Honestly, you guys need to give up wrestling, tune in to figure skating and turn in your man-cards.
A lot of people have come after my man-card. Afterwards, they walk away, and I promise to give them their own card back later if they learn a lesson from the whole experience. So, here we go.
If WWE really wanted to promote women's wrestling, they'd stop booking them as Divas. Just calling them that instead of women or dare I say SUPERSTARS automatically objectifies them.
First, we have the non sequitur that women's professional wrestling cannot be successful under the moniker "Divas". We then have a complete and total ignorance of how this whole debate started; that fans have started this social media thing about giving the WWE Divas a chance, because fans are recognizing that the WWE really isn't promoting women's wrestling.
OK, we're two paragraphs in, and so far your argument consists of telling people who don't agree with you that they aren't really men, followed by demonstrating that you aren't even paying attention to the issue under discussion- or at best, are five steps behind the rest of the discussion.
My favorite phrase, "Let's Face Facts". It let you know that someone's about to provide a personal opinion and present it as an unarguable statement.
Aside from a few panty-wipes, nobody cares about the purity and sport of women's wrestling.
BOOM! And there it is! Not only is it an unsupported personal opinion, you also jumped back to paragraph one to tell people that disagree with you that you don't think they're men. A galloping start, sir!
Even in May Young's day, they were side-shows to attract the prurient interests of the crowd.
In Rosa Parks' day, black people weren't allowed to sit in the front of the bus. During the Irish Famine, "Irish Need Not Apply" signs were commonplace in America. Saying "we used to do it this way" is the
worst possible argument you can present when the argument under discussion is an examination of whether "we used to do it this way" is a good thing or not.
In the Trish and Lita era, nobody was talking about what kind of ring generals either of them were. Because let's face it, they weren't. They focused on the fact that Lita would do a moonsault, but that's because women historically were not very good wrestlers and a moonsault was very much out of their arsenal. In other words, they were pointing out that women aren't very good and so she's only good on an adjusted scale.
So what you're saying is that after two generations where female wrestlers were generally excluded from professional wrestling training and performing, that once the industry opened up a crack, female wrestlers started becoming popular despite their limited moveset. (Which might just have something to do with their being almost no female professional wrestlers for two generations.) As we all know, moveset is the MOST important thing to professional wrestling. It's what they work on in NXT. They'll take a guy from ROH, and say "we like all of that talking you do, but the WWE, what the WWE is about, is learning 750 different moves, and the combinations and reversals from each of them. Get to work."
And let's be perfectly clear, fans have said a lot worse to Lita and Trish than anything I heard Monday night. Their intentions there were to get under the skin of these broads. It's hazing them for giving the fans another shitty divas bout.
This is your third use of "these are facts" or "let's be clear" statements. If you want your man-card back, one of the things I'm going to insist upon is that you stop using those kind of statements. You cannot possibly have earned your man-card if you're telling people that you're full of shit before you finish your sentence.
It's also your second use of "people used to do this" argument in a "is how people used to do this alright?" discussion. Which seems to be the only argument you have; tell people you don't think they're men, say "let me be clear", and then say "but we did things like this before".
And by the way, there were howling guys in the stands when Ronda Rousey was getting her WM moment.
Hey, that guy jumped off a bridge! Jumping off bridges is clearly totally acceptable behavior! Seriously, what are you, eleven? Did your parents not explain to you that just because one person does something, doesn't mean it's acceptable that others do it?
Now as far as the people commenting that the men are not getting hazed or yelled sexually explicit comments to them. That's because MALES are the majority of the live audience. If women were the majority in the stands, I bet you there would be plenty of sexual obscenities yelled that them too.
Well, it's an "I'd bet", at least, instead of trying to tell us that this is clearly an inalienable fact that you'd have to be deliberately ignoring Facts not to see. I'll take that bet. What are the terms you're offering here? Is this like a legitimate bet, or one which you know that the conditions for can never be reached, so you don't have to worry about making the statements?
Here's what you can do if you want your man-card back. First, stop visiting the MRA and GamerGate subreddits. Everything you just said is a regurgitation- worse, a lousy regurgitation- of the arguments you can find on those pages.
Second, start trying to think of things in terms of "how would I like to be treated?", and apply that to others. A lot of people here get stuck with the "but if they didn't want this treatment, then......" argument, so I'll cut you (and them) off- that statement can be applied to
anyone. It's the "she was wearing a short skirt" for our generation; it's a deliberately glib statement which precludes the proponent from having to examine their position with any seriousness. If you do that for a while, you'll realize why we're at where we are as a country in terms of recognizing female, gay, and minority discrimination; a majority of people have examined their positions with seriousness, realized that the way they thought in the '90s no longer applies to the '10s (and probably wasn't all that great in the '90s, either), and have chosen to change their behavior accordingly.
Third, as previously stated, no more "Let's be clear" statements. It's in Manhood 101, if you're being clear and facing facts, you don't have to tell people that you are. It comes across naturally in an argument. A fact is something that anyone can look up on their own and confirm for themselves. If you have to present your opinions as facts, you're telling your audience that you don't have faith enough in your argument to allow it to do its own work.
Do this- and I'm not promising to give you your man-card back, you might not still deserve it- but I'll at least give you the chance to post without completely deconstructing every argument you make to reveal you for the idiot you are.
