Why doesn't WWE recognise talent sex appeal

[Reflecto]

I can trust that straight male wrestling fans are secure enough that they can accept a handsome male superstar being recognized for his sex appeal and have it not matter as much to them- most of the straight male fans on this board will admit there are WWE wrestlers they think are handsome.

I just don't trust WWE CREATIVE to pull off billing the sex appeal of male superstars- the years of billing the Divas solely as "look how hot they are! Don't you want to sleep with them?" and then saying "Okay, done!" as far as gimmick goes has proven that they wouldn't write anything for male superstars other than "They're so dreamy...and they're so nice, too!" or "They're so handsome...too bad he knows it! What a jerk!" if they did this.

[deancubed]

They already have John Cena and Randy Orton, which is enough for 90% of their target audience's girlfriends to at least give sports entertainment a chance. Ziggler/Miz/Shield/Rock is enough for the other 10%. Just doing what they are already doing is PLENTY of sex appeal for most women. Just listen to those "I'm at a bachelorette party and I think this is Magic Mike 2" catcalls whenever Cena takes off his shirt.

The main thing they are missing, and no offense to Kofi/Truth/Oneal/Woods/Henry, but they don't have a dashingly attractive black man yet (other than Rock but that's not quite the same thing). The closest they have is Byron Saxton & David Otunga, and I can add up the amount of in-ring time they have had in the past 2 years on no fingers.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

Oct 10, 2014 18:03:35 GMT -5 deancubed said:

They already have John Cena and Randy Orton, which is enough for 90% of their target audience's girlfriends to at least give sports entertainment a chance. Ziggler/Miz/Shield/Rock is enough for the other 10%. Just doing what they are already doing is PLENTY of sex appeal for most women. Just listen to those "I'm at a bachelorette party and I think this is Magic Mike 2" catcalls whenever Cena takes off his shirt.

The main thing they are missing, and no offense to Kofi/Truth/Oneal/Woods/Henry, but they don't have a dashingly attractive black man yet (other than Rock but that's not quite the same thing). The closest they have is Byron Saxton & David Otunga, and I can add up the amount of in-ring time they have had in the past 2 years on no fingers.

Let Byron wrestle and he can be our sexy black man. It doesn't even matter if he sucks in the ring, he can just be a jobber. Just as long as he's in a pair of trunks and women/gay men can perv all over him.

[SEAN CARLESS]

Oct 10, 2014 17:19:01 GMT -5 Reflecto said:

I can trust that straight male wrestling fans are secure enough that they can accept a handsome male superstar being recognized for his sex appeal and have it not matter as much to them- most of the straight male fans on this board will admit there are WWE wrestlers they think are handsome.

It goes beyond that. Wrestling fans, especially the predominant demo, would balk at something they figured was being targeted not at them, but instead catered to a demo that they vastly outnumber. It's the core reason behind a lot of Cena hate to be honest. Those hardcores figure what they want out of the character, or out of the company itself, is being purposely ignored or taking a backseat to cater exclusively to a fringe fanbase.

The trick, if there is one, is to create characters whose actions and character exemplify EVERYTHING (including sex appeal) that EVERYONE wants simultaneously, without the company constantly pointing it out ham-fistedly or creating a nauseating narrative that pretends its the case. But that takes subtlety, which is not WWE's strong suit.

[giraffe4hire]

The majority of the male roster wears underwear or skintight clothing, is ripped, has defined abs, and is usually oiled up. I guess WWE's thought process is that if there are still women who are not interested in that, those women wouldn't be fans no matter what.

[Reflecto]

Oct 10, 2014 18:49:42 GMT -5 SEAN CARLESS said:

The trick, if there is one, is to create characters whose actions and character exemplify EVERYTHING (including sex appeal) that EVERYONE wants simultaneously, without the company constantly pointing it out ham-fistedly or creating a nauseating narrative that pretends its the case. But that takes subtlety, which is not WWE's strong suit.

But that is the whole point as well. Everyone wants something different out of a character, and in many cases those things directly contradict each other to the point that you have to choose who you're going to go with.

[CATCH_US IS the Conversation]

This is your "everything" guy right here

[SEAN CARLESS]

Oct 10, 2014 23:55:52 GMT -5 Reflecto said:

Oct 10, 2014 18:49:42 GMT -5 SEAN CARLESS said:

The trick, if there is one, is to create characters whose actions and character exemplify EVERYTHING (including sex appeal) that EVERYONE wants simultaneously, without the company constantly pointing it out ham-fistedly or creating a nauseating narrative that pretends its the case. But that takes subtlety, which is not WWE's strong suit.

