Wow... I learned a lot from that page. The main point to me was that the bald man in the black underpants with the black boots and black knee braces really likes to tell people to f*ck off! God bless institutions of higher learning.
Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery. -Malcom X
Originally posted by dMpWow...that's quite surprising.. 50 episodes.. 50 incidents of wrestlers beating referees. Only 50 incidents? I wonder how many of these are wrestlers shoving Hebner and him shoving back..
Are these the same stats that Foley quoted, which included X-Pac's entrance video when it referred to "Point at their crotch"?
...full of energy. Multi-orgasmic, if you will, in a cosmic sort of way."
Yes, I believe it is the same study. Being a grad student attending an Indiana University campus, I can say that this is definitely not the first time that IU has used an alleged "study" to try to make political hay. IU's main campus in Bloomington is home to the Kinsey institute for sexuality research. Ironically, in light of the report on pro wrestling, the Kinsey institute is at the forefront of trying to get pedophilia defined as a lifestyle choice rather than a form of child abuse.
In any case, the IU report on wrestling, from what I've seen of it, is simplistic to the point of being without scholarly worth. Enough scholarly work has been done on pro wrestling (usually from a cultural studies point of view) to demonstrate that it does hold significance beyond the knee-jerk "won't somebody please think of the children" aspect.
Sorry to ramble. The politicization of scholarship is one of my pet peeves.
Bishoplaud (terrific handle for your locale, interests, scholarly status), great post. And that's NOT rambling! (Some of MY posts, sure-- they ramble.) Welcome to go on at that length or longer, esp. when it's informative and on point like that.
Politicization of scholarship? A major problem. Another one: political 'scholarship,' where there was never any chance the individual's thought or research was going to pass muster among the educated. How many more Presidential advisers/cabinet members are going to be drawn from the furshluggner Hoover 'Institute' at Stanford before one of 'em is made to stand and deliver? (Obviously, the answer is 'tons,' as we get one president every half century who's equipped to evaluate the people handed to him as advisers by his/her corporate controllers.)
M. Cole: Oh no, what's Angle going to do with that chair. Tazz: Well, I think he wants to, you know, HIT HIM with it.
That's a great point. A lot of these "institutes" are the product of a way of thinking which goes, "There's no way we can accomplish anything unless we're surrounded by people who think the exact same way we do." Debate has been replaced by pronouncements such as, "Capitalism is bad", "Communism is bad", or "Pro wrestling (or video games, or pornography, or comic books, or religion, or lack of religion or anything you want) must bear the blame for people doing bad things."
I don't disagree with the IU study and the subsequent websites like that referenced above because I like pro wrestling, and think that any criticism of that is out of line. I disagree with them because they are shallow, elitist, and obsessed with placing blame.
It's unfortunate that Pro Wrestling doesn't have a vocal, well-adjusted, well-spoken advocate to speak out against studies like this. Foley did an admirable job refuting the study in his book but one must wonder to what extent he was preaching to the choir. Vince McMahon often seems to do more harm than good when he makes statements to the press.
What would be ideal would be a scholarly book about pro wrestling (written from the POV of a historian rather than a sociologist or anthropologist) which would make a solid case for wrestling being an integral part of the 20th century American cultural mosaic and, while not above criticism, deserves more credit than it is currently given.
Originally posted by Bishoplaud What would be ideal would be a scholarly book about pro wrestling (written from the POV of a historian rather than a sociologist or anthropologist) which would make a solid case for wrestling being an integral part of the 20th century American cultural mosaic and, while not above criticism, deserves more credit than it is currently given.
I was a grad student at IUBloomington when this study was being conducted and several of us in the comm department who were wrestling fans had great fun ridiculing both the research methodology and the rather pointed bias of the authors. Ironically, while this was going on, one of my good friends was denied permission to do his master's thesis on communicative practices and rituals in professional wrestling because "it wasn't a scholarly subject."
Tim -- who still gives thanks daily that he no longer lives in Bloomington
"Verhoeven's _Starship Troopers_: Based on the back cover of the book by Robert Heinlein."
If you somehow haven't read "Foley Is Good" yet, the last chapter breaks this entire study apart. God bless you, Mick.
And, while I think the violence towards women tends to get a little over the top (especially of the "Molly Holly doesn't put out! Kill her!" variety that they've been so fond of lately), this whole study is misinformed and self-righteous.
"The only difference between lilies and turds are those humankind have agreed upon, and I don't always agree." ---George Carlin
"Facts?! Aw, people can use facts to explain anything that's even remotely true!" ---Homer Simpson
Coincidentally (or not), Shapiro is like Arrested Development - not everybody gets it. I don't know if it's 98% of the "wrestling-recap" audience that doesn't get him, but clearly, it's not everybody's cup of tea.