What do You Think of Giving Certain Women a Pass

[Wolf Hurricane]

...because they're attractive? Based on something of an argument that was made in a thread on the TNA sub-board, about how posters have defended some women's over-exposure, lack of talent, etc. by pointing out how attractive they are (usually with pictures and "DAT ASS" comments). So I thought about it, and I do think it's fair to point out that some wrestlers, predominately women, have been given a pass because of their looks. So, simply put, which ones have you given a pass (if you have), and/or what do you think of the idea of giving a woman a pass based on how attractive she is?

["Playboy" Don Douglas]

I don't believe in it. Call me old fashioned, but I'm watching a wrestling show because I want to see entertaining wrestling. I enjoy beautiful, sexy women as much as anyone, but I'm not watching wrestling to see them. If they can't give me a good match or promo, I don't want to see them.

[Ultimo Chocula]

That's like giving guys like Ted Arcidi a pass. They look the part but if they can't perform then get the hell off my tv. Divas matches are the total opposite of what they are supposed to be on every single level.

[Brood Lone Wolf Funker]

Honestly just because some women don't have that look it holds them back, like I read somewhere that WWE didn't want a woman because she was too fat. Unlike the current crop of divas where only two can actually have a decent match and most of them are former models, its limiting the ones who can actually hold a match. That's why I like the knockout matches sure they are good looking but they can wrestle longer than two minutes and are willing to learn, Brooke for example has improved greatly. Promotions like Shimmer show that you don't have to have a look to be a talent they use their talent wisely and showcase only the best not based on looks. Sure some members here have an unhealthy obsession with Portia and Nicole but they aren't just beautiful but also talented. There needs to be a healthy combination of talent and beauty then fans will be happy. Honestly I am sad at the state of women's wrestling in WWE thats why I look else for matches

[SAJ Forth]

I notice the criticism is more intense for the women with no skills than the men get. It takes longer because of looks, but when they have a match where they really sex the dog, they get hit with the force of a Magnum load.

[FUNK_US/BRODUS]

Jan 23, 2012 18:40:34 GMT -5 SAJ Forth said:

I notice the criticism is more intense for the women with no skills than the men get. It takes longer because of looks, but when they have a match where they really sex the dog, they get hit with the force of a Magnum load.

The standard for mens wrestling as a general rule is higher though. With the women in WWE, the bad matches are REALLY bad. The men hired in WWE for having "the look" are at least competent at what they do, regardless of how interesting they are.

[HMARK Center]

I also wonder if some of the excess anger towards bad mainstream women's wrestling is that some of the audience feels like it's being pandered to. Like "You should enjoy this, these women are really hot! ...Even if they're not very capable wrestlers."

Or even directed at women "You should enjoy this, we're giving your gender some screen time! ...Even though we don't really give whether or not it's any good a single thought."

Both are examples of pandering.

[SAJ Forth]

Jan 24, 2012 13:22:26 GMT -5 HMARK Center said:

I also wonder if some of the excess anger towards bad mainstream women's wrestling is that some of the audience feels like it's being pandered to. Like "You should enjoy this, these women are really hot! ...Even if they're not very capable wrestlers."

Or even directed at women "You should enjoy this, we're giving your gender some screen time! ...Even though we don't really give whether or not it's any good a single thought."

Both are examples of pandering.

To me it is more thinking they're catering to men.

[Mr. Socko's Brother]

It should be about talent first. And anybody who does give women a pass because of their attractiveness...well, if you do, then I hope you aren't a Cena-hater, because you're doing the same thing that a lot of Cena's straight female fans do: focusing more on a wrestler's looks than on their ability.

[FUNK_US/BRODUS]

Jan 24, 2012 13:22:26 GMT -5 HMARK Center said:

I also wonder if some of the excess anger towards bad mainstream women's wrestling is that some of the audience feels like it's being pandered to. Like "You should enjoy this, these women are really hot! ...Even if they're not very capable wrestlers."

Or even directed at women "You should enjoy this, we're giving your gender some screen time! ...Even though we don't really give whether or not it's any good a single thought."

Both are examples of pandering.

This is why I dont like a lot of the Divas. It does feel like pandering. I can find hot women ANYWHERE. Theyve had Divas who were great in the ring and were over. I dont get why we've reverted to no talent eye candy.

[________ has left the building]

Let's be honest, a vast number of women throughout pro wrestling's history got hired and pushed mainly because of their looks first and talent second. Even during the prime years of Mildred Burke and Fabulous Moolah, women were presented as sex symbols more than athletes. Women wrestling is a niche within a niche. The main audience is majority male. There are talented women wrestlers out there who won't get a chance from WWE, TNA, even the beloved Shimmer due to they don't fit into what that target demographic desires in want to see. How many people here really would watch a match between 2 talented ladies who overweight and plain looking?

