|
Post by ShaolinHandLock on Mar 6, 2015 23:46:56 GMT -5
You call it garbage wrestling and some would call what you label "Pro" wrestling as garbage. I hate when people use the term garbage wrestling like they are the judge and king of what real and true wrestling is. Garbage wrestling, in my opinion, is when people in the ring do things that require little to no skill and has a very large chance that it can permanently injure the wrestler in the ring and is done primarily for shock value. Considering what happened at the show covered all of those bases I am very comfortable calling it garbage wrestling. I won't deny that neither will anyone else on here. I was a huge fan of hardcore and deathmatch wrestling at one time. I don't enjoy watching that stuff now because I would like these guys to have a good life post-wrestling without crippling medical problems. With what we know about concussions and brain injuries there is simply no place in wrestling for what transpired at that show. The business and many of its fans have changed and evolved throughout the decades mostly for the better. I would like to think that people are pushing for a safe environment where we can see wrestlers living a comfortable life in their old age. It is sad to read the struggles that many older wrestlers have due to these actions that were once consider part of wrestling. The industry of professional wrestling will be much better off once these types of things are totally eradicated and the business shows it actually gives a damn about the well-being of wrestlers. As a fan of hardcore/deathmatch wrestling, I don't agree with eradicating it. I agree with stopping unprotected chairshots to the head and stopping other stuff which may cause head/brain injuries or concussions, but I'm fine with everything else. You call it garbage wrestling and some would call what you label "Pro" wrestling as garbage. I hate when people use the term garbage wrestling like they are the judge and king of what real and true wrestling is. Bloodlust is very much a part of pro wrestling, and its been that way since wrestling got popular in the 50s at least. You would not have fans from that day and age trying to beat up, injure and kill heels if there was no bloodlust in mainstream wrestling. If not for bloodlust in wrestling a match would look close a Amateur wrestling match without heroes, villains and gimmicks. Trying to say bloodlust has no place or is not a part of mainstream wrestling is ignoring history. "Garbage Wrestling" is the official term used for promotions such as CZW (Early days, not so much now), IWA-MS and others to describe a hardcore wrestling promotion who does hardcore matches frequently for no reason except because the talent can't do anything else. Some notable garbage wrestlers are guys like Ian Rotten, Mad Man Pondo, The Sandman, Mitch Page and a lot of the IWA-MS talents. "Hardcore Wrestling" is very similar but is used for promotions such as CZW (Current day), ECW, FMW and others who have strong undercards and build to hardcore matches with story lines. Most of their hardcore guys can work a great regular match. Some notable hardcore wrestlers are guys such as Raven, Sabu and Terry Funk (Later years) Those are the differences. It's not some internet wrestling smart mark judgment thing it's basically an official label to title hardcore wrestling companies. All hardcore companies fit under one of the two labels. Hardcore is viewed as the better of the two in the eyes of the wrestling community but garbage wrestling companies have loyal fans also. Firstly, 'garbage wrestling' was never an official title anywhere. Secondly, people like Mad Man Pondo and Ian Rotten can (and do) wrestle normal matches, they never did the deathmatch stuff because they had to, they did it because they wanted to and enjoyed doing it. Not that that means anything these days anyway, as the type of wrestler you're describing with your 'garbage wrestling' definition died out years ago. Also, CZW counts as a deathmatch promotion, not a hardcore one.
