|
12 Nov 11 - 12:50 PM (#3255635) Subject: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie In a world which claims to have progressed past the Stone Age, why is this cruelty allowed to continue? |
|
12 Nov 11 - 12:51 PM (#3255637) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk Money. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 12:55 PM (#3255643) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Mrrzy I can't watch it but I wouldn't ban it, let the barbares have their gladiators... but I agree, yuck. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 12:59 PM (#3255646) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 Steers don't volunteer. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 01:02 PM (#3255648) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu I used to enjoy it in my youth. My old man was a big dan as he was a very boxer in his youth until he took a bullet in the shoulder and I learned to like it from him. I have avoided it for many years. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 01:05 PM (#3255651) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: olddude When I was a kid I enjoyed it. Money and greed destroyed it as a sport and today I could care less. After several boxers were killed in the ring I too decided it was time for it to go by way of the horse and buggy days. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 01:07 PM (#3255653) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I'm with 999, You can't call it cruelty when they do it to themselves. I'm long past that phase myself. But if you understand a young man's natural instinct to test and display his own courage and prowess against others, boxing is quite understandable. It is interesting to watch, and in many ways, no more "cruel" than any other art that requires a high level of self sacrifice, such as ballet. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 01:11 PM (#3255658) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Tunesmith I've competed in lots of sports but boxing was the hardest. It takes so much courage just to step in to the ring. Of course, I wouldn't like my children/grandchildren to get involved with it. But while it's here, I admire those guys more than any other sportsmen. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 01:14 PM (#3255663) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I certainly admire the smart ones. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 01:18 PM (#3255665) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: olddude I blame the refs more than any other. Many of the fights should have been stopped but they let them continue. Maybe today they have fixed that but I have watch so little of it that I don't know. The great era of boxing was truly a sport ... I lost interest when it became pay per view and the refs not doing their job and boxers being killed ... I did see Manny fight on TV. Only interested because I think he is probably the best fighter lb per lb in the last 100 years or so. My opinion. I don't follow it at all anymore except when I see the results of his fights. No longer care much about it |
|
12 Nov 11 - 01:39 PM (#3255680) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor The refs are hired and paid by the promoters and managers. They have always been chastised for stopping fights "too soon." It is understandable for a boxer to think he has a chance and to want to take a chance on his health even when injury is likely. I think Ali is the best example of that. Look at the first Rocky film, a simulation to be sure but, I believe very telling. I don't think there is much doubt that even the most careless real world ref would have stopped that fight in favor of the champ way before it went the distance. Yet in the audience, we were certainly not cheering for Rocky to listen to his manager and throw in the towel. I remember even then thinking. "If this was a real fight that guy would be damaged." Of course once Sylvester Stallone became famous one realized that it would be difficult to tell whether the fight had caused damage of if that was just Sly. But I digress. With due respect, Old dude, I beg to differ. I never blamed the refs. I blamed the fans, the sport and plain old human nature. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 01:47 PM (#3255684) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie So it's OK for two people to beat the shit out of one another for your enjoyment is it? How many boxers come from a well off background? They nearly all come from a poor background, where they have no hope of making their way in life by any other means. For those who aspire to a Socialist way of life, surely boxing should be top of their list, to be abolioshed. After all if you eradicate poverty, then there will be no need for men to suffer possible brain damage, in order to feed their families. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 01:53 PM (#3255693) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor They can clean toilets or drive a truck to feed their families. They box for praise and adulation and in our society for the possibility of becoming wealthy. I don't at all aspire to a socialist way of life. But in their time some of the best boxers came from the Warsaw Pact and Cuba. They didn't have to box to feed their families. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 02:26 PM (#3255715) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: The Sandman if i ever meet John Mckenzie, i will give him the silent box. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 02:32 PM (#3255719) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Midchuck If you make it illegal, it will just go underground. And be a hell of a lot nastier. Peter |
|
12 Nov 11 - 02:49 PM (#3255729) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu John... I agree. But, I feel compelled to comment on Dan's "I blame the refs more than any other." Yup. The reffing in boxing has been apalling for years. Absolutely disgusting. Far from the actual rules... even the commands that have been used for decades have been altered. The unwritten rules can be enforced or not enforced depending on who is "supposed to win". Now... let's take this one step further... WTF is this Ultimate Fighter shit? They put two guys in a cage and there is no ref? They can do ANYTHING they want except bite or whatever. When are we gonna see biting allowed? It's not "just" boxing anymore with some kinda rules. It's UNreal. I say it's time to ban the whole works. Yeah... I know... ya shouldn't tell other people what to do. But, if we are to move beyond violence as a world, this is a good place to start to teach (y)our children the difference. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 02:57 PM (#3255736) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall I used to be a huge fan of boxing. Did some myself, but I also thought the three stooges were funny. Funny how time changes things. I couldn't care less about either of them now. One is barbaric and the other just stupid. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 03:03 PM (#3255740) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu And vice versa? (No typo.) |
|
12 Nov 11 - 03:18 PM (#3255748) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie Dick you are living proof of the fact that there is more than one meaning of the word box! |
|
12 Nov 11 - 03:37 PM (#3255756) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 I don't go to boxing matches nor do I watch them on TV. Too many people get hurt badly. That is the nature of fighting. As Gnu said, when a guy is hit hard and disoriented, stop the damned fight. Michael Watson: coma for over six weeks, six brain surgeries and permanent partial paralysis. Davey Moore: dead a few days after the bout in 1963. Benny Paret: eighteen hits in six seconds, died as a result of his injuries in 1962. There are more. I don't know what that kinda shit is, but it ain't sport, imo. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 03:43 PM (#3255760) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie Who killed Davy Moore How come he died and what's the reason for? |
|
12 Nov 11 - 03:47 PM (#3255764) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Tunesmith Well, I wouldn't do it. Apart from the scrabbled brains, punching a hard bag is going to give you real arthritis problem; however, it is better controlled than years ago. For example, if you watch fights from the 50s, you would be amazed how refs let fight go on well after they would have been stopped nowadays. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 03:51 PM (#3255768) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp Look...this is simple. If ya don't like boxin', don't watch it! - Chongo |
|
12 Nov 11 - 03:56 PM (#3255772) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Tunesmith One of the daftest rules in boxing is that - when the action is taking place - only the ref can stop the fight; of course, in reality, if a corner man throws in the towel, a ref would be stupid to ignore it. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 04:06 PM (#3255779) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu "punching a hard bag is going to give you real arthritis problem" Yup. My right hand don't work worth shit these days. And it wasn't just a punching bag. Don't see real good outta my right eye either. Boxing is just what the title of the thread says it is. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 04:07 PM (#3255780) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Greg F. I'm with 999, You can't call it cruelty when they do it to themselves. True, Bruce, but ya sure can call it stupid. Lets bring back all the old-time gladitorial contests while we're at it- OH WAIT! we've got "cage fighting". |
|
12 Nov 11 - 04:54 PM (#3255812) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: alanabit I can quite understand why some people find it revolting John. I feel that way when fights are allowed to continue for too long. On the other hand, men will always want to test themselves and it is something you can not legislate out of the human condition. Moral outrage has always been a poor advisor to legislation. It would lead to the same catastrophic consequences as it did in the cases of prohibition, the "war on drugs", outlawing of gambling and the outlawing of prostitution. I once asked a German what he thought would happen if prostitution were outlawed in Germany. "Would there be one fewer prostitutes?" "No", he replied instantly, "but thousands more pimps!". Like it or not, boxing is part of the human condition. If you outlaw it, it will go into back rooms and outside any legal control at all. In many ways it is a corrupt and ugly business, but making it illegal would not reduce the damage one bit. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 05:45 PM (#3255833) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Sandy Mc Lean To me boxing is a sport of the past. Yes it was brutal but it was also very popular. The saddest part is that many past greats ended their days impovershed and damaged after lining the pockets of promotors, managers, and fair weather friends. Some like Marciano knew when to walk away, but he was the exception; not the rule. That is why I rate him higher than Ali or Louis but of course it is all very subjective. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 05:52 PM (#3255840) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 Greg, I made two posts (now three) to this thread. Here they are. 1) Steers don't volunteer. 2) I don't go to boxing matches nor do I watch them on TV. Too many people get hurt badly. That is the nature of fighting. As Gnu said, when a guy is hit hard and disoriented, stop the damned fight. Michael Watson: coma for over six weeks, six brain surgeries and permanent partial paralysis. Davey Moore: dead a few days after the bout in 1963. Benny Paret: eighteen hits in six seconds, died as a result of his injuries in 1962. There are more. I don't know what that kinda shit is, but it ain't sport, imo. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 06:03 PM (#3255848) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie "Who came to us from Cuba's shore Where boxing ain't allowed no more" |
|
12 Nov 11 - 06:48 PM (#3255869) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Greg F. Jeezis, Bruce, I'm sorry - I was responding to JTS's mis-quotation of what you said. Showsd what happens when ya don't read the small print. I wasn't paying attention- Apologies. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 07:02 PM (#3255876) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Well said, Chongo, well said! |
|
12 Nov 11 - 07:34 PM (#3255887) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall Ramos probably killed Moore, but the way he connected with the bottom rope may have done it too. |
|
12 Nov 11 - 09:25 PM (#3255921) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu But simply "not watching it" is allowing it to happen... it should not happen. It's inHUMANe. It's simply wrong. I (we?) am disgusted by dog fighting... cock fighting. If we(?) are, why are we not disgusted by human fighting? Yeah, I know I used to enjoy watching fights and I boxed, but I grew up and I now know that it is simply... wrong. Chongo... wanna put yer weiner dog up fer bait in a dog fighting training facility? |
|
