Quote:
Originally Posted by RVDmark
(Post 1968151)
So its now poor taste to do a death angle on the off-chance that someone might die soon after?
|
The off chance? Are you oblivious to the world around you?
There's an off chance that a plane will fly into a building. There's an off chance you'll get hit by lighting. There's a pretty damn good chance wrestlers will die, and specifically die young.
Yeah, yeah, I know. You said wrestlers die more than average. At the same time, you're more or less downplaying it at the same time. And continue to do so in subsequent posts.
Everyone's going to die some day. Hmmm...That's a nice, open, pointless argument that's repeated, and probably will be ad nauseum. So what? The same fatalistic argument could be argued for everything. If you're writing one of those useless pop psychology books, it's a great, trite statement.
Also, in terms of separating the real world from fiction, there are two important points:
WWE panders to a lot of children who may not fully understand the difference, especially in a field where Vince McMahon plays a character named "Vince McMahon," where they go "behind the scenes" a lot, etc.
Also, and this does tie into the previous notion, they kind of did what they did for a real death and paid tribute to him. Of course, there were a lot of differences, but they did pay tribute to him, they encouraged mourning, etc.
Ah well. You asked why anyone would have a problem with the angle, and you've been given several answers. You can complain that they're not valid, disregard that they are legitimate feelings that people have, or whatever else you want.
I'm gonna go back to making Chris Benoit jokes. It's part of my coping mechanism to crack wise at dark subjects.