It hasn't done anything to US ....

Ultimate fighting has done nothing to us except provide what our soul craves!
We pride ourselves on our progess as a people .... yet we still allow killing of babies .... why should this sport raise any eyebrows?
People are still people, and we are uglier than we want to believe.

Let them eat cake

More "Bread and Circuses"
I can go to one of these exhibits or watch it on TV and get all pumped up but I can not smoke a cigarette withing 10 feet or meters from the doors of City Hall.
What Fools these mortals be!
I don't buy in to the EOTWAWKI theory
But this revival of violence as entertainment makes me wonder.
Better than another world war, I guess.

As the whole world is

As the whole world is watching soccer where purposely inflicting pain is punished and extremely skilled players will fake pain to get an advantage, in Vancouver we are promoting a 'goon' sport where inflicting pain is the main purpose. Africans were inspired to create the 'diski' dance, a'vuvuzela' horn, colorful hats and clothing, a sense of 'we' rather than 'I'. What will ultimate fighting inspire in its fans?
It might be telling that in the once powerful economies like USA and Japan and those inclined to emulate USA like Canada, ultimate fighting is popular. In emerging economies like Africa physical skill without violence and team work are inspirational. We might ask our children if they would rather become ultimate fighters or super soccer stars.

Jimorsheryl

That has to be the most ridiculous comment I've ever heard.

You've conflated a difficult and very 'personal' decision between a woman and her doctor with an appallingly brutal spectacle of violence staged for money.

You can't be serious.

I just hope the people who voted for Gregor Robinson and James Moore are paying attention.

Both the biking mayor and 'big guy' Moore ought to be ashamed at their support for this childish and brutally absurd nonsense.

As for the fella who says MMA are 'a way of living' for him - please, read Chuck Palahniuk's novel and think a little bit about the existential swamp you're swimming in when you say such ridiculous things.

The problems of the world won't be addressed by non-thinking males who revert to violence to show themselves they haven't become too tied to their mothers' apron strings.

Please, give yourselves a break - it's an illusion and you're all walking in your sleep.

There's a world out there to engage in.

Grow up.

Tame the savage beast

Looks like we are going back to the past, gladiator style.

G West ...

I am with you 100%. You took the words, on all topics, right out of my mouth. Thank you.

bread and circuses

little different from roman gladiator events, cockfights and pitbulls in the ring.

and marc emery is doing solitary in seattle for selling pot seeds to usa. are we civilized or what??

It is sick.

I can't imagine what is so uplifting about watching people try to beat their brains out. I never watch boxing of anykind for this reason. I guess you really have to be someone of small brain to think this is entertaining. Im guess next we'll put a few guys in the ring with some lions just for fun.

Injury count

Five fighters went to hospital, not just three, according to the Vancouver Sun. Clearly, enterprising UFC fans should hang out by the Vancouver Hospital emergency ward to collect their wobbly autographs.

Anything to distract the various sheeple

While the Bildenberg Group does its thing!

"Human cockfighting"

The notion that popularity = acceptable is not the way we develop our moral community standards. So this non sequitur needs to be quashed from the outset of the debate. I have no doubt that if real snuff films were available on PPV, ratings would go crazy, too. The debate should have nothing to do with popularity.

Nor do I buy the if you can't beat 'em, join 'em arguments that suggest if we don't cash in on the spectacle, someone else will. This evades the moral question, and is not how we determine our community standards.

Nor do I buy the feeble argument that if we don't sanction it, we'll be left with illegal, back alley fight clubs. Nonsense, and no evidence to suggest this. This non sequitur is part of Dana White's PR strategy. This is the same slick PR campaign that has White saying there are more injuries in badminton than MMA. White is banking on our inability as a society to detect the absurd fallacy in these kinds of arguments.

The real questions boil down to: Is it good, safe, healthy for our community. I don't mean financially good. Is it morally good? I think the answer is obvious. "Human cockfighting" is not something I want to have to explain as socially acceptable to my kids.

Martial arts have always been, in my understanding, a defensive philosophy, not a destroy-to-the-death cage match philosophy. These arts are to be used in as a last resort, to avoid conflict, not create it. UFA throws that all out the window and has a well-oiled PR machine to defend this barbarism as legitimate sport or martial arts. I'm offended as much by the actual violence as I am by the symbolism surrounding this blood activity.

Make no mistake. This is not sport and its not harmless PPV fun. This is big business founded on the cynical truism that violence always sells if marketed and packaged properly.

We do not determine our community standards via a a couple of city council meetings.

Why didn't this article, or

Why didn't this article, or any posters, mention the 2 fighters in the main event are a teacher and accountant or that they have shown incredible discipline and commitment both mentally and physically to get were they're at? Oh ya it's much easier to spout rhetoric that exposes your gross ignorance. I have a great idea. If you don't like it don't watch it. If you don't want your kids watching it then don't let them watch it.

Let's take a look at the

Let's take a look at the winner of the main event. Remember he's a terrible blood thirsty human been who's leading the moral demise of society.

"Prior to becoming a full time MMA fighter, Franklin graduated from William Henry Harrison High School. He earned a bachelor's degree in mathematics and later earned a master's degree in education at the University of Cincinnati,[2] and taught mathematics at the Oak Hills High School in Cincinnati, Ohio.[3]

Franklin and American Fighter President Jeff Adler created The Keep It In The Ring Foundation to advocate non-violence and build character in youth. This is done through after school sports, martial arts and life skills programs."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich_Franklin

Terrible, terrible person.

Sloan

It's not the sport I hate, it's their fans.

Jim says

Franklin and American Fighter President Jeff Adler created The Keep It In The Ring Foundation to advocate non-violence and build character in youth. This is done through after school sports, martial arts and life skills programs."
that's all well and good but small communities that don't have a program such as you described have a great many admirers of MMA that go to the bars on the weekend, pick fights and bash each others heads in. I see more young men at my gymn that have black eyes, cuts and abrasions and swollen lips who wear them as a badge of honour. They come to the gymn for one reason and that is to get stronger so they can inflict more damage to their next opponent. And all of this is unsupervised. The character these people are building isn't something I'd want anything to do with.

