Comparing men and women as wrestlers

[Jingus]

You can do most things tastefully or tastelessly, I guess.

Yeah. Two examples: there was a Lufisto vs Sabian match in CZW which I found pretty disgusting. Practically every spot Sabian did involved some kind of sexual harassment, to the point of obsessing on the "hey y'all, there's a wimmin in this here ring!" aspect of the match (which oddly didn't happen when Lufisto was in the Cage O' Death match with three male opponents in the same promotion). Compare that to a Chuck Taylor vs Candace LaRae match I saw from PWG, which handled the mixed-gender part perfectly. It only came up a couple of times, especially a hilarious bit where Chuck thought that they were doing the old "a man and a woman who are sworn enemies are in the middle of a heated fight, and then suddenly start kissing" routine, but a horrified Candace quickly shot him down.

[Jingus]

Yes, I think think it would be fair to assume that she could not.

Why?

[Victator]

But since wrestling still has this bizarre desire to be seen as more "real" than other fictional performance arts, it clings to the old sports traditions even when there's no longer any reason to do so.

The last thing wrestling needs is to abandon more of the old sports traditions. Most of the current ills in wrestling boil down to some genius saying "Well its not real, so we can do whatever we want."

[NintendoLogic]

I don't know that I have desire to see that personally, just because the implications of violence against women.

Which, in itself, is kinda sexist. Such an attitude implies that women are incapable of defending themselves. That may be true of your average battered housewife, but female wrestlers are portraying characters who are supposed to be badass warriors. Is it too difficult to believe that, say, Cyborg couldn't knock the shit out of plenty of male MMA fighters in her weight class?

 

As usual, wrestling is far behind the times. Look at modern action movies. It's very common to see female characters who are kicking the fuck out of male characters. It's a commonly accepted part of today's pop culture, and has been for years. But since wrestling still has this bizarre desire to be seen as more "real" than other fictional performance arts, it clings to the old sports traditions even when there's no longer any reason to do so. We're long decades past the point when wrestling became regarded as a cartoonish joke in our society; trying to go back to the industry's carny roots is something which shouldn't even be discussed as a serious possibility.

 

I wouldn't take this too far. Wrestling is a genre of fiction, but it isn't completely fanciful. Just because people can buy Wolverine tearing Sentinels apart with ease doesn't mean they'd buy Rey Mysterio physically dominating The Great Khali. Women wrestlers may be badass warriors, but male wrestlers are badass warriors who are usually significantly larger.

[JerryvonKramer]

So anyone willing to argue for Moolah over Cena then?

 

I can see the argument for comparing them and it's convincing but the fact of the matter is -- for right or for wrong -- women's wrestling has consistently been treated as less of a deal than men's wrestling and the conventions within the worked sport has been to treat them separately.

 

Take a guy like Savage - in his career he wrestled just about all the greatest male workers he could have and precisely two women -- Sherri and Sapphire. So how on earth can we realistically compare Savage's career with Sherri's?

 

Yes, we can break it down and look at workrate, promo skills, charisma and so on, but everyone here at least is also very keen to look at "the body of work" and CONTEXT. Sherri was never ever ever in her career going to mainevent Wrestlemania.

 

The comparison is just unfair. Whichever way you look at it, Sherri was never going to get a chance to work with the guys Savage did as anything but their valet. It's much much fairer to compare Sherri with someone like Alundra Blaze / Medusa or Moolah or the Jumping Bomb Angels because they would have worked with the same sorts of talent. The fact that Chyna held the IC title and wrestled men is of no consequence -- just an outlier, the exception that proves the rule.

 

I don't think it's sexist to insist on a SPLIT between men and women for the purposes of a GOAT conversation. What can be achieved by comparing Aja Kong to the likes of Flair and Jumbo? How are they comparable? How could you justify ranking one above the other without getting involved in complex questions of gender politics? Aja Kong vs Bull Nakano is a proper debate. Aja Kong vs. Ric Flair is just nonsense.

