Brain damage as entertainment?

My grandad was the national heavyweight boxing champion of Sweden in his younger days. This was a long time ago, before MRIs and CT scans showed that every punch in the head, every concussion, can cause permanent, cumulative brain damage. This was before it was understood that repeated concussions cause early alzheimers and other forms of early dementia. This was before it was understood that prior to the onset of early dementia, repeated concussions often cause severe moodiness, depression, suicidal feelings, and sudden outbursts of violence in everyday life.

Some people with brain damage become epileptics. When they have a seizure, they fall on the floor flailing about and frothing at the mouth. With other types of brain damage, the seizure doesn't interfere with coordination, but it affects moods, self-control and paranoia, triggering a murderous rage. It just depends on which part of the brain is damaged. When completely out-of-control violence is triggered by this sort of brain damage, no amount of threat of after-the-fact punishment can prevent it in the same way that no amount of threat of punishment can prevent an epileptic from having a seizure.

My grandad was a gentle-natured guy. If he had known that he was causing permanent brain damage every time he knocked out an opponent, I very much doubt he would have been a boxer. At the time, it was commonly believed that being knocked out was like taking a fast-acting sleeping pill with no after effects.

We know the truth now. We know that multiply-concussed people are not just a danger to themselves and their families, they are a danger to all of society.

Many murders have been committed by people who were rational and easy going until brain damage caused them to fly into a violent rage that was triggered by some trivial thing. It's hard to understand why anyone would consider inflicting the type of permanent brain damage that puts the public at risk could be a reasonable form of entertainment.

Just stupid

UFC, pit bulls, boxing, gangsters,and this article are stupid.

There is no defence for blood sports.

AI?

Having never been to one of these events (nor seen one on TV), G-string-and-silicon would indicate some sort of artificial life. Do they have Androids? Perhaps you meant G-string-and-silicone?

How about bringing back the

How about bringing back the Roman circuses with the licenced killing of people to fulfill the demands of a brainwashed, lost generation for "Panem et circenses" ?

Ed Deak.

A defense?

How do you defend morons?

@ααα

Thanks for the catch, ααα!

Android life-form characterization removed. Plasticized life-form characterization inserted.

We regret having given the impression that there were any Cylons at the event.

Afraid?

If you are too afraid to pit your self against another man in a physical contest, dont degrade those that are not.
These contest have been around since the beginning of mankind, always have been, always will be.
Not all of us live in a little cyber world, some of us enjoy a full contact test of strength and fitness. It may not be your cup of tea, but for some of us it is, and apparently alot of us, so get over it.

Pitting against another is

Pitting against another is one thing, enjoy watching some brainless idiots beating each other up is another.

I suppose that's why so many beg to watch executions in the USA ? Especially the shootings. "Look at all the blood! Wow !"

I've held the legs of about 100 , not heroes, but victims of human stupidity, as they were being amputated and reamputated and haven't considered anything of it enjoyable. But, I suppose some of the spectators of these idiocies would have paid to do, or watch it.

Ed Deak.

ultimate fighting

sorry but this is just the end of another empire and the circus maximus of our times with gladiators...lets bring in the lions and see how that works...maybe shoot outs at the ok corral why limit ourselves

One of my boyhood heroes was

One of my boyhood heroes was Joe Louis. I was horrified when I met him in the flesh -- he was on display at some show in Montreal in the mid-50s, and was barely coherent. Even the winners lose (their health, their sanity, their personality.....).

Given what we now know about the effects of boxing, I thank my lucky stars that I wasn't able to beat more than a couple of others before being eliminated from competition in the service.

Irony-free, yes, but authentic?

Hmmm...pretty flimsy argument. The issue of brain damage alone is enough to convince me that UFC is not really good for anyone.

I'd argue that authenticity lies not in a punch to the head, but in genuine, honest communication between people, something that involves intelligent risk and some of that trust you speak of. If you're disillusioned with the world, I would say it's misguided (and sad) to look for something real and authentic in a bloody UFC ring. On that logic, is war, then, a noble expression of ultimate human genuineness? It's irony-free, sure, but it's still basically just killing people.

Let's be honest here. The appeal of UFC isn't some abstract notion of authenticity in a morally bankrupt world, but something more basic. Violence is exciting and satisfies some of our deepest instincts, and that's why we like it. That doesn't mean we should condone it.

I have yet to hear a better argument against UFC than how my friend once put it: "Can't we do better?"

Missed the point?

After reading these comments, I wonder if I read the same article as everyone else... or did everyone just stop reading before it got to the part about living in a world separated from consequence? If anything, these comments just underline how people create their own realities of what the world is like instead of actually going outside with an open mind to see what's going on.

But if people want to pick on UFC....again... then so be it.

While I don't share the urge to get in a ring and beat the crap out of someone, I'm not about to condemn something just because it's unhealthy.