12 Nov 11 - 09:44 PM (#3255927) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Bobert Well, people do do some dumb stuff... Boxing is just on of them... I boxed as a kid... Heck, them were the days when you'd square off with yer best friend, duke it out and then go get a burger... Big deal... We all boxed... Yeah, okay, it had it's drawbacks: busted hands, black eyes, busted lips... Big deal... Who cares??? Went down to DC when I was 15 or 16 and end me and my buddies all entered the Golden Gloves tournament... $5 and a forged parent's signature... Lotta fun... I made it to the 3rd round... My buddy, Llyod Shelton, made it to the finals before losing... Art Buckner??? He could flat out box... He took his weight class... We had a ball... It weren't no different than playing football... So boxing itself has a bad rap... Professional boxing??? Purdy dangerous and much different then just going down to DC and have a couple fist fights... B~ |
|
12 Nov 11 - 10:26 PM (#3255941) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,saulgoldie Funny this should come up. Just yesterday (or was it the other day??) NPR was ruminating at how they don't cover boxing much. I thought, WTF? Of *course* not. Your audience is *not interested* in it, that's why! Saul |
|
12 Nov 11 - 10:36 PM (#3255945) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 No problem, Greg. Not to worry. Was just letting you know. :-) |
|
13 Nov 11 - 12:42 AM (#3255966) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: MGM·Lion Real bit of chimp-logic from Chongo, I fear. I don't watch much rape or atomic warfare or mugging or murder either; but I don't think they should be tolerated, still less encouraged. Not an expression of opinion on the subject of the thread as such, as to which I find self in that increasingly frequent can·see·both·sides·buggerit frame of mind. Simply disagreement as to the 'well-saidness' of the inimitably opinionated Chongo's contribyoosh. ~Michael~ |
|
13 Nov 11 - 06:47 AM (#3256065) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall Maybe with a bit of retraining we could get all those boxers into chess tournaments? :-) |
|
13 Nov 11 - 06:16 PM (#3256441) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie Used to box ABA myself. Really enjoyed it and so did all the other lads. Obviously, strict regulation around safety and the point of boxing (not punching the shit out of the other lad but landing contact through his guard and earning points) always need reinforcing same as in any sport and the pressure in the professional game can ruin it just like football and cricket suffers. McColl's radio ballad "The fighting game" takes me back in a very nostalgic way. If you don't understand, don't automatically think your sanctimonious stance makes you look clever. The only thing nauseating here is reading your withering diatribe. |
|
13 Nov 11 - 07:03 PM (#3256467) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 Steamin' Willie, I've lost as many as I've won. I wasn't the best fighter y'ever met. But I do know what you mean. The 'art' of fighting is beyond many people. (If the knocks I took are any indication, they were beyond me too!) That said, and although I was never a boxer, I loved the intensity of a match, the need to do what I had to do, and the afterthought of why I won or lost. I do not engage in 'combat' anymore when it isn't needed, but I do engage in the afterthoughts. What you wrote makes sense to me, but it likely won't to many. What's that you guys say? Keep yer chin tucked in. That, and the rest of yer body. Good one. ######################################### BUT, boxing was never meant to be a fight to the death, and when it is, imo, the refs have screwed up. I like the Olympic rules: first blood = end of fight. Half the time it would have saved my life, the other half someone else's. Works for me. BM |
|
13 Nov 11 - 07:17 PM (#3256472) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu I was brought up on it. I enjoyed it. I boxed. I actually can watch a PROPER boxing match today and enjoy it IN A WAY. But I still think it should be banned. It just ain't right... is it? If we don't let dogs fight, why do we let children fight? |
|
13 Nov 11 - 07:31 PM (#3256477) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Q (Frank Staplin) Mackenzie- Boxing not allowed in Cuba? Cuba seems to be dominant in amateur boxing. They are strong in the Olympics. http://www.eastsideboxing.com/news/mollet1709.php I agree with the title of this thread. |
|
13 Nov 11 - 07:39 PM (#3256479) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie Just quoting lyrics Q |
|
13 Nov 11 - 08:08 PM (#3256494) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie There are two pro boxing threads going on at the moment. I am anti boxing, so I started this thread to put my point of view. You are welcome to agree or disagree, all I ask is that you extend to me a little courtesy, by respecting my viewpoint. Perhaps one might also find your critique more acceptable if you didn't add gratuitous personal remarks at the end. |
|
13 Nov 11 - 08:16 PM (#3256499) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall They should wear headgear. |
|
13 Nov 11 - 08:18 PM (#3256502) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu I don't understand that last post, John. In any case, I have contributed to those other threads. Seems like a contradiction but I chalk it up to the fact that I USED to follow boxing and was rather knowledgeble about the sport but then fell out of sorts with it. |
|
13 Nov 11 - 08:34 PM (#3256509) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Kendall... "They should wear headgear." I did VERY well as a lad in headgear. NEVER defeated. Took the headgear off. Got the shit beat out of me. I have EXTREME peripheral vision because my eyeballs protrude slightly from my eye sockets. I can see stuff WAY further to my sides than most people but I can't see shit when someone smacks me in the eyes. Me old man said to keep my head down but I said... "My eyes hurt! Fuck that!" Thus ended my career in the ring. It never was a "career", of course. It was just a sport I should have never been involved in. |
|
13 Nov 11 - 08:49 PM (#3256518) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 Anyone who's ever fought KNOWS yer a damned fool NOT to wear head gear. Jacques Plante taught all of us that. I saw a picture of the dents in his mask. Translate that to a heel kick or back fist, and you'll know what I mean. There's a difference between win/lose and stupid. IMO |
|
14 Nov 11 - 12:31 AM (#3256571) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor John MacKenzie, the start of this thread is not at all expressed respectfully, especially as an answer to another thread. Demanding respect from boxing supporters after calling them hypocritical cave men makes you look pretty hypocritical. It is also very disrespectful of the memory of the eulogized boxer, Joe Frazier. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 01:16 AM (#3256578) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Lonesome EJ Not a big boxing fan. I do like MMA matches on occasion. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 05:03 AM (#3256636) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie I never mentioned Joe Frazier Jack, you did. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 05:16 AM (#3256642) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Lox Well Mohammed Ali had it right. We all know he changed his name from Cassius Clay to Mohammed Ali because Cassius Clay was his "slave name" - so giving himself a Moslem name with an African connection was his way of reclaiming ownership of himself. But there is more to it in his case ... ... Cassius was a Roman gladiator ... a slave who fought for his living and his survival. ... Ali saw himself as the slave gladiator fighting to win his freedom. And while there was romance in ancient rome around gladiators, and while they got the girls and could make a fortune (if they survived) the practice was eventually consigned to history for being barbaric. Middleweight champion Chris Eubanks summed it up when, to the outrage of his competitors (who he was beating), he punlicly described boxing as "a mugs game". |
|
14 Nov 11 - 05:49 AM (#3256657) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Dave the Gnome Weird thing is that, so I am told, it was the introduction of gloves that resulted in more head injuries and brain damage. I must say that I am neither for nor against but did find it intriguing that the bare-knuckle fighters rarely used head punches because it caused their hands too much damage! Not saying we should re-introduce bare-knuckle stuff either but, just maybe, mixed martial arts is not as bad as boxing? Anyone know the if the ratio of damage done in MMA or even Thai Boxing is better or worse that boxing? DtG |
|
14 Nov 11 - 07:41 AM (#3256709) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall Kick boxing really sucks. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 08:13 AM (#3256729) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T ""Cheerleading is actually the most injury-prone sport for women."" And, I suspect it can also be somewhat dangeous for some of the "partnered" men watching it. Has anyone aptured the number of rolling-pin head hits? :) Most Dangerous Sports |
|
14 Nov 11 - 12:39 PM (#3256864) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor >>From: John MacKenzie - PM Date: 14 Nov 11 - 05:03 AM I never mentioned Joe Frazier Jack, you did. << What I did not do is make condescending remarks about his sport while his RIP thread was on the first page. That makes one of us. You can express your opinions of something with out a diatribe and without saying insulting things. Considering how you started this thread, and what you have said about your reasons for doing so, you have received way more respect than was warranted. Let's take that as a sign of how civilized this forum has become. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 01:09 PM (#3256885) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie There are some people in this world who take the fact that you don't share their enthusiasms as a personal insult. It is civilised to be able to express a contrary opinion without somebody taking as a personal insult. So some people don't agree with your viewpoint GET OVER IT! |
|
14 Nov 11 - 01:15 PM (#3256889) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 The most dangerous sport for male spectators is women's beach volleyball. The sport can do damage to the eye muscles. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 01:29 PM (#3256900) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor It is possible to disagree with someone with out the implication that they are less advanced than cave men. In my opinion it is perfectly OK to do so. If you are willing to take it like a man when you are called on it. "If you don't understand, don't automatically think your sanctimonious stance makes you look clever. The only thing nauseating here is reading your withering diatribe." Willie's opinion is that your "opinion" is a nauseating, withering diatribe. How is that more a personal attack than "Boxing; (and logically those who support and defend it in threads ) cruel, primitive & nauseating, remnant of the stone age" You want to be treated with respect? Here is how. One thing boxing does teach is that if you hit someone, and they hit back, you can't cry that they hit you. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 01:35 PM (#3256908) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG The one "sport" if you can call it that is the so-called "mixed martial arts". It's nothing more than common street brawling with a fancy name |
|
14 Nov 11 - 02:19 PM (#3256946) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie Wrong; if someone hits your, you DON'T have to hit them back. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 02:33 PM (#3256951) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk The only possible way of breaking a cycle of violence is for someone...eventually...not to hit back. This would apply to, for example, the longstanding problems in Ireland between Catholics and Protestants, the problems in the Middle East between Israel and various Muslims in that region, North and South Korea....and 2 or more individuals fighting verbally with each other on this forum. It only ends when someone decides not to hit back. The above doesn't apply to boxing, obviously, because boxing is entirely based on the premise of hitting back (until victory or the end of the round)...but it does apply to the wellnigh endless personal quarrels on this forum. They can only end when someone decides not to hit back. Not hitting back can involve an actual act of goodwill...that is, forgiveness...mutual understanding...or just disengaging or ignoring or avoiding each other from that point on (if reacting in a positive way is just too much to bear...and for some, it is.) |
|