 

It's not like making films, where it really doesn't matter what gender the director is because a film is a film, in wrestling gender matters because men face men and women face women. To use a Marxist phrase gender is "always already" a big deal. Just don't see how you could have a meaningful conversation that ignored that fundamental fact.

[El-P]

What can be achieved by comparing Aja Kong to the likes of Flair and Jumbo?

Trying to see how they compare as workers.

 

How are they comparable?

Jeez. They are three pro-wrestler doing pro-wrestling. In the modern era no less.

 

How could you justify ranking one above the other without getting involved in complex questions of gender politics?

Because gender doesn't matter one bit. They are pro-wrestlers, they are judge by the same exact criteria. It's fucking simple.

 

Aja Kong vs Bull Nakano is a proper debate. Aja Kong vs. Ric Flair is just nonsense.

No. The above statement is nonsense. And Aja is probably better than Flair too.

 

It's not like making films, where it really doesn't matter what gender the director is because a film is a film, in wrestling gender matters because men face men and women face women.

They don't "face" each other. They *work* with each other. Because it's a convention of a spectacle that portrays itself as a sport. But it's not a sport. It's a craftmanship. Therefore, it's like playing guitar or directing a movie or doing stand ups routines. Being a man or a woman doesn't matter. It's the same thing. Which is why you can work mixed gender match and be perfectly fine.

[KB8]

The only way I could see someone not liking joshi is if they didn't care for Japanese wrestling in general or had some kind of psychosexual hang-up about women performing the manly art of professional wrestling. I can understand not liking the Manami Toyota sprint style, but that doesn't warrant writing off the genre as a whole. At its heart, wrestling is about storytelling. There's no reason women should be necessarily inferior at that to men.

While I understand and more or less agree with the un-bolded part, the bolded part isn't really accurate at all. I mean, I'm not speaking for Will here, because I don't really know where he stands on it, but I talk to enough other wrestling fans that don't particularly like joshi to know that it's not because they dislike Japanese wrestling in general, and it's sure as shit not because they have some kind of psychosexual hang-up about women performing the manly art of professional wrestling.

 

It's a stylistic issue with me, not a gender issue (and I know it's the same for a lot of the people that don't much like joshi). A lot of it is so go-go-go with transitions and momentum swings coming so often that I get taken out of it. That's not just limited to Manami Toyota. Shit, it's not just limited to joshi, either -- I get taken out of it when guys are wrestling like that as well. There are matches where they're running through so much stuff that the things they're doing before it are more or less rendered meaningless. That's obviously not always the case, but most of the joshi I've been watching on the '96 yearbook recently has definitely fallen into that category.

 

Loss posted a Debbie Malenko quote (or paraphrased something she said, I don't remember exactly) in one of the yearbook threads that highlights the kind of allowances you have to make with a lot of joshi. I understand why people like the style and that they accept those allowances. I can accept them as well, and I know what I'm gonna get most of the time, but it doesn't mean I'll like it any more.

[Matt D]

Wrestling is about symbolism and perception. If you train the audience to buy into something (see: People's Elbow, Cobra) they will. Sometimes it takes time; sometimes it doesn't, but I think you can train the WWE audience into almost anything, really if you're smart and persistent enough. What's the last thing that they tried to do, that they stuck with for MONTHS, and executed at least moderately well that really bombed?

 

The Lashley push?

[NintendoLogic]

Why does Aja need to be split off into the female ghetto for GOAT purposes? She had a lengthy run as the ace of a highly successful promotion. She main-evented at the Budokan and the Tokyo Dome. She's regarded as one of the best workers of her generation. Those are things that most men don't do.

[Loss]

Aja Kong headlined a major promotion during a boom period as world champion facing challengers who were varying degrees of over, with varying degrees of talent, from multiple organizations. Lots there to compare to Flair.

