Wrestling with Outrage: Can Disgraced Wrestlers Find Redemption?

Before Hogan, some argued over how Chris Benoit should be remembered, often without considering Nancy and Daniel. Likewise, other Speaking Out “cancelled” wrestlers, like Marty Scurll, have been actively wrestling under the radar since 2021.

I’ll use the C word to emphasise how supposedly ostracised individuals, despite claims, are not always permanently excluded or have their livelihood destroyed.

Earlier this year, I discussed the historic roots and changes in how wrestlers have been blackballed before “cancelling” existed. Likewise, the limits of fan outrage, which cannot stop some wrestlers, like Tessa Blanchard, from returning despite backlash. Finally, social media has created a new type of kayfabe: performative outrage.

This sequel article builds on that groundwork to question how/if redemption is possible for disgraced, ostracised wrestlers to return to wrestling. Historically, the wrestling community has been a forgiving space. Social media complicates matters, beyond amplifying and stirring discord. The landscape sees more public scrutiny and exposure and, unfortunately, performative politics. The means of real change remain familiar.

Comparison and Retribution

Tribalism (but not exclusively) sometimes sees fans comparing wrestlers and allegations against them, like it’s a game of Top Trumps. Comparing WWE’s Brock Lesnar, whose name appears 44 times in the Janel Grant lawsuit, with AEW wrestlers who have received explicit (sometimes unsubstantiated rumoured) allegations against them is more than whataboutism. It’s more than false equivalency. It’s rarely about potential victims, their experience or justice.

Rather, it’s about justification and supporting an idea/cause/belief. Not the victims or their experiences. The gamification/commodification of women and their experiences in wrestling isn’t new. Individuals’ alleged actions should be judged separately, not compared alongside others.

Many fans want justice. For someone to be redeemed, there perhaps needs to be punishment. Wrestling is a cooperative enterprise requiring trust.

Retributive justice requires that wrongdoers be punished to prevent or stop them from repeating their actions. It’s satisfying in the short term when someone appears to “get what they deserve”.

However, look at the re-offending rates of former prisoners or the bank accounts of those with existing capital. Hogan took little responsibility publicly for his actions, yet Hogan and his brand continue to feature on the mat at each Raw while becoming symbolic of some of America’s lost glory days. Outrage and controversy serve as a social-political currency.

Alone, it doesn’t see meaningful change.

Restorative Justice, Support and Limitations

Contrastingly, restorative justice emphasizes that responsibility is taken through dialogue between the harmed and the harmer. A meaningful way of moving forward and healing wounds. In theory, rehabilitation that sees the victim given power to help decide the consequence and sees both parties find resolution and change.

Unlike retributive punishment is personal, not detached from the harmed. Less eye for an eye; more focused on healing than wounding. Although it’s complicated and not straightforward. It requires nuance, is time-consuming, and involves years of attempts and failures.

It also sometimes needs scaffolding to support it, in the form of rehabilitation, counselling, etc, to address underlying issues. Mental health issues, addiction, and trauma do not excuse behaviour, but often contribute towards it. Without addressing them, change is impossible.

Rehabilitation allowed Jake “The Snake” Roberts to Dustin Rhodes, who couldn’t have gained sobriety and contribute to wrestling again. Some find support in religion, like Shawn Michaels and Lex Luger, who found new purpose through religion.

Cynicism and criticism can remain. In 2010, Shane Helms called Michaels a hypocrite who used his religious conversion as a gimmick. However, years later, Helms said his claims came because they had “different ways of looking at things.”

There’s no one-size-fits-all model. Accountability is key, but it doesn’t guarantee acceptance or change history.

Apologies are Not Always Enough

Taking responsibility is step one. Subsequent follow-up and actions speak louder. When Jay Briscoe made homophobic comments about gay marriage in 2013 on X. Afterwards, Jay apologised, donated money to charity, and continued to declare he was wrong and stupid, even years after the incident.

“I put out a stupid tweet nine years ago, the most dumbest, immature, obnoxious s**t I’ve ever done. I don’t want anybody, from any walk of life, to feel like they can’t care for the Briscoes because I promise we love everybody.” Jay Briscoe, Battleground Podcast, transcript from Fightful.

Tony Khan’s biggest regret was never having Jay Briscoe on AEW programming. Sometimes, it’s as simple as one powerful person can determine someone’s future. This can breed frustration and comparison, especially if some feel another wrestler “got away with it”.

Will Ospreay apologised on X and offered his support to UK indy wrestler, Pollyanna. During Speaking Out, Ospreay was accused of having Pollyanna blacklisting from various UK promotions. Pollyanna rejected his apology. Whereas Ospreay on social media and TV appears to have grown up, winning new fans like myself, others have the right to be sceptical.

Redemption Should Be Hard, But When Appropriate, Possible

Skepticism is a valid response from some fans. Especially given how apologizing and public accountability in and beyond wrestling, can see figures take no/little responsibility, blame others, or appear to say the right things, only to repeat the same behaviors. Whether it is Ospreay, Sammy Guevara, or other wrestlers who have, now and in the future, they have to keep proving he has changed. Like sobriety, it’s a continual process.

Being a reliable and honest person isn’t an outrageous demand for a dream job in a trust-based business. Having to prove that their change is real is a small price to pay.

Avoiding accountability or failing to address accusations results in continual rejection. Although Tessa Blanchard apologized to Rosa Negra, what about the other women who accused Blanchard of bullying?  For some, redemption is possible through acceptance, responsibility and action.

We’ve seen this in the world outside of wrestling with Community and Rick and Morty creator, Dan Harmon, that those who abuse power can take ownership and meaningful support and make things right with those they hurt

However, the actions of some may be irredeemable. Trust perhaps maybe impossible to rebuild. Some wrestlers with a history of accusations and allegations, particularly patterns of abusive behavior, may never return to wrestling because of the damage caused. Those who want to prove they’ve changed could start by supporting those they harmed, if those harmed consent. There’s no guarantee or entitlement to forgiveness or redemption.

The business has always protected itself. Ideally, not at the cost of making wrestlers and fans, particularly women and those of minority groups, feel unsafe, unsupported or susceptible to harm.