14 Nov 11 - 02:48 PM (#3256956) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu I see nothing wrong with John's thread or his words. I know John fairly well and I don't think he started the thread to be disrespectul to Smokin Joe. Again, I don't think he has been disrespectful at all. I think he has been "clear" and I think he started an important thread... such should be "started" in Parliament (Congress, etc)... yeah, right... like that will happen any time soon. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 04:23 PM (#3257016) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Lonesome EJ MMA ... "It's nothing more than common street brawling with a fancy name". Like cricket is a guy waving a bat and trying to knock down a bunch of sticks. It is a pretty brutal sport, no argument, but there are rules, violations, penalties, and objectives beyond doing personal injury with any means possible, which I believe is the intent of a street brawl. For my money, rugby is probably just as violent and causes as many injuries. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 04:23 PM (#3257017) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk Before they get around to banning boxing, they should ban some of the more vicious forms of hand-to-hand combat that are being marketed lately on TV. Society was once strong enough in its long-established social traditions of common decency that the idea of airing such stuff on public broadcast would not even have been tolerated. It is tolerated now. That indicates to me not that we are becoming "more liberated", but that we are a society that is declining and sliding into decadence. I think decadence results when a great many people lose all sense of idealism (or indeed, hope) about their lives and they think only in terms of satisfying their immediate appetites...like frightened or hungry animals. Such people are natural victims of crass marketing schemes which pander to their appetites in the most aggressive fashion, and that's what we're seeing. I can counter that, though, by saying that we have also advanced culturally in a number of areas...such as raising awareness about the equality of women and about racial equality. So it's not all dark out there, it's a mixed picture between light and darkness. And that means there IS hope. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 05:27 PM (#3257050) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Raedwulf I have to disagree Gnu. John's thread is obviously intended only to further his own agenda. It's titled "Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating", and his opening comment is: "In a world which claims to have progressed past the Stone Age, why is this cruelty allowed to continue?" So yeah, I can really see how he is not being disrepectful to Joe Fraizer and every other boxer that chose to climb into the ring, for whatever reason. I don't box; never have boxed. I do understand the attraction of martial competition. I've won tournaments. They were fought with plenty of safety rules. I'd have cheerfully fought them with less rules than they had (not no rules, you'll note). Who the hell is John MacbloodyKenzie to pass judgement on what other people are happy to participate in? Sanctimonious, prurient, prudish? I've spared all the nasty words I could have used. Don't want to get whacked by a JoeClone. But, ironically, Hawk's words ring true, though I'm not sure he meant them to - "...equality of women and about racial equality..."? Yeah, Laila Ali, Muhammed's daughter CHOSE to step into the ring and won. Rather a lot. So it's about choice, then? And let's face it, no-one walks out the door of a morning expecting to be mown down by fate. But a casual friend of mine who was alive last week is dead now. He didn't box. And John MacKenzie's got a beef about people wanting to step into a boxing ring, has he? |
|
14 Nov 11 - 05:33 PM (#3257053) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Q (Frank Staplin) Time for a good old-fashioned street brawl. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 05:34 PM (#3257055) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk Yeah, sure it's about choice. Everything in life is basically about choice, when you come right down to it. That's why I'm in favor of legalizing marijuana (although I don't use it, and don't particularly advise others to, but it's up to them). That's why I'm not in favor of making tobacco illegal (though I would strongly advise ANYONE NOT to smoke it)...but it's up to them. Their choice. What I was really saying, Raedwulf, is that society is a mixture of the negative (which leads to decadence and suffering) and the positive (which leads aways from decadence and suffering). I was recognizing both sides of the coin. I would hope to see more of the positive and less of the negative. I'm very pleased about how far women have come in freeing themselves from traditional structures that held them down in the past. I wouldn't encourage anyone I know to go into a career in boxing...but...if someone really wants to do that and can relate to it, I'm not going to stand in their way. It's up to them. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 05:48 PM (#3257062) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Raedwulf it's all about choice, if John M wants to srart a thread with a title like BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating, then tat's his right and his choice. For you to oppose it, that's your right and your choice, so, quite frankly you're in no position to preach. I'm always sorry when someone dies (and no, I know it's not a choice!) but when we are alive we make choices, rightly or wrongly, to not have that right of choice, that option, well there are words to describe that too. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 05:58 PM (#3257069) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Greg F. Who the hell .... to pass judgement on what other people are happy to participate in? Hmmm- like the folks who are happy to participate in genocide, or paedophilia, or spousal abuse & such like, you mean? yeah, guess he's got one helluva nerve |
|
14 Nov 11 - 06:00 PM (#3257071) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Raedwulf Sorry, Hawk, I was malicioulsy & deliberately appropriating you for for my own purposes. I apologise for not being lissome, lithe, female & 18. ;-) BTNG - I think you miss the point. JohnM has been deliberately provocative and, quite frankly, out of order. This was never a nice thread, it was never a friendly thread, it was never intended to stimulate convivial discussion of the point at hand. He wanted either an argument or a knock-out punch. If he doesn't choose to box, that's up to him, but who the hell is he to pontificate about other people's choices? |
|
14 Nov 11 - 06:02 PM (#3257074) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Raedwulf And GregF, you really, really are a twerp. Sure, that was what I meant... |
|
14 Nov 11 - 06:11 PM (#3257080) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk "I apologise for not being lissome, lithe, female & 18. ;-) " Yeah.... ;-) Well, I admit, I have a hard time forgiving you for failing to meet those specs, Raedwulf...but I'm working on it. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 06:20 PM (#3257085) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Raedwulf Hey! I'm 26 years too old, 26lbs too fat, and the wrong sex. Stop acting like it's my fault. That's the trouble with you bleeding heart liberals... :p |
|
14 Nov 11 - 06:29 PM (#3257091) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor My problem is not that John started a provocative thread. It was that he whinged and whined at the first response. Certainly that is his choice. But I find it ironic that he demands respect after showing a lack of respect. Gnu, He said that you and most of our society is no more "advanced" than a cave man. If you are OK with that, I respect your point of view. But I also respect Willie's right to say that John's "withering diatribe" is the only thing on this thread he finds nauseating. Look again at what steaming willie wrote. There is no personal insult. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 07:30 PM (#3257124) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 Two things after I say how the heck have you been, Raedwulf? Good to see you again. 1) "I apologise for not being lissome, lithe, female & 18. ;-) " Little Hawk, so you bloody well should. It gets lonely in the frozen north. 2) I've met John MacKenzie in person, and he is one helluva nice guy. I think lots gets lost on sites that use the printed word to get ideas across. Most of us who have fought to greater or lesser degrees are less and less impressed with it all as time goes on. I don't think it's necessarily age related. Given certain provocations today I would fight. However, as some wise soul said earlier on this thread, it's better to walk away, and I also think that's true. Hurting someone is easy. Killing someone is also easy. However, there're better things to do with one's time. HOWever, boxing (and many other martial arts) has been responsible for many kids 'getting off the street', staying off dope and into lives where they could find good things to do. In that regard, it's a wonderful sport. It's maybe the 'pro' boxers and that whole world that have changed both the sport and the way we view it. IMO |
|
14 Nov 11 - 08:09 PM (#3257140) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG No Raedwulf I didn't miss the point at all...and I stand by what i said.Don't like it, too bad |
|
14 Nov 11 - 08:12 PM (#3257143) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG "but who the hell is he to pontificate about other people's choices?" it's called freedom of speech, an unfamiliar concept in many parts of the world |
|
14 Nov 11 - 08:23 PM (#3257149) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu LEJ... "For my money, rugby is probably just as violent and causes as many injuries." The object of rugby is to score points. The object of boxing is to score a knockout. Apples and oranges. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 08:36 PM (#3257156) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu "I have to disagree Gnu. John's thread is obviously intended only to further his own agenda." That's as far as I read. Why would I read any further when the first sentence is so absolutely stunned? The thread title says it all and opens a discussion. I didn't bother to read the rest of your post because you said right away that you don't think John's thread is worth discussion. That is simply YOUR words and indicates YOUR agenda... and it's a piss poor one. If you have something to contribute, do it. When you start to MAYBE do it THAT way, you ain't gonna get me to read it. Seriously... I refuse to read any post that starts out with an inane ASSUMPTION. Your credibility is down the drain with me when you say asshole things in the opening sentence. Perhaps you could be a bit more civil in future? Perhaps I would read your posts rather than just wanting to tell you to get some manners or fuck off. |
|
14 Nov 11 - 11:17 PM (#3257214) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor As a matter of fact Gnu, the object of boxing is to score points unless the opponent is unable to continue due to injury or knockout. In the Olympics, it is almost always decided on points. |
|
15 Nov 11 - 08:01 AM (#3257357) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST Boxing is not everyone's preferred sport, for many reasons. Personal reasons for liking or not liking anything are an individual choice, and these are never wrong for that person. Nauseating?: I suspect if you don't like to see blood, or folks being subjected to punches, boxing is obviously not for you. And, it may indeed seem cruel and nauseating for som,e, even many to watch. But, there is other sports that qualify high in these categories. (Maybe these are not for you either). Primitive?: The concept of fighting is indeed primitive. But, some form of fighting is also a major part of many other sports, if you have an open mind to make a list. It is even encouraged in some "non-fighting" type sports, like hockey. Some (or many) of these sports have cleaned up their act, and put in measures to better protect participants. Cruel?: Since people voluntarily participate in boxing, the word cruel is an odd choice of words, IMO. A good question is has the sport gone far enough to protect the participants from injury? It is likely more complex to do so where fighting is the main goal. With that in consideration, it has seemed very complex to clean up injuries where fighting is not the main goal of the sport, like in Hockey. A good question is, ""has boxing gone as farther in protecting participants as other fighting sports, such as MMA, martial arts"? I know that changes has been made. But, I feel they should go much farther in professional boxing to protect participants. What seems to be a problem with the sport is who controls it and makes the rules. This sport seems to be filled with fairly "shady" figures at the top. I suspect the problem lies there. Government does have some involvement in developing the rules in some locations. But, I suspect this involvement is very loose. Some folks seem to slip innuendo into this discussion, disguised as "fact", that boxing rates high as a dangerous sport. I suspect like many sports, there is significant case of injury and occasional death. Many sports are definately less dangerous. But, not all by any measure. Some injuries are likely difficult to determine, like with football. I also suspect participants and the organization does not go out of its way to track long term injuries. So, why not put forward existing factual evidence of boxings position among dangerous sports, among the other dangerous ones? IMO, this would make the discussion more interesting and less emotional. |
|
15 Nov 11 - 08:02 AM (#3257358) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Musket Very funny thread this; Made me laugh anyway. When you start a thread saying that something is primitive and nauseating, then when someone disagrees with you, you accuse them of not engaging in civilised debate... It would be too easy to point out that offending people by saying they are nauseating and then expect them to treat you with respect.. isn't the best way of debating. For what it is worth, boxing isn't primitive, it is a sport, it relies on point scoring and yes, some people want to see a knockout rather than a points win. But there again, many people watching a football match love to be outraged by a foul. Head guards protect against cuts and boxing gloves do likewise. However, bare knuckle fighters used to get more cuts (which heal) but less brain movement inside the skull (which can cause long term health problems.) There are long term health issues with boxing, and denying they exist isn't helpful, even for a pugilist aficionado like myself. But many sports professionals suffer in later life for sporting injuries, some of which are almost as inevitable as those associated with boxing. Smokin" Joe, Ali, heroes... |
