Should the gay gimmick be ridiculed

[Guest gearhead]

The question I'm asking in this thread is quite simple "Do you think the gay gimmick should be ridiculed at every possible opportunity?

 

In my honest opinion I think They should be ridiculed at every possible opportunity. Now don't go off flaming me, just bear with me. Acting gay makes you sick and disgusting. The most prominent current example of this is the portrayal of Rico, a flamboyant character who makes constant gay innuendo on the mic and in the ring. If you have read recent house shoe results, then you would have come across the comments that Hardcore Holly made during his match against Rico, if you don't know the comments I'll talk about it now. Hardcore Holly yelled out "Kill the queer!" while wrestling Rico at a recent house show. Is this a message that a character who hasn't clearly been established as face or heel be conveying to the audience? Even Rico's own tag partner, Charlie Haas, acts disgusted at Rico's actions. This might make sense if they were moving toward a feud in the not-too-distant future, but without any serious tag team challengers on the horizon, the act seems to be sending all negative messages.

 

Remember Billy and Chuck, they are probably the most infamous example of gay characters in the past (Someone correct me if I'm wrong). The WWE built up a storyline gay marriage between Billy and Chuck, I mean a "commitment ceremony," yet another example of WWE dancing around the subject, just like they do with Racism and Religion. The ceremony ended with Billy and Chuck revealing that they aren't really gay, which WWE apparently assumed would immediately turn them babyface, followed by Three Minute Warning beating both of them down. Was that a symbolic penance for their time as gay icons? Don't think so.

 

Sometimes this moves beyond pure storyline. John "Bradshaw" Layfield wrote in a recent column on WWE.com (At the start of May I think, someone correct me If I'm wrong) that those who criticize him are fat and gay. He ended with an insincere and stupid comment about not judging (Lol he contradicted his own column ). Some may try to argue that this was completely work, but anyone who has listened to, or read pretty much anything from Bradshaw has to wonder how much of this was shoot, if not all of it.

 

I'm not saying that WWE needs to present their gay characters as heroes for fans to emulate, but if WWE wants to take on such a complicated issue, they need to provide a more complex look at the issue, rather than the simple-minded, lacking direction-approach they take now. In fact, this applies to all of these issues. The problem isn't that WWE is dealing with them, but that they don't want to use them for anything more than a quick laugh or a cool look. They want all the advantages without any of the responsibility. IMO the WWE should either follow through or don't bother, because these half-cooked character elements don't do the wrestlers or their subject matter any justice.

 

Thoughts?

[Guest slacklet]

Remember Billy and Chuck, they are probably the most infamous example of gay characters in the past (Someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Gorgeous George (original, not WCW valet) was the first to introduce the concept of a flamboyant male character into wrestling.

 

He did that at a time when homosexuality was far more taboo than it is now.

[Guest Trivia247]

Remember Billy and Chuck, they are probably the most infamous example of gay characters in the past (Someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Gorgeous George (original, not WCW valet) was the first to introduce the concept of a flamboyant male character into wrestling.

 

He did that at a time when homosexuality was far more taboo than it is now.

Um Adrian Adonis you bunch o Youngins who didn't watch wrestling till Tyson went to Mania.

[nl5xsk1 0]

Acting gay makes you sick and disgusting.

 

Is it acting gay that you think makes someone sick and disgusting, or being gay?

[Guest slacklet]

Remember Billy and Chuck, they are probably the most infamous example of gay characters in the past (Someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Gorgeous George (original, not WCW valet) was the first to introduce the concept of a flamboyant male character into wrestling.

 

He did that at a time when homosexuality was far more taboo than it is now.

Um Adrian Adonis you bunch o Youngins who didn't watch wrestling till Tyson went to Mania.

Gorgeous George...1940's and 1950's...Legend...

 

Was Adrian Adonis even born then?

[Guest Trivia247]

Acting gay makes you sick and disgusting.

 

Is it acting gay that you think makes someone sick and disgusting, or being gay?

love that broad generalization.... acting gay makes YOU sick... you meaning everyone other than him assuming we just can't get past the fact its a goofy gimmick.

[Guest Trivia247]

Remember Billy and Chuck, they are probably the most infamous example of gay characters in the past (Someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Gorgeous George (original, not WCW valet) was the first to introduce the concept of a flamboyant male character into wrestling.

 

He did that at a time when homosexuality was far more taboo than it is now.

Um Adrian Adonis you bunch o Youngins who didn't watch wrestling till Tyson went to Mania.

Gorgeous George...1940's and 1950's...Legend...

 

Was Adrian Adonis even born then?

wasn't referring to you.

 

since you busted out the GG referance.

[Scroby 0]

I'm not excatly sure where you were going with your points. Are you saying Gay's shouldn't be represented at all because some wrestlers have problems with homosexuals or are you saying that if a homosexual is being gimmicked he/she should be in more serious role?

