|
Post by mistery on Dec 15, 2022 11:33:30 GMT -5
One of my main issues is that the WWE is woefully inconsistent in how they punish people: Jimmy Uso: 5 arrests for DUI. The most recent from July 5, 2021 dude blew a .205 at 10:35 AM(how insane is that!?) but no disciplinary action was taken because he was important to the Roman storyline. Rob Van Dam pulled over for speeding and they found weed and some Vicodin pills(in which the charges were dropped when he showed a prescription) dropped the WWE and ECW titles and suspended for 30 days. This was before the WWE was a strict PG. Paige makes multiple sex tapes that are leaked including with other wrestlers and cumming on a WWE title, it becomes a big joke referenced years later ON WWE programming. Mandy releases nothing near as graphic as that but it’s for profit and behind a paywall that you need a credit card to even access and some of it is leaked by a loser that then tries to blackmail her. Released. We all get it, she was in violation of the terms of contract and the WWE and Mandy made their choices and they’ll both be fine, but there is absolutely zero consistency with how the WWE doles out these punishments. The Paige situation was diff. She wasn’t selling those videos for profit, it was a legit invasion of her privacy. Meanwhile, with Mandy her stuff got leaked and if she has it protected, she can sue the people who probably violated the rules of ownership of that material that she sold to them them Yeah. The people trying to claim the Paige and Mandy situations are the same are either completely missing the point or being outright malicious. Mandy intentionally and willingly put her videos and photos out there for public consumption/viewership (even if its behind a paywall, its still out there). Paige's stuff was never meant for public consumption and the distribution of the materials could land you time in prison as it would fall under revenge porn laws. And revenge porn is illegal and considered a felony in all but four states in the US (South Carolina, Massachusetts, Wyoming, and Mississippi). Companies and sponsors aren't going to punish someone who was the victim of a sex crime.
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Dec 15, 2022 11:35:27 GMT -5
So here's the thing about the morality clause. If the person in question is credibly accused of a crime and they are found guilty in a court of law, WWE can invoke the morality clause, depending on the offense. The Usos DUI stuff likely also falls under the whole three strikes rule, and both of them have only been found guilty once or twice, and were sentenced to probation. Neither of them faced any actual jail time for their crimes. However, in the case of sex work, the morality clause also comes into effect, because it's written into the contracts that if something would offend a sponsor or other employees, the company reserves the right to terminate your contract at any time. And guess who would be offended by it? Sponsors definitely would be. And my point is that it's messed up. Because both should be under the latter. The fact they're not is messed up, regardless of all the weird justifications for it that people can have. It’s not weird justifications, it’s the truth of the matter, as it relates to public perception. Public perception and what sponsors/companies believe is public perception is what they are going off of here. If they think the general public is more put off by a wrestler selling graphic nudes than by a wrestler getting a DUI, then that’s the line the sponsor will draw. I don’t think anyone honestly thinks what Mandy did is ethically wrong or worse in any way than those who commit DUIs.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Dec 15, 2022 11:37:02 GMT -5
The Paige situation was diff. She wasn’t selling those videos for profit, it was a legit invasion of her privacy. Meanwhile, with Mandy her stuff got leaked and if she has it protected, she can sue the people who probably violated the rules of ownership of that material that she sold to them them That’s true, my point though is that if sponsors are truly worried about these types of things then they’re not going to care whether it was released legally or illegally. It’s WWE wrestlers getting freaky on camera and being referenced ON WWE programming. Literally the only difference is that Mandy was getting paid for her content. Which leads me to deduce that the real problem is that it somehow it got out to management at just how much Mandy was making and that’s at least part of the reason why she was let go. Just my opinion. 🤷🏻♂️ It does matter tho legally. Mandy was selling explicit material for profit. If her stuff was leaked and was only intended for eyes between her and her spouse or whoever this is a whole diff convo. Invasion of privacy vs actually selling is a whole diff kettle of beans.