|
15 Nov 11 - 08:20 AM (#3257374) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: MGM·Lion Not quite an acceptable analogy there, Ian: fouls are against the rules in football; knockouts are permitted in boxing. ~M~ |
|
15 Nov 11 - 08:33 AM (#3257382) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T 8:01 Guest was me. Here it is again, in case Guest post does not survive: Boxing is not everyone's preferred sport, for many reasons. Personal reasons for liking or not liking anything are an individual choice, and these are never wrong for that person. Nauseating?: I suspect if you don't like to see blood, or folks being subjected to punches, boxing is obviously not for you. And, it may indeed seem cruel and nauseating for som,e, even many to watch. But, there is other sports that qualify high in these categories. (Maybe these are not for you either). Primitive?: The concept of fighting is indeed primitive. But, some form of fighting is also a major part of many other sports, if you have an open mind to make a list. It is even encouraged in some "non-fighting" type sports, like hockey. Some (or many) of these sports have cleaned up their act, and put in measures to better protect participants. Cruel?: Since people voluntarily participate in boxing, the word cruel is an odd choice of words, IMO. A good question is has the sport gone far enough to protect the participants from injury? It is likely more complex to do so where fighting is the main goal. With that in consideration, it has seemed very complex to clean up injuries where fighting is not the main goal of the sport, like in Hockey. A good question is, ""has boxing gone as farther in protecting participants as other fighting sports, such as MMA, martial arts"? I know that changes has been made. But, I feel they should go much farther in professional boxing to protect participants. What seems to be a problem with the sport is who controls it and makes the rules. This sport seems to be filled with fairly "shady" figures at the top. I suspect the problem lies there. Government does have some involvement in developing the rules in some locations. But, I suspect this involvement is very loose. Some folks seem to slip innuendo into this discussion, disguised as "fact", that boxing rates high as a dangerous sport. I suspect like many sports, there is significant case of injury and occasional death. Many sports are definately less dangerous. But, not all by any measure. Some injuries are likely difficult to determine, like with football. I also suspect participants and the organization does not go out of its way to track long term injuries. So, why not put forward existing factual evidence of boxings position among dangerous sports, among the other dangerous ones? IMO, this would make the discussion more interesting and less emotional. |
|
15 Nov 11 - 09:31 AM (#3257413) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Tunesmith Well, the object of motor car/bike isn't to get killed, but it is inevitable that many will get killed and maimed - including pedestrians/on-lookers/- because of the nature of the sport. And, the sport undoutedly encourages members of the public to drive at silly speed, which in turn, leads to deaths, maiming and brain damage etc. In the past 12 months, in my smallish town, two young motorcyclists have died while driving at silly speeds. Indeed, it could be argued that bodies like the BBC are complicite in these deaths for airing Top Gear which is all about powerful cars that can drive at speeds well over the speeds limits of the country. |
|
15 Nov 11 - 09:39 AM (#3257418) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,kendall You folks who say that it is not necessary to hit back maybe were never bullied on the school playgrounds? Failure to hit back only invites more bullying. John has every right to express his opinion in any way he chooses. Those who disagree have the same right and neither has the right to resort to personal attacks. "Your opinion of me is none of my business.) |
|
15 Nov 11 - 09:58 AM (#3257430) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,kendall They were of course, Orangutans, not Monkeys or Chimpanzees. |
|
15 Nov 11 - 10:53 AM (#3257484) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Greg F. And GregF, you really, really are a twerp. Sure, that was what I meant. Well, Raed, that's what you blanket statement SAID. Perhaps you'd like to revise the statement? |
|
15 Nov 11 - 12:18 PM (#3257539) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG He's only 26 ...still VERY wet behind the ears... |
|
15 Nov 11 - 05:42 PM (#3257714) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Raedwulf No Greg, that it isn't what I said. It's what you chose to read because you wanted to score a point. As it happens, about the cheapest point you could go for. Godwin's law for the win, except that you didn't *explicitly* name the Nazi's. Lugging an utterly irrelevant reference to paedophilia in is just as vile though. BTNG - given your inability to read what is written, I'm not surprised you missed the point. I didn't say I was 26; I said I was 26 years too old. In a humorous aside. To someone other than you. But you're another one who apparently can't resist the urge to try for a cheap point. You failed to score as well. Gnu - what was uncivil about "I have to disagree Gnu. John's thread is obviously intended only to further his own agenda"? You didn't read any further, remember, so obviously you can't be complaining about me displaying some annoyance with the opening poster... 999 - Hello, sir! That sounds like Mr Murdoch. Have you changed your moniker again? As to your other remarks, first my apologies to John for sounding a bit irate, but I stand by my previous remarks. This wasn't intended to open a friendly, open discussion; it was deliberately provocative, heavily slanted from the start, presumably prompted by the recent publicity surrounding Joe Fraizer's death, and disrepectful. Then he complains that people aren't playing nice? As to boxing, as I've said, I'm no boxer, not any especial fan either, but I object to the colourful & unnecessarily emotive labels used in the first place. It's a sport. People choose to climb into the ring. If you don't like it, don't watch it. And since it's entirely consensual (unlike, oh, say, genocide? Paedophilia?), if it's not to your taste, leave those that do enjoy it to enjoy it. |
|
15 Nov 11 - 06:02 PM (#3257723) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG No, Raedwulf like I said i didn't miss what you laughingly call a point, the only point you had was to insult John M. Whether you're 26 or 226 you're still a nasty little man, and I do mean little, "JohnM has been deliberately provocative and, quite frankly, out of order" and if he is,so what? That's his choice and this society is all about choice and the democratic right. (you don't believe in choice and democratic right?) I think it is you who have been deliberately provocative, your right, your choice, BUT, don't you dare criticise others for what you yourself are doing. Physician heal thy self... |
|
15 Nov 11 - 06:05 PM (#3257726) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk This is getting tiresome. I think I'll start a thread about Tiddlywinks. |
|
15 Nov 11 - 06:17 PM (#3257736) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T Is this thread "cruel, primitive & nauseating" (he said, ready to duck potential abuse)? Just wondering:) |
|
15 Nov 11 - 06:43 PM (#3257754) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu "Gnu - what was uncivil about "I have to disagree Gnu. John's thread is obviously intended only to further his own agenda"?" Are you serious? You REALLY can't see what a terrible thing that is to say? Especially when you do not even suggest what you ASSUME to be his "agenda"? And, let's get sommat straight. The object of hitting someone with your fist is to hurt them. Do not "sugar coat" it with "scoring points". That's just silly. Even if it was about "scoring points", it's still exactly what John said it was. Kendall... agreed. Someone smacks me, they get it back. I was a fat kid who was bullied... until my old man taught me how to box. Fatso got replaced by Chat Rouge pretty quick (pun intended). Oh, ah, I had red hair and was as quick as a cat with my fists. |
|
16 Nov 11 - 12:27 AM (#3257867) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Gnu, "His agenda" crystal clear in the opening post. It was obviously an attack on "boxing" and on "society" for being so "stone aged" to allowing it. If he had said "Jack the Sailor; cruel, primitive & nauseating" I think you would say that was an attack on me. So he say's "Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating" I say, "I like boxing" what does that make me? In John's world on this thread it make me a supporter or enabler of the cruel, primitive & nauseating. It means that I am the part of society that has not "progressed beyond the stone age." And since you are on other thread saying positive things about boxing, he is saying the same about you. I don't really have a problem with him saying that about me. I answered his criticisms on their merits until Willie replied to him in kind and he took it personally. I don't think you are doing John any favors pretending that he wasn't rude. Even though you may agree with him, you wouldn't have chosen his extreme and insulting language. |
|
16 Nov 11 - 04:54 AM (#3257933) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie And if I said, "I hate bananas" does that mean I'm denigrating all those who like bananas? If I can't express my personal, and strongly held opinion, without someone thinking I am getting at them personally, then I despair of the future of civilised exchanges of views. Provocation it appears is in the eye of the beholder. To mix my metaphors ;-) |
|
16 Nov 11 - 08:03 AM (#3258021) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall It's a fact of life that when someone craps on another's idea, or thought, that "Victim" is unable to separate his/her thought/idea from him/her self. They take it as a personal attack on them. I find that rather silly. I have friends who dislike the policies of the democratic party. That does not mean that they dislike ME! John, looks like you "Plowed up a snake" this time. As Tennessee Ernie would say, you "Dropped a clod in the churn." Innit awful what they did to Marie Antoinette? |
|
16 Nov 11 - 12:42 PM (#3258193) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor John, OK lets talk about bananas. If you say that society is bananas. Society is people. A person as a member of that society has a right to criticize your stand on bananas as much as you have a right to criticize society for allowing bananas to exist. You whined about a "personal attack" but there was none. You said boxing was "nauseating etc." Willie said that your expressed opinion of it was nauseating. 100 |
|
16 Nov 11 - 12:44 PM (#3258195) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Oi! you leave bananas alone, or we'll have Chongo all over us, which is not a pleasant though, as nice a primate as Chongo is! |
|
16 Nov 11 - 02:32 PM (#3258275) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie Who the hell is John MacbloodyKenzie to pass judgement on what other people are happy to participate in? Sanctimonious, prurient, prudish? I've spared all the nasty words I could have used. Sorry Jack, but if this sentence, posted by Raedwulf isn't personal, then what is? |
|
16 Nov 11 - 02:58 PM (#3258293) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu I have no qualms about my posts on this thread or the others. I think they make sense if read entirely and in context. I have said that I STILL like a good boxing match at times but that I ALSO believe it should be banned as it is a bloodsport. Pretty simple stuff. As far a John affronting any individual with his opinions... that's an extrapolation I deem as incorrect. |
|
16 Nov 11 - 03:05 PM (#3258304) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG "Who the hell is John MacbloodyKenzie to pass judgement on what other people are happy to participate in? Sanctimonious, prurient, prudish? I've spared all the nasty words I could have used." If that's not personal I don't know what is |
|
16 Nov 11 - 03:21 PM (#3258315) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Yes, it is personal. But it is not what you were whining about. It was said the DAY AFTER you started whining. Were you whining preemptively? Or was it something else that start you off? Maybe this? Maybe you think it was "a personal attack" But I think it was in proportion to your opening salvo against the cave men who allow boxing to continue. >>>From: GUEST,Steamin' Willie - PM Date: 13 Nov 11 - 06:16 PM Used to box ABA myself. Really enjoyed it and so did all the other lads. Obviously, strict regulation around safety and the point of boxing (not punching the shit out of the other lad but landing contact through his guard and earning points) always need reinforcing same as in any sport and the pressure in the professional game can ruin it just like football and cricket suffers. McColl's radio ballad "The fighting game" takes me back in a very nostalgic way. If you don't understand, don't automatically think your sanctimonious stance makes you look clever. The only thing nauseating here is reading your withering diatribe. |
