dpg
Samurai Cop
Posts: 2,477
|
Post by dpg on Aug 10, 2010 16:25:58 GMT -5
If Dreamer wanted to bring his kids along I don't see what Dixie Carter was going to do, Dreamer seems a good dad so he must have thought they'd be fine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 10, 2010 16:29:35 GMT -5
If Dreamer wanted to bring his kids along I don't see what Dixie Carter was going to do, Dreamer seems a good dad so he must have thought they'd be fine. That's kind of what I think. Unless he's physically abusing his kids, its not really our place to say what they should watch.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,537
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Aug 10, 2010 17:09:01 GMT -5
If Dreamer wanted to bring his kids along I don't see what Dixie Carter was going to do, Dreamer seems a good dad so he must have thought they'd be fine. That's kind of what I think. Unless he's physically abusing his kids, its not really our place to say what they should watch. I agree with both of you. He's a good dad and I'm pretty sure they at fine. They didn't watch the vicious stuff, and unlike Foley at RR, Dreamer wasn't knocked senseless and didn't require severe medical attention. I hate how PC wrestling fans are starting to become (and the use of Benoit to prove the point....but that's another rant I'd prefer not to start).
|
|
|
Post by The poster with no name on Aug 10, 2010 17:37:59 GMT -5
Honestly, I'm not a guy to usually do this...but I side with the people saying they shouldn't have been there. It was kind of disturbing they were there in the first place but then came the fact that he knew the match was going to get that brutal...geez... Did noone in wrestling watch Beyond the Mat? TNA isn't that far in stealing ideas yet.
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Aug 10, 2010 18:22:54 GMT -5
I don't think his kids will have any kind of long lasting problems with it.
I do think it's pretty pathetic and desperate to use kids to put over wrestling angles.
|
|
|
Post by Slingshot Suplay on Aug 10, 2010 18:31:47 GMT -5
I don't think his kids will have any kind of long lasting problems with it. I do think it's pretty pathetic and desperate to use kids to put over wrestling angles. Dominic says hi.
|
|
|
Post by Threadkiller [Classic] on Aug 10, 2010 18:38:13 GMT -5
That was brutal to watch. I wondered if Dreamer was in a decade-and-a-half-long competition with Sandman over who could scar their kids more all in the name of ECW. Just terrible shit, and the antithesis to the classy send-off he got in WWE with his kids at ringside.
|
|
|
Post by Brian Suntan on Aug 10, 2010 18:44:59 GMT -5
I don't think his kids will have any kind of long lasting problems with it. I do think it's pretty pathetic and desperate to use kids to put over wrestling angles. Dominic says hi. I meant more in the way of using their real emotions. I don't remember how young Dominic was, but I presume he knew Eddie Guerrero wasn't his papi. Same with Raven and the Sandman. No matter how many times you tell them it isn't real, I imagine it's still pretty upsetting to see your dad busted open. Like I said - not going to damage them, and not even really a big deal, but still pretty cheap.
|
|
MrBRulzOK
Wade Wilson
Mr No-Pants Heathen
Something Witty Here.
Posts: 26,719
|
Post by MrBRulzOK on Aug 10, 2010 18:53:16 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but young kids SHOULD NOT be exposed to that at such a young age. Even if it didn't seem to upset them, who knows what mental and psychological damage it could've have done to them on a subconscious level? Just because they didn't seem to be affected doesn't mean that they weren't. Sure, one time may not have been so bad, but there's really no way to tell. Even if Tommy had warned his kids beforehand, that doesn't make it much better.
Think about it. If you were a parent would you have let your six year old watch their parents get beaten bloody in a match in front of a screaming crowd who seemed to approve of the situation? Would you have bled like a stuck pig in front of them? Anyone who says yes is in a very small minority of people.
Maybe it meant nothing, but it still doesn't shine a positive light upon TNA in general. But then again we should expect this sort of thing from the same company who hired a man who was responsible for a professional wrestling being paralyzed and made them one half of their tag team champions in an effort of glorifying the man.
Honestly, would it really have taken away from the match if the kids weren't exposed to this scene? Would it really have made any difference at all?