|
|
|
Post by Alice Syndrome on Dec 15, 2022 11:37:18 GMT -5
Yeah, I'm not gonna blame either side for this. And as far as "BUT THE USOS" and similar posts, if sponsors cared enough things would be said and done. And DUIs don't rank as high as heavily publicized atrocious shit like Fabulous Moolah and Vince to most sponsors, and at lot of the rest never really reaches anywhere close the their ears. Not saying it makes anything right or whatever, just that that's how it goes. At least the door is being left open for Mandy to come back if everything permits. Yep your right. As crazy as it sounds DUI's are misdemeanors (unless someone is hurt or something is destroyed) that usually always end with a slap on the wrist especially here in IL. On the other side of the coin you would not lose your job for a DUI but you would definitely lose your job for having an only fans account. This was just right over the border in IN nypost.com/2022/07/07/teacher-fired-over-raunchy-onlyfans-for-putting-reputation-at-risk/I am not justifying the fact that these people lost their job for putting money in the bank but unfortunately there is precedent. Yeah, I have distinct memories of the start of Lockdown when the New York Post decided it was a fun idea to out a nurse who was doing OF on the side because despite 70 hour weeks of saving lives in a generational trauma event, she couldn't afford rent. Somehow the articles on this never analyse that part while they're busy ruining someone's life
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Dec 15, 2022 11:42:44 GMT -5
The Paige situation was diff. She wasn’t selling those videos for profit, it was a legit invasion of her privacy. Meanwhile, with Mandy her stuff got leaked and if she has it protected, she can sue the people who probably violated the rules of ownership of that material that she sold to them them Yeah. The people trying to claim the Paige and Mandy situations are the same are either completely missing the point or being outright malicious. Mandy intentionally and willingly put her videos and photos out there for public consumption/viewership (even if its behind a paywall, its still out there). Paige's stuff was never meant for public consumption and the distribution of the materials could land you time in prison as it would fall under revenge porn laws. And revenge porn is illegal and considered a felony in all but four states in the US (South Carolina, Massachusetts, Wyoming, and Mississippi). Companies and sponsors aren't going to punish someone who was the victim of a sex crime. And realistically Mandy could sue people as well for leaking the material as she should have a clause in there saying sharing that material is illegal but it’s going be hard to track down who’s actually buying and sharing her stuff But yes, intentional Vs non intentional is a whole diff convo. Paige stuff was meant for her eyes (and whoever she shared it with) and you said revenge porn for sharing material like that lands your ass in hot water. Mandy sold her material and she does have rights to protect her material but under the contract she signed she shouldn’t be selling it
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Dec 15, 2022 11:44:42 GMT -5
Jimmy Uso: 5 arrests for DUI. The most recent from July 5, 2021 dude blew a .205 at 10:35 AM(how insane is that!?) but no disciplinary action was taken because he was important to the Roman storyline. . I’ll correct you and say that wasn’t his most recent. It was April 2022. That’s where the infamous “We have no responsibility for what our talent do outside of work” statement came from. It was also a couple of weeks before the Usos unified the tag titles. April 2022 was just when the video came out from the incident I believe. It was a July 2021 incident though.
|
|
gnr123
Unicron
Posts: 3,445
Member is Online
|
Post by gnr123 on Dec 15, 2022 11:53:26 GMT -5
To paint the company as the bad guys just doesn't make sense here. Mandy was under contract that said she couldn't do this stuff. She was warned about it, but she continued anyway. WWE is a public trading company who have sponsors and networks to answer too, and one of the sponsors saw what she was doing inappropriate. She was then let go because of it and if she's thinks she can make more money selling nude pictures of herself for simps without having to break her back, than more power to her.
|
|
|
Post by mistery on Dec 15, 2022 11:59:45 GMT -5
Yeah. No one here is blaming Mandy for deciding she would rather go into business selling her own photos. That's her choice and I'm not going to get mad about it, or even care at the end of the day. Just like it's WWE's choice to terminate her contract because they (or their sponsors) don't want to be associated with that kind of stuff, and no one should be getting mad at them for it either. At the end of the day, both parties just want to make money.
|
|
Kalmia
King Koopa
Happy to be here
Posts: 12,601
|
Post by Kalmia on Dec 15, 2022 12:04:50 GMT -5
WWE can be well within their rights to fire a talent for breaching their contract. People can also think that is absolutely ridiculous and that specific clauses shouldn't be in those very, very one-sided contracts. I think a lot of the arguments in this thread are kinda misunderstanding each other. Some people are arguing from a position of can WWE do this and others from a position of whether they should. Rose sold risqué photos in an adults only space and kept it all well away from her work as a WWE talent. Yes, that's against WWE rules. Yes, sponsors won't like it. Yes, society still doesn't accept this stuff. But IMO, that should be none of WWE's business. She's an independent contractor signed to an unfair contract (as all wrestlers are). In situations like this I'll always support the worker over the big corporation. The sponsors not liking it is exactly why it IS WWE’s business, though. This is exactly what I mean. Yes, the sponsor's care and WWE want to please them and I said exactly that in my post. I said IN MY OPINION it shouldn't be WWE's business. I'm not debating the facts and how things are, just saying they're unfair. I don't believe that we should just accept things because that's how they are.