|
16 Nov 11 - 03:30 PM (#3258323) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie Jack it's just not worth this endless dissection. If you don't see the last sentence you in your quote as personal, or if you seek to excuse it on the grounds that you didn't like what I posted either. Then you're always going to nitpick, and make excuses in order to justify yourself. So let's agree to disagree. Preferably in a non personal manner |
|
16 Nov 11 - 04:32 PM (#3258373) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Is there anyone here who would step into a ring today? My guess is none. And for good reason. It's stunned as me arse. Innit? |
|
16 Nov 11 - 05:00 PM (#3258390) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Fine Lets, not make it "personal." Your point of view as expressed in the start of this thread is "People who support boxing have not progressed past the stone age." You say that is not personal, fine than allow me to rephrase for Willie. "People who say "Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating" and people who say "In a world which claims to have progressed past the Stone Age, why is this cruelty allowed to continue? " are taking a sanctimonious stance in a feeble attempt to look clever. The only thing nauseating here is reading the withering diatribes of such people. Yes, so much better. Allow me now to rephrase for myself, "When people who draw such clear and "withering" lines in the sand, especially when admitting that it is in DIRECT response to the words of others who are at hand, start to whine about " gratuitous personal remarks at the end." those people theoretically, if such people existed, might be considered to be whiny hypocrites. Hiding ones insults behind generalizations like "the world" when one clearly does not mean the world, when one clearly is targeting "those people on the other thread" does not make them easier for some to take. Though obviously such cleverness can fool some people, but evidently not Willie. This is not in anyway meant to be a personal criticism but the viewpoint expressed was that anyone who supports boxing is on a level of a caveman. Such a viewpoint is very disrespectful of supporters of boxing and if it that is possible, even less respectful of their viewpoints. In context, what is below seems very very condescending. So much so that it struck a nerve with people other than the person it was aimed at. Such as Raedwulf and me. "You are welcome to agree or disagree, all I ask is that you extend to me a little courtesy, by respecting my viewpoint. Perhaps one might also find your critique more acceptable if you didn't add gratuitous personal remarks at the end. " May I please rephrase for you? "I am deeply sorry that in a smarmy and convoluted way, I called you a cave man. In future I will speak my insults more plainly and address them directly towards the intended target." Or if I may rephrase the start of the thread sans insult. "I find boxing to be cruel, primitive and disgusting, I find it upsetting that it exists, and I wish that it didn't." |
|
16 Nov 11 - 05:04 PM (#3258394) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Gnu. I would not step into a boxing ring. I would also not step onto a stage as a featured act at an accordion concert. If I had Joe Frazier's talent and was young enough I would box. I would box on TV pay per view, but I wouldn't force anyone who is nauseated by that to watch it. |
|
16 Nov 11 - 05:12 PM (#3258397) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Bowdlerising at it's finest. I prefer the original first posting, it's so much more descriptive |
|
16 Nov 11 - 05:17 PM (#3258400) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Heavens! BTNG, we can't all be Shakespeare! What a hoot!! |
|
16 Nov 11 - 06:13 PM (#3258446) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Joe_F "Even a leisurely game like cricket...can cause much ill-will.... Football...is far worse. Worst of all is boxing. One of the most horrible sights in the world is a fight between white and coloured boxers before a mixed audience. But a boxing audience is always disgusting, and the behaviour of the women, in particular, is such that the army, I believe, does not allow them to attend its contests...." -- George Orwell, "The Sporting Spirit" (1945) |
|
16 Nov 11 - 06:20 PM (#3258452) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I did not enjoy the violence of boxing so much as the science of it. Nelson Mandela |
|
16 Nov 11 - 06:41 PM (#3258467) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Boxing is like jazz. The better it is, the less people appreciate it. George Foreman Boxing is the only sport you can get your brain shook, your money took and your name in the undertaker book. Joe Frazier Boxing is the toughest and loneliest sport in the world. Frank Bruno Boxing is the ultimate challenge. There's nothing that can compare to testing yourself the way you do every time you step in the ring. Sugar Ray Leonard Boxing, for me, it's the beginning of all sports. I'm willing to bet that the first sport was a man against another man in a fight, so I think that's something innate in all of us. Omar Epps It's less about the physical training, in the end, than it is about the mental preparation: boxing is a chess game. You have to be skilled enough and have trained hard enough to know how many different ways you can counterattack in any situation, at any moment. Jimmy Smits One thing I like about boxing is that I will not have to deal with the same kind of politics that I had to in skating. In boxing, it is not about your appearance, or how your costume looks, what color it is, or how much it costs. Tonya Harding People say it's a movie about boxing, but... I don't agree at all. I don't think it's a movie about boxing. Boxing is like a platform. It's just a stage where this is played out. Morgan Freeman When archaeologists discover the missing arms of Venus de Milo, they will find she was wearing boxing gloves. John Barrymore |
|
16 Nov 11 - 07:59 PM (#3258487) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Joe Offer I used to listen to the boxing matches on Gillett Cavalcade of Sports when I was a kid in Detroit in the 1950s. The fights were great on the radio, but I couldn't stand watching them once they got onto television. Those boxing radio announcers were real artists. So were the baseball announcers. -Joe- |
|
16 Nov 11 - 08:52 PM (#3258521) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall No one can really say that another persons opinion is wrong. |
|
17 Nov 11 - 01:50 PM (#3258820) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Musket Come to think of it, yes. maybe there are a couple of people on Mudcat I would get in the ring with.... "And as he slumps in his corner, his seconds taping up the cut above his left eye, his lips cut and puffed out... He murmurs a comment to his opponent in the opposite corner, still fresh and pushing his seconds away. "But the 1954 interpretation is the ONLY interpretation Ian..." Before the referee signals for his seconds to throw in the towel." Must stop eating cheese before going to bed..... |
|
17 Nov 11 - 03:21 PM (#3258867) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Your eloquence shows in your posts JtS. I understand your point of view regarding the overall logic of your extrapolation about "individuals" but I still think John, and myself, had no intention of degrading any individuals but rather society as a whole for allowing a bloodsport. YES, I DO see your point... CLEARLY. Here is my point. The other side of this debate cannot even begin debate without stating the arguement. For anyone to take it personally or to say it should have never been brought up is barkin up the wrong tree... IMO. No accordians? Easy for you to say... >;-) |
|
17 Nov 11 - 05:09 PM (#3258933) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T "The other side of this debate" Not sure I know what you mean by that Gnu, maybe the other side of the emotion in this thread? I have not seen much meaningful debate? I tried in one post to introduce logic into the thread, by adressing elements of the post title directly. But, there were no takers on that perspective. Seems most people preferred to remainly smugly on their side of the emotion and insult posts. I have no shame in saying that I like boxing. But, I do not enjoy seeing people getting battered to a pulp. I know boxing (MMA, or the many other forms, including martial arts) it is not for everyone (no surprise there), and that's fine. But, unlike you,who seem to be calling for its end, I don't see that happening, and prefer to see rules to control/end the nasty side. It is easy to turn it off, or "demonize" the sport and participants, (and even those who like the sport, in some form). IMO, that does little to encourage change. But, in my observation of other sports, it would be much more effective for folks to demand change to protect participants, like with recent developments in hockey, football and other agressive, contact sports. I can't see the international demand and big $ for the sport ending, in any near time, if ever. The sport is filled with far too many shady characters, and sketchy rules and officials,and is in dire need of clear regulations to clean it up. But, there seems to be no significant call or champion for that at this time. So, it will likely dwell in the dark ages, with the shady folks profiting and getting their way for some time. Unfortunately, the bad side is reinforces by this, and people do face the good liklihood of serious injury (if not now, in their later years). |
|
17 Nov 11 - 06:53 PM (#3258991) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Sorry Gnu, You still don't get it. John said something controversial, something he knew would offend, something he later admitted was aimed at those on the other thread then ducked behind "personal comment" when someone called him on it. You have done nothing wrong. You have given as good as you got without calling anyone, anyone a cave man and without sulking and pretending to have your feelings hurt. You know my posting history. You know that I don't have a problem stating my opinion. If someone attacks my opinion they get it right back. I don't at all mind John insulting me. I don't mind him expressing his low opinion of my values. It his pretending that he didn't that bugs me. |
|
17 Nov 11 - 07:15 PM (#3259006) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall Jack, your opinion and you are not the same thing! That's where people get into trouble,thinking they are the same. |
|
17 Nov 11 - 07:27 PM (#3259014) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Joe, an imagination was needed back then, we listened to soccer, boxing, most sports, on the radio and it was the commentators who were able (if they were good) to conjure up and put in front of the lister what was going on the field, in the ring, on the water (yes I clearly remember a yachting race being on the radio) Als television has taken away that need. |
|
17 Nov 11 - 07:35 PM (#3259017) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Thanks Kendall People who sing sea shanties are too stupid for real music. |
|
18 Nov 11 - 07:39 AM (#3259264) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall Opinions are like asshole. We all have one. |
|
18 Nov 11 - 08:27 AM (#3259296) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: John MacKenzie "John said something controversial, something he knew would offend, something he later admitted was aimed at those on the other thread then ducked behind "personal comment" when someone called him on it." Total rubbish, your fevered imagination reads things that have not been written, by me or by anyone else. For instance, your response to my post on 16 Nov 11 - 03:30 PM bears little realtion to what I ACTUALLY said, and instead, harks back to the same old same old paranoid theme you have carried on all through this thread. You appear to think I was attacking Joe Frasier, I have no thoughts one way or the other on the man. he was just a boxer, and as such held no interest for me. By expressing the fact I don't like boxing, I did not diss, either the fans of, or the participants in, this brutal pastime. If you wish to repeat your response to my imagined postings please feel, free. If all you want is the last word on the subject, again; feel free. I shall say no more about it, as I'm fed up being constuctively misconstrued by someone with a pro boxing agenda, and no respect for the viewpoints of others. Oh, and do feel free to construe this post as personal, I put it down to tit for tat myself! |
|
18 Nov 11 - 08:49 AM (#3259310) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Midchuck I don't know whether boxing is cruel, primitive, and nauseating, but the bickering on this thread sure is. (Yes, I know I don't have to open it if I don't like it. But morbid fascination sometimes takes over.) P. |
|
18 Nov 11 - 09:25 AM (#3259330) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG It's like watching an accident on the motorway, you know you shouldn't look, but............ |
|