 

Bringing Sherri into the argument is worthless and again is a matter of kayfabe. She wasn't going to headline Mania, but she was a manager/valet for the most part. And quite a few men weren't going to headline Wrestlemania either. Again, that's a point about booking and positioning when that has absolutely nothing to do with what is being talked about.

 

The point is that you can compare match quality of women's matches to match quality of men's matches.

 

Any list of the top 10 matches of the 90s that didn't contain at least one women's match (probably more than that) would be a list missing some stuff it should have.

[Loss]

The only way I could see someone not liking joshi is if they didn't care for Japanese wrestling in general or had some kind of psychosexual hang-up about women performing the manly art of professional wrestling. I can understand not liking the Manami Toyota sprint style, but that doesn't warrant writing off the genre as a whole. At its heart, wrestling is about storytelling. There's no reason women should be necessarily inferior at that to men.

While I understand and more or less agree with the un-bolded part, the bolded part isn't really accurate at all. I mean, I'm not speaking for Will here, because I don't really know where he stands on it, but I talk to enough other wrestling fans that don't particularly like joshi to know that it's not because they dislike Japanese wrestling in general, and it's sure as shit not because they have some kind of psychosexual hang-up about women performing the manly art of professional wrestling.

 

It's a stylistic issue with me, not a gender issue (and I know it's the same for a lot of the people that don't much like joshi). A lot of it is so go-go-go with transitions and momentum swings coming so often that I get taken out of it. That's not just limited to Manami Toyota. Shit, it's not just limited to joshi, either -- I get taken out of it when guys are wrestling like that as well. There are matches where they're running through so much stuff that the things they're doing before it are more or less rendered meaningless. That's obviously not always the case, but most of the joshi I've been watching on the '96 yearbook recently has definitely fallen into that category.

 

Loss posted a Debbie Malenko quote (or paraphrased something she said, I don't remember exactly) in one of the yearbook threads that highlights the kind of allowances you have to make with a lot of joshi. I understand why people like the style and that they accept those allowances. I can accept them as well, and I know what I'm gonna get most of the time, but it doesn't mean I'll like it any more.

 

This point of view I can respect, because it's a problem with style, not a problem with gender. He doesn't care much for Joshi not because they're women, but because the style isn't his thing. So be it.

 

By the way, would YOU be interested in a short list of Joshi For People Who Don't Like Joshi recommendations?

[Matt D]

Would Wrestlicious be okay then?

[NintendoLogic]

The only way I could see someone not liking joshi is if they didn't care for Japanese wrestling in general or had some kind of psychosexual hang-up about women performing the manly art of professional wrestling. I can understand not liking the Manami Toyota sprint style, but that doesn't warrant writing off the genre as a whole. At its heart, wrestling is about storytelling. There's no reason women should be necessarily inferior at that to men.

While I understand and more or less agree with the un-bolded part, the bolded part isn't really accurate at all. I mean, I'm not speaking for Will here, because I don't really know where he stands on it, but I talk to enough other wrestling fans that don't particularly like joshi to know that it's not because they dislike Japanese wrestling in general, and it's sure as shit not because they have some kind of psychosexual hang-up about women performing the manly art of professional wrestling.

 

It's a stylistic issue with me, not a gender issue (and I know it's the same for a lot of the people that don't much like joshi). A lot of it is so go-go-go with transitions and momentum swings coming so often that I get taken out of it. That's not just limited to Manami Toyota. Shit, it's not just limited to joshi, either -- I get taken out of it when guys are wrestling like that as well. There are matches where they're running through so much stuff that the things they're doing before it are more or less rendered meaningless. That's obviously not always the case, but most of the joshi I've been watching on the '96 yearbook recently has definitely fallen into that category.

 

Loss posted a Debbie Malenko quote (or paraphrased something she said, I don't remember exactly) in one of the yearbook threads that highlights the kind of allowances you have to make with a lot of joshi. I understand why people like the style and that they accept those allowances. I can accept them as well, and I know what I'm gonna get most of the time, but it doesn't mean I'll like it any more.

