7 ms·

"When you show overt contempt for sports you are showing contempt for most everybody and that is problem with your social skills." That's nice. What other corp

by timr 12y ago

"When you show overt contempt for sports you are showing contempt for most everybody and that is problem with your social skills." That's nice. What other corporate products must I consume in order to be a validated member of your social caste? How about this: "when you show overt contempt for fast food, you are showing contempt for most everybody, and that is a problem with your social skills." If I don't eat at McDonalds because I care about my health, am I unfit for socialization?

Goronmon 12y ago
That's nice. What other corporate products must I consume in order to be a validated member of your social caste? Whats funny is that you could actually bring up this topic with fans of mainstream sports (especially for the NFL) and probably get a decent discussion going. Just mention things like TV timeouts and you'll probably get some level of agreement on how annoying things have gotten these days. Of course, if you phrase it in a way similar to how you did above, people will most likely just think you were an asshole.
- timr 12y ago
  "Of course, if you phrase it in a way similar to how you did above, people will most likely just think you were an asshole." Of course, a similar thought most likely crossed my mind when I read the parent comment.
  - FireBeyond 12y ago
    The difference being the parent made a valid point that you're not even willing to entertain - the notion that people can enjoy a sport, at the highest level, without enjoying the crass commercialization that might accompany it. But you couldn't respond without an indictment of how brainwashed he is, in your opinion. I love basketball. I grew up playing and refereeing it. I lost interest for about a decade, because the culture got to be too much about the personality and antics, and not the game. I've only just gotten back into it in the last year because it seems to have shifted back. And there is a lot of fun to be had attending a game.
    - timr 12y ago
      "But you couldn't respond without an indictment of how brainwashed he is, in your opinion." I encourage you to quote that part of my comment. For bonus points, quote the part where I said I can't understand why people enjoy sports.
      - FireBeyond 12y ago
        "That's nice. What other corporate products must I consume in order to be a validated member of your social caste?" Go ahead, say, with a straight face, that such a remark was not effectively a paraphrasing of what I said and was a non-loaded question asked with sincerity. To claim that you were not implying some corporate brainwashing in what you said is, frankly, disingenuous.
        anextio 12y ago
        Your characterization of a product successfully marketed to people as "corporate brainwashing" whenever you don't like someone pointing out that a thing is perpetuated by corporate profit motives is also disingenuous. I think the commenter was being a bit of an ass too, but I think he still has a defensible point, and it's not the absurd point that you're making it out to be.
        FireBeyond 12y ago
        I'll agree. There's a healthy middle ground and I was exaggerating for emphasis. Suffice to say, this: I think that it's possible to enjoy sport at a professional / high level (or local for that matter), in itself, whilst still having something of a disdain for overly crass commercialization (which varies between sports).
  - briandear 12y ago
    The original comment seems to reinforce the article's point.
toolz 12y ago
Exactly. Sports aren't a healthy part of society. They are games mean to occupy the less curious people of our culture so they don't get bored and dissatisfied with their existence. There is nothing healthy about sports culture. The socialization is entirely tribal and the impact on humanities future is non-existent. Imagine if we game all our attention and praise to teachers and all of our money to successful charities. Imagine if it was a cutthroat competition to become the first team of intellectuals to solve today's difficult problems. Just because a vocal majority aren't hurting anyone, doesn't mean I have some moral obligation to respect your choices that do nothing for anyone.
- rinon 12y ago
  Why are sports unhealthy? They are in fact extremely healthy, in the physical sense. Professional sports are simply an outgrowth of more "natural" sporting activities. Sports, even the professional variety, are not carefully engineered social prisons, but an evolution of natural human activities: physical activity and training combined with competition and the desire to observe others who are better than one's self. We can imagine such an idealistic world, but this is completely unrealistic and crazy. People legitimately ENJOY watching and participating in sporting activities. You cannot (practically speaking) dictate what people should or should not enjoy. Suggesting better alternatives, fine, but insisting that others follow YOUR vision for a perfect world is self-centered and conceited. I would argue that you do have a moral obligation to respect other humans which includes not purposefully hurting people's feelings for no reason. If you don't like sports, fine, but that's no reason to put down people who do.
  - toolz 12y ago