But that is the whole point as well. Everyone wants something different out of a character, and in many cases those things directly contradict each other to the point that you have to choose who you're going to go with.

I know he's not everyone's cup of tea these days, but Rock was pretty much all in one in the late 90's. He was cool, a cocky bad ass, funny, an ass kicker and girls liked him. But he didn't need the narrative telling you he was any of these things over and over, he just exemplified them all. And since no one was alienated or ignored, he was universally loved for a good period.

How Vince handled HBK in 1996 should be the personification on how NOT to book a good looking character. Once he did his striptease routine with Vince practically jerking off at the commentator's desk, he instantly got go away heat with grown men, to the point wherein Sid kicking his ass was given the Brock/Cena reaction at Survivor Series '96. Guys don't want to cheer a guy who's biggest character point is that he's who heir girlfriends want to finger themselves to when they get home. The fact that Vince thought anything otherwise showed how out of touch he was at that time.

[Lancers]

Oct 11, 2014 0:23:23 GMT -5 SEAN CARLESS said:

Oct 10, 2014 23:55:52 GMT -5 Reflecto said:

But that is the whole point as well. Everyone wants something different out of a character, and in many cases those things directly contradict each other to the point that you have to choose who you're going to go with.

I know he's not everyone's cup of tea these days, but Rock was pretty much all in one in the late 90's. He was cool, a cocky bad ass, funny, an ass kicker and girls liked him. But he didn't need the narrative telling you he was any of these things over and over, he just exemplified them all. And since no one was alienated or ignored, he was universally loved for a good period.

How Vince handled HBK in 1996 should be the personification on how NOT to book a good looking character. Once he did his striptease routine with Vince practically jerking off at the commentator's desk, he instantly got go away heat with grown men, to the point wherein Sid kicking his ass was given the Brock/Cena reaction at Survivor Series '96. Guys don't want to cheer a guy who's biggest character point is that he's who heir girlfriends want to finger themselves to when they get home. The fact that Vince thought anything otherwise showed how out of touch he was at that time.

Practically jerking off?

Back then, Vince had to hire a guy to clean up underneath the commentators' desk during this period. Just imagine how bad it had to have been for that guy because you had the self-touching triumvirate of Vince, Lawler and Dok Hendrix working the tables back then for RAW and the other syndicated stuff.

[Deleted]

Oct 11, 2014 0:23:23 GMT -5 SEAN CARLESS said:

Oct 10, 2014 23:55:52 GMT -5 Reflecto said:

But that is the whole point as well. Everyone wants something different out of a character, and in many cases those things directly contradict each other to the point that you have to choose who you're going to go with.

I know he's not everyone's cup of tea these days, but Rock was pretty much all in one in the late 90's. He was cool, a cocky bad ass, funny, an ass kicker and girls liked him. But he didn't need the narrative telling you he was any of these things over and over, he just exemplified them all. And since no one was alienated or ignored, he was universally loved for a good period.

How Vince handled HBK in 1996 should be the personification on how NOT to book a good looking character. Once he did his striptease routine with Vince practically jerking off at the commentator's desk, he instantly got go away heat with grown men, to the point wherein Sid kicking his ass was given the Brock/Cena reaction at Survivor Series '96. Guys don't want to cheer a guy who's biggest character point is that he's who heir girlfriends want to finger themselves to when they get home. The fact that Vince thought anything otherwise showed how out of touch he was at that time.

The notion that fans would resent a wrestler because of their sexual capital, overall looks or success is blind to most character-driven shows and how rampant shipping is by both sexes and both sides of the orientation fence. If the character is otherwise strong, they don't resent anything and will actively root for the individual, even in their personal exploits outside of wrestling. Whereas if the character is weak, we get that Michaels effect where people despise the guy for it because it's all the character is.

One thing that I'm dying to see is a character duo that involves a handsome guy and a good-looking girl who are introduced as an item but debut as faces. And both know how to wrestle and are allowed to do so. And constantly have to contend with people trying to throw them off the rails. I wonder how fans would react to it. My guess? It'd be overwhelmingly sympathetic and both of them would get over and stay over pretty quickly.