Just my two cents.
|
|
|
Post by mydixiewrecked on Aug 10, 2010 18:58:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Aug 10, 2010 19:02:34 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but young kids SHOULD NOT be exposed to that at such a young age. Even if it didn't seem to upset them, who knows what mental and psychological damage it could've have done to them on a subconscious level? Just because they didn't seem to be affected doesn't mean that they weren't. Sure, one time may not have been so bad, but there's really no way to tell. Even if Tommy had warned his kids beforehand, that doesn't make it much better. Think about it. If you were a parent would you have let your six year old watch their parents get beaten bloody in a match in front of a screaming crowd who seemed to approve of the situation? Would you have bled like a stuck pig in front of them? Anyone who says yes is in a very small minority of people. Maybe it meant nothing, but it still doesn't shine a positive light upon TNA in general. But then again we should expect this sort of thing from the same company who hired a man who was responsible for a professional wrestling being paralyzed and made them one half of their tag team champions in an effort of glorifying the man. Honestly, would it really have taken away from the match if the kids weren't exposed to this scene? Would it really have made any difference at all? Just my two cents. You know, that's the problem. This even MIGHT effect them. This MIGHT have left a scar. This MIGHT have been hurt deeply by seeing Dreamer beat up. All this going on about how they MIGHT be affected, and all jumping to the conclusion that this MIGHT do something sometime to somebody, even with factual proof to the contrary.
|
|
|
Post by FailedGimmick on Aug 10, 2010 19:14:17 GMT -5
I didn't see the show, but hearing about it on "Wrestle! Wrestle!" made it seem a bit more than it needed to be.
|
|
Urethra Franklin
King Koopa
When Toronto sports teams lose, Alison Brie is sad
Posts: 11,090
|
Post by Urethra Franklin on Aug 10, 2010 19:16:28 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but young kids SHOULD NOT be exposed to that at such a young age. Even if it didn't seem to upset them, who knows what mental and psychological damage it could've have done to them on a subconscious level? Just because they didn't seem to be affected doesn't mean that they weren't. Sure, one time may not have been so bad, but there's really no way to tell. Even if Tommy had warned his kids beforehand, that doesn't make it much better. Think about it. If you were a parent would you have let your six year old watch their parents get beaten bloody in a match in front of a screaming crowd who seemed to approve of the situation? Would you have bled like a stuck pig in front of them? Anyone who says yes is in a very small minority of people. Maybe it meant nothing, but it still doesn't shine a positive light upon TNA in general. But then again we should expect this sort of thing from the same company who hired a man who was responsible for a professional wrestling being paralyzed and made them one half of their tag team champions in an effort of glorifying the man. Honestly, would it really have taken away from the match if the kids weren't exposed to this scene? Would it really have made any difference at all? Just my two cents. You know, that's the problem. This even MIGHT effect them. This MIGHT have left a scar. This MIGHT have been hurt deeply by seeing Dreamer beat up. All this going on about how they MIGHT be affected, and all jumping to the conclusion that this MIGHT do something sometime to somebody, even with factual proof to the contrary. So there's factual proof that Tommy Dreamer's little girls won't be affected by this? Man, the world of academia is on top of things! Good on them for mastering time travel, too, to see that this incident didn't affect them 10, 15, or 20 years down the road. Facetiousness aside, yes, they might be affected and that's the point. Also, what "factual proof" is there that proves otherwise? That's utter nonsense. The fact of the matter is that Tommy Dreamer thought it was a good idea to take a beating in front of his 6-year-old daughters. That's his prerogative as their father. Hopefully, there won't be any negative consequences in the future. Maybe there will, maybe there won't. But the fact that there might be would be enough for me, if I were a parent, to think twice to exposing them to something that they might be too young to comprehend.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Aug 10, 2010 19:22:04 GMT -5
Considering that they weren't around for any of the real gruesome stuff of the match, and how they didn't seem to care the day after and were enjoying themselves, there aren't exactly on the road to a mental ward at 23, now are they?
