Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2022 14:14:34 GMT -5
I can do it for people with idiotic opinions like Hogan, Warrior, and the like. Not to justify their views, but you kind of have to keep in mind that these are people who lived in a bubble, and in that era, the whole industry was a bunch of crooked, largely uneducated carnies.
I can't do it with people who actually committed heinous acts, like Buck Zumhofe, Grizzly Smith, and the Fabulous Moolah. You can't handwave that stuff away as common stupidity.
Like I've said before Hogan is one of my all-time favorites, but while I enjoy the character of Hulk Hogan, I think Terry Bollea is an asshole.
|
|
chazraps
Wade Wilson
Better have my money when I come-a collect!
Posts: 27,989
Member is Online
|
Post by chazraps on Apr 30, 2022 18:22:38 GMT -5
I tried watching an A*stin Ar*es match for the first time in forever this week because I'm running low on Morishima ROH matches I hadn't seen. Just took me right out of it. Knowing multiple allegations of him following the same modus operandi of sexual assaults, and that despite those being out there he's still being booked by NWA and CYN, I couldn't get past it to enjoy Morishima's contributions to the match.
|
|
|
Post by James Fabiano on Apr 30, 2022 18:37:57 GMT -5
That bit about Owen and George Steele is way funnier than it should be. Dude ran out of pranks and just shoved him down some stairs. We hear too much about Owen's elaborate pranks I wanna hear about the ones that weren't creative at all and just kinda f***ed up. I don't think it's right Owen doing that to George, either "prank" but George could be very miserable. He was in ill health for years and very grumpy. I know a prank he tried to pull on a homeless person many years ago which involved him telling the man he would pay him to drive him to the next town but George's plan was not to pay him. It got reversed on him with the homeless man stealing his rental car and gear inside. For as much as George got from wrestling I think he was very bitter. One of the worst fan encounters I ever saw was George was a video of him being a total jerk to a fan who made a custom George shirt and wanted him to hold it so he could take a video. George was soft spoken but berated the fan the entire video about not being willing to hold the shirt up because the fan would use it, without paying George, for free publicity for the shirt. I get we all have our bad days but I've heard/read more crappy stories about George than good. And I am a big fan. He personally responded to me on email that he was willing to help a teacher of mine who had Crohn's disease though my teacher didn't really want to follow through. Funny...George was like the opposite when I met him. But now we're getting into that other topic, "so and so is nice/mean based on my experience at meet and greets"
|
|
thecrusherwi
El Dandy
the Financially Responsible Man
Brawl For All
Posts: 7,659
|
Post by thecrusherwi on Apr 30, 2022 19:00:04 GMT -5
Maybe I’m a bad guy, but outside of Benoit extremely late in his career - I’m talking like 2007 right before the murders, none of it bothers me. They’re just characters on a TV show. I don’t really enjoy watching shoot interviews with the really awful people, but their in character work doesn’t phase me.
|
|
|
Post by Limity (BLM) on Apr 30, 2022 19:25:22 GMT -5
It makes me think, if I enjoyed said performers characters/matches when I was a kid and then I found out who they are behind the mask, does that make me guilty by association? That's absolutely ridiculous, borderline original sin nonsense. I don't think there will ever be a consensus on this question, and there doesn't have to be. I still enjoy the wrestlers and matches I enjoy, separating the character from the person, and others choose not. Both choices are equally valid. That wrestlers are just as often characters as they are themselves just turned up, it's hard to find any kind of objective standard to apply. The closest I can come is if you like a character or person SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE of their crimes or abhorrent behavior, well then you're probably in the wrong. And even that is a standard that really only applies to the fans, not the wrestler.
|
|
Blade
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,943
|
Post by Blade on Apr 30, 2022 21:43:07 GMT -5
People are complicated, and everyone has to draw their own lines. I just try to be understanding that people draw lines for their own reasons and not judge them for it overmuch; I'm not going to say you shouldn't watch and enjoy Benoit matches, but advocating for him to be in the Hall of Fame is over the line and conspiracy theories about the murders are also shitty even if honestly believed.
