Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

This is the place to discuss all the latest ROH news, announcements and events!
User avatar
trufreedom
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:10 am

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by trufreedom »

DBSommer is butthurt about other things supersonic has said on these boards so he's attacking sonic about a totally reasonable question. This board is getting sad, but it's doing at the same time that ROH is, so it won't be tough to leave both.
User avatar
trufreedom
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:10 am

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by trufreedom »

Okay, I'm asking this, so before you freak out, I'm just asking a question.

Let's just pretend that not only does NC have discriminatory legislation against the LGBT community, but let's pretend every man, woman and child in NC is a horrible bigot. If you can draw a thousand or more bigots at $20 dollars a head, why wouldn't you, and take that bigot money right down to your non-bigot bank where the teller is gay and you can both laugh about it. I understand that bigotry is a hugely negative force, but does that make bigots less able to fill a building for wrestling?

Again, I don't believe this, and I don't not believe it, it's just a question I'm curios on your opinions about.
Robareid
Posts: 3133
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 10:48 pm
Location: Buckingham, South East England
Contact:

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Robareid »

I've been asked to lock this thread, because it's a non-wrestling issue. While I can kind of see that line of argument, I don't completely agree. As such I'm going to leave it open, and for anybody who feels it's a "non-wrestling discussion" and not relevant to the board then I invite you to simply not open this thread and/or post in this particular thread anymore.

However, if things do get messy and personal as they're already threatening to then bans/locking will ensue as usual.
User avatar
supersonic
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 8:53 pm
Location: Edgar Martinez Dr S
Contact:

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by supersonic »

trufreedom wrote:Okay, I'm asking this, so before you freak out, I'm just asking a question.

Let's just pretend that not only does NC have discriminatory legislation against the LGBT community, but let's pretend every man, woman and child in NC is a horrible bigot. If you can draw a thousand or more bigots at $20 dollars a head, why wouldn't you, and take that bigot money right down to your non-bigot bank where the teller is gay and you can both laugh about it. I understand that bigotry is a hugely negative force, but does that make bigots less able to fill a building for wrestling?

Again, I don't believe this, and I don't not believe it, it's just a question I'm curios on your opinions about.
I believe it's in the interest of ROH growing its brand to take a stance against the legislation. Do I believe there's a moral obligation to do so? Absolutely not - it would just be a really nice move on the company's part and speak volumes about its positioning on tolerance. By no means should ROH be held under any scrutiny for this; doing so is the same as people that tried to shame Michael Jordan during his NBA career into speaking out over these types of issues. (For the record, he's the Charlotte Hornets head honcho and has publicly spoken out against this legislation.)

Let's remember that the first segment in this company's history was offensive, utter dogshit, encouraging homophobia as a means to "mock" WWE and WCW's sports-entertainment booking in the recent years of that time. This move would go a long way in showing the company has matured and gotten away from the lowest common denominator mentality that the underground scene once had.
User avatar
Burnside
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:01 am
Location: New York City

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Burnside »

People asking for this thread to be locked is amazing to me. So easy to just not read it. But people just can't bear that it the conversation is even taking place.
Mr. Mojo Risin
Posts: 2400
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2014 11:37 am
Location: Wisconsin
Contact:

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Mr. Mojo Risin »

Burnside wrote:People asking for this thread to be locked is amazing to me. So easy to just not read it. But people just can't bear that it the conversation is even taking place.
That's the problem. It's so much easier to see the world in black and white. It's actually a very pertinent question that supersonic is asking.
User avatar
supersonic
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 8:53 pm
Location: Edgar Martinez Dr S
Contact:

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by supersonic »

Perhaps
Spoiler: show
BJ Whitmer vs. Steve Corino
is North Carolina's punishment. Would that suffice?
BigTChamp
Posts: 544
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2012 7:31 pm

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by BigTChamp »

"If you choose to remain neutral in the face of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor".

Yes, I think ROH should join many other entertainers in boycotting North Carolina until the law is repealed
BurningHammer
Posts: 2160
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:58 am

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by BurningHammer »

They are certainly building a card specifically to that area it seems, which I have no problem but considering it's a PPV I probably would have had a different shape to the card, but they are obviously trying to make a large crowd for the area which Is somewhat good business in the end if it works.
Big Red Machine
Posts: 4376
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Big Red Machine »

BigTChamp wrote:"If you choose to remain neutral in the face of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor".