|
|
PKO
King Koopa
Posts: 12,641
|
Post by PKO on Dec 15, 2022 12:11:41 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by canceled4truth on Dec 15, 2022 12:11:49 GMT -5
Yep your right. As crazy as it sounds DUI's are misdemeanors (unless someone is hurt or something is destroyed) that usually always end with a slap on the wrist especially here in IL. On the other side of the coin you would not lose your job for a DUI but you would definitely lose your job for having an only fans account. This was just right over the border in IN nypost.com/2022/07/07/teacher-fired-over-raunchy-onlyfans-for-putting-reputation-at-risk/I am not justifying the fact that these people lost their job for putting money in the bank but unfortunately there is precedent. Yeah, I have distinct memories of the start of Lockdown when the New York Post decided it was a fun idea to out a nurse who was doing OF on the side because despite 70 hour weeks of saving lives in a generational trauma event, she couldn't afford rent. Somehow the articles on this never analyse that part while they're busy ruining someone's life I was working for another journalism outlet at that time (I won't say their name, but you can DM me if you're really curious for proof) and I straight up refused to write about that and my editor gave me shit. It is depressing how 99% of the media, both in journalism and entertainment, act towards sex work.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Dec 15, 2022 12:17:22 GMT -5
The sponsors not liking it is exactly why it IS WWE’s business, though. This is exactly what I mean. Yes, the sponsor's care and WWE want to please them and I said exactly that in my post. I said IN MY OPINION it shouldn't be WWE's business. I'm not debating the facts and how things are, just saying they're unfair. I don't believe that we should just accept things because that's how they are. Sponsors = Money. It is why WWE became a publicly traded company, they have to answer to those people because they pay WWE an assload of money. So it is WWE business because without sponsors they lose revenue, which leads to cutbacks like dropping people off the roster
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 48,473
|
Post by Dub H on Dec 15, 2022 12:30:24 GMT -5
Lots of people signing to Mandy Rose OF out of protest
|
|
|
Post by canceled4truth on Dec 15, 2022 12:31:58 GMT -5
Lots of people signing to Mandy Rose OF out of protest Yeah. Out of protest. That's what we're calling it.
|
|
asuka007
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 23,768
|
Post by asuka007 on Dec 15, 2022 12:34:35 GMT -5
Jimmy Uso: 5 arrests for DUI. The most recent from July 5, 2021 dude blew a .205 at 10:35 AM(how insane is that!?) but no disciplinary action was taken because he was important to the Roman storyline. . I’ll correct you and say that wasn’t his most recent. It was April 2022. That’s where the infamous “We have no responsibility for what our talent do outside of work” statement came from. It was also a couple of weeks before the Usos unified the tag titles. Which is BS because they DID punish RVD when he was pulled over for having drugs in his car. They let Jimmy off the hook completely decayed he’s Roman’s cousin and they needed him for The Bloodline story, that simple. Heck JR basically said they let Ric Flair off the hook for the Plane Ride from Hell incident because of who he was. But Mr. Perfect was expendable so they fired him.
|
|
|
Post by darbus alan on Dec 15, 2022 12:37:54 GMT -5
Yep your right. As crazy as it sounds DUI's are misdemeanors (unless someone is hurt or something is destroyed) that usually always end with a slap on the wrist especially here in IL. On the other side of the coin you would not lose your job for a DUI but you would definitely lose your job for having an only fans account. This was just right over the border in IN nypost.com/2022/07/07/teacher-fired-over-raunchy-onlyfans-for-putting-reputation-at-risk/I am not justifying the fact that these people lost their job for putting money in the bank but unfortunately there is precedent. Yeah, I have distinct memories of the start of Lockdown when the New York Post decided it was a fun idea to out a nurse who was doing OF on the side because despite 70 hour weeks of saving lives in a generational trauma event, she couldn't afford rent. Somehow the articles on this never analyse that part while they're busy ruining someone's life The New York Post is the literal worst.
|
|
|
Post by canceled4truth on Dec 15, 2022 12:38:54 GMT -5
I’ll correct you and say that wasn’t his most recent. It was April 2022. That’s where the infamous “We have no responsibility for what our talent do outside of work” statement came from. It was also a couple of weeks before the Usos unified the tag titles. Which is BS because they DID punish RVD when he was pulled over for having drugs in his car. They let Jimmy off the hook completely decayed he’s Roman’s cousin and they needed him for The Bloodline story, that simple. Heck JR basically said they let Ric Flair off the hook for the Plane Ride from Hell incident because of who he was. But Mr. Perfect was expendable so they fired him. That one famous quote from some NFL GM about "if Hannibal Lecter ran fast enough we'd diagnose him with an eating disorder" applies here
|
|
Perd
Patti Mayonnaise
Leslie needs to butt out for fear of receiving The Bunghole Buster
Posts: 32,430
|
Post by Perd on Dec 15, 2022 12:48:17 GMT -5
Drunk driving is ok. You just can’t charge people money to watch you drunk drive.
|
|
06vwgti
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,808
Member is Online
|
Post by 06vwgti on Dec 15, 2022 13:15:11 GMT -5
Drunk driving is ok. You just can’t charge people money to watch you drunk drive. Drunk driving and getting caught 5 times is a okay
|
|
|
Post by Jindrak Mark on Dec 15, 2022 14:35:13 GMT -5
I'm surprised she was allowed to use her WWE name to post explicit stuff (or maybe she wasn't and that's what caused this) but it's right there at the bottom right of all those leaked photos/videos. WWE star Mandy Rose is obviously more known/marketable than Amanda Saccomanno but if you're doing stuff non-WWE related stuff it's probably safer to use your real name. I see she's now switched to Mandy Sacs and removed the Rose part. Tony Khan, please don't it.....please. I don't see why he wouldn't unless their network/sponsors are also uncomfortable with the content. She might be happy and making more money with her other ventures and not be that bothered about wrestling but if I was him I'd at least make the call and find out. She's a solid name to have and has the credibility of coming off a 400 day title reign.
|
|