[Reflecto]

Oct 11, 2014 1:09:11 GMT -5 @mightykretzler said:

The notion that fans would resent a wrestler because of their sexual capital, overall looks or success is blind to most character-driven shows and how rampant shipping is by both sexes and both sides of the orientation fence. If the character is otherwise strong, they don't resent anything and will actively root for the individual, even in their personal exploits outside of wrestling. Whereas if the character is weak, we get that Michaels effect where people despise the guy for it because it's all the character is.

That's really the point, though. Going back to the whole issue, it's a catch-22 for talent's sex appeal. Male and female, most of the wrestlers can be described as attractive (and every wrestler likely has someone who thinks it- just looking at that wrestling sex confessions tumblr can say that.) The only issue is that- if the character is strong enough, people won't resent anything and root for the individual- but you also WON'T NOTICE that the wrestler's so attractive because it'd just be a foregone statement and just another aspect of a strong character. If the character's weak, and their sex appeal is the only aspect of the character- that Michaels effect will tend to happen.

This ties into the big issue that leads to the thread: Women are sold on their sex appeal and only that, but at the same time- everyone can kind of agree, the writing for Divas' characters sucks. There's been flashes of good writing- current NXT, that 2006-2008 era where most of the Divas tended to have a gimmick of some kind, even the NXT 3 season (where having to push all-women led to the women actually getting a lot of characterization), but for the most part it falls into that level of really generic, bland characterization- which makes it so the Divas' sex appeal is the only thing that they're sold on. It's not just "they're the women", but "they're WEAK CHARACTERS".

By contrast, the male superstars are handsome, people can recognize it- but they're also getting far, far, far more characterization than the Divas tend to get. This means they can get to that place where the character is otherwise strong, but it also means that the wrestlers' sex appeal won't be on the forefront of the character, simply because they're strong enough characters so there's something there...and to put the male wrestlers' sex appeal at the forefront would, from what we've seen from the Divas, likely lead to them weakening their characters to compensate.

[Deleted]

Because 95% of Wwe TV is men nearlynude or stripping off for screaming women then grinding against each other.  Men get the women about 5% of TVa week.  Female fans have it made.

[nisidhe]

Oct 11, 2014 3:49:42 GMT -5 @ihateeverything said:

Because 95% of Wwe TV is men nearlynude or stripping off for screaming women then grinding against each other.  Men get the women about 5% of TVa week.  Female fans have it made.

That's somewhat true: however, in an age when _every_ male body presented is Adonic in its way, sex appeal has to be derived from other facets of the character. Whether it comes their off-campus activities (e.g. John Cena's charity work), their prowess in the ring (e.g. Daniel Bryan), or their bad-boy charisma (Roman Reigns), or even being someone we'd like to know in real life (again, Daniel Bryan fits the mold here, as would Cena to an extent - what I call comfort-level), such an addition to the character really separates the empty-headed or -hearted bodybuilder type from the principled or unprincipled warrior. Competence is sexy; charisma is sexy; compassion is sexy; comfort is sexy.

[Mid-Carder]

I tend to find that if women are already wrestling fans, they'll find someone to like

I mean, Dean Ambrose is a bit of a sex symbol for female fans from what I can tell- not in a million years would they have marketed him that way

[Deleted]

Oct 11, 2014 9:10:24 GMT -5 nisidhe said:

Oct 11, 2014 3:49:42 GMT -5 @ihateeverything said:

Because 95% of Wwe TV is men nearlynude or stripping off for screaming women then grinding against each other.  Men get the women about 5% of TVa week.  Female fans have it made.

That's somewhat true: however, in an age when _every_ male body presented is Adonic in its way, sex appeal has to be derived from other facets of the character. Whether it comes their off-campus activities (e.g. John Cena's charity work), their prowess in the ring (e.g. Daniel Bryan), or their bad-boy charisma (Roman Reigns), or even being someone we'd like to know in real life (again, Daniel Bryan fits the mold here, as would Cena to an extent - what I call comfort-level), such an addition to the character really separates the empty-headed or -hearted bodybuilder type from the principled or unprincipled warrior. Competence is sexy; charisma is sexy; compassion is sexy; comfort is sexy.

Geek culture and a Metal Gear Solid obsession is sexy to me but AJ has her geek cred doubted constantly and Eva Marie isn't REAL enough for wrestling so with those examples - you can see why WWE just treat women as bodies and ignore the problem completely for men.

Hell, Orton's Rick Rude promo a few months ago was mocked for pandering to women and him not carrying it off.  WWE cannot win.