For all the BS about how you can't do things cause of how things MIGHT be affected, it seems the whole MIGHT NOT thing is largely forgotten.
|
|
Urethra Franklin
King Koopa
When Toronto sports teams lose, Alison Brie is sad
Posts: 11,090
|
Post by Urethra Franklin on Aug 10, 2010 19:25:59 GMT -5
Considering that they weren't around for any of the real gruesome stuff of the match, and how they didn't seem to care the day after and were enjoying themselves, there aren't exactly on the road to a mental ward at 23, now are they? For all the BS about how you can't do things cause of how things MIGHT be affected, it seems the whole MIGHT NOT thing is largely forgotten. Here's a question for you: Would you get shot in the chest for $1 million? You MIGHT die, but you MIGHT NOT. I'll tell you my answer: no, because I MIGHT die. Sure, I MIGHT NOT, but the fact that I MIGHT is enough for me to say no. So that's why the MIGHT NOT thing is largely being forgotten.
|
|
MrBRulzOK
Wade Wilson
Mr No-Pants Heathen
Something Witty Here.
Posts: 26,719
|
Post by MrBRulzOK on Aug 10, 2010 19:33:47 GMT -5
Considering that they weren't around for any of the real gruesome stuff of the match, and how they didn't seem to care the day after and were enjoying themselves, there aren't exactly on the road to a mental ward at 23, now are they? For all the BS about how you can't do things cause of how things MIGHT be affected, it seems the whole MIGHT NOT thing is largely forgotten. Jumping off a skyscraper might kill you then again it might not. Does that mean that you should do it? Being in a war might result in you dying but then again it might not. Does that mean you want to risk participating in one? Sticking your hand in a jar full of one million dollars and one deadly scorpion might result in you becoming rich and then again it might not. Does that mean you're willing to risk reaching inside? Just because something is only a remote possibility does not mean that doing it is a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Aug 10, 2010 19:34:56 GMT -5
Considering that they weren't around for any of the real gruesome stuff of the match, and how they didn't seem to care the day after and were enjoying themselves, there aren't exactly on the road to a mental ward at 23, now are they? For all the BS about how you can't do things cause of how things MIGHT be affected, it seems the whole MIGHT NOT thing is largely forgotten. Here's a question for you: Would you get shot in the chest for $1 million? You MIGHT die, but you MIGHT NOT. I'll tell you my answer: no, because I MIGHT die. Sure, I MIGHT NOT, but the fact that I MIGHT is enough for me to say no. So that's why the MIGHT NOT thing is largely being forgotten. ......Really? You're comparing a fake wrestling match to getting shot and possibly killed? That's the most absurd argument I've heard today.
|
|
Urethra Franklin
King Koopa
When Toronto sports teams lose, Alison Brie is sad
Posts: 11,090
|
Post by Urethra Franklin on Aug 10, 2010 19:37:01 GMT -5
Here's a question for you: Would you get shot in the chest for $1 million? You MIGHT die, but you MIGHT NOT. I'll tell you my answer: no, because I MIGHT die. Sure, I MIGHT NOT, but the fact that I MIGHT is enough for me to say no. So that's why the MIGHT NOT thing is largely being forgotten. ......Really? You're comparing a fake wrestling match to getting shot and possibly killed? That's the most absurd argument I've heard today. You're right. That would be an absurd argument...if it were the one I was making. If you can't see the argument that I'm making, then I can see why you'd have no problem with Dreamer exposing his kids to violence like that.
|
|
|
Post by Michael Coello on Aug 10, 2010 19:36:08 GMT -5
Considering that they weren't around for any of the real gruesome stuff of the match, and how they didn't seem to care the day after and were enjoying themselves, there aren't exactly on the road to a mental ward at 23, now are they? For all the BS about how you can't do things cause of how things MIGHT be affected, it seems the whole MIGHT NOT thing is largely forgotten. Jumping off a skyscraper might kill you then again it might not. Does that mean that you should do it? Being in a war might result in you dying but then again it might not. Does that mean you want to risk participating in one? Sticking your hand in a jar full of one million dollars and one deadly scorpion might result in you becoming rich and then again it might not. Does that mean you're willing to risk reaching inside? Just because something is only a remote possibility does not mean that doing it is a good idea. Okay, what the f*** is up with this goddamn morbid line of questions, especially since Tommy Dreamer, at NO POINT during the match, was ever in danger of dying?!
|
|
|
Post by Bob Schlapowitz on Aug 10, 2010 19:38:43 GMT -5
Maybe TNA should go TV-PG then.
|
|