ridiculous to me to pretend Dave doesn't constantly miss the point on this stuff.

[sek69]

I hate to bring this up since it's such an overused crutch on the internet but I really think Dave shows a lot of signs of someone on the autism spectrum. The way he gets fixated on things and often seems to miss social cues only seem to be exacerbated on a medium like Twitter.

[Loss]

That really borders on speculation about things that are none of anyone's business that I'd prefer we stay away from if that's ok. His work and his words are fair game.

[BrianB]

Just that I respect Dave and there's so much more I'd rather get his take on than "Why are you biased against TNA?"-type questions mixed in with him responding to accusations that he reported things that he never reported. I also made that post days ago and it has nothing to do with the latest flare up over the N-word remarks.

 

Okay, thanks for the clarification. I agree with that. I get the impression that Dave wants the f4w q&as to cater to more what you want--though I do wish there was more in that regard myself--and the twitter stuff is mostly just him logging on and freestyling in his spare time or while he's between stories. It's mostly just an unfortunate fact of life that for most people and their psychology, unless they go in with set parameters or whatever, that trolling and hot takes will get a response, even if it's easy just because it gets such a visceral reaction.

 

 

I hate to bring this up since it's such an overused crutch on the internet but I really think Dave shows a lot of signs of someone on the autism spectrum. The way he gets fixated on things and often seems to miss social cues only seem to be exacerbated on a medium like Twitter.

 

I also like to pretend I've got DSM-IV/V criteria and the creds to determine such a thing... I've also seen people point to some of those tendencies as a "Jewish thing". Anecdotally, the latter seems quite plausible to me and makes sense, but I don't know and will concede as much. Just like how there's a stereotype for journalists being quite particular about things as well. Personally, as somebody who tends to be more long-winded than concise naturally, I find twitter a difficult medium to communicate in your full thoughts, and unless I really zone in on concisely, but not completely expressing my POV, it's easy to leave something that can be misinterpreted or read another way. Which then makes it necessary for more tweets....honestly, outside of the people who use twitter for self-promotion and funneling interest or just for pithy takes and jokes...I don't know why anyone would use twitter. It just seems like it has all the pros and cons of every other social media platform, except it has them on steroids. Anyway, that was my long-winded of suggesting that Dave seems like somebody who pithy takes don't come easily too, and so he can either seem too-longed winded or appear glib because he doesn't fully explain to counter that tendency rather than strike the happy mean. I don't know that, that's just me spitballing on my observations. Twitter is a difficult medium where I think it shows up more for him. His audio shows are less so, but have some of the same things, as well as his writings in the newsletter, though to a lesser degree at least recently, since it seems to me he now considers that a more "serious" part of his job, as it's his real reporting and recorded takes.

[BrianB]

Of course he's serious. By comparing the two words and talking about them like they're on a similar level shows a real ignorance of how the n word affects/affected people, it's a pretty clear example of white privilege.

 

I'm not sure that's accurate a). whatever impression Dave has historically has to be grounded in the impressions of black and other minorities who were called and derided with the n word by fans, promoters, or other wrestlers. Maybe some aspect of how he treats that shows privilege, but I'd need to see more proof on that. Some of the newsletter stuff from the past I think kind of supports that. But this recent controversy...it seems like a real stretch to me.

[Eduardo]

Totally back what Dylan said on Twitter.

 

Even Dave's coverage on MMA stuff, when something regarding race comes up, Dave goes on about the "race card", being so annoyed that people are "making things about race" and he seems to lack any nuance thought whatsoever on the intersection of race and sports. Him being annoyed about racism being brought up, as opposed to those who have had to live their whole lives dealing with it on a 24/7 basis is another clear example of white privilege. It's pretty embarrassing and disappointing.

 

Blaming this on people on Twitter overreacting or being "outraged" is also absurd. Dave is pretty bad when it comes to race, and he gets even worse when you question him about it. That's not a controversial point, at all, and those of us who are stating it aren't being dramatic or whatever.

[Fando]

I think we had a discussion about that stuff when it happened too, maybe even earlier in this thread.

 

 

Here: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/9754-dave-meltzer-stuff/page-272&do=findComment&comment=5649524

 

and here: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/9754-dave-meltzer-stuff/page-302&do=findComment&comment=5696236

[Loss]

I will mention in his defense here that Dave Meltzer basically created the idea himself of being a muticulturalist, globally-minded wrestling fan. Of course, that doesn't mean he's without flaws in how he views things.

[Loss]

2/1/88 WON: A reader criticizes Dave for calling a bad match an abortion. Dave explains that this is an insider term, but that there are other insider terms he does not use because they are offensive to minorities, so he will stop using this one as well.

[Cox]

Dave, like everyone on Twitter, should probably not tweet. And I include myself on that list as well.

[WashingtonFB]

2/1/88 WON: A reader criticizes Dave for calling a bad match an abortion. Dave explains that this is an insider term, but that there are other insider terms he does not use because they are offensive to minorities, so he will stop using this one as well.

 

The absurdity of this.

[NintendoLogic]

2/1/88 WON: A reader criticizes Dave for calling a bad match an abortion. Dave explains that this is an insider term, but that there are other insider terms he does not use because they are offensive to minorities, so he will stop using this one as well.

 

It's nice to see that people bending over backwards to find things to be triggered by isn't just a recent phenomenon.