|
|
|
Post by ThereIsNoAbsurdistOnlyZuul on Mar 7, 2015 5:23:49 GMT -5
It can't be that ba- HOLY MOTHER OF ZOMBIFIED TAP DANCING JOSEPH STALIN! I... I... she can't have agreed to that. Like she couldn't have been expecting it to be like that? I mean, it's just... what does it do for them? I mean your first job is to make it as safe as you freaking can. Yeah, you only accept spots you can take. But that chair shot would have had me in the ER, and I am a large, semi-robust individual. But lawn darting her? No matter what she agreed to, it doesn't even look like Dickinson even TRIED to protect her. I feel sick now. As a fan of hardcore/deathmatch wrestling, I don't agree with eradicating it. I agree with stopping unprotected chairshots to the head and stopping other stuff which may cause head/brain injuries or concussions, but I'm fine with everything else. I... listen I like violence. The problem is that hardcore/death matches do 2 things: 1) Introduce additional variables into a situation, where any variable WILL EVENTUALLY result in additional danger than the participants in a match are not able to to mitigate, and variables creep into regular matches anyway, there is real risk. Like how Benoit got the Crippler name, when he about killed Sabu. It may not happen in a given match. But it WILL happen eventually. Just like it will contribute even additional wear on the wrestler's body. 2) Desensitizes the whole shebang. This is not a critique of the wrestlers or promoters. This is acknowledging human bias and psychology. I know this seems an odd point to pick up. But this essentially Escalation. The audience associates greater and greater perceived risk to the wrestlers, devaluing 'lesser' efforts, and also meaning that non-hardcore/deathmatch will be a less valuable commodity to the audience. Eventually it gets to a point where you cannot reliable and safely produce product/event towards a paying audience, as you have traded value for spectacle. Effectively aiming for short term profit turnabout versus sustainability. And once your audience is burned out, if you can pull up roots and go elsewhere, you are pretty much screwed. I cannot say "No more hardcore/deathmatches," that is an unreasonable expectation, until someone is killed in the ring with the kind of spots Kimber Lee did. But the wrestling industry is under more scrutiny now than before, and in the age of endless news cycle and social media, this crap gets out, and people who are not fans will not be able to stomach it. As long as there is the effort to protect, and likely the elimination of light tubes (because of a chemical exposure standpoint) it's all I can reasonably want for as a fan. But blind and idiotic application only hurts the wrestlers and promotions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2015 16:37:50 GMT -5
Only read the first page but no mention of the balls in face pin cover and more on the violence. Austin Aries is upset.
Also read Lufisto's blog and it's quite depressing. She's a pretty well known wrestler by anyone's standards for the indy scene nevermind the lesser acknowledged female wrestling market and she feels she has failed because of who she is and her choices as opposed to the major companies' desire to hire and train models over women who took initiative to learn straight away.
She is 35 too so in WWE terms, she may aswell be 65. I am not sure what can happen to stop her feeling that way. Ugh.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 8, 2015 15:48:18 GMT -5
Has this type of stuff happened to her before? Anything as severe as this? I'm hoping not.
Also is this the same guy that beat and bullies the hell out of that little kid in the ring? I think he used to be affiliated with O'Riley from red dragon and the Richards.
If her head had hit the turn buckle, couldn't that have been enough force to actually snap and break her neck? I'm assuming thats what happened to Owen if I remember the story right. I know different fall but still.
Her head bounced off the mat pretty hard. And another thing, how the hell can she breathe after having her legs pinned back behind her head like that?
|
|
|
Post by mcmahonfan85 on Mar 8, 2015 16:12:42 GMT -5
Also is this the same guy that beat and bullies the hell out of that little kid in the ring? I think he used to be affiliated with O'Riley from red dragon and the Richards. You're thinking of Tony Kozina
|
|
percymania
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Percymania will live forever! Oh yeah!
Posts: 17,296
|
Post by percymania on Mar 8, 2015 17:56:03 GMT -5
This is my first exposure to Beyond Wrestling. Not a good impression.
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Mar 8, 2015 17:59:19 GMT -5
I'm just stepping in here to say right now that Beyond Wrestling has stated that if you order this show before 2pm tomorrow, all the proceeds are going to CTE research. I'm not sure how to feel about it but at least they are trying to do something good with this, even if all the steps before this have been frighteningly tone deaf. "Here at Beyond Wrestling, we are greatly concerned with the dangers of brain injuries and dementia, especially among our wrestlers after they smash each other's skulls with chairs and running powerbombs into metal turnbuckles"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2015 5:40:01 GMT -5
The gender thing gets twisted.
Yeah, it's a little more upsetting because it's a woman. But that's for two reasons. 1, women are smaller on average. Kimberlee isn't tiny for a woman, but in the grand scheme it's this small person getting wacked hard as possible over the head with a chair, and then powerbombed carelessly.
2, the sexual nature of it. The way he pins her is f***ing gross.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2015 6:35:58 GMT -5
The gender thing gets twisted. Yeah, it's a little more upsetting because it's a woman. But that's for two reasons. 1, women are smaller on average. Kimberlee isn't tiny for a woman, but in the grand scheme it's this small person getting wacked hard as possible over the head with a chair, and then powerbombed carelessly. 2, the sexual nature of it. The way he pins her is f***ing gross. I've been trying to stay out of this thread, really I have, but some of these posts are just so damn ignorant. You're better than this argument man. With regards to your second point, it's been pointed out a few times (hell, I've even posted a gif of it...) that THAT IS THE WAY THAT KIMBER LEE PINS PEOPLE. He was being a dickhead heel aping her style and "stealing" her move, but you guys are reading a hell of a lot of intent into it that might very well have not been there. Unless of course you think that guys like Greg Excellent, Drew Gulak and quite a few other wrestlers on the indie scene were being harassed by Kimber Lee when she pinned them the EXACT SAME WAY. I swear some of you would scream that Bray was trying to get Taker into a standing 69 or something if he tried to tombstone him, completely missing the point. Calm down.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Mar 9, 2015 10:10:46 GMT -5
The gender violence isn't really the issue here, I'd say. It's simply how dangerous the spots were.