    Professional sports are anything but healthy, as soon as competition is even remotely recognized and praised illicit drugs come onto the scene. As for a more idealistic world and my choice, I never even hinted at trying to legislate your ability to do what you want, but if you want me to clap and jump up and down and pick a favorite team because a bunch of grown people make ridiculous sums of money doing absolutely nothing for our future, well, count me out. I get it, it's comfortable to be in a vocal majority. I understand that in many conversations I'm not welcome if I don't have a favorite team. Humans are tribal creatures. Being in a majority doesn't give you some right to an unopposed position. Just because most everyone around you will agree with you doesn't make what you're doing right. If you would like to define some criteria and have a discussion about whether sports makes this world a better place I will gladly show you the fault in sports. Also to the person commenting that you could say the same for any type of entertainment (regarding it being useless). That couldn't be farther from the truth. I love aquaponics, for one. Finding new interesting ways to feed people is entertainment for me. It's not uncommon for people to enjoy creating and learning. That type of entertainment becoming more prevalent could have a significant impact on our future as a species.
rinon 12y ago
Having a valid reason why some activity is intrinsically bad (e.g. fast food) is very different from disliking such activities because they are "beneath" you. Sports are widely loved and not intrinsically bad. (I'd even argue that fast food itself is not intrinsically bad, but that's a different discussion) However, even expressing contempt for intrinsically bad activities can be interpreted as offensive and hostile. There's a difference between saying something is bad, and saying that someone is bad because they participate in or enjoy it. Making people feel bad for eating McDonalds is unlikely to make or keep friends and is therefore by definition a problem with your social skills.
- toolz 12y ago
  Sports are not intrinsically bad? Let's pretend a world without sports for a second. What do you see? I see a world where scientists and philanthropists are common household names. Where kids hero's are astronauts and firemen. I see a world where when someone makes a couple hundred million a year, they don't go immediately bankrupt after retiring because their industry wasn't intrinsically broken. That healthy panhandler who refuses to contribute to society gets no credit and recognition. Why should I recognize an athlete that take illicit drugs to perform well and teaches our youth that to be recognized you need to do something completely arbitrary and useless to society.
  - RobAtticus 12y ago
    Maybe that's the case if you also got rid of the other professions that make up celebrities: musicians, actors/actresses, etc. I doubt removing just sports would suddenly make scientists/philanthropists household names. You'd essentially have to get rid of all forms of entertainment to do that, which seems a bit ridiculous. Besides, many athletes ARE philanthropists, who work hard to give back to their communities. As to your last points, you shouldn't recognize athletes who take illicit drugs. Focus on the athletes who do things the right way: work hard, take care of themselves physically and financially, take care of their family/community, and so on. And besides, what makes you a better arbiter of what is useful to society?
    - 12y ago
hnnewguy 12y ago
>What other corporate products must I consume There is more to "sports" than watching them on TV. How about participating in them? It's good for your health, sort of like not eating McDonald's. >If I don't eat at McDonalds because I care about my health, am I unfit for socialization? There's a difference between "not eating" (or "not liking"), and "showing overt contempt" towards. So, yes. If you don't understand that, your social skills are probably lacking.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  > There is more to "sports" than watching them on TV. How about participating in them? The context here -- starting with the article, and followed in the thread prior to your response -- was participation in the culture of fandom of popular professional sports. Obvious, individual direct participation in sports is a completely different thing (and often a thing that competes with participation in fandom culture.)
  - Ar-Curunir 12y ago
    No, there is a direct relation. At least outside the US, many many children are inspired to go out and try and imitate their favourite sporting heroes, and even if they aren't athletic they usually are included in the larger community and get to play and socialize. This is definitely the case with soccer and cricket. I haven't seen a single case where being a fan has precluded children from going out and playing. Perhaps as adults the situation might be different, but their are a whole host of other factors at play there, including health and time issues.
    - dragonwriter 12y ago
      I wasn't talking specifically about children, and there is a big difference between saying an activity competes with another activity and saying that it precludes the other activity.
im3w1l 12y ago
>That's nice. What other corporate products must I consume in order to be a validated member of your social caste? I guess you ask that rhetorically, but I think it is an interesting question. I'd say you have to listen through the music top charts. You also have to watch most popular movies every year. There are more TV-series than there is time to watch, so I'd guess I'll say you only have to watch one or two of your choice. Read synopses of the rest. Furthermore you should have at least some passing familiarity with the most popular games, but there is no need to go all out. 10 hours each in final fantasy, mario, random flash games(10h total), mobile games(10h total), counterstrike, starcraft, league of legends, dota, wow,
- XorNot 12y ago
  Eh. This is more like just saying that you need enough general knowledge to sustain a conversation if you want to get along with people, and that you don't repeat yourself too often. The person who is into <extraordinarily specific topic, no matter how interesting> is always tiring to be around after a while (and can create a very one-sided social interaction).

