Wow. I think that’s the word that best describes my thoughts on one of the most biased, inconsistent, and misinformed articles in the history of the DFP. I, of course, am making reference to The Sherpa’s Second Serve: Sitting idly by while wrestling pollutes our culture, by Andy Smith. This article attempted to portray WWE and implicitly, the entire world of pro-wrestling as negatively as possible, with seemingly little provocation other than “Last week they returned to Boston.” Therefore, I feel morally obligated to properly inform the BU community about the real nature of WWE. First of all, some of the “arguments” that Andy makes are just absurd, like when he claims that “this wrestling stuff is really gay” and “queer,” citing the Bronco Buster, a move in which “one wrestler essentially dry humps the face of his opponent.” Just to clarify, the Bronco Buster was performed by a wrestler known as X-Pac, who is not even with the company anymore, but furthermore, it does not even closely represent a dry hump, but rather, uses a wrestler’s momentum to jump on his opponent’s upper chest area. Perhaps more importantly, though, if he claims that men performing with each is gay, he must also be willing to call all amateur wrestlers gay as well. I really don’t think that’s a burden he is going to want to uphold.
As far as the “fag” chants are concerned, Goldust, the wrestler who received those chants from fans (not at WWE’s provocation) was not booed specifically because he was gay, but because he was portrayed as a “heel” or, bad guy. Today, Goldust is just as effeminate as ever, and is a fan favorite. This is really nothing more than a few fans getting out of control many years ago, and should not be used to tarnish WWE’s current image.
The real problem I have with his point, though, is that he claims wrestling is both homoerotic and distinctly “anti-gay,” that men lust after women in bikinis but are, simultaneously, aroused by men in their “skivvies.” This proves that he is unsure of whether wrestling is gay or anti-gay. Just a little bit of advice on how to win an argument: don’t give conflicting statements.
Unfortunately, his bad arguments continued, like the one that likens WWE “zombie” fans to Nazi supporters. Please be reasonable here. This same argument can apply to any sports fan, like those of the New York Jets who often get just as frenzied and chant, “J-E-T-S, JETS JETS JETS!” Does that make them all mindless and Nazi-istic simply because they know and enjoy the cheer?
What about the argument that the WWE continues to support racial stereotypes? This is an excellent assertion, but coincidentally Andy provides not one example to back it up. Simply because a wrestler represents part of their culture is not enough to claim that it is wrong or inappropriate. God forbid a natural born Mexican like Eddie Guerrero says things like “Hey Esse,” that the British William Regal uses phrases like, “bloody heathen,” or even that cruiserweight star Yoshihiro Tajiri wears oriental style pants. Wrestlers generally act as exaggerations of their real life personalities, and there is nothing wrong with that. Moreover, there are just as many counter examples of characters that uphold moral issues and views or that are distinctly non-stereotypical. For example, this past week’s RAW program saw pro wrestler Shawn Michaels come to the ring, profess his love for God and his faith, and still receive one of the largest positive reactions of the night. Or what about a personality like the Rock, who, while he is black, can be defined as totally non-stereotypical?
Andy further claims that WWE supports physical violence against women. While actions like this have happened on occasion, the article grossly overimplies their frequency. Generally, violence against women is perpetrated by other women and in the context of a wrestling match. If you still think this is wrong, I would argue that it’s just a bit sexist to think that women should not held to the same standards as men in this aspect. Male on female violence, however, is actually quite rare. When it does occur, though, it is usually met with strict censure from the commentators and disapproval from the crowd, and is almost never used to gratuitously exhibit violence, but rather, to enhance the despicable nature of a bad guy wrestler.
The article also neglects empowering female figures, such as Chyna, a female wrestler, who often held her own against the men, and even held a major male championship on occasion. There is also Stephanie McMahon, portrayed as the powerful and independent General Manager of WWE’s SmackDown brand.
But what really frustrates me, as an objective observer, is the way the mainstream media always seems to highlight the negative aspects of WWE, without ever giving credit to their positive endeavors and/or social merits. For example, the DFP published an article a few days ago about WWE wrestlers speaking at Northeastern about the benefits of voting and political representation. This is just one manifestation of WWE’s little heralded SmackDown The Vote campaign, which has promoted political awareness and contributed to over 200,000 young Americans registering to vote since 2000. They also fail to acknowledge advertisements on their programs that salute our armed forces fighting abroad, the times when WWE wrestlers will participate in charity softball games, instances where stars like Kurt Angle will use their celebrity status to promote awareness on diseases, or even simple gestures like wrestler Christopher Nowinski spending time with sick and dying children this past week.
The author claims that WWE is polluting our culture, and something is wrong with us for watching, thereby, completely disavowing its entertaining aspects. It’s obvious that he has never seen a technically sound wrestling match between Chris Benoit and Kurt Angle that, albeit choreographed, is no less dramatic and exciting than a major movie fight sequence. It’s also quite obvious that he has no respect for a Rob Van Dam/Jeff Hardy ladder match, filled with athleticism, high-flying maneuvers and seemingly daredevil stunts. Perhaps he sees no entertainment value in Gregory Helms/The Hurricane, a mild mannered reporter, turned superhero, who serves as a lighthearted diversion for the fans. In my opinion, casting blame and ridicule at a group of performers who have literally broken their necks for the entertainment of the fans seems rather inappropriate.
Look I understand that professional wrestling and WWE is not for everybody. That’s fine. Everyone is entitled to their preferences. However, to simply degrade an entire company just to write an article, to me, seems wholly unjustified. Despite the “misogyny, racism, homophobia, necrophilia and every other evil of the world” that the author attempts to attribute to WWE, it has just as many, if not many more, positive qualities available to the fan who is willing to kick back for a couple of hours, abandon reality, and just be entertained.
-Michael Specian CAS ’03 -Jason MacMore CAS ’02
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
