Should we honored wrestlers that did bad things

Me and Deezy so rarely agree that I’m stunned that this is where we do. Chyna should not be involved in this conversation, and indeed, it seems most modern fans - the same one’s that used Snickers to motivate WWE to remove Moolah’s name from the women’s battle royal at Mania - are adamant that Chyna deserves the honour of a Hall of Fame induction for her contributions to wrestling; her choices after the fact were damaging only to herself (I’m speaking of the drug abuse here) and her own to make…

If number one didn’t exist, number two wouldn’t matter as much. Steph and Trip’s personal issues with Chyna were not helped by her porn career, especially in the movie she did were she had a threesome with actors portraying Vince and Steph, but if those personal issues didn’t exist it’s likely that particular movie wouldn’t either.

The Chyna situation is murky because of how her relationship with WWE ended and how her personal choices after that reflected how she felt about it, rather than the fact that she was Hunter’s ex and did porn, but her name should not be included in the same breath as a Benoit, a Moolah, or a Hogan.

Benoit was one of the most talented men to step in the ring, granted; but his chosen style directly led to how his life ended, and no amount of nice stories about the man before that weekend change the fact that he did what he did and that some people have come forward and stated he wasn’t just the quiet sweetheart people thought him to be before all that happened. It’s a far more complex issue than can be fully realised in a paragraph on a wrestling forum but Benoit should never be honoured by the WWE or any wrestling organistion for that matter. He needs to be remembered, certainly, but you don’t need to induct him into the Hall of Fame to remember him.

I’ve made my feelings on Moolah clear elsewhere on this forum and don’t feel the need to repeat it here, but suffice to say that without damning evidence against the multitude of allegations made against her, she’s better left off the honours list in the future.

Hogan may have been caught with his pants down, literally, but the fact that he said what he said is pretty damning evidence that the man thinks less of those born with darker skin than him; which is weird when you think about how much he likes to tan - and even if you can forgive privately stated racist comments he’s still a foul human being in general.

WWE aren’t gonna start removing people from the Hall of Fame, that’s just not going to happen without a real push from fans and the media which I don’t see as happening any time soon. Like Stone Cold and his domestic abuse issues, Flair has been grandfathered in because of how he is portrayed on our screens. I would suggest WWE not look to honour him again though. We live in an age where people can and will look into the finer details of a persons life in order to be sure that they deserve the honour they are receiving and I doubt Flair would get through that process unscathed in this day and age. He’s best off simply being Charlotte Flair’s dad from now on, I reckon. I could be wrong though, people may feel less harsh towards a man with his backstory, who has suffered though so many of his own issues and tragedies and is so very obviously proud of his children and their accomplishments.

While wrong, there is a huge difference between flashing people and pimping out women who are putting trust in you to help their careers. I have no doubt about it there are many more demons to Ric’s life though.

1 Like

I agree with John’s take on it. If you’re talking about the history of the company, you can’t just erase people like Moolah, Hogan, Warrior, or Benoit. All 4 of those people were major figures when it comes to the history of the WWE and wrestling in general. I think what gets the WWE in trouble and what they should not do is when they go about trying to name special awards and Rumble matches after these people. There was no reason to name that special award they give out at the Hall of Fame, the “Warrior Award.” All they did when they came out with this award and naming it that was bring to light everything controversial he had ever said. Same goes for naming the Battle Royale after Fabulous Moolah. If they had only talked about her while talking about the history of womens wrestling in the WWE, nobody would’ve made a big deal about it but when they decided to get cute and name the Battle Royal after her, that’s when people got mad. I think with both the Warrior award and the Moolah thing, I think it all comes down to Vince McMahon not giving the fans enough credit and not expecting them to know the horrible things Moolah and Warrior did and said. The WWE as a company, lives in their own universe and their own bubble and have always believed that when it comes to current and past superstars, the fans will only know about them what the WWE wants the fans to know about them, which as we’ve recently seen, is not true!

Don’t get me wrong, nothing I’ve heard about Ric Flair doing is close to as bad as the things Moolah has been accused of. Also, most of the shit you hear about Ric, is from Ric himself, so I kind of doubt there’s skeletons out there we don’t already know about - but best not to lift that rock if you’re WWE, yeah?

WWE need to realise that you can’t erase someone from existence just because their existence is problematic to your brand. They also need to realise that over-correcting and honouring someone who has said and done awful things is not the way to go about it either. You can remember an important figure in your history without making them out to be a hero or even a villain in certain cases, sometimes you just have to present the truth and let people learn from the mistakes of others.

Absolutely. Regardless of how you feel about the extensive brain damage and what effect that may have had on what happened, at the end of the day…what happened, happened. He should be remembered as an incredible wrestler but not honored. I don’t think he should be completely erased from history. But thats as far as it goes. Thats my personal opinion but its such a volatile issue I can understand every side on this one.

As for Chyna, its bullshit that she gets lumped in with Moolah, Sunny and Benoit. Even Hogan. Porn isn’t a crime. It would be nice if eventually Americans can get past the idea that we have to shit upon people who are sex workers. .

3 Likes

Even Sunny shouldn’t be in this conversation. Maybe I’m missing something but from what I’ve heard all she’s done is cheat on a boyfriend or two, take a few drugs and be a bit of a bitch; she’s not a racist, rapist or murderer as far as I’m aware.

She’s done way more than that. I have listened to Bruce Prichard’s podcast on her. She has done a lot of drugs, a lot of cheating and she’s had a long and violent story with Sable. Personally, I would have not inducted her. Today she is considered to be a criminal. She has been arrested many times. I am pretty sure WWE regrets giving her the ring.