by timr 12y ago

Goronmon 12y ago

That's nice. What other corporate products must I consume in order to be a validated member of your social caste? Whats funny is that you could actually bring up this topic with fans of mainstream sports (especially for the NFL) and probably get a decent discussion going. Just mention things like TV timeouts and you'll probably get some level of agreement on how annoying things have gotten these days. Of course, if you phrase it in a way similar to how you did above, people will most likely just think you were an asshole.

timr 12y ago
"Of course, if you phrase it in a way similar to how you did above, people will most likely just think you were an asshole." Of course, a similar thought most likely crossed my mind when I read the parent comment.
- FireBeyond 12y ago
  The difference being the parent made a valid point that you're not even willing to entertain - the notion that people can enjoy a sport, at the highest level, without enjoying the crass commercialization that might accompany it. But you couldn't respond without an indictment of how brainwashed he is, in your opinion. I love basketball. I grew up playing and refereeing it. I lost interest for about a decade, because the culture got to be too much about the personality and antics, and not the game. I've only just gotten back into it in the last year because it seems to have shifted back. And there is a lot of fun to be had attending a game.
  - timr 12y ago
    "But you couldn't respond without an indictment of how brainwashed he is, in your opinion." I encourage you to quote that part of my comment. For bonus points, quote the part where I said I can't understand why people enjoy sports.
    - FireBeyond 12y ago
      "That's nice. What other corporate products must I consume in order to be a validated member of your social caste?" Go ahead, say, with a straight face, that such a remark was not effectively a paraphrasing of what I said and was a non-loaded question asked with sincerity. To claim that you were not implying some corporate brainwashing in what you said is, frankly, disingenuous.
      - anextio 12y ago
        Your characterization of a product successfully marketed to people as "corporate brainwashing" whenever you don't like someone pointing out that a thing is perpetuated by corporate profit motives is also disingenuous. I think the commenter was being a bit of an ass too, but I think he still has a defensible point, and it's not the absurd point that you're making it out to be.
        FireBeyond 12y ago
        I'll agree. There's a healthy middle ground and I was exaggerating for emphasis. Suffice to say, this: I think that it's possible to enjoy sport at a professional / high level (or local for that matter), in itself, whilst still having something of a disdain for overly crass commercialization (which varies between sports).
- briandear 12y ago
  The original comment seems to reinforce the article's point.

toolz 12y ago

Exactly. Sports aren't a healthy part of society. They are games mean to occupy the less curious people of our culture so they don't get bored and dissatisfied with their existence. There is nothing healthy about sports culture. The socialization is entirely tribal and the impact on humanities future is non-existent. Imagine if we game all our attention and praise to teachers and all of our money to successful charities. Imagine if it was a cutthroat competition to become the first team of intellectuals to solve today's difficult problems. Just because a vocal majority aren't hurting anyone, doesn't mean I have some moral obligation to respect your choices that do nothing for anyone.

rinon 12y ago
Why are sports unhealthy? They are in fact extremely healthy, in the physical sense. Professional sports are simply an outgrowth of more "natural" sporting activities. Sports, even the professional variety, are not carefully engineered social prisons, but an evolution of natural human activities: physical activity and training combined with competition and the desire to observe others who are better than one's self. We can imagine such an idealistic world, but this is completely unrealistic and crazy. People legitimately ENJOY watching and participating in sporting activities. You cannot (practically speaking) dictate what people should or should not enjoy. Suggesting better alternatives, fine, but insisting that others follow YOUR vision for a perfect world is self-centered and conceited. I would argue that you do have a moral obligation to respect other humans which includes not purposefully hurting people's feelings for no reason. If you don't like sports, fine, but that's no reason to put down people who do.
- toolz 12y ago
  Professional sports are anything but healthy, as soon as competition is even remotely recognized and praised illicit drugs come onto the scene. As for a more idealistic world and my choice, I never even hinted at trying to legislate your ability to do what you want, but if you want me to clap and jump up and down and pick a favorite team because a bunch of grown people make ridiculous sums of money doing absolutely nothing for our future, well, count me out. I get it, it's comfortable to be in a vocal majority. I understand that in many conversations I'm not welcome if I don't have a favorite team. Humans are tribal creatures. Being in a majority doesn't give you some right to an unopposed position. Just because most everyone around you will agree with you doesn't make what you're doing right. If you would like to define some criteria and have a discussion about whether sports makes this world a better place I will gladly show you the fault in sports. Also to the person commenting that you could say the same for any type of entertainment (regarding it being useless). That couldn't be farther from the truth. I love aquaponics, for one. Finding new interesting ways to feed people is entertainment for me. It's not uncommon for people to enjoy creating and learning. That type of entertainment becoming more prevalent could have a significant impact on our future as a species.