Yes, I think ROH should join many other entertainers in boycotting North Carolina until the law is repealed
And the oppressor, in this case, is the STATE GOVERNMENT of North Carolina. Not its citizens, nor its county governments.
User avatar
Burnside
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:01 am
Location: New York City

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Burnside »

Big Red Machine wrote:
BigTChamp wrote:"If you choose to remain neutral in the face of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor".

Yes, I think ROH should join many other entertainers in boycotting North Carolina until the law is repealed
And the oppressor, in this case, is the STATE GOVERNMENT of North Carolina. Not its citizens, nor its county governments.
You can't exert pressure without affecting the citizens. That's the only way to affect government. The state government of North Carolina will reverse course when the people of North Carolina tell it to. They will do so when the penalties the discrimination incurs become too much to accept.

Live events cancelling, and companies pulling out and relocating, hits the local economy in the pocketbook. Without all the cancellations, there's no way Georgia or Mississippi would have backed down on their similar proposed legislation.

You have to make discrimination bad for business. Otherwise, it's not going to stop.

Here's a story from this week's Observer that makes that point pretty eloquently, and shows the intersection of wrestling and culture wars and how they can't be separated:
Billy Wicks, a former carnival wrestler and submission expert from Minnesota whose feud with Sputnik Monroe was a key point historically in Memphis wrestling, passed away on 5/6.

He was 84. His death came five days after suffering a stroke and the day after entering hospice care.

While Memphis had wrestling since the beginning of time, it was the debut of local televised wrestling, along with Wicks and Sputnik Monroe, that set the stage for it becoming a hotbed, before people like The Fargos, Jackie Fargo, Tojo Yamamoto, Jerry Jarrett, Al & Don Greene, The Von Brauners and later Jerry Lawler, Jimmy Valiant, Austin Idol, The Fabulous Ones and Bill Dundee became household names.

Wicks was a 25-year-old boy-next-door type babyface. He was able to get over as being small, but showed good skill and people bought into his toughness. Even though Wicks had the credentials, it was noted that in the pro rings, he never used them. There were no stories of him straightening out guys who tried to test him, or showing off his real skills in pro matches like a Lou Thesz or a Billy Robinson.

He first big program in Memphis as a headliner was with George. Monroe, who was not a large man, although outweighed Wicks by a considerable amount, would bill himself as “235 pounds of twisted steel and sex appeal,” and became a noted historical figure in the community because he hung out with African Americans when whites didn’t do so, drinking with them and getting into trouble at times. He had tremendous heat with the white community that supported wrestling as a “N***** lover,” which they’d shout at him. But the blacks loved him.

At the time, virtually everything in the South was separated racially, known as Jim Crow laws. There were drinking fountains for whites and for blacks. There were “colored sections” in public places, at least the places that allowed blacks in. City buses would only let blacks sit in the back. All sports, entertainment events, restaurants and movie theaters had separate sections. The “colored section” at the old Ellis Auditorium was in the balcony.

Legend had it that Monroe, who was the top star on television because of his ability to talk and because he had a big personality in town, would wrestle and the “colored section” would be packed and black fans would be turned away, but there were plenty of empty seats in the rest of the auditorium. Since he was a headliner and being paid based on the house, he protested and refused to wrestle unless blacks could sit anywhere in the auditorium.

Lance Russell, the announcer at the time, noted that while Monroe was very much important in the city’s history and that was all true, it was really Roy Welch, who ran Memphis, was secretly the catalyst of all this. He hated the idea that they were turning fans away even though the building wasn’t sold out. No place in the city allowed mixed racial seating. Monroe made the stand and Welch was very content to pretend that he didn’t want to give in but would lose his top drawing card if things didn’t change, so Monroe took the heat from the white public.

The weekly wrestling shows became the first public place where African Americans were allowed to sit anywhere they wanted. For a time, Monroe, even though he was actually the top heel, was a beloved figure in almost every African American household in the city because in time, after wrestling started the ball rolling, the Jim Crow separate but unequal period slowly phased away in the city.
User avatar
supersonic
Posts: 7665
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 8:53 pm
Location: Edgar Martinez Dr S
Contact:

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by supersonic »

NBA fans here in Seattle also understand about being treated as collateral damage to pressure local and state government. Obviously a much different situation, but it's an example of the citizens being punished due to the figurative gods not doing business together.
User avatar
BlackLesnar
Posts: 1067
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2013 12:44 pm

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by BlackLesnar »

BitW just turned to shit anyway so it's not like it matters.
I'm gonna be at the top of the mountain in three years, with or without this belt. I'm gonna be the best that ever lived. And what you don't understand is, even if I don't get that far, at least I had the courage to get off my ass and try.
Big Red Machine
Posts: 4376
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Big Red Machine »

Burnside wrote:
Big Red Machine wrote:
BigTChamp wrote:"If you choose to remain neutral in the face of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor".

