13 users responded in this post

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url
mygif

But it would have at least been honest to simply say “we can’t celebrate someone who did porn” rather than hedging.

But if you actually say that, you have to come up with a reasonable line between what Chyna does now and what Tammy Sytch was doing in the 2000s – does WWE really want to go on the record as saying nudity is fine, but penetration is too far?

ReplyReply
mygif

Chyna absolutely should be in the HOF, and I don’t agree with his argument, but I understand where Triple H is coming from. Our society has a huge problem in dealing with sexuality. WWE could ignore that problem and induct Chyna, but for any company to go against that grain would be more surprising than not.

I doubt it has anything to do with it, but I also wonder if Chyna’s past with Triple H might quietly play a role in it. Maybe the higher ups find her a distasteful reminder of when Triple H was just another talent, rather than a respectable member of the family. I doubt that plays a part, but there’s a chance that it might.

ReplyReply
mygif
DensityDuck said on February 3rd, 2015 at 11:01 pm

“he also wants his ostensibly family-friendly corporation to not extend recognition to a sex worker, which is judging her for her life choices.”

Except it’s not, actually. Judging her would be him saying “yeah, turned out she was an amoral slut who doesn’t deserve to be remembered as part of this wonderful family”. Saying the equivalent of “her public life doesn’t fit the image we want the WWE brand to have” is a decision about marketing, not morality.

And sure, you can reply “well it’s pretty lame that you’re just writing her out of WWE history after everything she did for pro wrestling”, or “that attitude seems kinda ass-covering and chickenshit for someone who’s supposed to be this badass pit fighter”. But it’s also valid for WWE to say “every time someone brings up Chyna they want to talk about The Porn Thing, and we don’t want WWE to be about Dealing With The Porn Thing, so we just don’t talk about Chyna.”

ReplyReply
mygif

One thing I didn’t think about yesterday: Val Venis. You know, the guy whose best-known gimmick was as a porn star.

ReplyReply
mygif

I was particularly galled that he tried to indicate Chyna going into the hall-of-fame was a non-starter because of the porn thing two weeks after using her partner in her first sex video to promote the Royal Rumble.

If Sean “1-2-3 Kid/X-Pac/Syxx” Waltman ever goes in the Hall of Fame, Chyna not being in it is an unfair double-standard.

ReplyReply
mygif

Nevermind the simple parading of heavily modified, near-naked female bodies around the wrestling ring being something of a time-honored trope. We have a woman celebrated for grabbing people’s heads between her thighs and body-slamming them, and we’re going to get squeamish about porn? Really?

This seems to be another edition of the weird faux-prudish American sexual taboo. The difference between sexy rock star and filthy mega-slut can be measured in the thickness of one’s nipple-tape.

ReplyReply
mygif

“Saying the equivalent of ‘her public life doesn’t fit the image we want the WWE brand to have’ is a decision about marketing, not morality.”

Ok, this is a pet bugbear of mine, but those two things are not exclusive, and presenting them as if they are exclusive IS a moral decision. Putting market value first is not necessarily an evil thing or a bad thing, especially if, say, you’re a leading representative of an organization that employs a lot of people, but pretending that economic decisions are exempt from any other measures can feed into a “market as one true God” kind of mentality.

ReplyReply
mygif

On a slightly different note, I am very surprised a Canadian would in any way criticize Bret the Hitman Hart. I think that might be against Canada’s Constitution or something.

ReplyReply
mygif

It’s been pointed out elsewhere that people who have done much worse than porn are in the Hall Of Fame.

Mike Tyson is a convicted rapist. He’s in there.

Steve Austin has, on more than one occasion, beaten up his significant other. He’s in there.

Jimmy Snuka probably murdered his girlfriend. He’s in there.

Yet Chyna isn’t in there because she did something completely legal that harmed absolutely nobody? Come the fuck on.

ReplyReply
mygif

A sex tape is somewhat different than pornography, isn’t it?

@Rob Brown: Is Chris Benoit in the Hall of Fame? If he’s not, I’m sure there’s a large contingent who want him there. It’s also probably not a big coincidence that every figure you list is a male.

ReplyReply
mygif

There is a rather obnoxious minority of the IWC who bring up Benoit going into the hall of fame every so often, insisting only your wrestling career should matter. Because a corporation and media entity really wants to celebrate the career of a man best know for killing his wife and youngest son. “But he was a great technician! He hit those German suplexes so well!” completely missing the point.

ReplyReply
mygif

@Andrew: I’m afraid I don’t see your point about everybody I mentioned being male. Is there a female wrestling personality who committed a crime (or did something legal, yet still worse than porn), and who got into the HoF anyway, that I should have mentioned instead? Off the top of my head I can’t think of any.

My point is that if you can be guilty of domestic abuse and be allowed into the HoF, then anything equal to or less than that should not disqualify future candidates. If Triple H claims that porn of all things keeps you out, then he and WWE are either seriously inconsistent or lying.

ReplyReply
mygif
Lister Sage said on March 2nd, 2015 at 3:13 pm

@Andrew: Chyna has done more then just a sex tape. She’s stared in a few adult films.

Shouldn’t keep her out of the HoF though.

ReplyReply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please Note: Comment moderation may be active so there is no need to resubmit your comments