Same reason I don't judge people for watching WWE, even though I won't watch them due to feeling contributing to WWE's further success is unethical (due to numerous reasons people can likely guess).
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on May 1, 2022 8:34:42 GMT -5
if you can do it it's fine but I feel one of the worst attitudes in modern wrestling is the idea that people who can't do it are somehow in the wrong. like, I'm sorry, for a lot of people Hulk Hogan's racist tirade or Ric Flair sexually assaulting a flight attendant are always going to overshadow all the good they achieved in their career, and that's just how it is. bragging about how you can still watch Chris Benoit matches like it's somehow an accomplishment isn't going to change anything either. just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by ChitownKnight on May 1, 2022 10:08:20 GMT -5
Besides shit like Benoit, Snuka, Moolah ect I think most things can be forgiven. Ryback posted an incredibly scummy tweet yesterday but if he gets mental health help and apologizes for his behavior then he could be forgiven
|
|
|
Post by sungod2020 on May 1, 2022 15:27:11 GMT -5
It makes me think, if I enjoyed said performers characters/matches when I was a kid and then I found out who they are behind the mask, does that make me guilty by association? That's absolutely ridiculous, borderline original sin nonsense. I don't think there will ever be a consensus on this question, and there doesn't have to be. I still enjoy the wrestlers and matches I enjoy, separating the character from the person, and others choose not. Both choices are equally valid. That wrestlers are just as often characters as they are themselves just turned up, it's hard to find any kind of objective standard to apply. The closest I can come is if you like a character or person SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE of their crimes or abhorrent behavior, well then you're probably in the wrong. And even that is a standard that really only applies to the fans, not the wrestler. I don't think it's that insane. I mean, even WWE has a limit on who they should and shouldn't honor. Yes, with me I can enjoy said wrestlers character work and matches, but with some guys, I won't give positive accolades(such as Benoit). It also doesn't surprise me that Dynamite Kid isn't in the Hall of Fame BECAUSE OF HIS OFF SCREEN CHARACTER, nor am I losing sleep over his omission. Guys like Mr. Fuji and Fritz Von Erich shouldn't be in there either if the whole dog-cooking is true(everything else I could let slide), and Fritz is an overall piece of shit for what he did to his children. The only reason why I can understand Fritz being in there is because it's much easier to induct the Von Erichs as a group instead of cherry picking which ones deserve to be in there because of their kayfabe accomplishments/who they were outside the ring. Fabulous Moolah is another example of blurring the lines between the character and the person as WWE got flack from fans for naming a battle royal in her honor due to allegations of pimping the divas and stealing their money, although since there's different accounts of what actually happened, it can't really be proven that she did. If it was proven 100% without a doubt that she did, I wouldn't be against removing her from the Hall of Fame. Although some will say(other than WWE) she was a pioneer who inspired other women to get into pro wrestling. Again the lines do get murky that you don't know which way to turn.
|
|
Johnny B. Decent
Patti Mayonnaise
Had one once
Everybody's Favorite Arizonian.
Posts: 31,076
|
Post by Johnny B. Decent on May 1, 2022 15:29:05 GMT -5
I don't know why, but even as a kid, I had a feeling The Undertaker was probably an asshole in real life, and it seems my hunch was right.
