Stuck in the Middle With You - A Gay Hypothetical

Stuck in the Middle With You - A Gay Hypothetical
Submitted by Da J-Train on Monday, July 26, 2004 at 1:36 AM EST

Welcome back to my column everyone. Well, how’s life for everyone on here? Things are going well here. I took the week off last week because my girlfriend came up from New Jersey and we spent the weekend together. I was thinking about writing a column and posting it anyway, but with the two jobs and Madden 2004 looming, and a possible visit to Auburn Correctional Facility (no, I’m not in trouble), I decided to take the week off. You know you missed me.

So what’s the story for this column? Why is it my “gay” column? Well, I am going to explore an issue that is a possible route I can see the WWE going in. I mean, chances are they won’t, but we’re talking hypothetical here. In fact, it may have already happened, and I just don’t know it, but be that as it may, I will ask anyway.

BUT FIRST...

Letters! I get Letters! I get sacks and sacks of Letters! LETTERS!!! That's right; it's time to answer some of my Love, Hate, Kind-Of-Care-For, and I-Only-Like-You-as-A-Friend-Mail… or at least the ones I look at amidst the emails that try to convince me that I have a small penis.

Feedback O Rama

Letter 1 :

Dear J,

In your most recent column you talked about how Ted DiBiase never held the WWF World Championship. While *technically* his reign was "erased" from the books prior to Wrestlemania 4 (the one with the tournament), DiBiase DID hold the Championship belt for several days. Here's the story, in case you forgot...

On Saturday Night Main Event, several weeks before the much-hyped Wrestlemania IV, Andre the Giant defeated then-World Champion, Hulk Hogan, with the aid of Ted DiBiase to win his first and only World Championship. Immediately following the match, DiBiase BOUGHT the Championship title from Andre, thus becoming the World Champion. Soon enough, in an effort to reverse this ridiculous and illegal transaction, then-President Jack Tunney announced that the title was to be stripped from DiBiase, and would be put up for grabs at the upcoming PPV spectacular in a tournament.

Ofcourse, as everyone knows, Hogan and Andre would be DQ'd during their first round showdown, leading up to Ted DiBiase earning a bye into the final round of the tournament. His challenge in the finals? "Macho Man" Randy Savage. Savage would go on to win the strap, but lose it one year later to his former compadre, the Hulkster, at Wrestlemania 5.

In closing, while DiBiase never *technically* "won" the strap in the ring, his millions of dollars earned him the title anyway. He did hold the Championship belt for a brief period before he was stripped of it. As for his IC title reign, I'm unsure when this was, but it was probably long before his gimmick even took off. DiBiase also held major titles in several regions of the NWA, and who can forget his World Tag Team title reigns with IRS (Mike Rotunda) as half of Money Inc.

Thanks,
Josh

Josh,

I did not know that story, not that you could blame me. I was about 1 years old when that happened, and I don’t delve into the history all that much. Maybe I just think that if it’s not in the books, it’s not official. Kind of like Owen Hart’s supposed World Title reign that lasted a night or something.

Be that as it may, I still think Ted DiBiase would have been a good champ if given the chance. He still goes down as my favorite heel of all time.

Letter 2 :

Having Eric Bischoff and Paul Heyman jointly run the company has its ups-and-downs, and the idea makes me more than a little nervous.

My view on things is that the ups would be that odds are we would be witness to many things that would not be possible with the McMahons still there. But the downs (well, really one down, but it's a big one) are that each one's downfall came from a mutual flaw: overspending. As I recall, Heyman got to the point where he couldn't afford his own payroll, and one thing that got Bischoff ousted in the first place (first place being September 1999) was overly-huge salaries.

With those in mind, I wonder if each would want to go for it if the situation arose. I'm thinking Heyman would be more up for it than Bischoff would. As we know, Bischoff has seen not one, but TWO companies fold, the second after practically putting his heart and soul into it.

On a side note, I would like to know more about the final years of the AWA, if possible. I've heard time and again about how Bischoff was actually the last guy to run the company, how it was already doomed by that point, and how the downfall of territories led to the downfall of the AWA. I'm thinking there has to be more to the story, and I'd like to know what. Do you know anything about this time, and if not, can you give me advice on where I'd likely find such information?

Mike

Mike,

See, I thought of the overspending when it comes to both men, and I honestly think that they would be better this time around. I personally don’t know much about the AWA’s problems with Bischoff, but my argument is that they would HAVE to be kept in check if they were to ever take over. Why? The WWE is a publicly traded company. My way of thinking is that there are much more investors in current WWE than in WCW, ECW, or the AWA. Therefore, considering the sake of the investors, I think the spending of Bischoff and Heyman would be closely regulated and looked at.

Therefore, their mutual weakness would be countered, and they could be free to have a second chance, or third in the case that Bischoff’s AWA history is true.

