RIPPA Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 I said this last night but I wasn't thrilled with the implication that Becky was too fat for Sasha to push her off of her Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazlo Woodbine Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Best bit of that finish was Lillian's call. "The following contest is a draw" 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nice Guy Eddie Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Best bit of that finish was Lillian's call. "The following contest is a draw" Nobody calls a draw like Howard Finkel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 "Is it because he's a McMahon...or a man?" I love when Stephanie goes full on Gloria Steinem on everyone. Not sure if it's part of the storyline or not, but yes, Shane's implication that, because he's a guy and has three sons he deserves more power in WWE than Stephanie and her three daughters is very Mad Menish. WWE TV offers up important social, political and gender talking points. Who knew? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick B. Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Steph has made a pretty consistent habit of accusing any objectors of not being comfortable with a female boss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sydneybrown Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Best bit of that finish was Lillian's call. "The following contest is a draw" Nobody calls a draw like Howard Finkel. Nobody calls ANYTHING like Howard Finkel... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPA Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Meltzer is saying that Miz got the win (and will probably get a couple others) due to him and Ziggler both being in a "multi-man match at Mania" and Miz needs to be built back up (Ziggler has the wins over Owens) He thought it would be for the IC title but let's honest - they need to do SOMETHING with the US title again so who knows Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Steph has made a pretty consistent habit of accusing any objectors of not being comfortable with a female boss. Her point about Shane and his misogynist arrogance is still very valid, though. Stephanie vs. The Patriarchy. In 2016. Book it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt McGirt Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Hey, that might make me like Steph. Wait... no, it won't. And as far as the US title goes you know who is getting that running again soon as he's back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy LaRue Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Stephanie is right about the male/female discrepancy. What makes Shane's kids better than hers to be considered 5th generation carny promoters? Because they're boys and carry the McMahon name directly? In 2016, that doesn't wash. Especially when Stephanie, whether anyone likes it or not, has actually been involved with the company while Shane decided to leave. His reasons may have been legitimate, but he still left. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fallacy! Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 But everyone knows boys are smarter than girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Curt McGirt Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 But everyone knows boys are smarter than girls. I know you're joking, but just to underline the point 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPA Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 To be fair - traditional lines of succession always followed the male preference (though laws have been passed to change this) So it isn't outrageous for Shane to imply that his first born son would be in line over Steph's first born daughter. (and when explaining this to my wife last week she immediately went "of course - that is the way it should be portrayed") HOWEVER - the execution was clearly clunky and it definitely came out as BOYZ RULE! GIRLZ DROOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fallacy! Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 All jokes aside, I've heard Meltzer say enough times that Wall Street believes Vince McMahon is the only one who truly knows how to run a successful wrestling company that if WWE said "a woman isn't fit to run this 'rasslin show" it probably wouldn't be that far off from the reality of what a lot of people believe. I'm sure there are many investors who would go "well, if Vince is gone then it's gotta be his son Shane." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trocar Slush Weasel Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 To be fair - traditional lines of succession always followed the male preference (though laws have been passed to change this) So it isn't outrageous for Shane to imply that his first born son would be in line over Steph's first born daughter. (and when explaining this to my wife last week she immediately went "of course - that is the way it should be portrayed") HOWEVER - the execution was clearly clunky and it definitely came out as BOYZ RULE! GIRLZ DROOL! Plus, the problem that Shane is the face and Steph is the heel, so Shane got the crowd to cheer for misogyny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick B. Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Not even denying that point. We've got subtle sexism vs. straw feminism in this storyline and we're supposed to support someone or other. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.T. Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Rollins would have been much better as a heel without HHH and Steph. This. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.T. Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Not even denying that point. We've got subtle sexism vs. straw feminism in this storyline and we're supposed to support someone or other. Yeah, I have no idea which is Scylla and which is Charybdis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 To be fair - traditional lines of succession always followed the male preference (though laws have been passed to change this) So it isn't outrageous for Shane to imply that his first born son would be in line over Steph's first born daughter. (and when explaining this to my wife last week she immediately went "of course - that is the way it should be portrayed") In 2016, though? This ain't the 1800s. Legalities have changed. Attitudes have changed. Yeah, Shane trying to claim him and his sons deserve more preference is, eh, more than a bit out of touch. Especially when we factor in he's meant to be the good guy. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reed Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Honestly, it feels like WWE have accidentally stumbled across a SOCIALLY IMPORTANT~! storyline here. But they're fools, so will just squander it. And Stephanie will just end up an evil shrew even though many of her points are spot on. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy LaRue Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 Steph's promo had me wanting a Shane vs HHH feud for control of the company, with Steph going to the wall as WWE's Lady Macbeth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPA Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 In 2016, though? This ain't the 1800s. Legalities have changed. Attitudes have changed. Absolutely on the former Not so much on the later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick B. Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 My original point was how, on multiple occasions, Steph deflected legitimate criticism of her evil-boss-ness with "don't like seeing a woman in charge?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie M. Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 How old is Shane's oldest kid? I'm half expecting them to trot him out at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RIPPA Posted March 1, 2016 Share Posted March 1, 2016 How old is Shane's oldest kid? I'm half expecting them to trot him out at this point. Declan just turned 12 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now