18 Nov 11 - 11:33 AM (#3259393) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Dave the Gnome It's a fact of life that when someone craps on another's idea, or thought, that "Victim" is unable to separate his/her thought/idea from him/her self. They take it as a personal attack on them. I'm not so sure, Kendall. I can see that happening in the playground but, surely, grown up people can separate criticism of tastes and ideas from criticism of self? I like to think so anyway but I must admit that the old (or young?) Gnome tries to surface periodically and takes umbridge at some innocuous comment. But then the brain cells kick in :-) Jack - People who sing sea shanties are too stupid for real music. Criticising shanties is NOT personal abuse. It is perfectly acceptable to not like shanties. In some areas it is compulsory :-) However, criticising the people that sing shanties is abuse of a personal nature. I presume this is what you were trying point out? Trouble is it doesn't work well enough as an analogy. If we were to say that people who either sing or listen to shanties are stupid, then we would reach a far wider base of people to insult:-) Cheers DtG |
|
18 Nov 11 - 11:51 AM (#3259401) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Full contact extreme marbles is frowned upon in some segments of society. |
|
18 Nov 11 - 12:12 PM (#3259416) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Dave the Gnome I have invented a new martial art anyway, Kung Shui The art of arranging furniture so your enemies fall over it. :D tG |
|
18 Nov 11 - 01:23 PM (#3259451) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST "Full contact extreme marbles is frowned upon in some segments of society" Using these? |
|
18 Nov 11 - 01:26 PM (#3259454) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Sandy Mc Lean Sorry! Me above sans cookie. |
|
18 Nov 11 - 01:30 PM (#3259457) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu JtS... "John said something controversial, something he knew would offend..." I say he voiced his opinion and I also say he had/s a right to do so. Same goes for everyone else. In any case, I think the final bell has rung and I don't think there are any "winners". Let me know if there is a rematch. |
|
18 Nov 11 - 03:46 PM (#3259553) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Using these? whoa yes, now that's what I called marbles!!! '-) |
|
18 Nov 11 - 05:36 PM (#3259616) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Yes Gnu, John has the right to speak. We all do. Including me criticizing him and you criticizing him and me criticizing you for sticking up for him, even though he called you a cave man. I actually think that Willie's point that is the most salient one expressed in this thread. If it is a thread where John simply expresses his opinion, it probably should have been immediately closed. If the topic is too be discussed then Willie's disgust with with John's whinging is certainly fair game. Willie was even kind enough to give advice as someone who knew the first thing about boxing to someone who clearly didn't. This is far more constructive than calling everyone in the world a cave man because they haven't banned something that offends the sensibilities of one evidently prissy Brit. |
|
18 Nov 11 - 06:49 PM (#3259662) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Lonesome EJ "I have invented a new martial art anyway, Kung Shui The art of arranging furniture so your enemies fall over it."-Dave the Gnome While not hilarious, that joke gives me a feeling of satisfaction and contentment. Namaste... |
|
18 Nov 11 - 07:06 PM (#3259672) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu JtS... yer outta line. John is not a prissy Brit. That is worse than "personal". I consider you both friends but John never attacked ANYONE personally (IMFO)... you just did. WTF is going on? Be da lard dyin Jaysus, buddy b'y, wha da fuck is all dat about anywhay eh? Ye got sumpin up yer arse? WIPE IT! |
|
18 Nov 11 - 07:49 PM (#3259700) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall John spoke the truth as he sees it. I can understand his opinion of boxing, but that's all it is, HIS opinion and his truth. If someone spouts opinion disguised as fact then that is different and it is open for genuine criticism. Now, JTS to criticize a sport is perfectly legal here, but to criticize a person is a personal attack and they are verboten here. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 12:59 PM (#3260006) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,Steaming' Willie Never known so much debate around a comment I made. Have to make sure my comments aren't too flippant then, if people are taking me seriously. Of course the problem there is that these threads are an ideal opportunity to say what you think without worrying too much about the consequences. But regardless of the subject or indeed the views expressed, I still say that if you start a thread with a title that alienates other forum members, don't be surprised when people point out their abhorrance of your opinion. I have no issue with someone feeling boxing is cruel etc, that is a view and one I can understand if not share. But the thread title implies a mudcat member would automatically dislike boxing, which is stereotyping members. A bit like M'Unlearned Friend reckoning everybody has the same political outlook as him. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 01:24 PM (#3260019) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Gnu, Where did I call anyone on this forum a "prissy brit?" You also seem to be under the impression that I am fighting with John MacKenzie. I am simply talking to him as he talked to you and me and everyone else on the Boxing threads. But I am doing so frankly. In fact I was careful not to talk specifically about any individual. Even if I did, refer specifically to some other person, it would be my opinion that he is a prissy Brit. Opinions are allowed right? And while this definition of prissy "Fussily and excessively respectable" my not apply exactly to John MacKenzie the person. It certainly applies to all of his postings on this thread except for the title. But that point is moot. I did not single out John MacKenzie, just as he did not single anyone out when he said that boxing supporters were cave men in response to boxing threads on this forum. I think that Willie's post perfectly sums up the point I am defending. To sum up, if you are going to pick a fight, be a man. Don't hide behind prissy language when someone gives your own medicine back to you. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 01:28 PM (#3260023) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG "Gnu, Where did I call anyone on this forum a "prissy brit?" " Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor - PM Date: 18 Nov 11 - 05:36 PM This is far more constructive than calling everyone in the world a cave man because they haven't banned something that offends the sensibilities of one evidently prissy Brit. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 01:32 PM (#3260026) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor No one was identified in that statement BTNG. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 01:49 PM (#3260040) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG if you say so........ |
|
19 Nov 11 - 02:09 PM (#3260058) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I am applying the "Gnu" rule, if you don't specifically attack a person by name it is not a personal attack. I reject his assertion that this rule that he has made up applies to John and not to me. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 02:12 PM (#3260059) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG you got caught on CCTV, sunshine, so give it up why don't you? |
|
19 Nov 11 - 02:15 PM (#3260061) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Are you that stupid? |
|
19 Nov 11 - 03:18 PM (#3260097) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall Careful! |
|
19 Nov 11 - 03:33 PM (#3260101) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T Anyone up for a frew rounds of fisticuffs? |
|
19 Nov 11 - 03:48 PM (#3260108) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG I know what I read and I stand by it. Some people (naming no names, of course*LOL*) hate getting caught out. And that's all from me, tune in next week when our panel will be discussing full contact extreme snakes and ladders. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 04:47 PM (#3260142) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu JtS... you fuckin with me? You wanna piss on me? Fuck off! You wanna piss on G? Fuck off. You wanna piss on logic and free speech? Fuck off. I have been your friend for a looong time. Fuck off. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 04:48 PM (#3260143) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor BTNG, I can't believe how pleased you are with yourself. What would you consider someone who held up a sign saying "Here I am doing this." to CCTV camera? Would you also consider yourself clever for having caught that person? I'm making a point about insulting people obliquely. All you are doing is demonstrating that you don't know what is going on. But by all means carry on if you want. All opinions are equal on this thread, no matter how poorly founded. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 05:04 PM (#3260152) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Gnu, You think John didn't mean to insult anyone. I believe that he did mean it. Solution is simple. John can settle it. He can say that he didn't mean to insult anyone. Because he certainly has not said that to date. Or he can explain how the "stone age" reference was not an insult. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 05:07 PM (#3260154) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu You talkin ta me? Why? What part of.... |
|
19 Nov 11 - 05:13 PM (#3260158) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Gnu, I like you when you are feisty! |
|
19 Nov 11 - 05:35 PM (#3260168) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cOh deruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG I know exactly what's going and the reason you don't think so is I won't agree with you statement that you weren't insulting anyone...sorry that ain't ever going to happen. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 05:57 PM (#3260191) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I obviously don't care whether you agree or not. I was making a rhetorical point. It was you acting as if you had caught me at something that confused me. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 06:10 PM (#3260195) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Oh we're falling back on the old it was a rhetorical point excuse are...oh for f**ksake give it up, I'm simply laughing my face off at this point, and even harder now, I realise just how easy it is to confuse you...mind you...oh never mind, this thread really has gone on way passed its best before date. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 06:14 PM (#3260199) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I am happy to have amused you. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 07:29 PM (#3260225) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall You guys just keep proving my point. Thanks. |
|
19 Nov 11 - 08:04 PM (#3260231) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG always glad to oblige, "kendall" |
|
20 Nov 11 - 08:14 AM (#3260369) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Raedwulf "No one can really say that another persons opinion is wrong." (Kendall) The only reason that that isn't the most sensible thing anyone has said is because "I don't know whether boxing is cruel, primitive, and nauseating, but the bickering on this thread sure is." That probably is. And yes, I contributed to it. Mr MacKenzie - I will apologise to you if you feel my direct response to you was over the top. However, I and others feel that your opening post was considerably worse than that. "You are your DEMONSTRATED behaviour". Not what you think you meant, but what other people heard (so I'm an argumentative bastard then! ;-) ). Several people, not just myself, think the tone of your post was way out of line, ESPECIALLY considering the fact that it was made in the immediate wake of the death of a man who was a fine competitor in his CHOSEN sport. Maybe it was just bad timing on your part. But do you see, why some 'catters think you should be challenged? Jack - give up on the prissy Brit point. You're in the wrong on that one. And yes, I am a Brit, but that has nothing to do with it. That was ad hominem and nothing else. BTNG - you add nothing to this discussion except petrol. You're not discussing; you're just stirring. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 12:18 PM (#3260440) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall Raedwulf, We all create our own reality. And that is a fact. It follows that we each decide what is cruel, etc. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 01:00 PM (#3260462) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor "prissy Brit." I certainly didn't mean that to be the devastating insult it has been taken to be. Or is "Brit" an insult? I thought it was just a short way to say someone from Britain. "Prissy", I think is a very good description of John Mackenzie's behaviour on this thread. I also think "prissy Brit" is accurate for another reason, I can't imagine a male who is not from Britain who would think about cruelty in terms of a contact sport, who would think of primitive as necessarily a bad think, (it is a synonym for primal) or who would use the word nauseating in anything but a clinical sense. All that said, I am sorry, to have upset anyone. Since I have no emotional attachment to any of the issues, it was pretty dumb of me to continue. Sorry folks, especially to Gnu. You are a good man with a good heart. I am sorry for winding you up. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 01:04 PM (#3260466) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Lonesome EJ Man, this topic is more polarizing than a British Folkie discussion on the relative merit of Lady Isabel and the Elf Night as a parable for the Crucifixion! Personally, I think those of you who want to call each other names and insult one another ought to engage in fisticuffs, put the video on Youtube, and let the rest of us choose whether we think the spectacle is, in fact "cruel, primitive,& nauseating". I can assure you, I'd watch. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 01:18 PM (#3260481) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I guess within the definition of the word we decide what is cruel Kendall. I always considered cruelty to be something one person or group had to impose on another. Interestingly according to the definition I just looked up, I guess, if you considered "boxing" to be an entity with free will and decision making power. Then you could say "boxing is cruel" but from the point of view of the boxer, having a disregard for the opponent, is next to impossible. Even boxing as a teenager in my own back yard, taking a couple of punches in the nose gives one empathy for anyone anywhere who has ever taken a punch. By this definition, especially the second one, are some of the fans cruel? Are the promoters and managers sometimes cruel? Did some boxers, especially Mike Tyson sometimes seem cruel? I would have to admit that the answer is yes. Adjective: Causing pain or suffering: "I can't stand people who are cruel to animals". Having or showing a sadistic disregard for the pain or suffering of others. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 01:20 PM (#3260485) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I will admit that I was trying to make a "boxing match" out of this thread. Sadly the "refs" kept stepping in. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 02:54 PM (#3260522) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Raedwulf kendall - of course we do, but I don't see what point you're trying to make to me? |
