Is "Kiddie Friendly WWE" Neccesary?

[Luke Flywalker]

They don't have to bring sex back to allow Edge to be... edgier. Just let him be a bit more vulgar and rude in the way he comes across. And about cursing, I don't wanna hear "fuck" or "shit" being thrown around like a navy captain using the words... but I wouldn't mind a bit of foul language. "You son of a bitch!" wouldn't be so bad to hear from time to time. I've heard far worse in Disney movies than I hear in WWE anymore.

I want to see Randy Orton bleeding when Triple H assaults him and has the cops arrest him. I wanna see Matt Hardy busted open to sell his I Quit forfeit and beating, to boost Jeff's presence as an all-costs kinda guy, and to symbolically sell that feud.

Sex doesn't have to be incorporated to make it edgier.

 

[MikeRaw]

"Bikini's aren't porn"

Please don't over-simplify what I'm saying in order to make me look stupid.

"End case"...?

Not at all. All you'e done is highlight the hypocricy that I described earlier (see BrWith all due respect, despite your protestations, you ARE stuck in the notion of PORNO (y'knowitney para).

fuck-flicks n' stuff) as opposed to the idea of what is and isn't PORNOGRAPHIC.


Look at it this way...

2 magazines:

Hot Bikini Chick Monthly = Porn (however mild/soft you deem it).
Beachwear Fashions Monthly = Not porn. It's primary purpose is not to titilate.

No. Just because your definition of porn is anything that arouses someone, doesn't mean that's right.
So if some sick fuck is aroused and as you would say "titilated" by a horse taking a shit, does that make it porn?
Your theory is annoying. You keep saying that anything done with the purpose to arouse or "titilate" someone is porn. That's not the case. You may want to classify all that stuff as porn, but it's not. Porn doesn't have to be sex, but it does have to be either nudity or sexual.
Before I go on though, I just want to say this. If you can provide me with hard, solid evidence that bikini's can be considered porn, I would gladly accept that you're right, but from my knowledge, I have never EVER seen anybody ever consider a bikini to be porn, no matter how seductive the acts in it are, unless it becomes actually sexual (either havign sex, or something such as stripping, etc).

Now, back on topic... The question on whether you would consider it to be porn isn't even relevant. Whether it is or isn't, people aren't asking to classify what it is. The topic is just to discuss whether you want it on WWE programming or not, regardless of what it's called.

Also, as for my opinion, RKO legacy summed it up to a T. Sex isn't needed to make the product more edgy. When people say they want more edginess, they don't mean they want eye candy and sexuality 24/7 from the divas. They mean it as in they want more violence int he storylines, maybe some blood, and although no one really wants fuck or shit said on TV, hearing ass or shit, or even bitch, would be ideal. That's how most people feel, myself included. But with that being said, I still like good looking females, and like alot of people, wouldn't mind one bit (and actually enjoy) if there were to be a bikini contest on the TV. I just don't need it to be there, and I'm fine without it.

 

[Airfixx]

Your getting annoyed???

I take time to best explain and substantiate my opinion but virtually all of it is either being overlooked or over-simplified in what comes across as an attempt to make me sound stupid.

I've reference laws (even then you insist on only quoting HALF of it.) and made countless analogy's - I don't know what else to say.

No more from me on this matter, apart from to say the only reason we are having this conversation at is because you chose to debate my response to Underrated_Superstar saying he wanted the sex stuff back.

@ Chuck: Nice to know I'm making some kind of sense.

 

[MikeRaw]

Look, all I'm saying is I've never heard of this before. Ever. My point here is that we can debate it all week long, but it wouldn't get anywhere. It's not that I'm trying to make you look stupid, or accusing you of making it up. You've said it quite clearly. I just wanna now see what everyone else has to say. I wanna see if anyone else ever knew of this, or can clarify this. I'm not trying to say you're definately wrong, but clearly you can see why I wouldn't think bikini's would be considered porn, as I'd bet almost no-one thinks or knows that.
Edit: Finally. Here's the best way we can settle this. Here's the basics of our argument.
http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-nude_photography
See? The matter is still very much in dispute. It comes down to a matter or opinion, which is what I've been saying all along. We can debate whether non-nude stuff should be considered pornography, but that's all based on opinion. There is no actual, true answer, to whether or not it is considered porn, because there's no answer. It's never been clarified. As of now, there's no official right or wrong, and it's just a matter of opinion. People who are detractors of this kind of non-nude stuff, like yourself, will classify it as pornography, but an equal amount of people, like myself, would call non-nude stuff, as long as it's just bikini's and such, to be normal, and not porn.

 

[LadyHotrod]

Most people start watching wrestling as kids and grow up with it. I personally enjoy wrestling more when it's more violent but it makes sense to make it kiddie friendly because kids are probably the biggest wrestling fanbase. If you don't appeal to the kids, you lose money.

I don't see any problem with how it is now. It's pretty much back to how it was when I watched it growing up.

 

[Luke Flywalker]

They use lingerie ads with the intent of titillation.. and they show those all day long on most channels. That's not seen as a form of pornography. WWE's intent with those matches is to appeal to the mind of the male audience. But Mike, Fixx is correct in saying that it is a very softcore form of pornography. It's not viewed that way in the eyes of many, because we're conditioned to believe that pornography is exposing what would be hidden beneath those final layers of clothing.

But Fixx, take a look at your definition of pornography. "No artistic merit" denotes that what WWE does in bra & panties matches, or lingerie contests, is artistic, therefore is not viewed as pornography under definition.

You're right that it is, but Mike's right in that it's not viewed that way in general. Whether the audience views it as sexual or art is up to their own interpretation.

But this subject is dry and boring in regards to this thread.