The ironic part is that it's probably Jimmy's best work in JCP/WCW since he was the fired up babyface defending his wife.

Exhibit #3

 

DX and Steph

 

I am not sure on the exact date but between unforgiven 1999 and survivor series. There is a raw where DX abduct Stephanie and it is implied heavily that they rape her.

 

Road dog is seen licking his lips and drooling as they drag her away.

 

After this the commentators wonder about what happened next with king wondering aloud.

 

The next smackdown it comes out that oh it was fine that they raped this girl as it was not intact Steph and instead some "ditzy drama student" so it is fine that they raped this girl as it was not Steph.

 

DX say that they did it to get to Vince and no mind was paid to the fact that they admitted to raping a girl as it was not anyone important so it is fine. There are no repocusions and they just move on next week

 

I want to bathe in bleach after writing that.

 

On top of literally having her drugged and had a drive thru wedding with her and Triple H, followed by intimating that Triple H had his way with her, while she was in an unconscious state, afterwards.

 

How THAT "marriage" stayed legal through the summer of 2002 defies even the most convoluted and sudsy television logic!

 

Let's not forget HHH and Steph as an on screen couple started with her being drugged and married at a drive thru Vegas chapel.

 

Isn't that the start of all loving relationships? I can't recall 100%, but wasn't it implied as part of the heel turn that she was in on the whole thing and so that part was staged though? Could just be making that up, as my brain is hurting thinking about it!

 

 

 

LOL! Okay, if that's how they want to get "out" of the first marriage of the on-screen characters being a sham, than why the hell not!

 

I do like the idea that after being divorced in 2002, they got married off screen at some point before the Vince vs. Shawn and then DX feud.

That was my rationalization as well--the drugging was fake and part of the longer-term cover-up.

Actually that further complicates things, because:

 

A. The audience wasn't in on it -- we're talking about a storyline explanation years after the fact, which leaves the entire initial viewing audience believing they saw a drugging and were told about a rape

 

B. This opens up the possibility for Steph to be complicit in her own drugging/assalt/kidnapping after the fact to go along with it all

 

C. How is this wrestling?

More like a month later when Stephanie turned. That's when I rationalized it at the time. I didn't think she was actually drugged.

 

And it's sports entertainment, baby.

Actually that further complicates things, because:

 

A. The audience wasn't in on it -- we're talking about a storyline explanation years after the fact, which leaves the entire initial viewing audience believing they saw a drugging and were told about a rape

 

B. This opens up the possibility for Steph to be complicit in her own drugging/assalt/kidnapping after the fact to go along with it all

 

C. How is this wrestling?

Stephanie, the character, as a manipulative attention whore gets played out in faking a pregancy in order to waste everyones time with a vow renewal ceremony.

 

So faking being drugged for the benefit of playing a long game to her heel turn seems pretty par the course.

Listening to Prichard's podcast on Unforgiven 1999 reminded me of :

 

Chaz, a regular guy from new Jersey. Who beats up his girlfriend Marianne. But not really. Because ya know, those bitches always accuse their men just to fuck wit'em. Damn those bitches.

 

Yeah. Vince Russo in all his mysoginistic, rape-culture inducing glory.

 

A. The audience wasn't in on it -- we're talking about a storyline explanation years after the fact, which leaves the entire initial viewing audience believing they saw a drugging and were told about a rape

 

B. This opens up the possibility for Steph to be complicit in her own drugging/assalt/kidnapping after the fact to go along with it all

 

The storyline explanation came two weeks after the fact, not years. On the December 13th 1999 Raw Stephanie does her promo explaining her actions and reveals the whole "Triple H abduction" wasn't real, it was all part of a long plan for revenge on Vince for orchestrating her kidnapping in April by the Undertaker in a 'false flag' to get at Austin.

 

By 1999 WWF standards it was pretty logical bit of continuity.

I wonder what Vince makes of this whole Weinstein business. I remember a news item saying WWE was in talks them about maybe partnering up on DVD distributorship. In my head Vince and Harvey were probably rivals when they each were promoting rock concerts in the northeast during the late 70's.

He's probably happy for the first time ever he's in the rasslin business since no one will care he's done most if not all the shit Harvey's said to have done.

In my head Vince and Harvey were probably rivals when they each were promoting rock concerts in the northeast during the late 70's.

 

Harvey: Hey, Vince, I'm in the music business now!