|
|
|
Post by Limity (BLM) on May 1, 2022 17:32:45 GMT -5
That's absolutely ridiculous, borderline original sin nonsense. I don't think there will ever be a consensus on this question, and there doesn't have to be. I still enjoy the wrestlers and matches I enjoy, separating the character from the person, and others choose not. Both choices are equally valid. That wrestlers are just as often characters as they are themselves just turned up, it's hard to find any kind of objective standard to apply. The closest I can come is if you like a character or person SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE of their crimes or abhorrent behavior, well then you're probably in the wrong. And even that is a standard that really only applies to the fans, not the wrestler. I don't think it's that insane. I mean, even WWE has a limit on who they should and shouldn't honor. Yes, with me I can enjoy said wrestlers character work and matches, but with some guys, I won't give positive accolades(such as Benoit). It also doesn't surprise me that Dynamite Kid isn't in the Hall of Fame BECAUSE OF HIS OFF SCREEN CHARACTER, nor am I losing sleep over his omission. Guys like Mr. Fuji and Fritz Von Erich shouldn't be in there either if the whole dog-cooking is true(everything else I could let slide), and Fritz is an overall piece of shit for what he did to his children. The only reason why I can understand Fritz being in there is because it's much easier to induct the Von Erichs as a group instead of cherry picking which ones deserve to be in there because of their kayfabe accomplishments/who they were outside the ring. Fabulous Moolah is another example of blurring the lines between the character and the person as WWE got flack from fans for naming a battle royal in her honor due to allegations of pimping the divas and stealing their money, although since there's different accounts of what actually happened, it can't really be proven that she did. If it was proven 100% without a doubt that she did, I wouldn't be against removing her from the Hall of Fame. Although some will say(other than WWE) she was a pioneer who inspired other women to get into pro wrestling. Again the lines do get murky that you don't know which way to turn. What I found ridiculous was your specific concern about being guilty by association for liking performers at a time when you culdn't have know what they were really like. I can't imagine finding fault for that. The rest of your post makes total sense, and is a great debate to have and hear about how others make their choices.
|
|
|
Post by sungod2020 on May 1, 2022 17:36:27 GMT -5
I don't think it's that insane. I mean, even WWE has a limit on who they should and shouldn't honor. Yes, with me I can enjoy said wrestlers character work and matches, but with some guys, I won't give positive accolades(such as Benoit). It also doesn't surprise me that Dynamite Kid isn't in the Hall of Fame BECAUSE OF HIS OFF SCREEN CHARACTER, nor am I losing sleep over his omission. Guys like Mr. Fuji and Fritz Von Erich shouldn't be in there either if the whole dog-cooking is true(everything else I could let slide), and Fritz is an overall piece of shit for what he did to his children. The only reason why I can understand Fritz being in there is because it's much easier to induct the Von Erichs as a group instead of cherry picking which ones deserve to be in there because of their kayfabe accomplishments/who they were outside the ring. Fabulous Moolah is another example of blurring the lines between the character and the person as WWE got flack from fans for naming a battle royal in her honor due to allegations of pimping the divas and stealing their money, although since there's different accounts of what actually happened, it can't really be proven that she did. If it was proven 100% without a doubt that she did, I wouldn't be against removing her from the Hall of Fame. Although some will say(other than WWE) she was a pioneer who inspired other women to get into pro wrestling. Again the lines do get murky that you don't know which way to turn. What I found ridiculous was your specific concern about being guilty by association for liking performers at a time when you culdn't have know what they were really like. I can't imagine finding fault for that.The rest of your post makes total sense, and is a great debate to have and hear about how others make their choices. I meant AFTER finding out who they really were. I still get nostalgic feelings about many Hulkamania and Attitude guys because that's part of my childhood.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2022 21:18:44 GMT -5
I tried watching an A*stin Ar*es match for the first time in forever this week because I'm running low on Morishima ROH matches I hadn't seen. Just took me right out of it. Knowing multiple allegations of him following the same modus operandi of sexual assaults, and that despite those being out there he's still being booked by NWA and CYN, I couldn't get past it to enjoy Morishima's contributions to the match. He made a crack about my close friend's weight outside of a wrestling setting, so I had no interest in watching anything he does, even before the allegations started coming out. Now, I want to see him even less.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2022 22:08:04 GMT -5
I tried watching an A*stin Ar*es match for the first time in forever this week because I'm running low on Morishima ROH matches I hadn't seen. Just took me right out of it. Knowing multiple allegations of him following the same modus operandi of sexual assaults, and that despite those being out there he's still being booked by NWA and CYN, I couldn't get past it to enjoy Morishima's contributions to the match. He made a crack about my close friend's weight outside of a wrestling setting, so I had no interest in watching anything he does, even before the allegations started coming out. Now, I want to see him even less. Aries seems like one of those "bullying is good, actually" guys. He's a piece of shit.