Yes, I think ROH should join many other entertainers in boycotting North Carolina until the law is repealed
And the oppressor, in this case, is the STATE GOVERNMENT of North Carolina. Not its citizens, nor its county governments.
You can't exert pressure without affecting the citizens. That's the only way to affect government. The state government of North Carolina will reverse course when the people of North Carolina tell it to. They will do so when the penalties the discrimination incurs become too much to accept.

Live events cancelling, and companies pulling out and relocating, hits the local economy in the pocketbook. Without all the cancellations, there's no way Georgia or Mississippi would have backed down on their similar proposed legislation.

You have to make discrimination bad for business. Otherwise, it's not going to stop.
The key word there is "proposed." This one is already a law. At this point, the quickest, and most effective way to change it is via the court system- which is already well underway (and when it reaches the supreme court, as this one invariably will), it will be overturned. The precedent set in Romer, and of the current court there are five justices who were either appointed by liberal presidents and/or voted for Romer, so I think it's safe to say that this law won't stand, even if the vacant seat is filled by an extreme conservative.
Furthermore the sort of economic pressure that really hurts in this case is the loss of federal funds for schools and roads and other infrastructure (the same thing that was used to force states to comply with Brown v. Board. A Ring of Honor show will not even come close to affecting anything they do. The NBA All-Star Game brings tourism revenue and national attention (and thus national attention to their pullout). A Springsteen concert being cancelled brings national attention to the pullout. An ROH event does nothing, in terms of either financial damage, nor public attention.
Burnside wrote: Here's a story from this week's Observer that makes that point pretty eloquently, and shows the intersection of wrestling and culture wars and how they can't be separated:
Billy Wicks, a former carnival wrestler and submission expert from Minnesota whose feud with Sputnik Monroe was a key point historically in Memphis wrestling, passed away on 5/6.

He was 84. His death came five days after suffering a stroke and the day after entering hospice care.

While Memphis had wrestling since the beginning of time, it was the debut of local televised wrestling, along with Wicks and Sputnik Monroe, that set the stage for it becoming a hotbed, before people like The Fargos, Jackie Fargo, Tojo Yamamoto, Jerry Jarrett, Al & Don Greene, The Von Brauners and later Jerry Lawler, Jimmy Valiant, Austin Idol, The Fabulous Ones and Bill Dundee became household names.

Wicks was a 25-year-old boy-next-door type babyface. He was able to get over as being small, but showed good skill and people bought into his toughness. Even though Wicks had the credentials, it was noted that in the pro rings, he never used them. There were no stories of him straightening out guys who tried to test him, or showing off his real skills in pro matches like a Lou Thesz or a Billy Robinson.

He first big program in Memphis as a headliner was with George. Monroe, who was not a large man, although outweighed Wicks by a considerable amount, would bill himself as “235 pounds of twisted steel and sex appeal,” and became a noted historical figure in the community because he hung out with African Americans when whites didn’t do so, drinking with them and getting into trouble at times. He had tremendous heat with the white community that supported wrestling as a “N***** lover,” which they’d shout at him. But the blacks loved him.

At the time, virtually everything in the South was separated racially, known as Jim Crow laws. There were drinking fountains for whites and for blacks. There were “colored sections” in public places, at least the places that allowed blacks in. City buses would only let blacks sit in the back. All sports, entertainment events, restaurants and movie theaters had separate sections. The “colored section” at the old Ellis Auditorium was in the balcony.

Legend had it that Monroe, who was the top star on television because of his ability to talk and because he had a big personality in town, would wrestle and the “colored section” would be packed and black fans would be turned away, but there were plenty of empty seats in the rest of the auditorium. Since he was a headliner and being paid based on the house, he protested and refused to wrestle unless blacks could sit anywhere in the auditorium.

