TPWW Forums - View Single Post

**Nacho Man** · 02-22-2004, 11:17 AM

Okay- sorry if I seemed patronising, I just don't understand how the necrophilia angle was any different to a number of angles that have nowhere near the same infamous reputation, say the Booker T race WM 19 angle, and the Nation of Domination- clearly a race angle, I would judge those to be far more offensive than a clearly fictional storyline involving what was meant to be a character (Triple H) illustrating his juvenile humour, and the fact that he acts without moral boundaries.

The entire angle was made to look like comedy, even if it's quality is in question. Nobody who has replied yet have offered any decent reason as to why this angle was particularly bad- even near as bad, as the number of race angles. I find it difficult to swallow, that the same people who bitch about the status quo being maintained, HHH on top on Raw, and Angle, Lesnar and Big Show (until recently) always being on top on smackdown are the same people who bitch when the WWE tried something new, which tanked in the long run, but at least demonstrated an acceptance by the writing staff that something had to change. Did you all act with shock the first time Austin flipped the bird at the fans, was that offensive? You are fans of an industry that maintains it's position by pandering to an audience of right wing fans- those who cannot handle 3D characters any more challenging than stereotypical racially defined ones- such as Salvatore Sincere, Iron Sheikh, and homophobic characters- such as Gorgeous George and Billy and Chuck: always used as heel for the right wing audience to boo because they have a lifestyle that does not please the fans.

I suppose this post has been a long winded way of trying to challenge the belief that wrestling owes us a Liberal Perspective of life. I am suggesting that instead, the WWE exists purely in the form of what is fundamentally lowbrow entertainment (Hardly a shock) Therefore, necrophilia is not against the grain of the WWE/F's long term booking and writing strategy. Any person who expects the WWE to regret using necrophilia in an angle is sadly mistaken, they wouldn't, because they know that for every 9 necrophilia's, there will be one angle that takes off like the Steve Austin foul-mouthed gimmick, and the money is with controversy as it always has been.

I hope this explains my position a little easier, and stops people rating me negatively due to a slightly clumsy point-making style.

02-22-2004, 11:17 AM	#10
Nacho Man Wont be Wearing the Shoes Posts: 185	Okay- sorry if I seemed patronising, I just don't understand how the necrophilia angle was any different to a number of angles that have nowhere near the same infamous reputation, say the Booker T race WM 19 angle, and the Nation of Domination- clearly a race angle, I would judge those to be far more offensive than a clearly fictional storyline involving what was meant to be a character (Triple H) illustrating his juvenile humour, and the fact that he acts without moral boundaries. The entire angle was made to look like comedy, even if it's quality is in question. Nobody who has replied yet have offered any decent reason as to why this angle was particularly bad- even near as bad, as the number of race angles. I find it difficult to swallow, that the same people who bitch about the status quo being maintained, HHH on top on Raw, and Angle, Lesnar and Big Show (until recently) always being on top on smackdown are the same people who bitch when the WWE tried something new, which tanked in the long run, but at least demonstrated an acceptance by the writing staff that something had to change. Did you all act with shock the first time Austin flipped the bird at the fans, was that offensive? You are fans of an industry that maintains it's position by pandering to an audience of right wing fans- those who cannot handle 3D characters any more challenging than stereotypical racially defined ones- such as Salvatore Sincere, Iron Sheikh, and homophobic characters- such as Gorgeous George and Billy and Chuck: always used as heel for the right wing audience to boo because they have a lifestyle that does not please the fans. I suppose this post has been a long winded way of trying to challenge the belief that wrestling owes us a Liberal Perspective of life. I am suggesting that instead, the WWE exists purely in the form of what is fundamentally lowbrow entertainment (Hardly a shock) Therefore, necrophilia is not against the grain of the WWE/F's long term booking and writing strategy. Any person who expects the WWE to regret using necrophilia in an angle is sadly mistaken, they wouldn't, because they know that for every 9 necrophilia's, there will be one angle that takes off like the Steve Austin foul-mouthed gimmick, and the money is with controversy as it always has been. I hope this explains my position a little easier, and stops people rating me negatively due to a slightly clumsy point-making style.