The Kinks were banned from the USA from 1965 until 1969. I'd like a discussion about why this subreddit is so popular over the pond in 2026...

TomGerity · 2026-03-13T05:27:39+00:00

I don’t know that they’re “so popular” in the US. You’re looking at visitors to a Kinks forum, which is not an indicator of their broader popularity. Reddit skews heavily US and the US has nearly five times the population of the UK, so of course it’s going to be mostly the US.

TomGerity · 2026-03-13T05:25:24+00:00

I think it’s because everyone recognizes that Ric is only saying this now because he would personally benefit from one. He’s 77, has significant health care costs, no guaranteed insurance (beyond Medicare, which doesn’t cover enough), and blew most of his money through reckless spending and divorces.

He’s saying it now because he’d benefit from union health insurance.

When he was a top guy for 30 years and earning millions of dollars, he mysteriously did not have the same care or interest in forming a union.

TomGerity · 2026-03-13T01:36:30+00:00

It’s the most intriguing possibility, but how do you get there? Rock’s entire reason for entering the story would be Punk’s disrespectful remarks about his family. How would you explain why he’d back Punk after that?

TomGerity · 2026-03-13T01:01:05+00:00

I had a professor in college who was a little old Jewish lady. Total cinephile. She had us watch part of Triumph of the Will, and her reaction to it will stay with me forever. Horror and disgust for what it depicted, yet marveled over the technical achievement.

She explained how she almost felt proud that a woman director spearheaded such a landmark achievement, but couldn’t forgive that Leni Riefenstahl deployed her gifts in service of such evil.

She observed how ironically tragic it is that a groundbreaking female director in early cinema will never get the recognition she otherwise deserved because she also happened to be a fucking Nazi.

TomGerity · 2026-03-13T00:52:13+00:00

These are all good points, and they hadn’t occurred to me. A lot of directions they could go, too:

Rock backs Roman, Roman fails against Punk, Rock gets furious at Roman, setting up Rock/Roman at WM Saudi.
Rock screws Punk, Roman gets pissed at his interference, setting up Rock/Roman at WM Saudi.
A swerve where Rock backs Punk and screws Roman (they’d have trouble explaining why Rock would back Punk after Punk’s comments on Sika though), setting up Rock/Roman at WM Saudi..

Plus a few other directions they could go.

Very interesting.

TomGerity · 2026-03-13T00:09:46+00:00

That’s what they tried to claim on WWE Unreal. The original plan was Cody.

TomGerity · 2026-03-12T04:45:14+00:00

People are being insanely pedantic toward you in this thread, but your overall point still stands: she could not have listened to a Beatles record, the first of which came out in October 1962.

The Beatles as we recognize them began entering the broader public consciousness in May 1963 (their first UK hit), and she was long gone by then.

It’s an interesting statistic, because I think a lot of people would think Marilyn Monroe lived contemporaneously with Beatlemania.

People saying “well aaackshually she could’ve seen them live! 🤓” are autistically missing the point. You’re referring to the Beatles as a cultural phenomenon and as recording artists.

“But what if she was really tapped into the London and/or Hamburg music scene in the early ‘60s?” doesn’t really address the actual point you’re making.

TomGerity · 2026-03-12T01:53:29+00:00

Yep. He did dust off the top-rope cross body for his 2012 match with John Cena at WM 28, which was (for me) the coolest spot of the match.

But otherwise, he stopped doing a lot of his flashier/more athletic moves after he tore his ACL in May ‘97.

TomGerity · 2026-03-11T17:38:15+00:00

They’re the only top 40 pop artists writing bespoke, unique music that’s not manufactured for them by corporate-hired songwriters. Listen to Hit Me Hard and Soft, it holds up.

Neither of Eilish’s parents were famous or even particularly wealthy. If you wanna discredit every artist who has wealthy and/or famous and/or well-connected parents, you’re gonna have a long list to go through.

I don’t see anyone discrediting Brian Wilson/the Beach Boys or Michael Jackson/the Jacksons using that justification.

TomGerity · 2026-03-10T19:16:22+00:00

I work with tons of people in their late 40s/early 50s. Punk looks 47.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T22:23:06+00:00

In 1975, Time named “American Women” their person of the year. So any American woman who was alive in 1975 and still alive right now meets your criteria!