Her personal life choices with drugs and relationship issues have zero influence on my opinion, those have nothing to do with anything in this discussion for me. Now, if you can convince me that she attacked Sable (I’ve not listened to the podcast so I don’t know the story, I keep wanting to check out Prichard’s pod but it’s always soooooo fucking long) with malice and intent, then we have a discussion… but if we’re talking about a backstage scuffle between two people that don’t like each other, then it’s a nothing issue.

Honestly, I wasn’t watching when Sunny was a thing and my only connection to her is through Jim Cornette’s waxing poetic about her on his podcasts, so I may have slightly rose-tinted glasses on because he’s so complementary of her but thus far I’m not seeing a major problem with her as a Hall of Famer.

Great points! I remember watching Sunny and she was one of my first pro-wrestling crushes when I was a kid. I didn’t deep dive into backstage antics, but luckily I had a family friend who worked for WWE and WCW and got to find out things when I was a bit older.

What I heard was it wasn’t uncommon for talent to attack or bully other talent. It was dog eat dog. It isn’t that way now from what I understand but Wrestlers, Valet’s, they lived hard…drugs, alcohol, crimes this wasn’t new ground being broken.

I don’t know the whole story, but I actively avoid some of it because who they are in person is not who I want to remember. I love hearing playful stories of the road on like E&C’s Podcast or certain former talent’s take on current events. But I don’t want to hear how Big Poppa Pump ran a guy down with his truck.

I don’t really keep up with Sunny now, I did eventually hear of some of the stuff she has done and I am not a fan overall, I just remember her time with the WWE and her character positively but I don’t really care for Tammy the person.

When Sunny was inducted, she was not having so many issues outside of the business a lot of the reported stuff with her came after I believe

Believing Bruce Pritchard stories :roll_eyes:

Or… as I like to think of it; It’s possible to respect someone’s contributions to something you love without raising them up and making them out to be a hero.

Feels like that’s the moral of this whole story really. :smile:

To take it further; It’s possible to dislike a persons personal choices and still realise that they did some great things in their chosen field.

People are complicated creatures and we aren’t as simple and binary as “Good” or “Bad”.

1 Like

As many above posters have mentioned -and I thank them in reeling the topic thread up from the bottom - there are so many complexities here. We will always be able to look back and condemn the taking of life. We can always look back and say that past culture was not one that looked at the holistic health of the talent. Perhaps it is these past tragedies that should guide the future? If the brain trust at the WWE looks at wrestlers as people and not disposable credit (similar to DDP in his unwavering support of Jake and Razor despite times they may ‘backslide’). WWE may be honoring the present talent by promoting their health and providing for their mental and physical well being (ex; Paige / Daniel Bryan). I can’t know this as I don’t know their realities. If I judge them on their (Vince’s pre-stock exchange) past then I would pile on with the judgments of exploiting talent and extracting performance out of the performers no matter what the cost to their mental or physical well being. I would like to be hopeful not fearful of the future for the kids who are the up-and-comers.

Well, I understand your opinions on Sunny and I agree to disagree. I would have never inducted her. But, I do understand and respect your arguments.

1 Like

I was explaining the Fake Diesel and Razor Ramon characters to a friend and it got me thinking about this thread.

I wonder if naming the battle royal after Fabulous Moolah or the naming of the Warrior Award, goes back to this timeframe where the WWE feels that they own the copyright separate from the individual. They are packaging the character as one that is worthy of celebration and ignoring what the human being was actually like.

Depends how it means to honour them.

I’m actually totally fine with the WWE showing Snuka or Moolah matches on the WWE network. But I do disagree with their extreme re-writing of history sometimes. Like Moolah being the greatest women’s wrestler of all time? No thanks.

And even though Chris Benoit could be argued to have been one of the greatest wrestlers of all time, I would still not feel comfortable with them naming a certain match after him either. But showing old footage or talking about real history is something I would be fine with.

1 Like

The root of this issue here is whether or not the individual can be separated from their body of work and, for those that have committed transgressions, there isn’t an established standard for what’s forgivable. Much like art, it’s nearly impossible to define but we often know it when we see it. For a case like Benoit, everyone I’ve talked to generally feels that he should never be honoured because of what he did but it’s OK, for the sake of historical completeness, to have his matches on the WWE Network.

For other people like Chyna and Sunny who have made adult films and had public disgraces relating to a lack of sobriety opinions vary. While their actual crimes (drug possession and public intoxication for the most part) may not be among the most serious I can understand a publicly traded company not wanting to emphasize their relationship with people whose recent history is less than glowing, even if they’re not the worst of the worst.

Hogan having his induction removed is also a divisive topic. I can understand why WWE removed him but I simultaneously find it hypocritical that Warrior remains inducted. Undeniably bigoted though Hogan’s remarks were, they were a leak of a surreptitious recording of a private conversation. Warrior made publicly hateful statements for years to which WWE turned a blind eye. To be clear, I’m not excusing Hogan and I don’t feel sorry for him but I struggle to understand WWE’s yard-stick for inclusion in their Hall of Fame that kicks out Hogan but keeps Warrior.

Personally, I largely roll my eyes at the WWE Hall of Fame as it’s really just a list of people the WWE feels like shiniing a spotlight on that year. They’d need to have a legitimate balloting process and seek input from people outside of WWE for it to be taken seriously and only then can one have a meaningful conversation about inclusion/exclusion criteria. WWE is notoriously tone-deaf to anything beyond their version of their own history and only changes course when sponsorships and share price are at risk. The recent Moolah naming controversy is a microcosm of how things have always been. It took Snickers to threaten pulling out sponsorship money to move them to action. I doubt anything would have changed otherwise.

2 Likes

It’s a fake HOF for a fake sport that isn’t based on achievements. …even the Hollywood Walk of fame is based on a monetary donation.

1 Like