Saying that, someone cited above Benoit breaking Sabu's neck, which happened on a botched flapjack and so isn't really admissible.
Or from another angle, is admissible as a reason why the fake sport we all love so much is kinda bullshit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2015 12:17:54 GMT -5
The gender thing gets twisted. Yeah, it's a little more upsetting because it's a woman. But that's for two reasons. 1, women are smaller on average. Kimberlee isn't tiny for a woman, but in the grand scheme it's this small person getting wacked hard as possible over the head with a chair, and then powerbombed carelessly. 2, the sexual nature of it. The way he pins her is f***ing gross. I've been trying to stay out of this thread, really I have, but some of these posts are just so damn ignorant. You're better than this argument man. With regards to your second point, it's been pointed out a few times (hell, I've even posted a gif of it...) that THAT IS THE WAY THAT KIMBER LEE PINS PEOPLE. He was being a dickhead heel aping her style and "stealing" her move, but you guys are reading a hell of a lot of intent into it that might very well have not been there. Unless of course you think that guys like Greg Excellent, Drew Gulak and quite a few other wrestlers on the indie scene were being harassed by Kimber Lee when she pinned them the EXACT SAME WAY. I swear some of you would scream that Bray was trying to get Taker into a standing 69 or something if he tried to tombstone him, completely missing the point. Calm down. That's fair. I came in here with hardly any knowledge of Beyond Wrestling, and didn't read the whole thread. If the pin was her getting comeuppance of some sort, cool. But the thing about size, I just think that's something that goes overlooked in these situations.
|
|
Reflecto
Hank Scorpio
The Sorceress' Knight
Posts: 6,847
|
Post by Reflecto on Mar 9, 2015 15:35:56 GMT -5
I've been trying to stay out of this thread, really I have, but some of these posts are just so damn ignorant. You're better than this argument man. With regards to your second point, it's been pointed out a few times (hell, I've even posted a gif of it...) that THAT IS THE WAY THAT KIMBER LEE PINS PEOPLE. He was being a dickhead heel aping her style and "stealing" her move, but you guys are reading a hell of a lot of intent into it that might very well have not been there. Unless of course you think that guys like Greg Excellent, Drew Gulak and quite a few other wrestlers on the indie scene were being harassed by Kimber Lee when she pinned them the EXACT SAME WAY. I swear some of you would scream that Bray was trying to get Taker into a standing 69 or something if he tried to tombstone him, completely missing the point. Calm down. That's fair. I came in here with hardly any knowledge of Beyond Wrestling, and didn't read the whole thread. If the pin was her getting comeuppance of some sort, cool. But the thing about size, I just think that's something that goes overlooked in these situations. Plus, being fair, it does lead to another double-standard even if it ISN'T ignorant: If you assume it's "okay" if Dickinson steals her pinfall for it being sexually tinged- then by definition it should also be mentioned that this just raises even more gender issues. If it's fair to mention that as a reason it's 'okay' for it to happen, then it also has to be mentioned that it's somehow "okay" for a woman to have to pin guys like that- and thus add a fetishistic aspect to her pinfalls, instead of being allowed to pin guys...well, like you'd pin someone in any other match.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2015 21:35:19 GMT -5
That's fair. I came in here with hardly any knowledge of Beyond Wrestling, and didn't read the whole thread. If the pin was her getting comeuppance of some sort, cool. But the thing about size, I just think that's something that goes overlooked in these situations. Plus, being fair, it does lead to another double-standard even if it ISN'T ignorant: If you assume it's "okay" if Dickinson steals her pinfall for it being sexually tinged- then by definition it should also be mentioned that this just raises even more gender issues. If it's fair to mention that as a reason it's 'okay' for it to happen, then it also has to be mentioned that it's somehow "okay" for a woman to have to pin guys like that- and thus add a fetishistic aspect to her pinfalls, instead of being allowed to pin guys...well, like you'd pin someone in any other match. Again, this harkens back to the gender argument, saying that it's okay for two guys to do something but not a guy and a girl. That pin is an alligator clutch. It's actually a legit and well-established pinning move. Yes, Kimber Lee plays the underdog in a similar way to how guys like Spike did, but again, she's not being held back or mistreated because she's a female. Her whole gimmick is the tough as nails contender who you think might be slaughtered, but she holds her own and does it well. She's basically Little Mac from Punch-Out. She gets brutalized but always ends up handing out just as much punishment and/or gets the win as well. In other words pretty similar to Candice. If anything she's a hell of an example of a woman kicking ass and more than holding her own in a male dominated sport. I'll say it one last time... you can be annoyed by the stiffness and dangerousness of the moves, but every single person who is trying to bring gender into the argument and using it to say that Kimber Lee is somehow being mistreated is wrong. Just plain wrong. They're only making judgments due to a tiny clip that's shocking out of context. They're the ones being ignorant and sexist as f***. The way that they did the chairshot and powerbomb was dangerous and stupid (but really pretty par for the course for them unfortunately)... that is the ONLY argument at play here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2015 21:45:01 GMT -5
Eh, does nothing for me.