[Lil' Bitch 0]

Difference is when Goldust did it, it was sick and disturbing back then. Almost 10 years later, when Rico does it, the audience...likes it. Well, they pop for it anyway.

Goldust never really acted gay much in the ring when the ring one he turned face, Rico didn't change one bit, if anything he got even MORE flamboyant.

 

I can't wait for Rico to finally drop the gimmick and get something else (or back to the Tiger suit). I never liked to begin with.

 

Evil Stylist > Adrian Street II

[Guest Trivia247]

Difference is when Goldust did it, it was sick and disturbing back then. Almost 10 years later, when Rico does it, the audience...likes it. Well, they pop for it anyway.

Goldust never really acted gay much in the ring when the ring one he turned face, Rico didn't change one bit, if anything he got even MORE flamboyant.

 

I can't wait for Rico to finally drop the gimmick and get something else (or back to the Tiger suit). I never liked to begin with.

 

Evil Stylist > Adrian Street II

well there is also subtle differences between Goldust and Rico.

 

Rico seems to grope his opponents almost out of some giddy light hearted way. Its funny and its transparently obvious that its to get under their skin

 

When Goldust debut and really cranked up his gimmick, it wasn't light hearted because he was also a vicious wrestler.. It was more like Molestation.

And that almost takes outside the realm of hetro/homosexual issues as its becomes more of control and dominance.

[jester 0]

Wrestling audiences tend to be very... simplistic in their views.

 

"Introducing first, from a PLACE THAT'S NOT AMERICA, wrestler X!"

 

"BOOOO!"

 

I'd like to see that menality go. Unfortunately, it's probably going to hang around for a good long while.

 

When it comes to homosexuality, some audiences can be very hostile, but queer culture is rapidly getting more acceptable and mainstream. It will eventually filter down to wrestling. Will it happen to tomorrow? No. But eventually.

 

I personally think that Billy & Chuck were a huge wasted opportunity. The gay community was taking notice, and Vince had an audience interested in wrestling that never had been interested in it before. What did he do? SWERVE! That basically said to the gay community that it was all a big con, and boy, don't you look stupid for believing it?

 

"Yep, we sure did," said the gay media, and now ignore everything Vince does.

 

Vince, gay couples have a very hard time adopting children. That means that they tend to build up large amounts of DISPOSIBLE INCOME, which they could spend on DVDs, PPVs, house shows, you name it.

 

All they had to do is keep them together as a pretend gay tag team. Just like actors playing a role.

[Guest Goodear]

Metaphors and stereotypes are great fodder for wrestling in general and the WWE in particular. Just like any entertainment medium, wrestling takes things that are generally in the news and uses them in order to move product and tell stories. Sure the execution is normally incredibly lacking due to the poor writing and acting but it is still a simple way to get the casual audience into a character. Eugene for instance, if he was the strait-laced grappler everyone here seemed to want him to be would be in the same position Danny Basham finds himnself in now. But playing to a gimmick and putting out decent performances allows Dinsmore to be 10 times as popular as he would be otherwise. Gimmicks give people a reason to buy in, and then the performances decide how well the worker will get over. Suffice to say, playing a gay character is no better and no worse than anything else that the WWE might put out.

[TheBigSwigg 0]

Has everyone forgotten the unforgettable Lodi and Lenny in WCW?? They were a gay tag team before Chuck was even in WCW. They did it well, and the fans seemed to like it.

 

Also, not quite sure about Gorgeous George being gay. I think he was more of a prima donna. I've only seen two matches with him in it, though, so I'm not necessarily an authority there.

[Jobber of the Week 0]

Vince, gay couples have a very hard time adopting children. That means that they tend to build up large amounts of DISPOSIBLE INCOME, which they could spend on DVDs, PPVs, house shows, you name it.

 

All they had to do is keep them together as a pretend gay tag team. Just like actors playing a role.

Billy and Chuck were the epitome of the overly-flamboyant stereotype that a quiet majority of gay people want to get away from.

 

Only the people in the assless chaps marching down Main Street once a year are interested in being painted as low as Billy & Chuck were acting.

[King Cucaracha 0]

I got no problem with Rico's act really, except when too much 'flesh' is shown.

 

Trouble is, it's not being explained well enough. Tazz and Cole mention that 'Rico can wrestle when he wants to' and that he's a 'tough guy'. They should be saying that Rico's acting flamboyant simply to freak people out and to get people's attention. And they should emphasise that every chance they get. That way, the Rico character isn't simply a gay character...it's more one of a cunning wrestler.

 

 

And Holly is a jackass anyway. It's not like his 'comments' are worth a dime, in the ring or out.