 

I would distinguish between not caring for a genre in general and writing it off completely. I have the same issues with joshi as a whole, but I still think Aja Kong is awesome. By the same token, the New Japan juniors don't do much for me, but I still like Jushin Liger.

[NintendoLogic]

By the way, would YOU be interested in a short list of Joshi For People Who Don't Like Joshi recommendations?

I have a couple in mind. The first would be Kong/Toyota from Big Egg Universe. It was the first joshi match I ever saw, and I've heard it described quite a bit as a joshi gateway drug. Anyone who likes Vader/Sting would probably enjoy it. The second would be Hokuto/Kandori from Dreamslam. It's basically a superior version of the Hart/Austin submission match.

[Loss]

Both great matches, but I was thinking more off the beaten path. Anyone who has dabbled in Joshi has likely seen both matches. Also, matches that aren't worked in such a go-go-go way with more long term selling and meaningful momentum shifts.

[KB8]

This point of view I can respect, because it's a problem with style, not a problem with gender. He doesn't care much for Joshi not because they're women, but because the style isn't his thing. So be it.

 

By the way, would YOU be interested in a short list of Joshi For People Who Don't Like Joshi recommendations?

I was actually going to say I'd be down for a list when you posed this to Will, so yeah, that would be pretty good.

[Loss]

Aja Kong vs Bull Nakano is a proper debate. Aja Kong vs. Ric Flair is just nonsense.

I missed this before. Could you elaborate on what you meant?

[KB8]

The only way I could see someone not liking joshi is if they didn't care for Japanese wrestling in general or had some kind of psychosexual hang-up about women performing the manly art of professional wrestling. I can understand not liking the Manami Toyota sprint style, but that doesn't warrant writing off the genre as a whole. At its heart, wrestling is about storytelling. There's no reason women should be necessarily inferior at that to men.

While I understand and more or less agree with the un-bolded part, the bolded part isn't really accurate at all. I mean, I'm not speaking for Will here, because I don't really know where he stands on it, but I talk to enough other wrestling fans that don't particularly like joshi to know that it's not because they dislike Japanese wrestling in general, and it's sure as shit not because they have some kind of psychosexual hang-up about women performing the manly art of professional wrestling.

 

It's a stylistic issue with me, not a gender issue (and I know it's the same for a lot of the people that don't much like joshi). A lot of it is so go-go-go with transitions and momentum swings coming so often that I get taken out of it. That's not just limited to Manami Toyota. Shit, it's not just limited to joshi, either -- I get taken out of it when guys are wrestling like that as well. There are matches where they're running through so much stuff that the things they're doing before it are more or less rendered meaningless. That's obviously not always the case, but most of the joshi I've been watching on the '96 yearbook recently has definitely fallen into that category.

 

Loss posted a Debbie Malenko quote (or paraphrased something she said, I don't remember exactly) in one of the yearbook threads that highlights the kind of allowances you have to make with a lot of joshi. I understand why people like the style and that they accept those allowances. I can accept them as well, and I know what I'm gonna get most of the time, but it doesn't mean I'll like it any more.

 

I would distinguish between not caring for a genre in general and writing it off completely. I have the same issues with joshi as a whole, but I still think Aja Kong is awesome. By the same token, the New Japan juniors don't do much for me, but I still like Jushin Liger.

 

I'm actually more or less the same on the New Japan juniors.

 

And if there's anybody in joshi I tend to enjoy no matter what, it's Aja. I also get the sense I'm with Loss in that I tend to like Hotta way more than Jerome.

[NintendoLogic]

How about Aja Kong vs. Yumiko Hotta from 1/24/94? It's probably the most brutal straight wrestling match I've ever seen. It makes Regal/Finlay look like a pillow fight.

 

I'd also point to Devil/Chiggy from 8/22/85. Joshi wasn't quite as sprinty back then, and it's a serious contender for best match of the 80s.