rinon 12y ago

Having a valid reason why some activity is intrinsically bad (e.g. fast food) is very different from disliking such activities because they are "beneath" you. Sports are widely loved and not intrinsically bad. (I'd even argue that fast food itself is not intrinsically bad, but that's a different discussion) However, even expressing contempt for intrinsically bad activities can be interpreted as offensive and hostile. There's a difference between saying something is bad, and saying that someone is bad because they participate in or enjoy it. Making people feel bad for eating McDonalds is unlikely to make or keep friends and is therefore by definition a problem with your social skills.

toolz 12y ago
Sports are not intrinsically bad? Let's pretend a world without sports for a second. What do you see? I see a world where scientists and philanthropists are common household names. Where kids hero's are astronauts and firemen. I see a world where when someone makes a couple hundred million a year, they don't go immediately bankrupt after retiring because their industry wasn't intrinsically broken. That healthy panhandler who refuses to contribute to society gets no credit and recognition. Why should I recognize an athlete that take illicit drugs to perform well and teaches our youth that to be recognized you need to do something completely arbitrary and useless to society.
- RobAtticus 12y ago
  Maybe that's the case if you also got rid of the other professions that make up celebrities: musicians, actors/actresses, etc. I doubt removing just sports would suddenly make scientists/philanthropists household names. You'd essentially have to get rid of all forms of entertainment to do that, which seems a bit ridiculous. Besides, many athletes ARE philanthropists, who work hard to give back to their communities. As to your last points, you shouldn't recognize athletes who take illicit drugs. Focus on the athletes who do things the right way: work hard, take care of themselves physically and financially, take care of their family/community, and so on. And besides, what makes you a better arbiter of what is useful to society?
  - 12y ago

hnnewguy 12y ago

>What other corporate products must I consume There is more to "sports" than watching them on TV. How about participating in them? It's good for your health, sort of like not eating McDonald's. >If I don't eat at McDonalds because I care about my health, am I unfit for socialization? There's a difference between "not eating" (or "not liking"), and "showing overt contempt" towards. So, yes. If you don't understand that, your social skills are probably lacking.

dragonwriter 12y ago
> There is more to "sports" than watching them on TV. How about participating in them? The context here -- starting with the article, and followed in the thread prior to your response -- was participation in the culture of fandom of popular professional sports. Obvious, individual direct participation in sports is a completely different thing (and often a thing that competes with participation in fandom culture.)
- Ar-Curunir 12y ago
  No, there is a direct relation. At least outside the US, many many children are inspired to go out and try and imitate their favourite sporting heroes, and even if they aren't athletic they usually are included in the larger community and get to play and socialize. This is definitely the case with soccer and cricket. I haven't seen a single case where being a fan has precluded children from going out and playing. Perhaps as adults the situation might be different, but their are a whole host of other factors at play there, including health and time issues.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    I wasn't talking specifically about children, and there is a big difference between saying an activity competes with another activity and saying that it precludes the other activity.

im3w1l 12y ago

>That's nice. What other corporate products must I consume in order to be a validated member of your social caste? I guess you ask that rhetorically, but I think it is an interesting question. I'd say you have to listen through the music top charts. You also have to watch most popular movies every year. There are more TV-series than there is time to watch, so I'd guess I'll say you only have to watch one or two of your choice. Read synopses of the rest. Furthermore you should have at least some passing familiarity with the most popular games, but there is no need to go all out. 10 hours each in final fantasy, mario, random flash games(10h total), mobile games(10h total), counterstrike, starcraft, league of legends, dota, wow,

XorNot 12y ago
Eh. This is more like just saying that you need enough general knowledge to sustain a conversation if you want to get along with people, and that you don't repeat yourself too often. The person who is into <extraordinarily specific topic, no matter how interesting> is always tiring to be around after a while (and can create a very one-sided social interaction).