It makes sense to me.

So you get a masters degree in education and degree in mathematics and your contribution to the human condition is to beat another's brains out while he tries to do the same to you. This shows "that they have shown incredible discipline and commitment both mentally and physically to get were they're at?" I guess it really is easier to spout rhetoric about how character building it is. I'm with barney on this one and it makes no sense that your education can't produce anything better.

a sport that takes into all

a sport that takes into all human gifts an abilities is only sinister to those who hate human liberty.

Enjoy your moral outrage while we robber barons rule the world. What a waste of pixels this whiny, hateful screed this article is - it's like a very ugly woman hating an attractive female and trying to find reasons to hate her sister.

Get a grip.

commitment both mentally and physically to get were they're at?"

Reminds me of a joke:
Homey just arrived at Oxford and "shucks and Jives" up to a Senior and asks:
"Can You tell me where the Library is at?"
Senior: "My Good Man: At Oxford we do NOT end our sentences with a preposition!"
Homey: "OK, can you tell me where the library is at, A$$hole?"

This idiocy has nothing to

This idiocy has nothing to do with "freedom", but the glorification of brutal force against others to rule, otherwise known as "dictatorship".

The Roman circuses, with thousands being killed to the cheering of the plebes, boomed with the growth of dictatorship and the worst emperors.

In a way, it is the symbolic representation of our economic system that glorifies destruction and violence, calling it "efficiency"

Ed Deak.

Gangsters have needs too

Gangsters have wholly supported the rise of this so called sport in Vancouver right from the start. Creates new business opportunities for them and where better to find new recruits that relish the smell of fresh blood when needed. What better way to desensitize the public on the subject of violence and mollify their trail of gore. How naive does one have to be not to realize the connection of the two?

gladiators

Historically, public gladiatorial bloodsports have always been the hallmark of decadent societies.

Still, it might be a useful way to divert the energies of some who might be tempted to use their violent tendencies in less organized way.

Go Away UFC

Is says a lot about an organization that is willing to bully a city into allowing these violent events to take place. The Mayor of NYC resisted such bullying and has not allowed UFC events to take place in New York. Unfortunately, the Mayor of Vancouver has allowed Dana White to bully his way into Vancouver and bring his thuggish brand of entertainment right into our neighbourhood.

While the Mayor and VPD has been out praising the UFC and the success of this event, the residents around GM Place were horrified to learn one of our neighbours was brutally attacked and robbed right in front of their condo building on Keefer Place an hour after the UFC event let out.

While the Mayor, VPD and UFC will do everything they can to distance themselves from the violence and vandalism that took place in our neighbourhood after the UFC event, the people who live here know otherwise and do no appreciate hearing the Mayor praising the organizers of this event for doing a heckuva job.

http://www.cknw.com/Channels/Reg/NewsLocal/Story.aspx?ID=1241534

As the VPD had a huge contingent of Anti-Gang Units on duty inside the stadium, they knew the kind of crowd this event would attract. Yet the police presence on our streets outside the stadium was nearly non-existent. Why?

I would be happy if the Mayor took New York City's lead and banned the UFC from hosting events in Vancouver. It's not worth the threats, vandalism and violence the UFC fans are prone to.

'...terrible, terrible person...

One should understand having received a bachelor's and masters degree that every person is capable of good and bad and that one must judge each act to see whether its overall effect favors the public good. No one is against improving personal skills but making a public spectacle of inflicting pain to another has no redeeming qualities to my way of thinking. Real martial arts masters can make their opponents 'give' with a simple touch. To the best of my knowledge no masters take part in these competitions, just as no sage would partake in the 'are you smarter than a 5th grader'. How learning is used is surely as important as what is learned.

What has ultimate fighting done to us

First of all, I like to watch and have participated in competitive activities/sports.
Yes, we all dislike having our personal freedoms limited and also there are many sports that can cause major injuries and even death.
There are some that have UNACCEPTABLE INTENT.
Perhaps, none of the participants may be uneducated and or unrespected citizens... So were some mass murderers.
However, in our society the Law places a great deal on a factor that is called "intent". For example, killing someone without intent versus with intent is substantial i.e. murder one versus crime of passion or accident with a much smaller penalty.
In a sport such as Ultimate Fighting, clearly, the intent is to physically hurt the oponent at no matter what the (bodily harm) cost to win.
It is OUR SOCIETY that has made the "norm" that an intent to harm another human (and even an animal)is punishable by law. Therefore, to justify a sport that has that (to harm) intent is "abnormal" and therefore should be illegal.
If we choose to change that - are we not also changing a much broader legal implication and is that really what the majority of our society wants?

Follow the money

The article’s by-line is typical of the not uncommon thinking that tries to divert attention away from our failure to take personal responsibility for our behaviour. It’s easier to find some else to blame.

The reality is UFC has done nothing to us. Whatever it is that is supposedly being done cannot be attributed to what takes place in the cage: we do it to ourselves.

A more meaningful title would read, “What, exactly, has the city bought into?”

Cage fighting is all about money and the fact the promotors have found an easy way to capitalize on the palpable upwelling of anger and hostility that exists on the street.

This profiteering is sanctioned by officialdom, who have also bought into the blame game, when they try telling us that the concussions, broken bones and the spilling of copious quantities of blood are now “properly regulated”. Yup, that’s a good enough reason for me. Bring it on!

Why do so many Canadians like it? You certainly won’t find the answer in this article.

Wanting to know what it feels like to kill someone?

This makes me think of a number of instances of violence I've read or heard about. In one case, four guys surrounded a friend's nephew, and would have beat him to death had it not been for an off-duty cop who came along. Although they admitted guilt, there was a meager legal sanction as they had no criminal history. When I heard the story, it sounded like these four guys, wanted to know what it felt to kill someone with their bare hands and they almost did it. They were 'new' Canadians, and probably not aware of the decent Canadian notion that four against one is a completely unfair fight.

