Thread: WWE Sexist?
View Single Post
Old 08-19-2010, 09:46 AM   #2
Next Big Thing
 
Next Big Thing's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,839
Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)Next Big Thing has a relatively large amount of rep (50,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Guycott View Post
NBT asked: "Is Playboy sexist for not wanting to put women that look like the offspring of Whoopie Goldberg and Barbara Walters on the cover?"

No, but they also don't tell a beautiful supermodel "Hey, you can't be in our magazine because you suck at math." Sure, it would be a plus if she were smart, but in the end, the product Playboy produces IS entirely image. With this example applied to the argument, a woman's wrestling ability- and I'm speaking wrestlers, not valets- should be the "looks", and their looks should be the "math". In a wrestling match, I'd rather see a Jazz than a Lacey Von Erich, although by standards of looks, Lacey would make the superior arm charm.
Next Big Thing is offline   Reply With Quote