|
|
|
Post by James Fabiano on May 2, 2022 11:55:29 GMT -5
That's absolutely ridiculous, borderline original sin nonsense. I don't think there will ever be a consensus on this question, and there doesn't have to be. I still enjoy the wrestlers and matches I enjoy, separating the character from the person, and others choose not. Both choices are equally valid. That wrestlers are just as often characters as they are themselves just turned up, it's hard to find any kind of objective standard to apply. The closest I can come is if you like a character or person SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE of their crimes or abhorrent behavior, well then you're probably in the wrong. And even that is a standard that really only applies to the fans, not the wrestler. I don't think it's that insane. I mean, even WWE has a limit on who they should and shouldn't honor. Yes, with me I can enjoy said wrestlers character work and matches, but with some guys, I won't give positive accolades(such as Benoit). It also doesn't surprise me that Dynamite Kid isn't in the Hall of Fame BECAUSE OF HIS OFF SCREEN CHARACTER, nor am I losing sleep over his omission. Guys like Mr. Fuji and Fritz Von Erich shouldn't be in there either if the whole dog-cooking is true(everything else I could let slide), and Fritz is an overall piece of shit for what he did to his children. The only reason why I can understand Fritz being in there is because it's much easier to induct the Von Erichs as a group instead of cherry picking which ones deserve to be in there because of their kayfabe accomplishments/who they were outside the ring. Fabulous Moolah is another example of blurring the lines between the character and the person as WWE got flack from fans for naming a battle royal in her honor due to allegations of pimping the divas and stealing their money, although since there's different accounts of what actually happened, it can't really be proven that she did. If it was proven 100% without a doubt that she did, I wouldn't be against removing her from the Hall of Fame. Although some will say(other than WWE) she was a pioneer who inspired other women to get into pro wrestling. Again the lines do get murky that you don't know which way to turn. They are indeed. Like with, well, everything, there's two sides both shouting their stance at you. Why am I surprised that every issue is like that in today's society? But that there are two sides, that's what made this look like a kneejerk reaction to make sponsors happy. (and you had the Warrior Award in plain view at the time, and things Warrior said and did ARE out there in the public eye) Oh yeah, if it was absolutely true and could be proven, screw Lillian Ellison, as I said before. But...there's a lot that's suss about the matter. Seems like it came out after she died...that's never good. I don't know if that guy I referenced before is right (only 2 women said it, there's dozens of interviews debunking it. He did admit the ruthless businesswoman stuff, however). But yeah. About the Von Erichs and animal abuse...hopefully the Sleaze List isn't accurate there, otherwise, screw them too.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on May 2, 2022 13:38:41 GMT -5
Some people can separate them, others can’t. So long as one’s attitude isn’t “I’m totally fine with the awful things this person may have said or did”, you’re not a bad person for continuing to enjoy a performer’s content so long as you can still condemn their f***-ups.
Conversely, everyone also has their own limitations for when they’re done following someone, and one isn’t in the wrong either for jumping ship if a performer/content creator is up to no good/they did something that’s hard to walk back.
There’s a number of musicians, actors, directors, artists, writers, wrestlers, athletes, whoever who have said stupid shit, committed awful crimes and the lot, but I can still get something from their work or at least prior output in many cases even while either rolling my eyes at how dumb they can be or just finding them flat out reprehensible as people. But it’s not my position to force anyone to feel how I feel about it, especially since it’s mostly gonna be a case by case basis.
