Mr.E Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 In WWE's defence, isn't it most likely that the way they "advise" the diva's to look is essentially to gain more viewers, of the primary target audience of men aged 18-35?WWE used to have proper "women wrestlers" pre attitude era, and I'm sure some wrestling fans actually liked it. But in saying that, come the attitude era when dolled up, lovely looking ladies wearing not much turn up, I imagine that does contribute somewhat to the ratings. These days some of the diva's aren't any where near as obvious in terms of appealing to that portion of the audience, but they are they to cover the bases and draw in the bloke who just like looking at nice women.......which essentially is all straight men on the planet, so you can't blame them for doing what they do.Would I like to see more legit women wrestlers on TV? Yes I would. Do I also fancy the hell out of heel Lana in the suit with the tied up hair, even though I don't think she's very good at anything else......also yes. And I'd rather stare at Lana, that see legit women's wrestlers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Linus Posted October 23, 2015 Paid Members Share Posted October 23, 2015 It's not even that, though, is it? How they look may be at the forefront of Vince McMahon's boner-mind but you don't have to play his game. Â And I'm nowhere near saying we shouldn't discuss fit women, it's just that it shouldn't play any part in how good they are at their job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powerful_Fox Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 But some of the women are hired purely on that basis though, regardless of talent, some are hired because they are fit, they in segments because they are fit. Â As Mr. E pointed out, most straight males between 18-35 will play that same game Vince does simply because they are straight males between 18-35. If a diva is hired and presented as a look-how-fit-this-bird-is-type to a demographic of that nature, it is the expected, and natural, reaction to judge "yeah she is fit, you're right". Â If a different diva is pushed as a good hand, talented, solid in ring performer, chances are the primary reaction will be "she is decent... pretty fit too", that isn't a womanising, sexist, old-fashioned viewpoint. It's pretty natural. Granted some may focus more on the fit-ness than talent but that again comes with the years of previous sexploitation from WWE and each individual males personality. Â Take Asuka here as an example, a decent hand in the ring and (my own personal preference) she is good looking. Now, I would judge the talent first as she is presented to me as such, as a male I am also going to naturally think "she is also quite fit". In contrast, Stacy Keibler is fit but she was always presented as a fit bird, so my first judgement is going to be on her fit-ness, in fact solely on her fit-ness as that is the only reason she was ever there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Sergio Mendacious Posted October 23, 2015 Paid Members Share Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) I miss Traniel Bryan. Â I didn't know till relatively recently that tranny was a slur against transgender people as well as transvestites, but then, neither did RuPaul, who you'd think would know about that kind of thing. Edited October 23, 2015 by Bill Diarrhea Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Coconut Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 A slur? Surely it's just an abbreviation? Is champ a slur? I'm too old for this shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Scott Malbranque Posted October 23, 2015 Paid Members Share Posted October 23, 2015 Like Jap or Jew, innit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 I, too, am perpetually stuck in the year 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Linus Posted October 23, 2015 Paid Members Share Posted October 23, 2015 RuPaul may not have a problem with it. But then, as the picture in the article shows, he's able to put on a suit and become a "man". Plus, he's pretty rich and famous, which tends to negate a lot of the shit ordinary trans people get thrown at them. Â Ignorance actually is an excuse on this occasion, but once you know that "tranny" is offensive to many trans people it's not hard from that point on to use "trans" instead. Or even just "man"," or "woman", as appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Scott Malbranque Posted October 23, 2015 Paid Members Share Posted October 23, 2015 What about Les from Eastenders? Didn't the little youngone who goosed Fats say "Tranny". I don't think there was any backlash - excuse the pun - from that, sir? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Sergio Mendacious Posted October 23, 2015 Paid Members Share Posted October 23, 2015 RuPaul may not have a problem with it. But then, as the picture in the article shows, he's able to put on a suit and become a "man". Plus, he's pretty rich and famous, which tends to negate a lot of the shit ordinary trans people get thrown at them.  Ignorance actually is an excuse on this occasion, but once you know that "tranny" is offensive to many trans people it's not hard from that point on to use "trans" instead. Or even just "man"," or "woman", as appropriate.  Precisely — Ru made a fool of himself over this, imho, and lost a lot of respect.  The point is, saying "it's an abbreviation, innit?," or "I'm not offended by it" doesn't make it okay, or any less offensive. It's like white people whining because they can't go round saying n**ger just because black people say it, or insisting that saying black lives matter somehow invalidates all other lives. RuPaul may not have a problem with it. But then, as the picture in the article shows, he's able to put on a suit and become a "man". Plus, he's pretty rich and famous, which tends to negate a lot of the shit ordinary trans people get thrown at them.  Ignorance actually is an excuse on this occasion, but once you know that "tranny" is offensive to many trans people it's not hard from that point on to use "trans" instead. Or even just "man"," or "woman", as appropriate.  Precisely — Ru made a fool of himself over this, imho, and lost a lot of respect.  The point is, saying "it's an abbreviation, innit?," or "I'm not offended by it" doesn't make it okay, or any less offensive. It's like white people whining because they can't go round saying n**ger just because black people say it, or insisting that saying black lives matter somehow invalidates all other lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Linus Posted October 23, 2015 Paid Members Share Posted October 23, 2015 Oh, well if Eastenders says it's okay I stand corrected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DraxSpago Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) Oh, well if Eastenders says it's okay I stand corrected. Â Don't be a smart arse, he's just making the perfectly valid point that the word was used in a mainstream pre watershed tv show and no one's kicked off about it, I imagine if Phil called Patrick a wog there'd be a bit of a fuss i.e. every front page and execs from the BBC getting sacked/resigning Edited October 23, 2015 by DraxSpago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Linus Posted October 23, 2015 Paid Members Share Posted October 23, 2015 I don't know what to tell you. If a significant amount of transsexual people find it offensive it shouldn't be hard to refrain from using it. Eastenders should know better. However, the trans lobby isn't as strong or as vocal as other minorities, and probably chooses to pick their battles. Â I will say that some trans people can be just as bad, throwing around the "cys" term, but that shouldn't muddy the issue. Â Anyway, back to Raw being shit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CTXRussomark Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 I've never not thought of tranny as a slur and find it incredible anyone thinks otherwise. Even when I was younger and it was associated mainly with transvestites it was still clearly an insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 (edited) So to get back to wrestling talk, spoilered if watching Smackdown is somehow still in your weekly routine Tyler Breeze's debut was quite surreal to watch. It's difficult to see an NXT fav shoehorned into the company's worst of its three storylines, but in fairness he suited the role fine and the segment was alright. Just can't figure out why it wouldn't happen on a Raw episode, like which 6-tag absolutely had to go out that week in favour of something new and interesting - the one they'll repeat on the kick-off show? I can only imagine there's a demand for more worthwhile content on Smackdown but it does feel like a bit of a death sentence to debut there in 2015 Â Edited October 23, 2015 by sj5522 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts