4 ms·

Certainly the current surge of MMA popularity (perhaps abating) appears to me to be a return to more primitive western mores around violence. It is interesting

Certainly the current surge of MMA popularity (perhaps abating) appears to me to be a return to more primitive western mores around violence. It is interesting how eye gouging and biting were, even in greek times, considered out of bounds. Why? From where does this moral sense of fairness-in-violence come? Why would people cheer a man who has successfully broken another mans neck, but shun a man who has gouged another mans eyes out? One wonders if we will eventually return to widespread animal sport fighting.

stefs 12y ago
my guess is that you can't really effectively harden yourself against biting and eye gouging and neither takes it any skill to perform those moves. and they're comparably dangerous: eye going blinds you and biting can lead to potentially lethal infections days after the fight. the undefeated champion would be at risk of being blinded or infected by a desperate amateur without matching skills. it would take away from the spectacle and ruin an otherwise perfectly healthy athlete easily. breaking the neck, on the other hand, is NOT an easy task, especially if your opponent is also a trained wrestler. you need skill and strength and at least it's something for the audience. i'm pretty sure though that deaths happened rarely and were mostly the result of accidents. the fighters were athletes after all, not cold blooded murderers. they were in for the money and the fame. same with the soldiers; mutilating your fellow soldiers wouldn't be a good thing.
dougk16 12y ago
MMA, now and back then, is a business. Techniques like eye-gouging, small joint manipulation, etc. would put athletes out of subsequent fights for long periods of time or even permanently...not a good business model for anyone. With other types of submissions there is usually plenty of time to tap out to avoid permanent injury. So AFAIK there's no moral imperative at play here. I've also never witnessed a broken neck in my ten plus years of watching MMA. I'm sure it's happened, but most likely as an unfortunate accident and not intentionally.
_yosefk 12y ago
Rules must be such that enough people enjoy watching the fights, and enough people agree to fight. Presumably, few will agree to fight if nothing is off limits, and even if that is false, few will have the chance to gain the skills making the fights enjoyable before their eyes are gouged out. (Personally, I'm not into this sort of entertainment to say the least, but that is beside the point...)
- jetti 12y ago
  Modern day Vale Tudo is as close as you get to organized Pankration[1]. It has very limited rules and was (not sure if it still is) popular in Brazil. [1] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vale_tudo http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vale_tudo
scott_s 12y ago
I think you have some mistaken beliefs about the linked ancient sport, and modern MMA. The goal is a submission, that is, to put the other person into a position in which they have to submit, or they risk injury. So I find your "successfully broken another mans neck" question to be a non-sequitur. Breaking someone's neck is not a desired outcome, nor is it particularly likely. I practice Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, and have sparred a decent amount of MMA.
joaotorres 12y ago
From the WP article, they mention fights end with submission or when the judge stopped it. You seem to be implying that the competition is a fight to the death ("breaking someone's neck"), but that's not what the article says. It doesn't mean that death could or did not occur either, but just that it's not the main goal.

stefs 12y ago

my guess is that you can't really effectively harden yourself against biting and eye gouging and neither takes it any skill to perform those moves. and they're comparably dangerous: eye going blinds you and biting can lead to potentially lethal infections days after the fight. the undefeated champion would be at risk of being blinded or infected by a desperate amateur without matching skills. it would take away from the spectacle and ruin an otherwise perfectly healthy athlete easily. breaking the neck, on the other hand, is NOT an easy task, especially if your opponent is also a trained wrestler. you need skill and strength and at least it's something for the audience. i'm pretty sure though that deaths happened rarely and were mostly the result of accidents. the fighters were athletes after all, not cold blooded murderers. they were in for the money and the fame. same with the soldiers; mutilating your fellow soldiers wouldn't be a good thing.

dougk16 12y ago

MMA, now and back then, is a business. Techniques like eye-gouging, small joint manipulation, etc. would put athletes out of subsequent fights for long periods of time or even permanently...not a good business model for anyone. With other types of submissions there is usually plenty of time to tap out to avoid permanent injury. So AFAIK there's no moral imperative at play here. I've also never witnessed a broken neck in my ten plus years of watching MMA. I'm sure it's happened, but most likely as an unfortunate accident and not intentionally.

_yosefk 12y ago

Rules must be such that enough people enjoy watching the fights, and enough people agree to fight. Presumably, few will agree to fight if nothing is off limits, and even if that is false, few will have the chance to gain the skills making the fights enjoyable before their eyes are gouged out. (Personally, I'm not into this sort of entertainment to say the least, but that is beside the point...)

jetti 12y ago
Modern day Vale Tudo is as close as you get to organized Pankration[1]. It has very limited rules and was (not sure if it still is) popular in Brazil. [1] http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vale_tudo http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vale_tudo

scott_s 12y ago

I think you have some mistaken beliefs about the linked ancient sport, and modern MMA. The goal is a submission, that is, to put the other person into a position in which they have to submit, or they risk injury. So I find your "successfully broken another mans neck" question to be a non-sequitur. Breaking someone's neck is not a desired outcome, nor is it particularly likely. I practice Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu, and have sparred a decent amount of MMA.

joaotorres 12y ago

From the WP article, they mention fights end with submission or when the judge stopped it. You seem to be implying that the competition is a fight to the death ("breaking someone's neck"), but that's not what the article says. It doesn't mean that death could or did not occur either, but just that it's not the main goal.