Saddest aspect mainstream women's wrestling?

[Dat Dude]

It's no secret that mainstream women's wrestling (WWE/TNA) have a lot of issues. But of all the issues, which one do you think is the saddest?

*Women being release while still in their prime? (Mickie, Melina, etc)

*Experienced and talented women on indies never offered contracts (Melissa, Mercedes, etc)

*Talented women prematurely released despite never given a chance (Katie Lea, Serena, etc).

*The talented women fired while in development (Sofia, ODB, etc)

*The ratio of models/non-wrestlers being hired over experienced wrestlers.

*The lack of time and storylines given to women on the main roster.

*Talented performers sidelined in favor of the "flavor of the month"

*Other (explain)

EDIT: dang poll cut off the text at certain points lol. Please reference the above post for your poll options.

[Cela]

If they were given more time, they would be more of a draw, and would need more indie talent to pull it off. So, that one.

[Indiana Miz]

I chose the lack of time and storylines. It doesn't matter how talented or experienced you are if nobody ever sees it.

[Steveweiser]

Natalya when given time is up there amongst the best female wrestlers in the world today. Sadly we very rarely see this. Although I look forward to Paige and some of the other NXT women coming up, if they're still given two minutes on RAW (and sometimes lucky to even get that), not much will really change.

[Been burned too many times]

Mar 9, 2013 12:55:34 GMT -5 Indiana Miz said:

I chose the lack of time and storylines. It doesn't matter how talented or experienced you are if nobody ever sees it.

Agreed.

[kidglov3s]

Their role as fetish objects.

I'd prefer them not to have stories if the stories they get are primarily going to involve cameras framing their ass in the best shot as they bend over for 30 seconds.

[Deleted]

They don't get any time to showcase in the ring, matches last < 2 minutes, they get zero storylines and don't have a chance to develop characters.

[Deleted]

Mar 9, 2013 12:55:34 GMT -5 Indiana Miz said:

I chose the lack of time and storylines. It doesn't matter how talented or experienced you are if nobody ever sees it.

Exactly. Regardless of who is on the roster, they're all considered terrible by most fans as nobody gets any interesting storylines or opportunities to show anything in the ring.

[Deleted]

Your runaway top two female talents (Natalya & AJ) are put in oddball stables and don't even wrestle anymore. (Edit: They wrestled each other yesterday on Saturday Morning Slam, way to blindside me, WWE.)
And then there's Rosa.

The other four girls couldn't draw flies if they were wearing honey-covered manure outfits.

[norsisclouds]

I voted for lack of time and story line but I also think the over-sexualization and exploitation of women in wrestling is horrendous.

[Deleted]

Other: MATCH STRUCTURE

I don't know if this is on the agents or what, but there's HORRIBLE match structure in women's matches that go more than a few minutes. There's no shining, cut off, hope spot etc in any sort of logical flow. Now I'm not advocating every match has to follow the classic formula in the exact order every time but women's matches in the WWE are all over the place. It always feels like they're just trading offense without any real structure to the match.

Compare to the Ivelisse vs Tapa match from TNA gut check recently which came off very well. It wasn't that they were doing anything special. None of what they did couldn't have been done by the more competent female wrestlers they have (which is dwindling I know, but point stands). However the match followed the classic formula and now people are talking about it like it's women's match of the year. Not that I'm saying it was a crappy match, but the reason it was praised so much was that it felt like a men's match because it followed the usual flow we're used to. You weren't reminded it was a women's match by poorly thought out exchanging of moves.

[Savage Gambino]

Mar 9, 2013 13:04:15 GMT -5 kidglov3s said:

Their role as fetish objects.

I'd prefer them not to have stories if the stories they get are primarily going to involve cameras framing their ass in the best shot as they bend over for 30 seconds.

Mar 9, 2013 13:44:54 GMT -5 norsisclouds said:

I voted for lack of time and story line but I also think the over-sexualization and exploitation of women in wrestling is horrendous.

I voted lack of time and storylines, but I agree with both of these opinions wholeheartedly. I mean, I get it, the women are largely used as eye candy. But the "male gaze" camera work can get beyond salacious. I mean, it's gotten a little better nowadays in comparison to, say, the Attitude era, but it can still be a bit much.

It's at the point that I actually change the channel during a womens' match if I have company.

[kidglov3s]

Mar 9, 2013 14:17:36 GMT -5 Savage Gambino said:

it's gotten a little better nowadays in comparison to, say, the Attitude era, but it can still be a bit much.

In most cases I'd agree but if you watch the AJ stuff from June-July of last year, especially that one that had her on like 7 times with the battle royal, it was as bad as anything, Attitude, TNA or otherwise. And that was probably the first time since Trish that you could tell they were really really really trying to push a woman. In WWE, a woman getting a big push = that stuff all over the place.

As time goes on I'm really surprised that stuff like the Divas in 2004 or the Laycool era happened. I'd love to see more of that. Earlier, bootytime made a post about how the women don't really have well constructed matches, but McCool's matches were generally well put together. All throughout 2010 Laycool would have these feuds and matches that were a consistent feature and allowed the women characters beyond just being bouncy or bending over. I wouldn't say they were particularly over or popular but I would call it good wrestling and a positive exception from what is the norm in WWE.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

I don't really mind the models over wrestlers thing. I think that the model thing is a by-product of the success of Trish Stratus. WWE just wants to create another Trish, a pretty face with sex appeal who can learn the ropes and become a passable to great in ring talent. Ideally there should be a mix of both. Women shouldn't be hired solely based on their looks, but they shouldn't be turned away because they're "too pretty" either.

[Dat Dude]

Yeah I'm starting to kick myself for not putting the a hyper-sexualizing of women option in the poll. It's so obvious, but yet so commonplace that I overlooked it.

As a wise dinosaur once said "My bad".

[Zaq "That Guy" Buzzkill]

They wear to much clothes.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

Mar 9, 2013 14:41:37 GMT -5 Zaq "That Guy" Buzzkill said:

They wear to much clothes.

*high five*

[kidkamikaze10]

The fact that management/higher ups outright hammer any nail that sticks out.

To just say lack of story and match time doesn't really explain what they actually do, what Ivory and other divas have outright stated. Any Diva that gains momentum in a way the E doesn't want gets cut short quicker than Zack Ryder ever did.

[Deleted]

Mar 9, 2013 14:42:36 GMT -5 CATCH_US IS the Conversation said:

Mar 9, 2013 14:41:37 GMT -5 Zaq "That Guy" Buzzkill said:

They wear to much clothes.

*high five*

[Deleted]

Mar 9, 2013 14:24:31 GMT -5 CATCH_US IS the Conversation said:

I don't really mind the models over wrestlers thing. I think that the model thing is a by-product of the success of Trish Stratus. WWE just wants to create another Trish, a pretty face with sex appeal who can learn the ropes and become a passable to great in ring talent.

I don't buy that at all because that's what Mickie and Melina both were. Most casual fans liked them or thought they were pretty, and they're both talented wrestlers.

Fact is, WWE doesn't want the women upstaging the men. If any female wrestler does, they immediately take umbrage and begin the burying process.