|
|
|
Post by sungod2020 on May 2, 2022 14:33:08 GMT -5
I don't think it's that insane. I mean, even WWE has a limit on who they should and shouldn't honor. Yes, with me I can enjoy said wrestlers character work and matches, but with some guys, I won't give positive accolades(such as Benoit). It also doesn't surprise me that Dynamite Kid isn't in the Hall of Fame BECAUSE OF HIS OFF SCREEN CHARACTER, nor am I losing sleep over his omission. Guys like Mr. Fuji and Fritz Von Erich shouldn't be in there either if the whole dog-cooking is true(everything else I could let slide), and Fritz is an overall piece of shit for what he did to his children. The only reason why I can understand Fritz being in there is because it's much easier to induct the Von Erichs as a group instead of cherry picking which ones deserve to be in there because of their kayfabe accomplishments/who they were outside the ring. Fabulous Moolah is another example of blurring the lines between the character and the person as WWE got flack from fans for naming a battle royal in her honor due to allegations of pimping the divas and stealing their money, although since there's different accounts of what actually happened, it can't really be proven that she did. If it was proven 100% without a doubt that she did, I wouldn't be against removing her from the Hall of Fame. Although some will say(other than WWE) she was a pioneer who inspired other women to get into pro wrestling. Again the lines do get murky that you don't know which way to turn. They are indeed. Like with, well, everything, there's two sides both shouting their stance at you. Why am I surprised that every issue is like that in today's society? But that there are two sides, that's what made this look like a kneejerk reaction to make sponsors happy. (and you had the Warrior Award in plain view at the time, and things Warrior said and did ARE out there in the public eye) Oh yeah, if it was absolutely true and could be proven, screw Lillian Ellison, as I said before. But...there's a lot that's suss about the matter. Seems like it came out after she died...that's never good. I don't know if that guy I referenced before is right (only 2 women said it, there's dozens of interviews debunking it. He did admit the ruthless businesswoman stuff, however). But yeah. About the Von Erichs and animal abuse...hopefully the Sleaze List isn't accurate there, otherwise, screw them too. Well Fritz Von Erich was definitely without a doubt one of the biggest POS promoters out there, and you didn't even need to read any dirt sheets to see it. He exploited his sons deaths, one of the worse was promoting Mike Von Erich's in-ring return after he was recovering from toxic shock syndrome.....HE LOOKED LIKE A f***ING SKELETON!! I mean he was lucky to be alive, why would he even think about wrestling? That's only one of the many scummy things that he did, and I'm sure there's alot I'm missing that he did for all the World to see. Mr. Fuji I only learned about being a malicious ribber the other day. The whole cooking someone's pet and feeding it to them in order to get revenge I HOPE TO GOD was not true, or if it was, he can rot in hell.
|
|
|
Post by James Fabiano on May 2, 2022 14:39:45 GMT -5
They are indeed. Like with, well, everything, there's two sides both shouting their stance at you. Why am I surprised that every issue is like that in today's society? But that there are two sides, that's what made this look like a kneejerk reaction to make sponsors happy. (and you had the Warrior Award in plain view at the time, and things Warrior said and did ARE out there in the public eye) Oh yeah, if it was absolutely true and could be proven, screw Lillian Ellison, as I said before. But...there's a lot that's suss about the matter. Seems like it came out after she died...that's never good. I don't know if that guy I referenced before is right (only 2 women said it, there's dozens of interviews debunking it. He did admit the ruthless businesswoman stuff, however). But yeah. About the Von Erichs and animal abuse...hopefully the Sleaze List isn't accurate there, otherwise, screw them too. Well Fritz Von Erich was definitely without a doubt one of the biggest POS promoters out there, and you didn't even need to read any dirt sheets to see it. He exploited his sons deaths, one of the worse was promoting Mike Von Erich's in-ring return after he was recovering from toxic shock syndrome.....HE LOOKED LIKE A f***ING SKELETON!! I mean he was lucky to be alive, why would he even think about wrestling? That's only one of the many scummy things that he did, and I'm sure there's alot I'm missing that he did for all the World to see. Mr. Fuji I only learned about being a malicious ribber the other day. The whole cooking someone's pet and feeding it to them in order to get revenge I HOPE TO GOD was not true, or if it was, he can rot in hell. Oh sure, about Fritz. To add, there's the fact that he forged David autographs to sell at the Parade of Champions, apparently. I was referring however, to the Sleaze List telling tales about the Von Erich boys and animals.
|
|