Letter 3 :

What does the title really have to do with people liking John Cena? People will still tune in to see him and still buy his merchandise, title or no title. In fact, even more people may tune in to see what he does about it, or how he's going to get it back. Also, some other stars need a chance to shine, people complain about how WWE isn't putting John Cena in the main event status, and as soon as he loses his mid-card title people get upset. Maybe this is the start of his main event push? And if you feel he should be rewarded because of how much he sells, then why don't you think of this. Triple H, is one of the biggest sellers in the WWE, he's a great worker and he has excellent mic work, rather you want to admit it or not, and WWE rewards him for it, by giving him so much say in his character, and giving him the championship possibly more than any other superstar, and you guys get pissed, you say other people need a chance to shine. I love your column, and other work of columnists here at LOP, but sometimes you guys just piss me off when you view everything that the WWE does as negative, and a lot of the times your negativety is hypocritical. All I'm saying is that, before you guys are so quick to say something negative about the WWE, take a minute to really think about it, and try to think of the good that can come out of an angle, if nothing can come out of the angle, like the Lita, Matt, and Kane angle then please, feel free to trash it but sometimes things in WWE get trashed when they're really not that bad. Well, I'm done and thank you for taking the time to read this feedback.

Pattitude619

Thanks for the email Pat, but I have to disagree with you. My rant about the Cena situation is not a case of Internet Negativity; it’s a case of plain old criticism. Criticism is making a positive or negative judgment based on what you have seen or what has already transpired due to observations or inferences. Internet Negativity is so much different… that happens when it is blind bashing, biased ranting, or any of the other wonderful things the IWC does.

For example… when Tyson Tomko debuted, many people wrote him off as an untalented hoss who was probably green. Many claimed that he had no talent before he even wrestled an official match in the WWE. THAT is Internet Negativity. Now, the people who say that, AFTER his first official, it is considered a criticism, unless there is personal bias toward that character.

I think what I said was a criticism because at the time the comment was written; there really was no logic in the decision to strip Cena of the title. He was without a defining feud for the title itself, and the decision was made by Kurt Angle, who flip flops between him and Guerrero in feuds, which could confuse viewers. Also, I was criticizing the move because at the time I wrote the comment, the best odds for the new champion would be Kenzo Suzuki or Luther Reigns… two guys who haven’t earned shit, and one who is a terrible wrestler. At that time, it seemed as if his Booker T feud ended and RVD and Rene Dupree were no where in sight, yet it seemed as if the title would go to either Luther or Kenzo. I was wrong, but I don’t think that’s a case of internet negativity… merely me criticizing an angle that I didn’t like.

To be honest, I still don’t like it. I was all for giving Booker T the title, which he seems to have right now, but if you were going to give Booker the title, why not just give it to him on the Smackdown when Cena got it stripped by having him legitimately beat him? I mean, think about it… by giving Booker T the title now, doesn’t it make the last 2-3 weeks a little irrelevant? I don’t know, but hey, that’s just my opinion

Well, that’s that. Enjoy the rest of the column.

A Gay Hypothetical

Just think about this for a second… what if there was a gay wrestler… who actively wrestled in the WWE… and it was well known by all fans and the world that the wrestler was gay. Not necessarily as a gimmick, but more as an example of art reflecting reality, meaning, I would hate for the WWE to take an OVW and make him the “gay” wrestler, like they did with Eugene, who isn’t really retarded. I’m talking about a man who is gay in real life and was outed as such in the WWE. I’m wondering if it could work.

I know what you may be thinking… there have been borderline gay characters in the WWE before. Rico, Billy and Chuck, evenGoldust in his early confrontations with Ahmed Johnson and Razor Ramon. I’m not talking about that. Those were characters designed to either entertain with tongue-in-cheek homoerotic references, or possibly to reinforce the apparent bizarreness and stereotypes of homosexuality. I’m not talking about that stuff. I’m not talking about Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, I’m talking about Tom Hanks in Philadelphia… minus the AIDS.

Seriously though, what if there was a normal wrestler who had good all around skills in wrestling, didn’t act flamboyant or “fruity” in any way, but he ended up being gay in life and in character? I don’t know of any time in the WWE when this type of character existed, short of Pat Patterson, but they only alluded to his real life sex choice. So, if I’m wrong, don’t shoot me. Could I be way far off as to think that this wrestler could be one of the most interesting characters in the WWE? I personally can’t believe that the WWE hadn’t already thought of it. After all, there was a lot of talk about gays in the media in the last year with popular television shows, outed celebrities, and marriages.

One of the reasons I think that this wrestler would be interesting is because it would force the audience to make their own decision about how to approach the wrestler as a fan standpoint. An audience member could choose to go along with the storylined role of the wrestler and cheer him if he’s a face and boo if he’s a heel, or they can cheer or boo him based on their own personal feelings on homosexuality. If a wrestler outed himself on WWE TV, the audience would truly dictate the popularity of that wrestler. They could either accept him or boo him unmercifully. I truly don’t think the reaction would be the same for each crowd either.

Say, for example, the wrestler in question, for the moment, he is face, is being harassed by a heel faction such as Evolution for his sexual orientation. This is a storyline that would be realistic given the circumstances. Would the crowd boo Evolution for harassing a man over something like sexual orientation, or would the crowd cheer the Heels for harassing a gay man? To be honest, I think this character would be a statement in where gays lie in terms of popularity and acceptance.