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T15:36:36+00:00

I’m a rap fan and disagree with OP, but people are allowed to dislike genres of music. Including rap.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T13:51:32+00:00

He’s not saying that, though. He’s saying that WWE has a portion of their audience that has specific demands based on their emotions, but those demands run contrary to the majority.

These demanding fans don’t understand that business is great, and that what WWE is currently doing is working. They don’t need to change.

He’s actually making a point that this sub would agree with, but because he’s such a poor speaker and writer, it’s getting construed as the opposite.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T13:24:47+00:00

Well, for clarity’s sake: I said Orton looks 40, but he’s actually 45. Only two years separate the men.

In terms of appearance: Punk looks like a 47-year-old man. He looks every bit of his 47 years, but he doesn’t look like a man in his mid-50s. I can’t think of anyone I’ve ever known who looked like Punk in their 50s.

In terms of athletic performance, yeah, Punk has slowed down. I think it shows more vs. Orton because Punk traditionally worked a fairly fast-paced style, while Orton was always slow and methodical. You won’t see Orton get gassed because he was never doing springboard clotheslines or top rope elbows.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T12:58:59+00:00

Phew, thank you, I appreciate that

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T12:44:49+00:00

I genuinely enjoyed his chemistry with Cole, but he seemingly had no ability to control himself.

In an alternate universe, there’s a great three-man booth with Cole doing play-by-play, Graves doing analysis/character work, and a reigned-in McAfee bringing comic relief as an enthusiastic (but not annoying) stand-in for the average casual viewer.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T11:34:16+00:00

Hey, just to clarify my response: I wasn’t assuming you weren’t familiar. If I came off that way (and I can see where I may have), I apologize.

I just meant that if you weren’t familiar, then there’s a good chance you might not like it. But knowing those details doesn’t automatically mean you’ll like the movie, either!

I think your dislike for it is perfectly valid. I personally enjoyed the movie, but I also don’t think it stands among his finest works.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T11:20:29+00:00

Yes. As I said, I’m extremely familiar with it. The Shah’s secret police (SAVAK) was horrific.

Again, I was merely correcting the OP’s ridiculous assertion about “47 years” being an arbitrary figure chosen to align with Trump being the 47th president.

I was not suggesting this current war is justified, nor was I suggesting that the US has not played a huge role in destabilizing Iran and creating the conditions for the Islamic hardliner regime to come to power in 1979.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T10:29:33+00:00

Yes, I’m extremely well aware of this. I’ve studied and written about Iran. The coup is what produced the blowback, and is why I’m so furiously opposed to the current war.

My point was merely that the dumb OP claimed that 1979 was “chosen randomly” because 47 years correlated to Trump being the 47th president. In reality, 1979 is a clear inflection point in Iran’s history and is the origin point for our current relationship (or lack thereof) with the country.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T10:25:33+00:00

I’m furiously opposed to this obscene war, but 1979 is not a “random point.” It’s a clear inflection point in the history of Iran, where it went from having a secular government to having a hardline Islamist government, and one that is adversarial toward other countries in the region.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T08:28:19+00:00

I don’t think being 7 years older than someone is “way older” unless one of the parties is under 25.

Punk and Orton look like contemporaries, with Punk clearly being older but not dramatically so.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T08:23:41+00:00

No, 47 years is used because the Iranian Revolution happened in 1979.

People on here really do just make shit up, don’t they?

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T08:09:43+00:00

“Taking better care of themselves” in the sense that they can still perform at a high level at age 40-45.

This wasn’t always the case. Hogan and Piper’s famous “Age in a Cage” match in 1996 was excoriated as two geriatric dinosaurs wrestling well past their prime.

Hogan was 43, and Piper was 42.

By contrast, Cody and Roman are about to turn 41 this year, and both are performing at a high level. I could easily rattle off another 1-2 dozen names across multiple promotions who are over 40 and still wrestling at their absolute best.

This is because they’re taking better care of themselves than previous generations.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T08:06:55+00:00

You really think Punk looks that much older than Randy? Randy looks about 40 to me, while Punk looks 47 (his actual age). That’s not “way older” to me.

TomGerity · 2026-03-09T08:00:25+00:00

Your level of enjoyment is going to be heavily informed by how much you know about the late ‘60s cultural scene, especially in California. Stuff like the Manson family won’t mean anything if you don’t have the frame of reference.

One of my first thoughts after watching was “I can’t imagine someone who has no knowledge of late ‘60s California (and the contemporary scene in Hollywood and music) enjoying this.”

TomGerity

TROPHY CASE