I don't understand why parents put their children in pageants caked in makeup with their hair teased and wearing miniature ballgowns. I don't understand why people smoke. I don't see why people eat junk food or ride motorcycles. All of these things can cause a degree of harm to society but they are all choices people are allowed to make... and I'm not going to assume that the people making these decisions are knuckle-dragging morons. They have a different point of view and that should be respected, not slandered. UFC is no different. If you don't agree with two people beating the crap out of each other then fine but don't judge those who do. If you think less of someone because they like seeing seeing blood then you are making generalizations about who they are and you are being an elitist prick.

Oh, and if anyone tries the "what about the children" argument against UFC, schoolyard fights and bullying have been around a lot longer than UFC. You can't keep your kids from experiencing that. If kids want to immitate UFC fighters, sign them up for Taekwondo. They will learn really quickly when violence is not appropriate and how to control their anger.

People who go to watch these

People who go to watch these idiocies are enjoying the suffering inflicted by the nutcases beating each other to pulp.

Otherwise known as the enjoyment of sadism.

The same people who go to cock and dogfights.

The nazis missed out in a big way when they didn't sell tickets for spectators to watch the death agonies in the gas chambers.

Too bad we no longer have public executions so people could enjoy watching them.

Ed Deak.

Ed Deak.

all kind of pricks

cherdman
Maybe I am an elitist prick, but I draw the line when I see people doing stupid things; not that I personally give a damn if they will suffer from it, but because I know that eventually we will pay for the hospital bills and as a society will be liable to live alongside people with an impaired brain who is likely to become violent.

Boxing

My (four years older) neighbour got TWO pairs of gloves when I was about ten years old.
He would talk me into strapping them on and offer me the first hit. Then BOOM!
It was great.
This UFC popularity bothers me.
Any body with too many muscles but normal skull and reproductive parts looks funny.

im with matt

.. Its a great nights entertainment. whats so bad about it? Everyones making money and everyones happy.whats the difference with a race car blowing up? if you all want to go to church on sunday thats your deal. they wouldnt do it if thousands of people did not want to pay to go, its entertainment.good letter matt.

Well ...

The points made in the article about the banality and falseness of so much of contemporary life are all fine and valid. But proselytizing simian brutality as some kind of "precious route" to a more truthful alternative, or that it somehow represents "realness, authenticity and truth" strikes me as the utter height of lunacy.

Beg to disagree, Matt

" You may be one of many who prefers to avert your eyes, but I want to witness for myself its visceral appeal.

In so doing, I am looking for an antidote to the 140-character digital universe... I just want a taste of something real, and I don't mean that in the phenomenological sense: I'm talking about the right-here-right-now-in-my-face sensuality sense."

No you don't. You're looking at porn. So is everyone else there. The rest of your article was a paean to violence porn. You're not suffering - you're watching gratuitously as someone else suffers, likely in part for the ignominy of playing for the adulation of a crowd of morons - "Russian gangstas, playas" and balding dads.

If you'd written about what it was like for you to get into the ring with all your fear and go up against someone for the challenge, then I'd believe the in-your-face phenomenology you write about was at least partly authentic.

Violence, at its core, is a monument to the tragic human failure to come to an agreement on what to do about two opposing points of view. Humans will always disagree, and act wrongly, and suffer consequences - this comes out of living our lives. Thus arises the necessity of violence.

In truth, our striving should be to find out how to live our lives consistent with our principles, and without harming others in the process. That may not always be possible, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't try. We won't always succeed, nor will we eliminate all violence, but if our goal as humans is not to minimize the number of conflicts we have with each other, then what kind of animals are we? (You see why I can't stand Ayn Rand.)

Training to fight is no shame - it's not only good, but a necessity to be prepared - but exhibiting that training in a ring to prove who's tougher or luckier or for money... I don't need to say any more - you get my disgust.

That said, however, it'll be interesting to read your second article.

Disgust for your neighbors? Assumption city.

I have great respect for many of the posters here, but I am a little perplexed by the assumptions that many of you are making about the sport, and the audience. Like cherdman, I too am wondering if I read the same article as everyone else.

To call observers of these sports “morons” is such a sweeping generalization. Of course this sport appeals to a certain demographic, but so does ice hockey. Many Americans criticize hockey with the very same arguments that are being presented here. Yet, I do not see these same posters attack hockey with the same rabid commentary. Let’s face it, 55,000 “morons” gathered in Toronto to watch the largest UFC/MMA event in history. However, when the event dispersed, there was not a riot, nor were there wide scale assaults, vandalism….. you would think there would be, considering the 18-34 male demographic in attendance….. But there was not much of anything at all. Please, do some research people before you make too many assumptions about the audience and their behaviour.

Let us start asking real questions, rather than make snap judgements on taste and civility.

Is boxing different than MMA/UFC? What are the physics of each sport? Should they be categorized the same? If boxing did not cause permanent damage, would this debate even be necessary? Would the discussion of empathy and the question of violence be an issue if being knocked out was simply like taking a fast acting sleeping pill? I do get uncomfortable with boxing for this reason. I re-watched a documentary of Shawn O’Sullivan to remind me why I am uncomfortable with a sport that leaves permanent damage on the competitors. I never really thought of it when I was in my early twenties/late teens watching Tyson fight.

Sport brings out the best and worst in all of us. It reminds us that we have instincts and raw emotion. And that can make us uncomfortable.