I think the attraction of MMA is that we can't go out and kill someone without legal sanction. MMA is living vicariously. Look at all the people fodder who get dispatched and offed in all sorts of movies. Other human beings, mostly men, are depicted as disposable because they are bad (and deserved to die). Or, they are with the good guys, but wear the wrong colour shirt, so they are toast.

This interest in MMA is in part the lure of forbidden fruit, but also the result of a society where violence is fetishized. I see a connection to the idea that in a highly sexualized society, young women seem to have lost the ability to judge whether clothing is provocative. Fashionable is the first point, but when music videos and advertising equate dressing fashionably with dressing provocatively, the notion of appropriateness is frequently lost to sluttiness.

Good question, KWD

I don't know the answer.
Maybe something to do with being really safe in one's living room (unless your living room happens to be in Oliver) and watching reality TV - the bashing of bits and parts off actual people.
It seems to be a reaction to a perception of undefined danger "out there".
Maybe if I watch these guys and pump iron I can defend myself from anything?
Just remember:
"Never bring a knife to a gunfight."

Feros Ferio

I believe this activity should be allowed to continue and expand. Society could move from these kind of fights to knife fights. Moving them from the streets to the ring hopefully would make the streets safer and ultimately remove from society the participants in this endeavour. Maybe we could even find a venue for gun fights. Wouldn't that be exciting?
You may ridicule this but think how much society will advance!

Context, context...

"the 2 fighters in the main event are a teacher and accountant .."

"Prior to becoming a full time MMA fighter, Franklin graduated from William Henry Harrison High School. He earned a bachelor's degree in mathematics and later earned a master's degree in education at the University of Cincinnati,[2] and taught mathematics at the Oak Hills High School in Cincinnati, Ohio."

I don't see what these CV's have to do with anything. What occupations would make it more or less acceptable to involve oneself in this activity? The logic is not there...I know people who graduated from all sorts of fine places, but who are not interested in fisticuffs. Are people suggesting this is somehow an occupational hazard of certain job categories?? Please clarify.

And, GWest, you must surely be wrong in that the talk is about abortion! I feel certain the writer is referring to the carnage of young people on our higways and in our streets, even if most of them no longer qualify as 'babies', I think this is just metaphorical in the case in question.

I Wonder -

if the "cage" contained two dogs trying to kill each other, how long would the "sporting event" be tolerated by society?

Libertarians of all stripes (or politics) are dangerous. The willingness of participants and spectators to enjoy the infliction of pain upon another cognitive being is indicative of the danger to society involved in that so-called "freedom."

Our Canadian interpretation of peace, order, and good government must always supersede the individualistic life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, especially when that "life" is debased, that "liberty" is abused, and that "happiness" is achieved at another's expense.

Addendum -

I'm also reminded of the selfish attitude of so many who do things like ski or snowmobile out of bounds but expect rescue by society when things go wrong. Who is paying for the broken arm to be re-set in a cast, or the overtime for police crowd control, etc.?

To answer the question "Why

To answer the question "Why do so many Canadians love it?" I'd guess because as a whole we're not really a classy bunch.

What has Ultimate Fighting done to us?

UFC is a reflection of the mores of a significant portion of our society, so perhaps we are all associated with it to some extent. To ban this exhibiton would merely be to drive it undergound (again?). So perhaps it should be allowed where the majority wish it to occur. That may be nowhere within our country, but perhaps some jurisdicitons may favout it; if not, then perhaps let it occur in some rules-free zone (similar to a duty-free zone). There all the afficionados may congregate to see their heroes bash each other ad nauseum, whilst quaffing ales or other drugs of choice, with knife in hand to fend off foes of all that is good and right. Oh, and by the way, repairs to mind and body are at THEIR expense, not ours, for competitors and fans alike.

driftwolf

There is always Afghanistan..........

recruit them!

I feel sure that the military will set up a recruiting kiosk outside the next event!
Surely the easiest way to find testosterone-filled fools, who are eager to get to play with all the toys they advertize so much.

Tragically Pretentious

I knew an article like this would finally appear, and I looked forward to it... but I am a little surprised by the reaction.

The distortion of facts here is truly amazing. This sport is not "mortal" combat or human cockfighting. The UFC coming to town is not going to lead to sanctioned knife fighting.

Do we really, really, really, really, think that each athlete is going into the ring with the intent of "killing" or permanently maiming their opponent? Has a fighter ever simply "lost control" and snapped an opponents neck with the intent of legally killing someone? I am sure it could and might happen one day.... but it really doesn't, because it would be murder.

I understand that there is a dislike for the audience - the 18-34 male. But problems with this demographic existed long before the UFC.

Please people, use a bit of reason and even a little fact in your arguments.

As I read...

... these (mostly) very good responses, I can't help but think that this one "sport" will, more than any other thing in society, lead to the large-scale implementation of public videocameras and the attendant loss of privacy.

No proof, no reasoning, just a feeling....

All you really had to do....

to understand what we are up against was to watch the actions and the faces of the youths at this "show." They truly frightened this old man. I feel sorry for the next generation if this is the kind of "sport" they will have to indulge in to prove themselves "men."

Moat

I think that a reality check is in order. The UFC pays a bonus to the best knockouts of one of their extravaganzas. Dana White announced that three of the winners each will receive a bonus of $85,000 for their efforts here in Vancouver. Pray tell which discipline this bonus reflects on. From my perspective, it is the discipline of marketing, nothing more.

I was a fan of boxing in my younger years, watching some fights on TV and listening to many of them on the radio. In those days technology was pretty rudimentary. One could obviously see nothing on the radio, but even the televised events were not indicative of the power a punch to the head can have. It was only later in life, when technology improved to the point that one could see the impact of a gloved fist contorting his opponents face to such a degree that the recipient was unrecognizeable that I became a non-fan. Seeing Sean O'Sullivan interviewed on television not too long ago just reaffirmed my suspicions of such sports. He has suffered permanent brain damage, and for what? A few bucks. Notariety? Infamy? Who knows. I'm not even sure that he can tell us now.

If the UFC only allowed the competitors to use the marshall arts that do not involve knocking out their opponent, they would have been out of business long ago. There is no redeeming value in this supposed sport, and I use the term sport loosely.

MichaelT

Liberty for you, but police surveillance for others.

http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Olympics2010/2009/12/01/undercover-cop-infiltrate/

Freedom of opinion for you, but ridicule for others.

http://thetyee.ca/ArtsAndCulture/2009/08/21/MallsRUs/

The moral outrage of robber barons? Or EI prince?
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/Federal-Politics/2009/11/06/NDP-to-vote-against-NST-bribe-funds-Layton/

A little more logic couldn't hurt your cause.

Whatever it is.

You have no clue part 1.

MMA is a brutal sport, no doubt about it, but there are many brutal sports in the world, and I don't think you can argue that sports like hockey have had a negative influence on people.

That being said I will now take your article paragraph by paragraph and tell you how you are wrong and why.

To the point about people being sent to the hospital, that is a safety precaution to make sure that nobody are severely injured.
Bones get broken in any physical sport, it's a part of life, Franklin even said he was going to keep fighting if he had to and that a broken bone didnt phase him that much, this shows how dedicated these people are to their sport and what kind of athletes who the UFC promotes.

What the hell does what two fans did an hour after the event have to do with the UFC, honestly. Should we blame Christianity for some wacked up loon who kills 3 abortion doctors? OF COURSE NOT, video game studies have shown that violent games do not make violent people, however people with a predisposition to violence will be attracted to them, I believe this to be the same with MMA (and let's be honest, video games are much more immersive than watching MMA).

Now I believe the way yous speak of James Moore is a bit unfortunate, it shows how you lack substance in your argument and instead have to retort to petty personal insults instead of arguing for/against MMA.

When you start talking about the roman gladiator and gang clothing you still seem to lack substance, idolization of gladiatory matches is nothing new in the western world, and using it as a symbol for warrior is yet even more common, I wish you would just stick to the case instead of going "GOT YA" at every small detail that resemble violent images.
And as you argue for the gateway drug to more violence position you forget that arguments should often be factually based instead of making assumptions that the human mind is so simplistic that it cannot distinguish between entertainment and right or wrong, there are of course violent sociopaths out there, but these aren't a product of their environment and definitively not from watching MMA as they have a predisposition to violence.

As you talked to miss Woodsworth I believe you should have asked fundamental questions such as studies that show how violent imagery in return creates more violence, show me one, and I can show you two that argue differently.

To be continued

You have no clue part 2.

You should also ask her to explain how an organized sport, turn into random acts of violence, the link really doesn't exist as I have argued earlier, but to clarify my stance, MMA is a sport that is a mixture of different martial arts, many are viewed as legitimate activities on their own, it has many rules designed to protect the fighters, and the entire setting makes it surreal for someone looking for an ultraviolent expression that they can apply to their own lives, instead I believe that it will get mroe kids interested in Martial arts, which I believe is a good thing, as they promote a healthy body and mind.

Reading down further I again see that you retort to petty personal attacks for his political beliefs instead of sticking to the issue.

You are right however that Mccain is a hypocrite, but I do not understand why you have to throw race into the mix, there are a lot of black MMA fighters as there are white.

Again you bring race into it, the reason the UFC and MMA is popular is because people wants to see it, you can't say that because one of the top P4P fighters are Canadian that automatically ensures that the sport becomes successful. No, people see something they like, that is it, there is no rocket science behind it, it is how a (relatively) free market works, if you offer something people want they will buy it.

To summarize I feel that you, and everyone who thinks that their moral and nonfactual opinions should impose on others are wrong, unless you can show REAL and scientific evidence of MMA having a huge negative impact on society, you should take the route of least resistance and just don't give the UFC your money.

Everyone misses the point...

Regardless what you think of UFC, it is a legal activity. It is also a consensual activity between adults who are capable of making their own decisions. In a free society, you have the option to participate or not. But you don't have the right to impose your moral values to ban legal activities.

Although I am not a fan, I'd like to point out that the biggest fans of these sports are working-class guys like me...the guys the NDP claim to represent. So for all of you silver-spooned socialists trying to protect us great unwashed from ourselves, please stop. We don't need your protection.

Sure thing. Long live wars

Sure thing. Long live wars and let's have some public gunfights between the "conservative" free enterprise gangs.

Now, have the injured been treated free under medicare, or don't they need any such socialist help and protection ?

Ed Deak.

Ed Deak,

It's complicated

Should UFC fights and other MMA events be allowed in Vancouver? The funny thing is, Predicted, I think they should be. I didn't take a position in the article, because my objective was simply to illustrate some of the complexities of the issue. However, in the end I think that while harm is caused by the UFC, greater harm is caused by telling people they can't pay to watch two consenting adults elbow each other as hard as they can in the nose, notwithstanding laws (prizefighting distinctions aside) that say we should not intentionally cause harm to another person. And I can't show you any empirical studies to support my position. I also respect James Moore's view on the UFC, even though I don't share his affection for the sport. I have less respect for people who attack others personally when they take a position that doesn't accord with their own. I think that's pretty clear in the story. I also think people should spend less energy on visceral argument and more energy on closely reading what others have said.

alive

Faced with the very real possibility of having to take it (in the fatal sense of of the meaning) as well as dishing it out, duck-and-cover would be the order of the day for most of "the boys".

Get Beyond the Hype

While I respect that not everyone enjoys MMA, I do wish that we could step back a bit and look at some of the criticism of it in the context of sports in general.

Why is it that some posters here are shocked by Rich Franklin's broken arm, but not by Didier Drogba's broken arm in the run up to the World Cup? Or by the countless shattered knees, ribs, shoulders, or noses suffered in football or hockey? Injuries are an unfortunate part of contact sports, but why does MMA have to defend itself more than others?

I'm sure some might say "well, that's because the violence in MMA is intentional, and in other pro sports it's accidental". Let's be honest about that...all professional hockey and football teams put enforcers on their teams, whose sole job is to hit (and in some cases intentionally injure) smaller and more agile players. At least if you compete in MMA, the guy trying to hurt you is right in front of you instead of trying to hit you from behind. And yet the idea of banning hockey would NEVER be tolerated in Canadian society ;)

The safety record of martial arts in general, and MMA in particular is far better than that of football, hockey, or as an earlier poster mentioned, cheer leading. The reason for this is that MMA fighters and organizers are well aware of the dangers of their techniques, and train to avoid them whenever possible.

A particularly good example of this surrounds the "referee stoppage" system in MMA, where the ref will stop the fight not when the fighter is completely out cold, but the moment the fighter has stopped defending him/herself. In boxing, being able to get back up again and again within a 10 count results in the possibility of multiple concussions in a match...and brain damage for the fighters later on in life. The same concussions occur in hockey or football, where players are often pressured to return to the game after "shaking off the cobwebs". Interestingly enough, there are many MMA fighters in their early 40s who are still as spry (mentally and physically) as ever, something unheard of in boxing or football, and uncommon in hockey.

Visually, MMA is bloodier than other contact sports...no doubt about it. Anyone with a clumsy 4 year old knows that cuts on the scalp, even when superficial, will bleed like crazy and result in some tears and ice cream to put things right. But I think this sport has been held up to some unfair scrutiny by the media (and some on this forum).

descent into madness

The justification for cage fighting probably comes from the same Machiavellian realist mindset that seem to have found its way into spheres of political power. These are the folks that claim nations are better off arming themselves so, as they strut the streets of international affairs, they will be feared. As Machiavelli claimed, it is better to be feared, rather than loved.

The U$ is a prime example, and sadly, Canada under Harper, seems only too eager to join in the madness.

Other than judgments about degrees of violence, cage fighters are no different than participants in other sports. They are the sacrificial victims of a society that wants someone to atone for its excesses, environmental and social destruction, and abuse of power. They are the diversions that keep the masses occupied and out of trouble ... politically.

That Canadians seem to be eager to embrace UFC is confirmation that it too has succumbed to the “armed to the teeth” and “screw everyone else” philosophies.

As far as the argument that claims the human mind can distinguish between entertainment, and right and wrong goes, there is countless evidence to the contrary.
Pistol duels, cannibalism, human sacrifice, public hangings and the Samurai are but a few examples of human behaviour that was once accepted. Although no longer tolerated, today there seems to be a reversal in the acceptability of violence.

Like the abundance of life sustaining resources, peace and empathy seemed to have “peaked”. It can only get worse.

And as for the masses who attend these events...

Airports around the world have had to set up screening programs to try and catch soccer hooligans who attend matches simply to start fights. Montreal police had zero incidents connected to the three MMA events that have been held there, and yet had to call out riot police to quell looting mobs during the Habs run at the cup this year. Vancouver police had to ask liquor stores to close early during the Olympics to quell public drunkenness and violence.

And yet again, there is no question of banning these sports.

Lastly, I am personally offended by the way in which this article, and coverage on the CBC implied a connection between the brutal attack on two gay men near GM place with the UFC event, despite there being no evidence to support this. As a gay man who has faced this type of threat before, I know that one of the WORST things the media can do is try to link this type of homophobia to a single event, rather than to an inherent prejudice in our community. Oddly enough, The Metro managed to cover this story without the connection to the UFC, and put the "story spotlight" on the fact that Vancouver, despite being a generally tolerant place, has the highest rates of hate crimes in the country.

That hatred and violence was there long before the UFC ever came to town.

jimkata

You need, I would respectfully suggest, to look at the 'object' of the 'games' in question.

The 'object' of MMA is personal submission.

The object of football is to score a goal. You should be able to flesh-out why your analogy fails - with the possible exception of professional wrestling (not really a 'sport' I'd submit) and prize fighting.

As for banning the more violent aspects of other sports - bring it on. To attack those who say MMA is a descent into something more primitive while ignoring the fact that our culture is replete with putative physical challenges - (not to say "physical violence" for any testosterone-enhanced males who were obviously born several thousand developmental and evolutionary years too late) - seems rather to beg the question that our society is over-ripe in such areas as it is.

If you want to make that case, why not petition for dog fighting; bull-baiting; cock-fighting and a return to duels to the death to settle political arguments?

G West

The object of a MMA match is to win...like any other sport. In these matches, this comes through a submission, that is true; but in hockey or football, teams often resort to violent tactics to achieve these goals. When a player is carried off the ice or field on a stretcher, I would argue they have indeed "submitted", but without having been given the chance to defend themselves. Again, at least with MMA, two consenting adults, who are well aware of the risks involved, attempt to submit, but not intentionally injure their opponents. injury statistics for MMA vs. football and hockey would back this up.

As for dog fighting, etc? Well the big reason I don't condone them is because these animals cannot consent to this violence. The two are apples and oranges. I also don't condone unregulated pit fighting because there's no way you could reasonably consent to the types of injuries (or fatalities) that could occur. The UFC and other professional MMA organizations are not like this.

I guess, as a martial artist, I see the training, camaraderie, and personal growth that goes on when you compete in these types of sports. I see the positive physical and mental results of these sports, and don't just focus on the violence.

jimkata

You seem completely to have missed the point.

The object of games is to win by scoring goals; the object of MMA and prize fighting (of any kind) is personal submission - there's a huge difference.

Furthermore, you seem to have missed the point of my last remark - it was ironic.

As to whether or not participation for a dog in a dog fight is consensual - I don't think you know much about animal behavior - where do you think these beasts got their start?

I support your desire to train together with your friends and grow personally and physically - I just don't believe you have to indulge in a primitive activity that is akin to barbaric warfare to do it.

Join a club, work out, buy some weights, run a marathon, climb a mountain - there are lots of challenges out there - and ones that don't require an audience of bloodythirsty males and undoubtedly a sprikling of females screaming (and paying big money to do it) to watch.

Better still, if you really want some personal growth, show up at your local soup kitchen a few mornings a month and volunteer - you'll be amazed what it does for you.

Well, it seems as though

Well, it seems as though we're just going to have to agree to disagree.

I disagree with you about dog fighting...animals do not "naturally" compete for an audience in the wild, but for the right to mate, hunt in better areas, etc. Dog fighting, bull fighting and the like are human constructions that exploit animals, and I'm not being sarcastic (oops, sorry, ironic).

I disagree with you about martial arts being primitive. Fighting arts have a longer history than just about any other sport, and despite their violence, in essence they are about competition. If you see a huge difference between this and other contact sports, I encourage you to write it out.

Martial artists, including MMA fighters, get the same sense of personal accomplishment from competing that you would from any physical sport...the sense that you have challenged yourself physically and mentally, and succeeded.

And on a personal note I also volunteer regularly in a soup kitchen...and climb mountains, and used to run marathons ;) Let's keep the discussion focused on the ethics of violence in sports though, and away from personal advice.

Charles

Excellent viewpoint. I really appreciated this article. Though it may seem anti-MMA to those who love the fights, it's actually just because fighting and it's backlashings are ugly. Fighting is ugly. Making someone bleed is ugly. Threats are ugly and usually illegal... but this is legal I guess. I've one question that I always ask the watchers of the fights: Why? I've yet to get an answer.

newphorik

There is a school of tho’t that believes all social violence--whether by war, revolution or economic exploitation--is ultimately a consequence of child abuse. This line of thinking believes that it is the propensity to re-inflict childhood traumas upon others in socially-approved violence that explains and predicts the actual outbreak of wars, more than economic motivations. Periodic sacrificial rituals, like war, and including the sanitized versions of war we call “blood sports”, will occur so long as childhood trauma continues.

I would agree with this thinking in that we know childhood trauma directly influences the way folks think. Trauma is often part of the indoctrination process whereby cognitive links to cue words like good, bad, right and wrong, and the whole host of equally problematic judgmental labels are established.

It’s easy to find correlations to support this reasoning, but because of the complexities in the variables that influence the process of human psychological development, finding causation is not.

The main question here is

The main question here is not whether any of these bloodsport circuses should be permitted, but the mindset of the people who pay, or even enjoy to watch them.

I have taken part in a number of sports as a competitor, 2 of them internationally, have been nominated to a Canadian sport hall of fame, but once I've quit I've never watched any of them and can't see why anybody should waste their lives, and especially go berserk over either side winning, especially when they get paid.

Who the hell cares and why ? The Canucks, or the Lions, have nothing to either with Vancouver, or BC, the players are bought and sold like animals by absentee owners.

As far this beating each other to pulp idiocy is concerned, the only object is profits by stripping the braindead public.

Ed Deak,

@charles

I felt that your article expressed a poorly concealed contempt for MMA and the UFC, I apologise for reading more into it than you intended, I guess I came into it with the wrong mindset, my statements stand however, if not as a criticism towards your article, but towards those who take the moral highground and look down upon us who enjoy this great sport.

Well said

Charles, I really respect the reply you gave to Predicted earlier on, and while I too thought the article had a bit too much bias to it (and again, I really didn't appreciate the unsupported link to the hate crime against those poor men), I can see from your reply that you really do see the complexity of the issue.

And G West...well, I guess I commented on this because I feel I have expertise in it, whereas I do not consider myself an expert on Vancouver's DTES. I don't really spend much time posting on forums, but felt passionate about this particular issue.

And as for the audience for public hangings...well, FYI, the original UFC, conducted with almost no rules and no care or insurance for fighters, had almost NO audience. In fact, they nearly went bankrupt before they recognized the need for rules and proper conduct in order to attract mainstream viewers. I don't think there's any public appetite for killing someone, and don't think you can really place MMA in the same category with it.

All the best, and no hard feelings on my end either...and I hope you check out some clubs or some of these events sometime in the future and get a better feel for who is participating, and what they get out of the experience.

My problem with injury

Where I have difficulty with MMA and the UFC is the point at which someone who is sitting on top of another person who cannot defend themselves intends to injure them with an elbow to the head. I can't entirely explain how this distinguishes it from boxing, where the objective is to get someone to let their guard down and then punch them in the head, and then punch them again when they are stunned. Maybe it's because the matter simply seems a little clearer. But when someone tries to injure another person who has reached the point where they can't defend themselves, that flips the switch for me. I can take no pleasure from it, no matter what skills or rules come into play. And people cheering the aggressor in that situation makes me deeply uncomfortable.

At least twice UFC 115 bouts reached that point. I think others in the crowd, people who are big fans of the sport, also felt uncomfortable when that occurred. I think the UFC will as it becomes more mainstream continue to put the brakes on these aspects of their fights. But for me they are not there yet.

We're less likely to get there, however, if we ban these events altogether. Which brings us into the issue of competing harms. We'd like the issue to be simple, but like the competing rights issue it is not simple at all. Does a tobacco company intend to harm the smoker? Does it show reckless disregard? Do UFC fights set an example that contributes to violence? We can't say that in the case of the Keefer Street incident, we can only wonder. But I do worry about this with what Andrea Reimer referred to in her conversation with me as "empty vessel" kids -- the ones that don't have strong parental attachments that help them shape their values.

We've had this debate with movies and TV and video games and there are no easy answers, except that almost everyone has a point at which their line is crossed. Often that line involves children. So for me when the UFC event featured images of 10-year-old UFC fans, my own personal line again was crossed.

Conversely, while I'm no moral relativist, I think we need to be very careful when we impose our values on others, and that we don't confuse real core values with tastes and preferences. That confusion often makes debates about MMA noisy and unhelpful, and I appreciate jimkata and Predicted for meeting me halfway on this.

Sport is War

Most sports are a form of stylized combat or otherwise dangerous endeavours. MMA is simply less stylized than a hockey or football game (for example), both of which we are becoming increasingly aware of as being hazardous w/r/t concussions, even though the governing bodies are loathe to bring these problems out into the open. Even repeatedly heading a soccer ball will take a toll on your brain, as studies have borne out. So, we're not worried about people getting hurt. Joe Theissman's famous broken leg wouldn't have so many hits on Youtube were it not the case. You especially don't want to watch weightlifting out-takes. So many broken bones.

Having watched a few PPV MMA bouts, first as a reluctant spectator hangin' with the guys, and then as a mildly interested viewer, it's no more brutal than a chippy hockey game. I especially chuckled at the comments upthread suggesting we are destined to see knife fights and gun fights as a result of MMA... because we already have both, in the form of fencing and paintball. You can even win an Olympic medal for pretending to be the stabbiest person around!

Chess: stylized regicide.

hits to the head

"But when someone tries to injure another person who has reached the point where they can't defend themselves, that flips the switch for me. "

Hi Charles:

It's not a great thing to be sure, but if it were disallowed, there would be an incentive for fighters to 'play possum' and try to gain the upper hand through trickery. One thing you can say about fighting sports, the 'dive' in pretty much non-existent, and it's way, way harder to cheat to gain an advantage.

I too

get VERY uncomfortable with late stoppages...and have huge respect for fighters who actually stop and ask the ref when they see that they have clearly incapacitated their opponent. It's a symptom of MMA being a young sport, and they're still trying to get referees who are really good at officiating it (for example, Herb Dean is a veteran referee who, to my knowledge, has never allowed a fight to go on too long). Personally I think that MMA has a long way to go as far as training referees goes, and hope they'll continue to make improvements in the future.

Interestingly enough though, while elbows are spectacular and cause a lot of cuts, they rarely cause more than superficial damage. A lot of blood, certainly, but nothing that stitches won't fix. This is one reason why elbows are allowed, but knees or kicks to the head of an opponent on the ground are not allowed. Far more concussive damage is done by punches.

I also don't like the idea of kids being trained as mixed martial artists...they're simply too young to understand how much damage can be done, and how quickly. I would have NO problem putting an age restriction on these types of events (although that would probably make them even more popular).

red herring of a particularly ugly kind

"we, as a society all have the blood of the innocent on our hands, because we not only allow it, we also pay for it."

Sorry, all your posturing doesn't fool me. Since you are not equally outraged about killing children on the roads, or killing their souls in a day's work, which we do in som namy ways, I don't believe you're concerned about morals, or about 'innocents'. I believe that like so many others with this kind of obsession, this is the closest you can get to indulging in voyeristic fantasies while calling it something self-righteous. You haven't by any chance ever worked in a residential school for FNPs, have you?

This aside, the issues as brought in here is a big ugly red herring. We are discussing the legitimacy of slugging it out with no holds barred as a sport, and the morality of trying to justify it by its potential for bringing in a profit. I do not remember this being part of the politcal platform of Gregor R., so I don't see where he is coming from sucking up in his capacity of mayor, and I certainly hope none of my tax dollars go into this endeavour.

It's all so ...

regressive.

I mean, evolutionarialy speaking.

To think we climed down from the trees all those many many moons ago to just scuttle right back up and start thumping chests alkl over again. And their apologists who rationalize the, ahem, required skills and expertise! Gimme a break buddy-bub Jim-Bob.

All these blood sports are so machismo, so simian, so retrograde, so "My dad's bigger than your dad and if you don't suck it up I'm gonna beat your brains into a pulp...."

My, my.

How enlightening; how constructive; how advanced and civilized.

Ooops

climed = climbed.

and alkl = all

Ha, ha, ha. Spellin' jus like a fighta.

The many and various opinions

above are all interesting takes on the issue of MMA as one expression of "competition." But all competition is based on represssed sexuality, meant to impress the "other" whether in single or multiple units.

Even in botany, evolution has made flowers bigger and better in order to attract the insects that enable fertilization. Animals use competition to illustrate superiority in the ability to subdue or intimidate rivals.

Civilized people transmute that natural instinct into non-violent displays of power. That transmutation is the while point of being civilized. 'Nuff said.

Geez - correction

whole point, not "while." I must use the preview window from now on.

Read the article, hyperbole people.

Ok, I think that the Tyee might as well simply go to posting only headlines in order to provoke discussion.

Most commentators here did not get beyond the title, "What Has Ultimate Fighting Done to Us?"

Yes, the article has certain bias or tone, but really, the intent was to promote discussion,
not the moral grandstanding showing up in the comments section.

Go beyond the headline, but look at a few of the questions raised in the article.

See the line that stated that "cheer leading" has more injuries that MMA or ice hockey?

I completely agree that some of the crowd that enjoys the UFC does not always conjure up the best
image, but neither does rodeo, or golf for that matter.

Crankypants, you did take some time to bring out some facts and provide an illustrative examples.
Yes, there is a bonus for winners.... and the knockout is encouraged. It happens in hockey, football
and other sports. Not the bonus, but the approval.

Yes, you are very correct in stating that the goal of achieving a knockout is a bit strange, but
that is the risk they take. They are trying to avoid being knocked out.

If we call in nonsensical, we might as well lump in skiing, as paying $80 to go down a mountain
risk a concussion and broken leg is silly. So is skydiving, backcountry hiking, horseback riding.
Real injuries occur in these activities frequently.

But let's compare boxing to MMA. Most MMA fights are three to five rounds, not ten. Most fighters
do not fight very much during the year. We know that the repetitiveness of boxing does do damage
to fighters. However, they are still collecting the data on MMA. Would I register my own child
in it? No, but ultimately it would be their choice when they are old enough.
Let's talk about, not exaggerate the dangers, so that we can create a safer sport.