[tbondrage99 0]

I think that if the person is protrayed as a stere-typical flaming gay guy then sure, but if the person just comes out and says hes gay but still acts as any person should (Including real life gay guys) then no I dont think the person should be booed at all, gay people are no different then anyone else you see walking the streets, the only difference is there sexual preferance, so should a person who just so happens to come out and say there gay be ridiculed? Hell no.

[Guest Loss]

Wrestling has never had a gay character. They've just had several gay gimmicks. If they actually developed a gay character, who knows, it may take them somewhere they've never been. I don't think now is the time to try something like that though, considering that they don't even have a full grasp of how to do the basics.

[iggymcfly 0]

I really do wish that the WWE would get rid of all the "cheap heat" gimmicks, that work to pop a live crowd, but look tiresome and embarrassing on TV. This includes Rico, Rikishi, La Resistance, the Hurricane, and the current incarnation of Val Venis.

 

I'm not saying gimmicks are bad per se, as they can be a very effective tool to get a wrestler over. For example, a character such as Eugene that leaves room for emotional depth, and a variety of responses works fine. In much the same way, the original Kane, Undertaker, and Mankind all were effective money-drawing characters.

 

However, when we have "this man's flamboyantly gay, that's just hilarious, laugh at him!" or "this team is flamboyantly French, they're Unamerican, boo them!" or "he just put his ass in someone's face AGAIN, that's hilarious, laugh!", it demeans the audience as a whole, and makes people embarrassed to watch wrestling.

[Slickster 0]

I agree 100% with iggymcfly and jester here. Back during the Billy and Chuck angle, Josh Grutman of 411mania wrote an EXCELLENT article about the gay gimmick and one *good* way it could be done.

 

Here's the full article, but I've included some excerpts below:

 

Billy and Chuck have been the most talked about wrestlers in the media since Hulk Hogan returned. Billy and Chuck have actually garnered more mainstream coverage then Hogan, and their wedding is comparable to the media attention the death of Owen Hart received. I heard a K-Rock DJ announce on Monday Night that Billy and Chuck would be getting married on Smackdown tonight, and it was disgusting. Although I have not read them or heard them, a lot of other media outlets have bashed the angle with similar reasoning. The one friend the angle had was GLAAD, and I’m sure they’ll be pretty miffed when it turns out that Billy and Chuck are straight.

 

I guess that’s my biggest problem with the angle. The WWE has all of these critics right now because two homosexuals are being married on the show, and on Thursday night the homosexuals are going to turn out to not be homosexuals. You think anyone who has bashed the WWE about this will run a story about how the gay guys suddenly turned straight and were attacked by the Island Boys? ....Two men not getting married isn’t a story, unless you’re an outraged, misled member of the gay media.

 

They should have kept Billy and Chuck gay. They should have been proclaimed Husband and Husband. They should have shared a long, passionate kiss and Vince should have smiled as steam physically came out of Bozell’s ears. Instead they went the coward’s route, pissing off their friends on the issue (GLAAD) in an attempt to placate their enemies who couldn’t really give a crap. GLAAD deserved better.

 

One out of every ten people are gay. These people are not villains, but they have never been represented as anything but villains in wrestling. A guy who dug up his parents’ bodies and his brother who actually killed his parents [ed: Kane and the Undertaker, respectively] are both good guys right now, but being gay is the ultimate sin in wrestling. Is this because the fans are so hate filled and homophobic that they couldn’t cheer for a gay character? I believe the answer to that is no. ....The homosexual is not the bad guy. How about the Birdcage? Were you rooting against Robin Williams and Nathan Lane?

 

No, the problem isn’t the audience. This is the year 2002. The straight male audience might not want to see two men having anal sex, but they’d have no problem accepting a gay wrestler as a good guy, so long as he was a good guy first and a gay wrestler second.

 

Here's my favorite part of the article because it's actually feasible (albeit with a different person now):

Therefore, allow me to offer up a suggestion that I think would work as a way to make this up to GLAAD.

 

Make John Cena gay.

 

The man has no gimmick anymore. He’s wallowing in mid-card hell. Imagine if he went on a winning streak and was prepared to challenge Lesnar for the World Title, but Heyman told the world he knew a secret about Cena and would tell the world if Cena fought Lesnar. Then Cena didn’t show up for his match against Brock, and the next few weeks he became Paul Heyman’s errand boy, helping Brock win matches and what not. Then during a Brock Lesnar beat down of, oh, I don’t know, Shannon Moore, Cena snapped and attacked Brock Lesnar, and Heyman says he’ll reveal the secret next week unless John Cena quits the WWE.