 

Vince: Congratulations, Harvey, I'm in the auditory-entertainment business!

Probably relevant too this thread that the guy who was the face of WhatCulture's wrestling shows admitted he was sliding into women's DM's/asking for nudes/being generally creepy all while lying about being in an open relationship.

Probably relevant too this thread that the guy who was the face of WhatCulture's wrestling shows admitted he was sliding into women's DM's/asking for nudes/being generally creepy all while lying about being in an open relationship.

He was fired today from the new Cultaholics website.

The Flair-Garvin feud was super creepy in retrospect since it was basically Flair saying he was going to have sex with Garvin's wife whether she wanted to or not (and she was clearly positioned as not wanting to). Plus every time she rejected his advances and/or slapped him he seemed turned on like it was a live action version of Pepe Le Pew chasing the cat.

 

Not feeling this feud at all. Garvin actually drags Flair down in his idiotic slapfests matches, and the other Garvin really still shows nothing good to me, he's definitely useless.

 

But damn, those interviews get creepier and creepier.

Is it valuable at all to talk about the kayfabe element here? Example...HHH's faux-then-real-then-DUDE THESE TWO PEOPLE ACTUALLY GOT MARRIED LATER ON wedding angle was designed by a company desperately trying to get him over as the uber-bad guy (never worked, in my estimation).

I don't know if I even validate (let alone accept) the idea that it isn't a reinforcement of rape culture if it's the bad guys who are doing it...and that's an especially bullshit argument in the Russo-Attitude Era when no one was supposed to be a true face or heel...but I do feel reasonably certain that They were the heels would be the counterargument offered by the writer/bookers.

In HHH's case in particular they were trying (too hard IMO) for the cool heel element with him and somehow thought that was how to achive that.

In HHH's case in particular they were trying (too hard IMO) for the cool heel element with him and somehow thought that was how to achive that.

No doubt they were trying too hard (I think I have a near-fanatical desire to expose how tragic that prolonged effort was for the business). I just don't know if his actions were supposed to be perceived as cool* as opposed to super-villainous.

 

*Let's be clear, I don't care, ultimately. Rape is among the unthinkable offenses that, to me, are incredibly unwise to portray in pro wrestling subject matter. I'm not onboard, personally, under any circumstances. Hell, I think overt blasphemy is a stupid idea, and I'm a left-winger.

 

I just wonder if we think that one can validate booking/writing rape if (and only if) the justification the creative team gave was "he's the bad guy!" Because...ideally...that would always have to be part of the justification, right? Not that they haven't made Kane the Rape-Babyface a couple of times, I think.

I'm pretty sure most Danshoku Dino matches count.

Not to defend the taste level of that angle, but just to point out that the HHH-Stephanie drugged and date raped thing was revealed to be the two of them scheming a week later.

I seem to remember Vince defending something (might have been Trish on her fours barking like a dog *douchechills*) to Bill Costas saying that weeks later his character got his comeuppance from that. The Attitude Era's booking ran the risk of doing these highly tasteless things that would turn people off from watching it, who later wouldn't care at all if there was something to counter-balance it from a story-telling point of view.

 

I'm remembering this from memory but there's a pretty funny moment on Prichard's show about the XFL when he talked about the time Stephanie was on camera in the crowd, and everybody around her was chanting "slut! slut! slut!" to her. Bruce was in the production truck, and someone inside was freaking out saying "who is it? get her out of there" thinking there might have been a woman who took a top off or something. Bruce then had to explain to her that they were chanting that to the on-screen persona of who they sent out in the crowd to do a segment for their national broadcast. I say it's funny because I can imagine just how bewildering to someone who wasn't aware of the McMahons something like that would be.

I'm kinda amazed that on the verge of the Harvey Weinstein debacle, we heard no one in "da business" come out and tell about some shit that surely happened.

 

Then again, the WWE was paying a tribute to Jimmy Snuka not too long ago, so that's one of a kind business for sure... But still.

I keep expecting it to happen and still think it's only a matter of time. The question is if anyone will care. I think they still benefit from the perception that because "it's all fake", somehow the people involved aren't real either.

I don't know. The ring boy scandals were a pretty huge deal in 1992.

Reading through this thread and the reactions, ideas, etc. shared around the web in the past few months--I will discuss this unfortunate aspect of our culture on a future episode of MIS.