Lance Russell, the announcer at the time, noted that while Monroe was very much important in the city’s history and that was all true, it was really Roy Welch, who ran Memphis, was secretly the catalyst of all this. He hated the idea that they were turning fans away even though the building wasn’t sold out. No place in the city allowed mixed racial seating. Monroe made the stand and Welch was very content to pretend that he didn’t want to give in but would lose his top drawing card if things didn’t change, so Monroe took the heat from the white public.

The weekly wrestling shows became the first public place where African Americans were allowed to sit anywhere they wanted. For a time, Monroe, even though he was actually the top heel, was a beloved figure in almost every African American household in the city because in time, after wrestling started the ball rolling, the Jim Crow separate but unequal period slowly phased away in the city.
Big difference between these two things. This story is a promoter finding a way to make more money while playing off of the crowd's racism to get heat on his heel (who happened to legitimately want to end a terrible injustice). ROH controls nothing here. If they want to give LGBT rights advocates time on the show to speak, they could do that, but that's really all they can do.
User avatar
Burnside
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:01 am
Location: New York City

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Burnside »

Did you miss the part where Sputnik Monroe refused to perform in front of segregated houses?

They could refuse to perform, just like Springsteen, Pearl Jam, Tracy Morgan, Cirque de Soliel, etc. are doing. That's what they can control. If all of these people are pulling out and you're announcing your show in the wake of all these people cancelling, then like it or not you're making a statement.

Honestly, I'd prefer that this not have to be solved via federal legislation dragging North Carolina kicking and screaming into the 21st century. That tends to not go very well, especially in the South. I'd rather send a cultural message of, "Hey - stop being assholes or it'll cost you something" and for the people of North Carolina to make a value judgement accordingly.
Last edited by Burnside on Thu May 12, 2016 1:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Burnside
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:01 am
Location: New York City

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Burnside »

BlackLesnar wrote:BitW just turned to shit anyway so it's not like it matters.
Yeah, they're making it an awfully painless show to skip.
Big Red Machine
Posts: 4376
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Big Red Machine »

Burnside wrote:Did you miss the part where Sputnik Monroe refused to perform in front of segregated houses?

They could refuse to perform, just like Springsteen, Pearl Jam, Tracy Morgan, Cirque de Soliel, etc. are doing. That's what they can control. If all of these people are pulling out and you're announcing your show in the wake of all these people cancelling, then like it or not you're making a statement.

Honestly, I'd prefer that this not have to be solved via federal legislation dragging North Carolina kicking and screaming into the 21st century. That tends to not go very well, especially in the South. I'd rather send a cultural message of, "Hey - stop being assholes or it'll cost you something" and for the people of North Carolina to make a value judgement accordingly.
Legislating from the bench is how it's going to have to be (at least based on the polls in NC about this issue and related issues). And between the two approaches, I'd prefer the government step and in just yell in their faces that "too bad! This discrimination is unconstitutional!" and make them realize that if they believe in the other rights guaranteed by the Constitution then they have to believe in this too than the rest of the country imposing an asshole tax on them. The first one is outsiders pointing out to them that their law is not accordance with the other values that they hold dear. The asshole tax version is just outsiders attempting to economically coerce you into believing what they believe. I'd rather teach them that they are wrong than make them just pretend to tolerate LGBT people in public out of fear of economic sanctions.
User avatar
Burnside
Posts: 3030
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 4:01 am
Location: New York City

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Burnside »

Federal legislation isn't going to "make them realize" anything beyond the usual "we hate Democrats and Yankees" and "Thanks, Obama!" bullshit. Imposing actual non-abstract cultural consequences will actually work. Imposing federal legislation will make bigots feel like martyred heroes.
Big Red Machine
Posts: 4376
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 10:10 pm

Re: Should ROH remove BITW '16 from North Carolina?

Post by Big Red Machine »

Burnside wrote:Federal legislation isn't going to "make them realize" anything beyond the usual "we hate Democrats and Yankees" and "Thanks, Obama!" bullshit. Imposing actual non-abstract cultural consequences will actually work. Imposing federal legislation will make bigots feel like martyred heroes.
In most cases you would be correct, but where LGBT rights have differed from most other causes that split along red-blue lines is that once people are exposed to LGBT people and that they aren't different than you or me, much opposition to LGBT rights disappears. Laws that protect open LGBT people from discrimination encourage more of them to be open, expediting the process. It might make the bigots looked like heroes temporarily, but within a few years, that won't be the case anymore.
Locked