Like some, I watched meat and potatoes 'rasslin' my whole life and became fascinated by things like ECW and FMW when I found out they existed. Hardcore stuff.... is cool when you're used to watching people work bumper lane safe all the time.
It wore off though. I still like a nice stiff bump if they set it up right, but I don't need it. However, I get that there's a definite market for a more blood and guts product and it ain't really my place to say anything if the workers are cool with it. It might not be a good thing for the longevity of their careers, but I'm not their Mom.
It sucks to see people bumping, blading, taking chairshots or whatever for peanuts like they're prone to do, but that's wrestling to them. I can't tell them they're wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2015 8:23:45 GMT -5
I'll say it one last time... you can be annoyed by the stiffness and dangerousness of the moves, but every single person who is trying to bring gender into the argument and using it to say that Kimber Lee is somehow being mistreated is wrong. Just plain wrong. They're only making judgments due to a tiny clip that's shocking out of context. They're the ones being ignorant and sexist as f***. The way that they did the chairshot and powerbomb was dangerous and stupid (but really pretty par for the course for them unfortunately)... that is the ONLY argument at play here. There is either a disconnect between what people are actually arguing and what you're hearing, or you're just arguing straw men so that you can be "right". Your last several comments in this thread have not even addressed the substance of the counter arguments, but just continue to repeat the same justifications and make the same attacks. 1. People are not wrong just because you say they are. 2. People are not "ignorant" or "sexist as f***" just because you say they are. 3. Name calling and personal attacks are no substitute for a solid argument. Maybe it's time to just say "We disagree and that's okay" instead of continuing to egg the situation on with personal attacks and insinuations of misogyny. At this point, I doubt there's anyone who doesn't fully grasp your position and the positions of all other participants. I was ok to leave the thread alone, but I find the continual personal attacks (and that's what they are) to be unnecessary and offensive.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2015 9:20:00 GMT -5
I'll say it one last time... you can be annoyed by the stiffness and dangerousness of the moves, but every single person who is trying to bring gender into the argument and using it to say that Kimber Lee is somehow being mistreated is wrong. Just plain wrong. They're only making judgments due to a tiny clip that's shocking out of context. They're the ones being ignorant and sexist as f***. The way that they did the chairshot and powerbomb was dangerous and stupid (but really pretty par for the course for them unfortunately)... that is the ONLY argument at play here. There is either a disconnect between what people are actually arguing and what you're hearing, or you're just arguing straw men so that you can be "right". Your last several comments in this thread have not even addressed the substance of the counter arguments, but just continue to repeat the same justifications and make the same attacks. 1. People are not wrong just because you say they are. 2. People are not "ignorant" or "sexist as f***" just because you say they are. 3. Name calling and personal attacks are no substitute for a solid argument. Maybe it's time to just say "We disagree and that's okay" instead of continuing to egg the situation on with personal attacks and insinuations of misogyny. At this point, I doubt there's anyone who doesn't fully grasp your position and the positions of all other participants. I was ok to leave the thread alone, but I find the continual personal attacks (and that's what they are) to be unnecessary and offensive. I'm not making "personal attacks" and I HAD left the thread alone and agreed to disagree until the "sexual nature" of the pin was brought up again. You're incorrect in assuming that there's no one who doesn't fully grasp my position though, as (as I pointed out) some people haven't read the thread and are making posts regarding nonexistent issues that have been debunked already. My posting here again was reiterating those points, nothing more. If I thought the issue was fully understood by the person posting and they just held their position even though I felt it was wrong, I wouldn't have argued against it. I was informing, albeit while exasperated, nothing more. If you really want to get into personal attacks though, I haven't attacked anyone personally, just "ignorant posts" as a whole. I've not called anyone names or called out any one person or anything of the like. Anytime I came close to being even slightly personal I either edited my post, apologized or both. In fact, the closest to an actual "personal attack" I've seen in this thread lately is the comment of yours that I'm quoting that was directed at me. The fact that you disagree doesn't mean you have any right to attack me either man. In short I'm not arguing against people with an opposing opinion to me (that's your wheelhouse it seems), I feel they have every right to think what they want to think. I'm only trying to help put the whole thing in perspective for those who have never seen a Kimber Lee match before.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2015 9:32:34 GMT -5
