AntiDote

And thus the basic premise of American Pie was created.

1 hour ago, Your Fight Site said:

So he got called out for abusing his position of trust as a trainer by entering a (by all accounts, manipulative) relationship with a trainee. So, instead of learning and thinking, “That was probably a bad thing” he’s instead jetted off to another country and done the exact same thing?

You have to give him credit for publicly demonstrating how to be a complete f***wit.

31 minutes ago, Tamura said:

What I'm not saying it's a finished propsal, it isn't even a first draft. But what I do know is that if the government and the promotions aren't going to take action, simply sitting around complaining about it isn't going to change anything.

Absolutely 👍🏻

10 minutes ago, Tamura said:

I suggest you read the article about the Casualties that was conveniently linked to in my original post. Jorge Herrera hasn't been prosecuted or convicted, yet action was taken by multiple venues as a result of the grass-roots activism. Is the government going to take action? It's hard to imagine a group of MPs deciding to ban El Ligero from wrestling isn't it? Are promotions going to take action? Some have and should be applauded for that, but others are going to take no action and hide their inaction behind a DBS check fig-leaf. So who else is left? I don't see writing a letter to the lead singer of Echo and the Bunnymen changing much, so it's up to the wrestlers and/or fans to make their voices heard.

I take on what you say, I honestly do. I just think music performers (and the industry itself) are generally taken more seriously than wrestlers. There’s just more legitimacy about it that makes me feel such a campaign wouldn’t be effective in the long term.
 

Maybe I’m wrong, perhaps your suggestion is the way but I'm just not feeling it.

9 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

Good and fair points. In my opinion anything like this for Britwres needs to be led by women. Ultimately it’s up to the promoters to decide what threshold there is. Usually targeting a loss of money by a campaign of information to the consumers is the way to go but this being wrestling, profit isn’t always an attainable goal for promoters. 

Using a targeting campaign could also lead to a venue stonewalling any future promotions wanting to run shows there.  
 

To a lot of people “wrestling is wrestling” and whereas a new ‘clean’ promotion may want to run a venue that previously intended to have an abuser on the show but got blackballed by such a campaign, that venue’s owners may then associate wrestling with dodgy characters and subsequently pull the shutters down on any shows wanting to run there.

I don’t know what the answer is but I wish someone could come up with one soon.

16 minutes ago, Keith Houchen said:

An organisation carries more weight than a lone person. BTC can link to stories about the individual in question and mobilise people to mass email the venue of promotion, so it carries more weight than a single email. Ultimately it’s down to the promoters/venues but which one of the above looks more credible?

Again a good theory but who would be behind such an organisation? The abused? Possibly but how much weight would it carry if there haven been no convictions/prosecutions?

1 hour ago, Tamura said:

 One thing that appears to be missing (to the best of my knowledge) is an easily accessible list of which wrestler has been accused of what, it's no use expecting promoters and venues to scour wrestling newz sites or read all 128 pages of this thread. Once you have that, it's a lot easier to inform venues and promoters that a wrong un will be appearing on their show, by flooding their email and/or social media channels with complaints for starters. 

 

Good idea in theory but what would prevent someone with a grudge against a guy on the show from emailing the venue with false accusations? I’m sure anyone mischievous enough could concoct a real-enough looking list.