Wendy Richter got a big push in the 80's due to her looks. Misty Blue Simmes the same. WWE and TNA are doing what other promoters were doing for decades. Both companies knows sex sales and present their women as such. Doesn't mean its the right thing to do. Just means its a easy way to make money.

[AztecaDragon]

The standards are different.
The men are supposed to...not stink up the ring first.
The women are supposed to...not look ugly first.

The Divas didn't set that standard.

Jan 24, 2012 14:07:14 GMT -5 ________ has left the building said:

Doesn't mean its the right thing to do. Just means its a easy way to make money.

"Sex sells"?
Which type of sex are you talking about?

John Cena may be a looker (to some people) but he clearly isn't pushed or promoted in a way that's supposed to get me turned on. It's "Straight White Guys or Bust!" as far as the people they want watching the shows, any other fans usually classified as a "periphery demographic."

[________ has left the building]

Jan 24, 2012 14:33:00 GMT -5 AztecaDragon said:

The standards are different.
The men are supposed to...not stink up the ring first.
The women are supposed to...not look ugly first.

The Divas didn't set that standard.

Jan 24, 2012 14:07:14 GMT -5 ________ has left the building said:

Doesn't mean its the right thing to do. Just means its a easy way to make money.

"Sex sells"?
Which type of sex are you talking about?

John Cena may be a looker (to some people) but he clearly isn't pushed or promoted in a way that's supposed to get me turned on. It's "Straight White Guys or Bust!" as far as the people they want watching the shows, any other fans usually classified as a "periphery demographic."

Like I said, women wrestling's audience is mostly male. Most males like looking at attractive women. Therefore the companies cater to that crowd. And years ago, Randy Orton was a sex symbol for women (and gay males). WWE marketed him towards that group with the short lived Randy Wear clothing line.

[Ultimo Chocula]

Hold it, hold it, hold it. Randy Orton had a clothing line? Jeepers H Cookies...

[AztecaDragon]

Jan 24, 2012 14:54:27 GMT -5 ________ has left the building said:

Like I said, women wrestling's audience is mostly male. Most males like looking at attractive women. Therefore the companies cater to that crowd.

...to the exclusion of a hell of a lot of people, including the ones who wish they had longer matches and wrestled. I know. It's stupid, right? It was stupid back in the Attitude era when the hardest, consistent push they'd get is the "Playboy Push" and it's certainly stupid now that you can't rely on the "Playboy Push" at all.

They'll show Rumble stats and random championship highlights out of their behinds, for instance, but I've rarely seen them give anything the women have done the same type of treatment. It looks like they believe women largely haven't contributed moments to the product then and certainly don't now.

It's funny, they're having a hard time drumming up interest for nearly anything they're doing now, so you'd think they would try something more than half-hearted token attempts to expand their audience.

Or maybe they'd try to build new audiences by getting women wrestlers and treating them with some respect.

But...oh...that would cost them so much time and money and guys wouldn't watch...whoops, the **** I give about any of those excuses just left me.

And years ago, Randy Orton was a sex symbol for women (and gay males). WWE marketed him towards that group with the short lived Randy Wear clothing line.

"Here's these few times the WWE has tried!" is not convincing when I'm talking about the Status Quo of the company.

"Years ago"?
Why wouldn't he still be? WWE chooses to ignore the obvious all the time and Randy Orton didn't suddenly become hideous. He did shave that bathtub ring around his chin, so it only got better.

[Ultimo Chocula]

I think Azteca got real close to the real problem not just with the Divas but with the WWE as a whole. The E doesn't change with the times, they have the change thrust upon them and they have to adapt or fail. How long after the Attitude Era was dead did they keep going back to the same schtick over and over and over again? How many "Next Big Things" did they trot out only to have the audience give an indifferent shrug? It was the same with the cartoony 90's. Vinny Land would have kept trotting out plumbers, garbagemen, and bee keepers if Steve Austin didn't happen. Austin was an accident, he was the fan chosen star that Vince had no choice but to focus his attention onto and thereby changing the direction of the company entirely.

The Divas are the same thing. They're trying to recreate the next Trish, Lita, Ivory, etc and it's not happening because they don't understand what made those original Divas so popular in the first place. Yes, they had big hooters, but they also had some degrees of talent, charisma, and a unique look so you could care about each individual one. Nowadays they are all variations of the same person, a person who I don't care to see. The only Diva I can name right now is Kelly Kelly because she stinks even by Diva standards. The WWE will keep doing this over and over until something happens that will force them to take women's wrestling seriously. Kharma could have been it, but we won't know for sure unless she comes back.

That's just my 2 cents, though.

[Magic knows Black Lives Matter]

As far as I am concerned, you can like anyone you want for whatever reason you want. If you're a huge Velvet Sky or Kelly Kelly fan just because you think they are really hot, more power to you.

