9 ms·

> If football came into being today, people would riot in the streets. Who would pay money to watch mostly lower-class, mostly black[1] players permanently dama

by vacri 11y ago

> If football came into being today, people would riot in the streets. Who would pay money to watch mostly lower-class, mostly black[1] players permanently damage each other's brains and bodies? Mixed Martial Arts is a very popular sport which is exactly this (maybe not the 'mostly black' part), and as a spectator sport in the US has only really risen recently. No rioting in the streets against it yet. Also, given your criticisms, how do you find football more repugnant than professional boxing, given that the latter's explicit goal is to literally beat your opponent into submission?

chroma 11y ago
MMA likes to tout itself as the closest thing to a pure fight, but it's scarcely less restrictive than boxing. Fish-hooking, biting, eye-gouging, rabbit-punching, breaking and dislocating fingers and toes... those were never allowed. Even UFC 1 didn't come close to actual "anything goes" fights. And much of MMA's popularity is owed to the fact that public outrage has significantly tamed it. Many effective (but permanently damaging) moves are now banned. Fighters wear gloves to prevent broken hands and ugly faces. Refs err on the side of stopping the fight early, rather than letting a fighter suffer significant injury. Ethics-wise, I place MMA in the same bin as boxing. Speaking of which... It's hard to say whether I find boxing more repugnant than football. If I could wave a magic wand and eliminate one, I'd pick football due to its popularity. The number of people put through that meat grinder is much higher than the number of boxers. That said, I do find boxing abhorrent. Watching a boxing match, I get the same emotions as watching a disaster. Horrifying, yet fascinating. Some part of me is compelled to keep watching. I think most people are similarly affected.

9 ms·

> If football came into being today, people would riot in the streets. Who would pay money to watch mostly lower-class, mostly black[1] players permanently dama

by vacri 11y ago

chroma 11y ago
MMA likes to tout itself as the closest thing to a pure fight, but it's scarcely less restrictive than boxing. Fish-hooking, biting, eye-gouging, rabbit-punching, breaking and dislocating fingers and toes... those were never allowed. Even UFC 1 didn't come close to actual "anything goes" fights. And much of MMA's popularity is owed to the fact that public outrage has significantly tamed it. Many effective (but permanently damaging) moves are now banned. Fighters wear gloves to prevent broken hands and ugly faces. Refs err on the side of stopping the fight early, rather than letting a fighter suffer significant injury. Ethics-wise, I place MMA in the same bin as boxing. Speaking of which... It's hard to say whether I find boxing more repugnant than football. If I could wave a magic wand and eliminate one, I'd pick football due to its popularity. The number of people put through that meat grinder is much higher than the number of boxers. That said, I do find boxing abhorrent. Watching a boxing match, I get the same emotions as watching a disaster. Horrifying, yet fascinating. Some part of me is compelled to keep watching. I think most people are similarly affected.