There is either a disconnect between what people are actually arguing and what you're hearing, or you're just arguing straw men so that you can be "right". Your last several comments in this thread have not even addressed the substance of the counter arguments, but just continue to repeat the same justifications and make the same attacks. 1. People are not wrong just because you say they are. 2. People are not "ignorant" or "sexist as f***" just because you say they are. 3. Name calling and personal attacks are no substitute for a solid argument. Maybe it's time to just say "We disagree and that's okay" instead of continuing to egg the situation on with personal attacks and insinuations of misogyny. At this point, I doubt there's anyone who doesn't fully grasp your position and the positions of all other participants. I was ok to leave the thread alone, but I find the continual personal attacks (and that's what they are) to be unnecessary and offensive. I'm not making "personal attacks" and I HAD left the thread alone and agreed to disagree until the "sexual nature" of the pin was brought up again. You're incorrect in assuming that there's no one who doesn't fully grasp my position though, as (as I pointed out) some people haven't read the thread and are making posts regarding nonexistent issues that have been debunked already. My posting here again was reiterating those points, nothing more. If I thought the issue was fully understood by the person posting and they just held their position even though I felt it was wrong, I wouldn't have argued against it. I was informing, albeit while exasperated, nothing more. If you really want to get into personal attacks though, I haven't attacked anyone personally, just "ignorant posts" as a whole. I've not called anyone names or called out any one person or anything of the like. Anytime I came close to being even slightly personal I either edited my post, apologized or both. In fact, the closest to an actual "personal attack" I've seen in this thread lately is the comment of yours that I'm quoting that was directed at me. The fact that you disagree doesn't mean you have any right to attack me either man. In short I'm not arguing against people with an opposing opinion to me (that's your wheelhouse it seems), I feel they have every right to think what they want to think. I'm only trying to help put the whole thing in perspective for those who have never seen a Kimber Lee match before. The point is that all the positions have been clearly stated, and calling everyone who differs on a topic "sexist" and "ignorant as f***" is a personal attack. Whether you mention them by name or not is irrelevant. I'd like for you to specifically point out how you were personally attacked in the post of mine you just quoted. There is nothing I said that made any assumptions about you as an individual nor anything that was not completely relevant to the discussion. Putting things in perspective is welcome. I can completely see where you're coming from even if I don't completely agree on what you think it proves. Following it up with insinuating, if not outright stating that everyone who disagrees is an ignorant misogynist is not welcome.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2015 9:48:34 GMT -5
I'm saying "if you think like this I think that you're wrong", which is my opinion and far from "personal". Your post was saying "You're wrong for doing this" to me, which is, by definition, personal.
My posts have been against general ignorance, and trying to inform while not singling out any one person specifically (or personally). Your post was a direct attack against me and my post.
I've also never said nor insinuated that anyone who disagrees with me is an ignorant misogynist. I've said that the people making this about gender are being such. That's all.
Edit: Oh and you said that "calling everyone who differs on a topic "sexist" and "ignorant as f***" is a personal attack." It's absolutely not. It's a blanket statement not calling out any specific person. "Everyone" is the exact opposite of "Personal".
I'm done arguing either way though. I do indeed feel you've made it personal and I don't really want to get into a personal argument.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 10, 2015 10:26:08 GMT -5
I'm saying "if you think like this I think that you're wrong", which is my opinion and far from "personal". Your post was saying "You're wrong for doing this" to me, which is, by definition, personal. My posts have been against general ignorance, and trying to inform while not singling out any one person specifically (or personally). Your post was a direct attack against me and my post. I've also never said nor insinuated that anyone who disagrees with me is an ignorant misogynist. I've said that the people making this about gender are being such. That's all. Edit: Oh and you said that "calling everyone who differs on a topic "sexist" and "ignorant as f***" is a personal attack." It's absolutely not. It's a blanket statement not calling out any specific person. "Everyone" is the exact opposite of "Personal". I'm done arguing either way though. I do indeed feel you've made it personal and I don't really want to get into a personal argument. That's probably for the best. I'm sorry you feel that I've attacked you personally. Bye.
|
|
|
Post by edtheripper on Mar 20, 2015 18:27:12 GMT -5
|
|