 |
| Old man racism is not cute, no matter how he portrays it as such Photo Credit: WWE.com |
Yeah, it's disingenuous to paint all old men as crotchety bigots; it's a cute trope in media to let the old people drop disgusting language, sure. Much like every other stereotype, it doesn't begin to describe the consensus. It also really hurts the causes of trying to get rid of things like distrusting Jewish people based on religion or promoting awful misogynist ideals regarding food by making it seem "cute." It's not like anyone should have trouble heeling on Paul Heyman or Vickie Guerrero without delving into hateful language. So why continue the trivialization of real life social issues just to add to a homespun patriarchal antagonist?
I think the answer is clearly that McMahon is the antagonist in this case. He's clearly the out of touch old man trying to stop the valiant warrior Triple H from fulfilling his destiny of burying every single unworthy young wrestler in his power. It's not even sarcasm. Everyone opposing Curtis Axel in this case has openly questioned whether he was worthy of Triple H's attention, with Papa Bear only changing tune after realizing it does nothing for anyone to be dragging Axel through the mud verbally. Regardless, Trips has his axe to grind, and McMahon wants to stop him. That should be good enough to allow him to be as insensitive in his curmudgeonly behavior, right?
Well, not really. For one, the only reason why introducing any kind of bigotry in a story is to make someone pay for said bigotry. It's why Zeb Colter and Jack Swagger formed an acceptable act. They were set up to have Alberto del Rio make them eat their words, and he did just that. Will Triple H go to bat for Heyman? HAHAHAHA, no. In fact, you could argue that Trips himself isn't feuding so much with Axel as he is with Heyman because he's bitter that Brock Lesnar defeated him at Extreme Rules. The next babyface that comes to Guerrero's defense will be the first one. It's not so much that Triple H is fighting McMahon because he's a racist old coot here.
But why do the father of the bride and son-in-law have beef? Well, that's the second problem. McMahon is the bad guy here because he is trying to keep the heir apparent to his empire from turning his brain into a grey matter smoothie over a guy whom he clearly thinks isn't on his level. Punching down is bad enough when everyone involved is of sound body and mind. As Brandon pointed out in Best and Worst yesterday, WWE is already dealing with two wrestlers who have concussions, both of whom are ensconced in various title pictures. They're also donating money to the Nowinski Institute for concussion research. Trips, out of character, has been quoted as saying that while the object of the National Football League is to hit guys as hard as they can, WWE is about the opposite of that.
So why make light of it in the story? Why is McMahon the bad guy here for wanting concern? Why is Triple H the good guy for wanting to bash his own brains in? Well, it's not surprising. This is the same company that trumpets its Divas as being "smart, sexy, and powerful," despite not giving them the chance to walk the walk to back up said talk. They have a babyface roster full of bullies, yet support the BA Star program. If you ever wanted to see a company that perfected the art of lip service while remaining transparently opposed to the things they say they're against, look no further than Titan Towers.
So all in all, that makes McMahon's homespun racism all the worse. Then again, it’s not like he ever tried to hide in-character awfulness. I mean, the Kiss My Ass Club? Trish Stratus barking like a dog? Countless examples of him making off-color statements, regardless of his alignment? Maybe I should have expected him to continue being just the worst in character. But then again, not being surprised by something doesn't mean it's still not disappointing, and that it's still something one has to take passively.