5 ms·
I think the main issue, as briefly mentioned in the article, is that the dangers of football weren’t really known. Now, those dangers are known, and people stil
by njtransit 2y ago
I think the main issue, as briefly mentioned in the article, is that the dangers of football weren’t really known. Now, those dangers are known, and people still willingly choose to participate (for huge sums of money at the professional level). What is left to discuss?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- kbos87 2y agoFair point in the sense that most professions involve some level of trading your well being for labor, as anyone who works in a job that even remotely involves manual labor can tell you. The difference here, for me at least, is that my attention would directly subsidize a system that clearly costs young, often under-resourced minorities decades of their lives. That really should be tough for people to sit with.
- nunez 2y agoI'm sure people made the same argument when gladiator sports (that were played to the death) were a thing. Should a sport that demonstrably and predictably leaves so many of its players permanently handicapped so early into their lives solely for our entertainment continue to exist? I don't think so, but I'm biased, as I strongly dislike American football and the culture it espouses.
- njtransit 2y agoI’m pretty sure gladiators were slaves, so pretty much the opposite of willing participants.