I don't really wish to be the defender of a sport that I have little interest in ever participating
in, but some of us can appreciate the skill, art, and spectacle of it - whether we are "thugs".
or not.

Do we really, really, really, really, think that each athlete is going into the ring with the intent
of "killing" or permanently maiming their opponent? Has a fighter ever simply "lost control" and
snapped an opponents neck with the intent of killing someone in a "legal" accident? I am sure it
could and might happen one day.... but it really doesn't, because it would be murder.

Ah well, I like team sports better anyways, but the last article written about the Canucks brought
out the Tyee commentators out in force - ready to show off their ethical rhetoric and high
degree of civility.

Moat (et al)

In this society, we do not condone the "rite of passage". We think it a waste of time and resources, and a holdover from an earlier,"more primative" era.

But the rite of passage is ingrained, and kids will find it in their own way (often destructive). Or, they will live a life forever seeking some sort of meaning to it (and failing, then resigning themselves to a meaningless existence).

MMA is one of those searches - and of course, the way we measure things, the more money involved the "better".

the rite of passage

"In this society, we do not condone the 'rite of passage'."

Sure we do. Tis the season to graduate from high school... a ceremonial rite of passage if ever there were one, and there are many, from the first legal drink at age 19 to the gold watch at 65.

OP: "Where I have difficulty

OP: "Where I have difficulty with MMA and the UFC is the point at which someone who is sitting on top of another person who cannot defend themselves intends to injure them with an elbow to the head."

By the rules of the UFC, if one fighter cannot intelligently defend themselves the match is stopped. I've read reviews of UFC 115 which indicate that in at least one fight, the Loiseau fight, the ref didn't do his job and stop the fight. That is not a fault of the rules. Also note that under the rules of the UFC, deliberate blows to the back of the head are not allowed, and downward elbow strikes (grab your shoulder with your hand and swing your arm up and down - that type of elbow strike) are also forbidden. A list of fouls can be found here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Fighting_Championship#Fouls

As for those who blame the UFC for any post-event violence near GM Place, I disagree. I'd blame alcohol first and foremost.

Chris Keam

If a rite of passage doesn't involve a certain risk, it isn't a rite of passage. We've ensured that by insisting that all our "emerging citizens" aspire to become proverbial accountants (whose mark of "success" is indeed the gold watch).

But as for such "meaningless" accomplishements as the 13 year old boy who climbed Mount Everest and the 16 year old girl who sailed solo around the world, we lend no credence, and strive to keep our own children away from such "useless" (read: non-productive) tasks - unless of course there is a resulting "book deal".

"f a rite of passage doesn't

"f a rite of passage doesn't involve a certain risk, it isn't a rite of passage. "

The Bar Mitzah and first Communion are two risk-free rites of passage that spring to mind immediately.

Die and be held accountable in your own style...

75.
Cattle die and kinsmen die,
thyself too soon must die,
but one thing never, I ween, will die, --
fair fame of one who has earned.

76.
Cattle die and kinsmen die,
thyself too soon must die,
but one thing never, I ween, will die, --
the doom on each one dead.

Hávamál
The Words of Odin the High One
from the Elder or Poetic Edda
(Sæmund's Edda)
translated by Olive Bray

http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/havamal.html

As for rite of passage, it is traditionally a skill-test, especially focusing on survival skills, ergo in older times it was fraught with risk, or else it was no test. Today, it is almost impossible to find out what we need to pass into, in the sense of adulthood. There have been skill tests instituted, such as the Queen's Venturer award quest of Scouts Canada, which entails facing nature and some degree of loneliness, a journey, which is the meaning of 'passage'. Many spiritual traditions have the typical vision quest, where there is some degree of risk, again by facing nature on one's own, and dealing with loneliness and doubt. The idea is to make or break the questing youngster, and indeed many of the ersatz rites the young people inflict on themselves break them quite badly, or even in a final way. We all need a 'baptism of fire' in order to become real and know who we are. No pain, no gain. For all of us, there should be a moment where we know in our inner person, that now we have left childhood behind for good.

"When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things."

1 Corinthians 13

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Corinthians_13

To rob a young person of that happening through misunderstood 'caring' is a gross violation. It is just that we need to find a cultural consensus and then support it. UF is a poor choice and the whole endeavor reeks of profit-hunger. We should not exploit a natural need in this fashion.

We should not exploit a natural need in this fashion.

The "efficacy adherents" in this society have boiled everything down to dollars, our sole measuring stick.

Thanks, Dorothy!

Back to Ultimate Fighting......

How about Zombie Companion, World of Warfare, and all the dross that passes for "entertainment" -- at the risk of yet another analogy, nothing but Roman Circuses for modern man?

And BTW jimorsheryl, can you present an arguement or a defense that does not require the constant use of the word "believe"? And as for "we all die", I suppose that's true....at least that's what we "believe".

Hi, I really liked the

Hi, I really liked the article. Not half as anti or pro as most of the posters on here seem to think. In the future, however, please refer to the sport as MMA as opposed to Ultimate Fighting. Seeing that in the headline made me think i had woken up in 1995 ;)

Also, for the homophobic attack after the fight, would people be blaming it on the sport the men had just (allegedly?) seen if it had been a hockey game? A boxing match? It's called being a drunk homophobic asshole and it happens way more often than we'd like to think, with or without the UFC. Blame homophobia, not MMA.

Happy the sport is finally legal in Vancouver, and am looking forward to see some of the legal and sanctioned events that can showcase upcoming talent in the Vancouver area. These guys have (mostly) nothing but respect for each other.

Everyone here posting about "civilized" sports need to go into a gym and talk to some of the men and women who compete and ask themselves if these people are really any less civilized than any other athletes. GSP, Sarah Kaufman. 'nuff said.