[Loss]

Just started a thread.

[Childs]

Like Will, I have developed an instinctive aversion to women's wrestling. I was actually really excited to dive into joshi a few years back, because I had read so many plaudits for the best workers and matches. But it never clicked for me. The go-go style epitomized by Toyota wears me out in a hurry. And there are a few aesthetic aspects linked to gender -- all the screaming, for example -- that bug me.

 

I don't think of my resistance to joshi in gender terms. I'm just as skeptical of current puro and matches involving Davey Richards and Eddie Edwards, and for many of the same reasons.

 

I still attempt to keep an open mind. In going through the yearbooks, I try to watch the matches that Loss praises with a fresh eye. Usually, they end up striking me as formless overkill, but not always.

 

I have no problem saying that Hokuto, Kong, Jaguar, etc. were great wrestlers and I see no reason at all why they can't be judged against Flair or Jumbo. Any GOAT poll requires cross-genre, cross-era comparisons, and any voter is going to harbor biases for and against certain styles. Aja vs. Flair is no different than Satanico vs. Flair or, I don't know, Vader vs. Jim Breaks.

[MJH]

To not want to watch women wrestling *because they're women* is sexist.

 

To not want to watch Toyota vs. Inoue because it's a sprint and you prefer something else stylistically is not.

 

I'm not actually that big a fan of sprints - I can't stand Davey vs. Edwards etc - but my argument in defence of Toyota/Inoue, Toyota/Yamada, and Toyota in general is that she's (one of) the best sprint worker(s) I've ever seen. Much like, I don't know, Dragon Gate in general I find pretty bleh but the 8/03 12-man match is great fun, or something.

 

Dismissing all Joshi as sprints is silly, though.

[Childs]

Dismissing all Joshi as sprints is silly, though.

This is unquestionably true, and yet, I have to admit that's how I have joshi classifed in my wrestling brain. So I'm less open to a joshi match that might be good than I would be to pimped matches in most other genres. You almost have to start out by convincing me that the match won't fall into my preconceived notions of what sucks about joshi. That's unlikely to change at this point, but yeah, sexism isn't at the root of my bias.

[Loss]

Dismissing all Joshi as sprints is silly, though.

This is unquestionably true, and yet, I have to admit that's how I have joshi classifed in my wrestling brain. So I'm less open to a joshi match that might be good than I would be to pimped matches in most other genres. You almost have to start out by convincing me that the match won't fall into my preconceived notions of what sucks about joshi. That's unlikely to change at this point, but yeah, sexism isn't at the root of my bias.

 

Have you watched Kansai/Kong yet? Main event slugfest with a two-year title chase finally being realized. It's not my favorite Joshi match of the year, but knowing what you like, I think it's the one you are most likely to like.

[jdw]

Well, I don't think those awards should be separate. I think it's archaic and a relic from an era where women were seen as inferior to men. I hate making assumptions, but it's hard not to see "I have no interest in watching women wrestle" as not being chauvinist.

It's largely because there are fewer quality roles for Women. If they weren't split, you'd have men dominate the nominations.

 

Don't think so?

 

Sample the last 20 years of Best Picture nominees. Split them into categories by Man Is The Lead, Woman Is The Lead, Tweener. Even the Tweener part is tricky, because as much as there's Johnny & June in I Walk The Line, it is more about Johnny than June. It just happens to have a strong woman role. You might even need to have Tweener Lean Man, Tweener Lean Woman and True Tweener.

 

Why is this the case?

 

As truly compelling as June's life is relative to Johnny's (and it's arguable even more compelling), Men for the most part Write / Direct / Produce / Greenlight movies. Even major indy houses are... The House Of Weinstein.

 

It kind of sucks that they're split. But I'd rather see 5 women get the nod than 1. Or worse, they expand the field to 10 and 7 end up men on average, and 3 women.

 

It sucks, but it's the reality of US movie making.

 

John