|
20 Nov 11 - 03:44 PM (#3260541) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG To shut the silly little old woman,Raedwulf enters and does the very thing she accuses others of doing. Personally I could care less one way or the other about boxing or any of the so-called martial arts, they are boring and they don't interest me, and nor do the personalities involved interest me. The reality (Good God reality!!)is that boxing and other forms of fighting, professional and amateur are here to stay and they're not going away in a hurry, so why bitch and complain. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 05:11 PM (#3260572) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Ya needn't bother talkin at John. I know him. When he says he is gone, he is gone. He won't post and he won't even open the thread to read any of it again. Me, I might say gnightgnu but I still reserve the right to read and post if I feel my words have been twisted... unless it's a known troll that twisted my words, at which point I know the readers with a brain don't pay attention to their crap. And there's a lot of crap on this thread. BTW, no more PMs about this thread please... positive or negative. I said my piece. Got no more to say. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 05:40 PM (#3260585) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Raedwulf So what was the point of you commenting at all then, BTNG? Oh, another internet warrior who bravely hides behind his keyboard. Yet more ad hominem, attempts at personal insults? Please, if you can't make them better than feeble, at least make them coherent. Yes, you really express yourself like that in real life, I can see that... Gnu - pretty sure we've posted views in the same threads before; pretty sure we haven't always been on opposite sides. Not sure why you're being so hostile this time, unless it's because I've talked back to someone you personally know? |
|
20 Nov 11 - 05:55 PM (#3260590) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: catspaw49 I never have added hominy to attempts OR to insults. It goes good with eggs though......Bacon, hominy eggs, cheese.......makes one helluva' fine breakfast. Or do you do this hominy adding as grits? Those are really damn good and especially with cheese and green chili peppers! Personally though, I think posting on these threads can be cruel, primitive, and nauseating, but sometimes you learn something. The thing I'd like to learn here is what the hell kind of hominy is "hominem?" Is that made with a special corn or what? And by the way you Dumbasses........there are two d's in add............ Spaw |
|
20 Nov 11 - 06:02 PM (#3260592) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor there are two d's in add. Not in "had hominy." |
|
20 Nov 11 - 06:21 PM (#3260597) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Megan L The only way boxing could ever be considered even remotely interesting was if it was carried out by blindfolded naked men in a mud pit. Even then they wid hiv tae make sure there were good adverts tae keep fowk amused |
|
20 Nov 11 - 06:28 PM (#3260599) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person") short for argumentum ad hominem note: single "d" it's Latin not English |
|
20 Nov 11 - 07:23 PM (#3260620) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Megan... cool. Yer a wise woman. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 07:36 PM (#3260626) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall We all create our own reality. Period. Nuff said. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 07:38 PM (#3260630) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Lonesome EJ I would argue the case of boxing being "primitive". Wasn't boxing in fact one of the Olympic contests practiced by the ancient Greeks, a culture which practiced true democracy, lived in harmony with the earth, and made a religion of beauty and truth? You can't tell me their culture wasn't superior in most aspects to this one. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 07:59 PM (#3260635) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor You do realize that the ancient economy ran on slave labor and slaves did not have a vote? Also, while they did have wrestling, I believe that what we call boxing was invented by a prissy Brit known as the Marquis of Queensbury. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 08:44 PM (#3260644) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T Yes, indeed, I agree, boxing is dying, and few people in the world find it interesting to watch. But, wait a minute, there are many boxers and many of them make millions of dollars in their career, which is only a fraction of the money taken in from the matches globally. I know, the facts make it difficult for those disconnected who blew the big bubble to propose that it is a dying sport,(and not even interesting enough to watch). One recent reminder that it is indeed not dead is Manny Pacquiao: ""In 2008 Manny Pacquiao received 15 to 30 million dollars (share of the pay-per-view), plus a guaranteed amount. Tickets reportedly sold out just hours after they went on sale. Moreover, the total gate revenue for the fight was said to be nearly 17 million dollars, making it the second largest gate revenue in boxing history."" ""In 2009 a Pacquiano title fight Miguel Cotto generated 1.25 million buys and $70 million in domestic pay-per-view revenue, making it the most watched boxing event of 2009. Pacquiao earned around $22 million for his part in the fight, whilst Cotto earned around $12 million. Pacquiao–Cotto also generated a live gate of $8,847,550 from an official crowd of 15,930."" ""In 2010, Pacquiao defeated Clottey at the Cowboys Stadium in Texas with paid crowd of 36,371 and a gate of $6,359,985. Counting complimentary tickets delivered to sponsors, media outlets and others, the Dallas fight attracted 41,843, an epic number for boxing. In addition, the bout drew 700,000 pay-per-view buys and earned $35.3 million in domestic revenue."" ""(Manny) Pacquiao has been included by Time Magazine as one of the world's most influential people for the year 2009, for his exploits in boxing and his influence among the Filipino people. Pacquiao also graced the cover of Time Magazine Asia for their November 16, 2009 issue. Pacquiao was also included by Forbes Magazine in its annual Celebrity 100 list for the year 2009, joining Hollywood actress Angelina Jolie and fellow athletes Tiger Woods and Bryant.[139] Forbes also listed Pacquiao as the World's 6th Highest Paid Athlete, with a total of 40 Million Dollars from the second half of 2008 to the first half of 2009. Tied with him on the sixth spot was the NBA player LeBron James and golfer Phil Mickelson. Pacquiao was again included in Forbes' list of Highest Paid Athletes from the second half of 2009 to the first half of 2010; he was ranked 8th with an income of $42 million. Pacquiao had also won the 2009 ESPY Awards for the Best Fighter category, beating fellow boxer Shane Mosley and Brazilian mixed martial arts fighters Lyoto Machida and Anderson Silva. More recently, ESPN Magazine reported that Pacquiao is one of the two top earning athletes for 2010, alongside American Major League baseball player Alex Rodriguez. According to the magazine's annual salary report of athletes, Pacquiao earned $32 million for his two 2010 boxing matches against Clottey and Margarito"". Richest boxers |
|
20 Nov 11 - 08:47 PM (#3260645) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG The 9th Marquess of Queensberry was a Scottish nobleman, remembered for lending his name and patronage to the "Marquess of Queensberry rules" that formed the basis of modern boxing, among other things. Boxing: An Overview |
|
20 Nov 11 - 08:56 PM (#3260648) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T Oh yea, blame it on the defenseless and much defeated Scottish. A tricky manoeuvre indeed. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 08:59 PM (#3260650) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T If the Macdondalds and Campbells had only agreed to a boxing match Queensberry rules,instead of more deadly tactics, the world would be a better place today. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 09:03 PM (#3260652) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Look it up on the net or go to your local library A Wee History of the Marquess of Queensberry title |
|
20 Nov 11 - 09:24 PM (#3260661) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 Anybody named Marquis HAS to learn to box. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 09:45 PM (#3260667) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T John Sholto Douglas, (ya know, the 9th Marquess of Queensberry) was also an outspoken atheist prone to violence, abused his wife and contributed to the downfall of author and playwright Oscar Wilde. He seems to have been a disgusting fellow: Marquis of Queensbury |
|
20 Nov 11 - 09:54 PM (#3260668) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG We're talking about the boxing rules that bear his title and nothing else |
|
20 Nov 11 - 10:04 PM (#3260671) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T Well, at a minimum, you are talking about that:) |
|
20 Nov 11 - 10:10 PM (#3260672) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG Exactly, and that's what this thread is about |
|
20 Nov 11 - 10:13 PM (#3260674) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T The title says nothing of the sort, no Boxing rules nor your Gordon fellow rules are mentioned. Sounds more to me like some type of tread rules you are trying to make up?. |
|
20 Nov 11 - 10:49 PM (#3260685) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG absolute rubbish, but think as you will actually Oscar Wilde isn't mention ed either (thank god) |
|
20 Nov 11 - 11:47 PM (#3260696) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor According to the author, the only purpose of this thread was to express his opinion of boxing. Everything else is gravy. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 02:53 AM (#3260738) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: catspaw49 BTNG must be kinda' off or something.....He posted this: "ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person") short for argumentum ad hominem note: single "d" it's Latin not English" Does he mean men eat hominy or what? That's the only way a guy can get hominy inside him so adding hominy must be the answer. Or does he mean giving somebody a can of hominy. If so, I'd like some canned spinach too......and some eggs....but no eggs in a can. Just add the fresh eggs to the canned hominy and then you have a meal! One thing sure, you won't get no "argumentum" from me even if you can't spell that right either. The word is "argument." This ain't no Latin forum but if some Latin type wants to post here like Antonio Banderas or Rita Moreno then I would expect them to also use the proper English spelling. Are you, BTNG, of Latin heritage? If so, I guess it will be okay to "ad" hominy if you want. Just bring eggs and I won't have any argumentum with that.. Spaw |
|
