Racist Wrestling Fans

[MPhillips]

48 minutes ago, BerniePragle said:

I don't know if that was directed at me??

I hold you in the highest regard...It was probably the four pages of nonsensical drivel that belongs in a different forum. 

It's Festivus and I'm, "airing grievances." 

[1032004]

28 minutes ago, MPhillips said:

I hold you in the highest regard...It was probably the four pages of nonsensical drivel that belongs in a different forum. 

It's Festivus and I'm, "airing grievances." 

Honestly I thought about putting this thread in the “Non Wrestling Topics” section, but:

1) It is related to wrestling, as many would argue there is a racism problem in wrestling.   Is it moreso than the general population?  I’m not sure, but I’d lean yes.

2) The Non Wrestling Topics forum is pretty much all politics.  Racism conversations shouldn’t really be about politics…and honestly even as this thread has veered slightly off topic there hasn’t been a ton of political talk

[ionel]

57 minutes ago, MPhillips said:

It's Festivus and I'm, "airing grievances." 

Oh my ... big words again.  Wkn! can we gets some help over here!

There are five essentials to a Festivus celebration. To stay authentic, one must have an aluminum pole, meatloaf on a bed of lettuce for dinner, a gathering to air your grievances, at least one Festivus miracle, and, last but not least, a Festivus wrestling match

Edited December 23, 2023 by ionel

[Hammerlock3]

well, at least we're mature enough to avoid this becoming politcal and getting the thing locked....

[Ohio Elite]

2 minutes ago, Hammerlock3 said:

well, at least we're mature enough to avoid this becoming politcal and getting the thing locked....

Oh I'm sure it won't be long until this thread no longer exists.

[Hammerlock3]

5 minutes ago, Ohio Elite said:

Oh I'm sure it won't be long until this thread no longer exists.

holding out hope it will die of natural causes

[1032004]

Just now, Hammerlock3 said:

holding out hope it will die of natural causes

So I take it you’re not going to provide your definitions of race and racism, despite saying taking a picture was racist and criticizing others for providing their thoughts on the definitions?

[Hammerlock3]

3 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

So I take it you’re not going to provide your definitions of race and racism, despite saying taking a picture was racist and criticizing others for providing their thoughts on the definitions?

I think you already know the answer, i don't think your question is in good faith and I could answer, but i'm certain it would just start the whole process over. 

Edited December 23, 2023 by Hammerlock3

[ionel]

The world population can be divided into 4 major races, namely white/Caucasian, Mongoloid/Asian, Negroid/Black, and Australoid. This is based on a racial classification made by Carleton S. Coon in 1962. There is no universally accepted classification for “race”, however, and its use has been under fire over the last few decades. The United Nations, in a 1950 statement, opted to “drop the term ‘race’ altogether and speak of “ethnic groups”. In this case, there are more than 5,000 ethnic groups in the world, according to a 1998 study published in the Scientific American.

So should we go with 4 or 5,000?

[PortaJohn]

13 minutes ago, ionel said:

The world population can be divided into 4 major races, namely white/Caucasian, Mongoloid/Asian, Negroid/Black, and Australoid. This is based on a racial classification made by Carleton S. Coon in 1962. There is no universally accepted classification for “race”, however, and its use has been under fire over the last few decades. The United Nations, in a 1950 statement, opted to “drop the term ‘race’ altogether and speak of “ethnic groups”. In this case, there are more than 5,000 ethnic groups in the world, according to a 1998 study published in the Scientific American.

So should we go with 4 or 5,000?

In biology the answer is ONE

 

"In a landmark paper based on the Human Genome Project, scientists showed that there are no “races” but a single human race—not in sociological terms, but according to biology.

The project found that there is more genetic variation within a single population subgroup than between two different population subgroups. For example, there may be more genetic diversity within a population in Asia than between that same population and a different population in Europe."

 

[1032004]

1 hour ago, Hammerlock3 said:

I think you already know the answer, i don't think your question is in good faith and I could answer, but i'm certain it would just start the whole process over. 

Well I thought the below definition was pretty good, but you complained about people trying to define it, so no I’m not sure what your definition is.

On 12/22/2023 at 12:03 PM, TNwrestling said:

Being racist is being prejudice towards a different race. 

 

[Hammerlock3]

3 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Well I thought the below definition was pretty good, but you complained about people trying to define it, so no I’m not sure what your definition is.