 

Next week comes, and Cena has apparently quit, but during the Brock/Paul interview Cena comes out in more ways then one. First he challenges Brock for a title shot at the next PPV. Then he announces that he doesn’t care about the consequences, he’s going to tell the fans the truth right now, and he believes in his heart that they’ll still respect him. He then tells the crowd that he’s gay. I imagine the sound would be something like, “YEAH! WOOO! CENA! WE LOVE YOU NO MATTER WHAT, YOU CAN TELL US! YEAH… oh. Um, hmm. Okay. Uh, boo?”

 

As the crowd is deciding what to think, Brock Lesnar begins to laugh. Cena then beats the holy crap out of him and Paul. In another interview, Cena tells the crowd that will probably be booing him that he didn’t want them to find out because he didn’t want them to hate him. He says that his home life is his home life and that he’s the same person he always was, only one with a huge load off his shoulders. He goes on like this for the next few weeks, occasionally saving a face from a Lesnar beat down, but the face is never appreciative of Brock’s help.

 

Right before the PPV, Lesnar is beating down the Rock or Hogan or someone with that leverage and Cena comes down to help, only to get beat down by Lesnar. The Rock or Hogan or maybe the Undertaker gets up and kick Brock’s ass out of the ring. Then he raises John Cena’s hand, stopping short of hugging the guy.

[dubq 0]

Here's my favorite part of the article because it's actually feasible (albeit with a different person now):

Therefore, allow me to offer up a suggestion that I think would work as a way to make this up to GLAAD.

 

Make John Cena gay.

I wouldn't be surprised if he actually is..

[nl5xsk1 0]

Wrestling has never had a gay character. They've just had several gay gimmicks. If they actually developed a gay character, who knows, it may take them somewhere they've never been. I don't think now is the time to try something like that though, considering that they don't even have a full grasp of how to do the basics.

Hey, people are always looking for Paul London to get more TV-time ...

[Slickster 0]

Seriously, though, I like that fantasy booking. It's a perfectly logical storyline and it wouldn't lead to Wrestler X acting like Lenny Lane the next week. Cause unless I'm *really* out of the loop, most gay guys don't act/dress like that all the time.

[Slickster 0]

Hey, people are always looking for Paul London to get more TV-time ...

You know, I was thinking the same thing....and it *could* work.

[JustJoe2k5 0]

Spanky would've been better.

[Guest Dazed]

Spanky would've been better.

 

Not with a hetrosexual name like "Spanky"

[King Cucaracha 0]

One out of every ten people are gay. These people are not villains, but they have never been represented as anything but villains in wrestling.

 

Rico=face. Goldust was face towards the end of his run in 1997.

 

Right before the PPV, Lesnar is beating down the Rock or Hogan or someone with that leverage and Cena comes down to help, only to get beat down by Lesnar. The Rock or Hogan or maybe the Undertaker gets up and kick Brock’s ass out of the ring. Then he raises John Cena’s hand, stopping short of hugging the guy.

 

Yes, the 'stopping short of hugging the guy' would make Cena seem PERFECTLY normal...right?

[Slayer 0]

Here's my favorite part of the article because it's actually feasible (albeit with a different person now):

Therefore, allow me to offer up a suggestion that I think would work as a way to make this up to GLAAD.

 

Make John Cena gay.

I wouldn't be surprised if he actually is..

No way.

 

Someone who calls everyone else gay certainly can't be gay himself

[Slickster 0]

Yes, the 'stopping short of hugging the guy' would make Cena seem PERFECTLY normal...right?

Well, just because he's gay doesn't mean that all the other wrestlers are totally comfortable with it. They respect him, but they're not going to be all lovey-dovey with him. This can help with character development over the next several months (ie Wrestler X earns the respect/trust of skeptical/uncomfortable faces).

 

Besides, its not like all the hetero faces are hugging each other all the time anyway.

[notJames 0]

Sure they do. Benoit has hugged men on three separate occasions that I can think of: EDDY~! at WMXX, Edge after they won the tag belts, and Eugene on this past RAW. I'm sure there's countless others.

 

Nevertheless, expecting Vince and Co. to craft a well thought out characterization of a gay wrestler is akin to asking Holly to job to Booker T in a squash (if the rumours are true ). Wrestling will always cater to the lowest common denominator, so as it has been historically, "gay" characters will be portrayed as the swishy, effeminate stereotype that has ingrained itself in the average fan's mindset.

[jester 0]

 

All they had to do is keep them together as a pretend gay tag team. Just like actors playing a role.

Billy and Chuck were the epitome of the overly-flamboyant stereotype that a quiet majority of gay people want to get away from.

According to the Wrestlecrap book, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) supported the angle, going so far as to give Billy and Chuck a wedding gift.

 

I have no doubt that some gay people saw Billy & Chuck offensive. But I personally thought they were no more stereotypical than the 100,000 % Stereotype Through and Through gay characters they had on Sex & the City.