I’m not trying to paint wrestling fans as homophobes… so don’t think that I am. The fact is, though, that homosexuality is a much debated issue, and everyone seems to have a stance on how they view it. I personally have no problem with it. So, what I am trying to say is that how the audience would take to the wrestler in Philly may be different than Boston. Why? Because it’s a different crowd with different people, and the odds are that the crowds would have different views.

So what if there was a gay wrestler in the WWE? A serious gay wrestler, who doesn’t try for laughs by grabbing other guys’ asses and doesn’t perpetuate a stereotype, he just wrestles. Would you boo him? Cheer him? Accept him? Reject him? Would you go by the storylined role that he is given or would you cheer or boo based on your own personal view of gays?

I’d like to say that I could see this in the WWE, but I don’t think it would be. If this character is portrayed the way I described, it would probably show the federation in a positive light media wise. It may even lead to awards from GLAAD. However, it could also alienate viewers who refuse to tune into a federation that seems to accept a controversial lifestyle and promote it on their shows. I know I would like to see it, simply to see the crowd reaction it receives. But hey, maybe this sort of thing would be a little bit too real for the WWE.

Random Stops Along the Way

I’m looking forward to Raw’s Iron man Match, but I don’t like the rumored long term fate of the WWE title. Rumor has it that Randy Orton will win the strap. I’m not so sure I am behind this decision if it were to transpire. As much of a fan I am of Orton’s, I still think he should continue his role as a strong midcarder, like The Rock was before his eventual title. It would really help the Intercontinental Division on Raw.

I loved the ending to Smackdown last week, and I am looking forward to this week’s edition. Despite my feelings on the John Cena angle, I think Smackdown has really improved as opposed to a month ago. Hell, I am so optimistic as to say that I think John Heidenreich may work the second time around, because of his involvement with Paul Heyman.

Akio and Sakoda were sent down. This kind of worries me. Sure, Sakoda seemed as if he needed the work, and let’s face it, Akio really does wow move wise, but not emotion wise… but I am just worried that there is another intention in the demotion. After all… Sean O’Haire was sent down to OVW to work on his wrestling, and a few weeks later he was released. I hope that this doesn’t happen, because I like both wrestlers.

We were all asking an important question for a while. It seemed unlikely to ever be answered. We all got our answer on Monday Night. Apparently, the adequate training regimen for a Super Hero in Training is around one year. So, I am now announcing a leave of absence from LOP, so I can train and come back in a year as J-Train Man, Defender of Columnists Everywhere. Nah, that’s stupid, and I’m lazy… scratch that.

Well, it’s about that time again…

Free Flowing Hostility: Minor cultural items I am Bored With, Tired Of, and Pissed At.

I’ve only got one thing that really pissed me off this week… and that is…

1. Everything Happens for a Reason

Good lord do I hate this cop out. That’s all it is, a cop out. It’s just an excuse for people to say something in the event that they don’t have anything else to say. Have you ever been in a situation where life is dealing you a crappy hand, and someone decides to comfort you by saying… everything happens for a reason. I have news for you assholes… it’s NOT COMFORTING! Look, I appreciate the fact that you are TRYING to comfort me with this, but it doesn’t help. Ever. Why can’t people just be honest and say, hey, it sucks that you got shafted or I’m sorry for your misfortune, there’s really nothing I can say that’ll make it better, so I guess I’ll just have to be here for you if you need me. That’s a lot better than saying everything happens for a reason.

Seriously, how cold is that? That’s like saying… hey, I care about what you are saying, and so let me change the subject because it’s not going anywhere. Everything happens for a reason is a good excuse for stuff like love, but not tragedy. I have a friend whose father passed away a few months ago at a young age due to cancer. I wouldn’t dare tell him that everything happens for a reason, and if I did, I would have followed it up with… now please punch me in the face. The next time someone cops out on you by saying that, look them in the eye, and say, ok asshole, since you’re so wise… tell me the reason… and they will never know.

The Caboose

What did we learn today?

We learned the difference between Internet Negativity and good old fashioned criticism. Oh trust me, I’ll probably be back with a whole column about that shit.
We learned that it takes a little over a year for a Superhero to Train... wait a minute… why is it that it takes around a year for a superhero to train in the WWE and it takes about 5 minutes in the movies? Elapsed time can do wonders!
Finally, we learned that about 8 times out of 10, Everything Happens for a Reason is just a cop out, and people who say it deserve to be punched in the testicles or ovaries… case depending.

That’s it for this week… You know the drill.

----------------------------------------- Da J-Train -------------------------------------

merlinJAP@hotmail.com (If you email me, put FEEDBACK in the email subject or it will be deleted)

AIM: JPAW101…. Feel free to talk to me, I am friendly and give good hugs!

Tons of Backstage No Mercy News: Comedy Segments Cut from PPV, What Match WWE Officials Didn't Like, More Injuries, HBK, MORE!

Quick Links -
[Back to LOP] [News Archives] [Results] [Columns] [Forums]