[________ has left the building]

The Diva stigma plays a much bigger role here. If a woman started as a hired model but improved into a decent to great wrestler; unless they are named Trish Stratus, few respect is given. Michelle McCool in her LayCool peak was just as good as any top women in the indies. But most were too busy making Skeletor jokes or freaking over the Piggie James angle to notice. Layla improved tremendously in the ring before her injury but folks made "Dat Ass" comments instead. Naomi is constantly praised here that I think some forgot she only been doing over a year and was one of the very model divas they hate. AJ wrestled for years in the indies but some think she was just hired for her looks. And just because a woman wrestled in the indies doesn't automatically make her better. Traci Brooks been wrestling over a decade but outside her being actually able to run the ropes, she's really no better than a majority of the "model" divas. There is a lot of things to do in order to change that up. But it's going have to be a group effort. From WWE not shying away from letting women highlight their talents in and out the ring to fans not raging at the thought of women not fitting the mold getting a shot.

[________ has left the building]

Jan 24, 2012 17:43:05 GMT -5 Ultimo Chocula said:

I think Azteca got real close to the real problem not just with the Divas but with the WWE as a whole. The E doesn't change with the times, they have the change thrust upon them and they have to adapt or fail. How long after the Attitude Era was dead did they keep going back to the same schtick over and over and over again? How many "Next Big Things" did they trot out only to have the audience give an indifferent shrug? It was the same with the cartoony 90's. Vinny Land would have kept trotting out plumbers, garbagemen, and bee keepers if Steve Austin didn't happen. Austin was an accident, he was the fan chosen star that Vince had no choice but to focus his attention onto and thereby changing the direction of the company entirely.

The Divas are the same thing. They're trying to recreate the next Trish, Lita, Ivory, etc and it's not happening because they don't understand what made those original Divas so popular in the first place. Yes, they had big hooters, but they also had some degrees of talent, charisma, and a unique look so you could care about each individual one. Nowadays they are all variations of the same person, a person who I don't care to see. The only Diva I can name right now is Kelly Kelly because she stinks even by Diva standards. The WWE will keep doing this over and over until something happens that will force them to take women's wrestling seriously. Kharma could have been it, but we won't know for sure unless she comes back.

That's just my 2 cents, though.

It's not just a WWE thing. A number of wrestling promotions still follow the Attitude Era model. Think of it as this, Alabama is successful in the SEC mainly due to its defense. They never try to get an elite quarterback because their style doesn't require one. Each season, they stock up the defense and offense line but just toss a mediocre QB on the field. They could become even more dominant with a better QB but won't change the format because they get results by their proven method.

[Ultimo Chocula]

Jan 24, 2012 19:19:41 GMT -5 ________ has left the building said:

Jan 24, 2012 17:43:05 GMT -5 Ultimo Chocula said:

I think Azteca got real close to the real problem not just with the Divas but with the WWE as a whole. The E doesn't change with the times, they have the change thrust upon them and they have to adapt or fail. How long after the Attitude Era was dead did they keep going back to the same schtick over and over and over again? How many "Next Big Things" did they trot out only to have the audience give an indifferent shrug? It was the same with the cartoony 90's. Vinny Land would have kept trotting out plumbers, garbagemen, and bee keepers if Steve Austin didn't happen. Austin was an accident, he was the fan chosen star that Vince had no choice but to focus his attention onto and thereby changing the direction of the company entirely.

The Divas are the same thing. They're trying to recreate the next Trish, Lita, Ivory, etc and it's not happening because they don't understand what made those original Divas so popular in the first place. Yes, they had big hooters, but they also had some degrees of talent, charisma, and a unique look so you could care about each individual one. Nowadays they are all variations of the same person, a person who I don't care to see. The only Diva I can name right now is Kelly Kelly because she stinks even by Diva standards. The WWE will keep doing this over and over until something happens that will force them to take women's wrestling seriously. Kharma could have been it, but we won't know for sure unless she comes back.

That's just my 2 cents, though.

It's not just a WWE thing. A number of wrestling promotions still follow the Attitude Era model. Think of it as this, Alabama is successful in the SEC mainly due to its defense. They never try to get an elite quarterback because their style doesn't require one. Each season, they stock up the defense and offense line but just toss a mediocre QB on the field. They could become even more dominant with a better QB but won't change the format because they get results by their proven method.

You're talking about a stylistic choice in comparison to a physical result based on previous experience and current results. A football game is much different than a TV show. If Alabama is winning football games based on a decades old offensive plan, it's because it works. The WWE is a creative medium. The outcomes don't matter, it's how it's delivered. What worked in 2000 won't work now. It's like Poison. They sold umpteen million records in 1988 but couldn't draw a dime in 1992. Their style of music was over and done but they still were out there playing party music for crowds that wanted something more substantial. Lousy example but it's all I got.