Modern Skepticism is my way of explaining how I interpret the natural world through the disciplines of Philosophy, History, Language, Politics, and Economics. It is a polemically written blog that pulls no punches; so jab back and let's enjoy the ride!
Friday, May 24, 2019
Power-bombs and Feminism
To even the most casual of fans, the notion of extreme feminist thought pervading the WWE is obvious. Whether it was the ironic and feeble-minded pay-per-view Evolution, or the hyper-ironic women's match in Dubai between Alexa Bliss and Sasha Banks, the company and its product are rife with pathos and pseudo-solidarity. One segment even involved the C.O.O asking the female superstars to step forward on stage in what seemed like a simultaneously self-emancipating and self-glorifying presentation to proclaim their collective value and superiority. I am forced to believe that not all of the women were on board with this spectacle as it neglected the intra-female competition. However, the very nature of the political correctness is too simple to attack from the hackneyed "oh the men were disregarded and subverted" M.R.A approach; this is a female problem. I do not want to sound prophetic (nor do I think I am) but the consequences of actions like these cause young talent to desire a release. A paradoxical phenomenon occurs; the more one stresses and promotes the validity of the female universally, the more one obscures and negates the female individually.
Sports entertainment (specifically WWE) is unique not only in the steadfast adherence of its fan base, but its internal machinations and organizational structure. Obviously, it is one of the few athletic arenas in which the rivalries, performances, and outcomes are all overtly predetermined. One can debate about to what degree the content of matches and promos should be rehearsed and choreographed, but its calculation is essential. Thus, gimmicks and personas are contrived and modeled to reflect company interests and audiences' reception. One of the most ironic of the creative department's decisions (not including inconsequential and self-defeating semi-topless segments and various seductive female hotel scenes) is Becky Lynch's current epithet - The Man. It feels superfluous to explain the hypocrisy and stupidity of this invention. Just as the architect and members of the women's division demand egalitarian representation and consideration, the best conceivable vehicle for doing so becomes the propagation of a masculine character. This to me is completely anti-feminist and a sign of defeat. A more honest and confident attempt would have been "The Woman"; I digress. I am not here to petition for a job working alongside the likes of Vince Russo. Much like any other gimmick proposed or tried, the wrestling community has its detractors and its supporters. One rather shallow but not inexpensive point was Lynch's attempt to maintain such a character without actually realizing she isn't male. Stupid retorts such as "Not all nicknames are literal" usually constitute the defense. The point is entirely missed; she is endorsing the very belief against which she rails so intensely. That only traditional male personas can get over and resonate with the crowd. If she and other women want to defend and perpetuate their scapegoat, they are going to have to come up with one hell of a fine ad hoc rationalization.
Recent attempts to justify this have been made by new villains with whom the hottest babyface in the company can clash. Boringly and predictably, her main antagonist is a traditional Southern woman with an affinity for aesthetics, etiquette, and cattiness. Self-evidently, the only way a woman could disagree with Lynch's hilariously conformist and workaday attitude is if she is a blithering buffoon with Stockholm syndrome for nostalgic oppression. Even if one were to assume that such a conclusion was accurate and valid, it in the very least must acknowledge the schizophrenia going on within the organization and its ambassadors. Do you want to abide by the self-contradictory proposition of total inclusivity (within which a heel cannot exist, because you would have to endlessly vilify the contemporary Western ethos while trying to extract money from it. To paraphrase Jim Cornette - no one wants to pay to get their own ass kicked) or defy it and betray your principles?
Apocalyptic signs have already occurred for the world's largest wrestling conglomerate: risque quasi-nudity cannot co-exist with exclusively female promotions, I would love to see how Vinny Mac squares this circle within the squared-circle.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)