3 ms·
> Do we want to deny people that chance to get out of poverty even though they have to knowingly risk their life? I honestly don't know because I didn't grow up
by majormajor 8y ago
> Do we want to deny people that chance to get out of poverty even though they have to knowingly risk their life? I honestly don't know because I didn't grow up poor.
I think this is unfortunately a specious question. It assumes that we can't give people other ways to get out of poverty, and hides that we the fans don't really give a shit about players getting out of poverty at all - we like the primal, violent aspects of the game. We don't just put up with them, they're what we've been optimizing for for decades. Even before we knew about the mental impacts we knew about the physical ones.
- jedberg 8y ago> we like the primal, violent aspects of the game Do we? I like the strategy. Honestly I'd get just as much enjoyment if they played touch football and replaced the line with counting to three banana.
- zrobotics 8y agoWhile some do, at least anecdotally IME people are more often fans of the more violent aspects of the game. So while it is possible to enjoy the game purely for the strategy involved, I suspect that isn't the majority opinion. I'm not a fan of the game, but I will freely admit that the violence is one of the main draws to me for hockey. There definitely is strategy & grace of motion involved in the game, but I can't deny that the visceral elements of the game are a big draw as a spectator. I would also feel fairly confident in stating that this is likely the majority opinion among fans of the sport.
- science4sail 8y agoThat does make me wonder what the market for actual gladiatorial games would be. I guess that the closest equivalent would be MMA?
- smileysteve 8y agoBased on "Hit Hit Hit" highlighted in the article, "we" seems accurate, otherwise, outplaying would be more important than physical.