sad

[sidewalksparkle]

It's now officially too depressing to have an entire entry about my murder of the mommy spider as the most recent.

So I shall write about another really depressing thing: the Jackson Katz documentary "Wrestling With Manhood," about the WWF (now the WWE). It was a very frightening movie. AAR hosted it, so it was mostly AAR people in the audience, with a few scattered others. The movie was about the skewed perspective of "manliness" given by the WWE shows and about the homophobia they cause and the intense psychological and physical degradation of women present in these programs. It freaked me out. I've never gotten into wrestling and I don't really have friends who like it (at least, none who have watched it around me), so I'd only been exposed to tiny snippets of the wrestling shows. It all looked fake and silly, and I knew it had a huge following, but I'd never really paid attention to the thousands of people in this country (male and female, toddlers to old people) who like to get off on a woman being forced to apologize for something by taking off her clothes, getting on her hands and knees, and barking like a dog. Or a big guy yelling "Bitch!" and picking somebody up and throwing her across the room. Or the two "gay wrestlers" getting mimicked and taunted and brutalized as if they were subhuman. It's sick. Or a 20-something pretending she really liked the forced, aggressive kiss from a man who looked 40 years her senior. Or a guy pouching on another guy for the sake of breaking a huge table, or a piece of wood, or for the sake of making "blood" gush everywhere.

I don't really understand how a woman would decide she was willing to become one of the Divas, or female wrestling characters. I don't know how you make the transition from regular woman to breast-implanted, jaw-reformated (in the case of Chyna), slut-for-everybody-to-toss-around, objectified gladiator toy. Maybe there's some rush involved, or a lot of money, or something. Definitely not worth it.

After one depiction of faked (yet realistic) abuse between two married characters after the supposed infidelity of the wife (who happens to be the actual, real-life daughter of Vince McMahon, the sick man who runs the WWE), fans were interviewed saying "She had it coming," "She deserved it," etc. It was sad to see teenage boys saying this stuff, but even worse were the women and girls who looked to be about my age. Were they just so glad that they were on the sidelines, so glad they weren't the ones being called sluts, that they honestly couldn't see that the woman out there was one of "them" (meaning one of their own gender)?

Yes, we love our big fake boobs and our fake blood and our fake pain in this great nation. Especially since there are lots of impressionable (stupid?) people out there willing to replicate the entire experience in a horrifyingly real way. I don't think these people on these shows realize how much of a backward impact they are having on society. Or else they do realize it and enjoy the power it gives them.

Comments

jumping into debates is fun! :)

[peaceofpie.livejournal.com]

I disagree with the premise that moral arguments are the exclusive territory of conservatives. I think an important step to understanding others' perspectives is realizing that all opinions have some root in perceived morality or lack thereof.

Re: jumping into debates is fun! :)

[padraiceen.livejournal.com]

Ahhh, but my point was that arguments based on moral opinions or choices have no place in debate - an appeal-to-morality fallacy is just that, for the simple reason that morals differ from person to person, and thus a valid and convincing logical argument can never be based on morals. Deciding something for yourself based on your own morals is one thing, but trying to convince someone that something is wrong because it is immoral would require that you convince the other person that your morals are correct (which is something of which both radical liberals and radical conservatives are consistently guilty, no?).

Re: jumping into debates is fun! :)

[peaceofpie.livejournal.com]

Indeed. My assertion is that all arguments are, to some extent, based on someone's moral opinion. A convincing argument ought to be supported with facts, but I can't think of any reason why someone would go to the trouble of putting together a convincing argument unless they believed they were, to some degree, right. And "rightness" is a moral concept.

I'm Danni, by the way. *shakes your hand*

Re: jumping into debates is fun! :)

[padraiceen.livejournal.com]

This is a difficult argument without a good definition of "moral", really.

I think one can pursue an action which has elements that offends one's morals, yet which is a right action. For example: I disagree on a moral level with the concept of abortion. However, I also disagree with taking away the right to have them. So, my course of action is determined what I believe to be moral, but rather, what I believe to be right. My morals aren't relevant for you or anyone else, really, so I can't argue a position in a logical debate based on those.

Besides, most people have conflicting morals, which makes morals even harder to use as the centerpiece of an argument.

I'm Patrick, as my replies should indicate. I've known Katie for, what, four years, now? :D

Re: jumping into debates is fun! :)

[sidewalksparkle.livejournal.com]

Yep, it's been since 2000 or 2001...I wonder if we'll ever meet in person someday. :)

Re: jumping into debates is fun! :)

[padraiceen.livejournal.com]

Having E there is a requirement.

Re: jumping into debates is fun! :)

[sidewalksparkle.livejournal.com]

Yeah! That would be fun. Maybe I'll go to New England someday!