 

privately message me and i'll answer

[Caveira]

On 12/23/2023 at 4:39 PM, ionel said:

The world population can be divided into 4 major races, namely white/Caucasian, Mongoloid/Asian, Negroid/Black, and Australoid. This is based on a racial classification made by Carleton S. Coon in 1962. There is no universally accepted classification for “race”, however, and its use has been under fire over the last few decades. The United Nations, in a 1950 statement, opted to “drop the term ‘race’ altogether and speak of “ethnic groups”. In this case, there are more than 5,000 ethnic groups in the world, according to a 1998 study published in the Scientific American.

So should we go with 4 or 5,000?

Never thought I would see the day there are infinitely more genders than races on this planet.   
 

who said something about the thread getting locked?

[buckshot]

On 12/21/2023 at 3:34 AM, 1032004 said:

Of the 28 replies, I count 4 clearly racist replies including 1 use of the n word (but at least x/twitter censored it).  Not a good look.  Hopefully some of these people learn to be decent humans for Christmas but I doubt it.

You're always going to get this when you have a sport where most of its fans call themselves "christians"

[gimpeltf]

10 hours ago, buckshot said:

You're always going to get this when you have a sport where most of its fans call themselves "christians"

Perhaps most of its American fans, at least.

Edited December 26, 2023 by gimpeltf

[Bigbrog]

11 hours ago, buckshot said:

You're always going to get this when you have a sport where most of its fans call themselves "christians"

Are you saying most Christians are racist?

[Jim L]

11 hours ago, buckshot said:

You're always going to get this when you have a sport where most of its fans call themselves "christians"

Don't the majority of Americans call themselves "Christian"?

A legitimate question that this thread could ponder is if the outlook of wrestling fans is better or worse of the American public in general. IMO, it is probably about the same

[1032004]

1 hour ago, Jim L said:

 

A legitimate question that this thread could ponder is if the outlook of wrestling fans is better or worse of the American public in general. IMO, it is probably about the same

No idea how to prove this either way but I’d lean worse.  Maybe mostly because there are probably less black wrestlers as a % of participants than other sports.

[Lipdrag]

On 12/21/2023 at 6:12 PM, Lunaticfringe said:

What racial mix is Bartlett? I’ve always been curious is he 1/4 black, Hispanic?

'murican.  100%.  Nothing else matters.

[Idaho]

5 minutes ago, Lipdrag said:

'murican.  100%.  Nothing else matters.

Murican .... 

[Lipdrag]

13 minutes ago, Idaho said:

Murican .... 

Mulleted Murican.  Sub-species.  Not many procreating opportunities so it might die out.  Or evolve to improve its mating opportunities.  In a rural, bible-honoring, Christian-y way, of course.

[Idaho]

6 minutes ago, Lipdrag said:

Mulleted Murican.  Sub-species.  Not many procreating opportunities so it might die out.  Or evolve to improve its mating opportunities.  In a rural, bible-honoring, Christian-y way, of course.

Never....

[Lipdrag]

2 minutes ago, Idaho said:

Never....

This is a class picture.  He's still in their grade and this is the class picnic.

That is my story to myself and I'm sticking to it.  The alternative is too horrific to contemplate.

[Idaho]

5 minutes ago, Lipdrag said:

This is a class picture.  He's still in their grade and this is the class picnic.

That is my story to myself and I'm sticking to it.  The alternative is too horrific to contemplate.

sometimes it is hard to come to grips with Murica. 

[flyingcement]

Wrestling in America has historically been more popular in rural / suburban places that have an appreciation for hard labor - whether agricultural or industrial.  Those communities have tended to be less racially diverse on average than urban communities which may lend to the stereotyping that wrestling is defined by being a racist community.  I would argue against that being the case, while also acknowledging, there may be a higher likelihood of minorities facing cultural challenges because of the natural demographics of the sport. 

This is why when the black wrestlers took a photo together a couple years back, I found it was in recognition of their success in the face of a shared experience and I thought that was really cool and worth taking the time to celebrate.  I don't think it's racist in a negative sense for them to take such a picture.  If white people did the same, it would be racist in a negative sense to me.  It would be celebrating success from the position of shared privilege instead of shared challenge.  If this was a basketball team, it gets more complicated, because white players are not typically as successful in the sport than their black counterparts.  

I think it is also worth pointing out that from a long-term perspective, there was more of wrestling country in the union than the confederacy (and a significant portion).  Not that it matters specifically today, but often times, there are lots of invisible walls that take hundreds of years to tear down. Our current media structure which has the urban and rural sides pretty firmly aligned with the two major political parties, there is another dynamic in play, where we fall victim to viewing the other team as the enemy, and using visual cues like race, fashion choices, etc. in order to make those determinations.  So that acts as an amplifier to an already sensitive situation.  

In summary, I think wrestling is not a racist sport, but there is a decent amount of nuance to consider how each race may experience the sport in its current form.