21 Nov 11 - 06:14 AM (#3260772) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T As Oscar Wilde pointed out, it is important to be earnest.;) The thread content has had very little to do about boxing, but was mostly crap-talk. But, it is what it is, and there is no sense of trying to make it more than that. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 07:33 AM (#3260789) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,kendall Millions of dollars to beat another man senseless. Hmmm. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 07:54 AM (#3260802) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Midchuck In my opinion, a lot of people are arguing the wrong question. As they are with respect to alcohol, tobacco, and mara...mari...weed. "Is it good or bad?" is the wrong question. The right question is "Assuming it's bad, will passing laws against it help the situation, or merely drive it underground and thereby make it worse?" P. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 08:27 AM (#3260822) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Greg F. Millions of dollars to beat another man senseless. Kinda like millions of dollars to mangle someone on the football field. Or to throw a basketball around. But ain't that America. Priorities seriously fooked. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 09:02 AM (#3260842) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Or millions of dollars, or any money at all, to sing and play music. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 09:28 AM (#3260871) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T ""Millions of dollars to beat another man senseless"" Yes, and, it's called football and hockey. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 09:38 AM (#3260878) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Or the Republic debates. Though there is evidence that some of them show up senseless. Even the "sane" one forgot how long he had been married. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 09:39 AM (#3260879) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor 200 !!!! 200 posts about nothing Bwahahahaha!!! |
|
21 Nov 11 - 09:56 AM (#3260895) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T I nominate this thread as the one most akin to discussing tonail growth. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 10:08 AM (#3260901) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Toenail growth: cruel, primitive & nauseating. In a world that claims to have advanced beyond the stone age how can we allow it to go on? |
|
21 Nov 11 - 12:25 PM (#3260969) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Greg F. Or millions of dollars, or any money at all, to sing and play music. Refresh my memory: when was the last time a musician, by perfoming, placed someone into a coma, caused irreversible brain damage, brought on premature Parkinson's disease, or made someonne in the audience a paraplegic? Etc. (Madonna excepted, of course) |
|
21 Nov 11 - 12:57 PM (#3260982) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG catspaw49 it's not my problem you only speak English it's yours, I simply prefer not to live my life ingnorance of other languages. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 01:07 PM (#3260990) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG that should read,in ignorance of other languages |
|
21 Nov 11 - 02:05 PM (#3261026) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,kendall ...drive boxing underground? Sure thats where it was over 100 years ago |
|
21 Nov 11 - 02:18 PM (#3261036) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG "drive boxing underground? Sure thats where it was over 100 years ago" Through the late nineteenth century, boxing or prizefighting was primarily a sport of dubious legitimacy. Outlawed in England and much of the United States, prizefights were often held at gambling venues and broken up by police. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Doing a wee bit of googling, I came upon this interesting snippet: An English court case, in 1882 found that a bare-knuckle fight was found to be an assault occasioning actual bodily harm, despite the consent of the participants. This marked the end of widespread public bare-knuckle contests in England. The judgement ran as follows: R v. Coney (1882) QBD 534 is an English case in which the Court for Crown Cases Reserved found that a bare-knuckle fight was an assault occasioning actual bodily harm, despite the consent of the participants. This marked the end of widespread public bare-knuckle contests in England. The case also found that voluntary attendance as a spectator was evidence that could be put to the jury to support a charge of aiding and abetting the assault. Could boxing being driven underground happen again? Yes if we allow "The Aunties" among us to tell us what is and what is not good for us. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 02:49 PM (#3261052) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: catspaw49 BTNG said...... "catspaw49 it's not my problem you only speak English it's yours, I simply prefer not to live my life ingnorance of other languages. " I can see from the way you spell "ignorance" that you don't mind being ignorant of a lot of other things besides your lack of knowledge about hominy. Now I can see you don't know jackshit about hominy 'cause you never have told me what kind of hominy that hominem is. Or is that the Latin word got grits? I can also tell by reading this thread that there are quite a number of other things where you don't seem to mind sharing your ignorance...........maybe it has to do with some kind of language since you seem to prefer Latin. Spaw |
|
21 Nov 11 - 02:53 PM (#3261055) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I hate to be the one to tell you this BTNG, but Spaw, knows enough Latin to be pulling your leg. I don't think he tried to specifically. You just seem to be excessively literally minded. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 03:01 PM (#3261061) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Drive it underground and get if off TV. Get the gratuitous violence off TV and out of video games. Use the media to educate rather than to "entertain" people with, and incite people to, violence. Oh... wait... not a hope. That's the way the poor suffer and die and the rich stay rich. Rather naive of my to even suggest it eh? Yeah... that COULD be considered a trolling type post and definitely thread drift but it's the way I feel about things. And, I still reserve the right to leave and not post any more in a huffy-hissy fit and then come back and state my feelings again. Deal with it. >;-) |
|
21 Nov 11 - 03:05 PM (#3261066) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG "Get the gratuitous violence off TV" Now, if that happened the first to go would be the news programmes |
|
21 Nov 11 - 03:19 PM (#3261075) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor "Get the gratuitous violence off TV" For the most part boxing is off broadcast TV. It is on subscription services, HBO, pay per view. One has to go out of one's way to get it. I have to go to a friend's house. As for video games and other "gratuitous violence" you have to go only slightly less out of your way for those, basic cable, buy the game. Or you can see it all on the internet. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 03:43 PM (#3261095) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Get it off TV... broadcast TV or pay per view or internet or whatever. It's dehumanizing. One more time... dog fighting and cock fighting and bear baiting and gladiators and feeding humans to lions... baiting humans to fight each other. WTF? I was accused, I believe, of not discussing this subject rationally and logically. I think I did, at times. Anyone who doesn't think so, please bring forth your arguenments against what I have just offered for discussion AGAIN. That is... do you believe that human bloodsports are any different from dumb animal bloodsports simply because you THINK that these young humans have a CHOICE? Surely, if they had a choice, they would opt for not getting punched in the face and risking DEATH? Come ON EH? |
|
21 Nov 11 - 04:46 PM (#3261128) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T ""when was the last time a musician, by perfoming, placed someone into a coma, caused irreversible brain damage, brought on premature Parkinson's disease, or made someonne in the audience a paraplegic? Etc"". ""Cant count the times, last time, or the people involved. It's called drugs (light, heavy, and others), and has been known to follow certain forms of music, concerts and music groups around. At least with boxing, only two are potentially impacted"" |
|
21 Nov 11 - 05:21 PM (#3261139) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: catspaw49 ""when was the last time a musician, by perfoming, placed someone into a coma, caused irreversible brain damage, brought on premature Parkinson's disease, or made someonne in the audience a paraplegic? Etc"". Actually, in 2009, a retired Jewish pants presser named Ezekiel Lipschitz living in Pittsburgh was found in a comatose state in his basement. Taken to the hospital, a complete examination was performed and doctors at Allegheny General reported Mr. Lipschitz had reduced brain function and showed signs of Parkinson's disease. The lack of brain functions also affected his nervous system other ways and doctors could find no nerve signals to his lower body suggesting that he will also be a paraplegic should he recover from the coma. A neighbor and friend, Gladys Blatz, had been with him the night before and told police she had left him about 8:30 the previous evening after telling her he intended to listen to the collected musical works of Yoko Ono. Doctors now expect he will not recover. Spaw |
|
21 Nov 11 - 05:31 PM (#3261145) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T ""Get it off TV... broadcast TV or pay per view or internet or whatever. It's dehumanizing. "" Good luck with having your way with that, Gnu. No maytter hard you post, leave and return to this thread, how many "fucks offs and such offs" you throw around, you will never reach those lofty grapes.:) |
|
21 Nov 11 - 05:32 PM (#3261146) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Greg F. Yeah, well, Spaw, I forgot about that case. Point taken. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 05:44 PM (#3261150) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Dave the Gnome "when was the last time a musician, by perfoming, placed someone into a coma, caused irreversible brain damage, brought on premature Parkinson's disease, or made someonne in the audience a paraplegic? Etc"". Only last year I watched "X-Factor". I came round about 2 weeks ago. What happened to 2010? And if anyone doubts the irreversible brain damage I would only point to the rest of my postings... DtG |
|
21 Nov 11 - 05:45 PM (#3261151) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Spaw... O NO! |
|
21 Nov 11 - 05:48 PM (#3261152) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor If you make the point of violence in the media leading to violence in the general subject then the subject of Sex, Drugs, and Rock and Roll needs to be addressed. Speaking for myself here. I lost a lot more brain cells following the example of say Keith Richards (as one of dozens of such examples) than I did following the example of George Foreman. Is Madonna a proper roll model? Is "Lady" Gaga? how about Amy Winehouse? |
|
21 Nov 11 - 06:07 PM (#3261169) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T Interesting articles on football and brain injury, helmet or not: Gilchrist An Ordinary Football Game football player Dave Duerson Footballers brain Football, anyone? Game changers? Center for the Study of Traumatic Encephalopathy |
|
21 Nov 11 - 06:16 PM (#3261174) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Interesting stories on Music "injuries" The Doors The Janis Joplin Story The Hank Williams Story The Johnny Cash Story The Elvis Presley Story The Jimi Hendrix Story The Amy Winehouse story..... |
|
21 Nov 11 - 06:46 PM (#3261198) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Oh my. Music injuries? Hahahahaa. Yer crackin me up. Pun intended. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 06:56 PM (#3261204) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I am NOT for banning the broadcast of boxing. I am for "watching it again." like this guy! Pound for pound... Duran... the "no mas" was not about being sick to his stomach. It was about being sick of the referee. And I agreed. As near as I remember??? I'd have to watch it again. Kendall... ya forgot to add Larry Holmes as the best technically well trained fighter ever... the man was flawless in execution EVEN when he lost. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 07:24 PM (#3261220) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: kendall Larry had the best jab in the business. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 07:24 PM (#3261221) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu I addresed that before JtS. For you to bring it up again is rather odd. And kinda disturbing. If that is all you have to offer, and I really don't know why you would, gnightgnu to you. |
|
21 Nov 11 - 07:27 PM (#3261225) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I am sorry that I missed you addressing that. |
|
22 Nov 11 - 08:09 AM (#3261433) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk Spaw - Thanks for the best laugh I've had here in some time! My heart goes out to poor Mr Lipschitz. |
|
22 Nov 11 - 08:35 AM (#3261441) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T ""The scratches in Yoko Ono records are moments of relief"". -S.A. Sachs |
|
22 Nov 11 - 09:26 AM (#3261463) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG add to the list of "music injuries" The Sandy Denny Story.... |
|
22 Nov 11 - 10:09 PM (#3261847) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk Har! Har! ;-D Another hilarious post. Look, man, I long ago refused to contribute any of my genes to the gene pool, because I'm not impressed with the general scene out there. It's mostly stupid and in vain. It leads nowhere that I would wish to go. Therefore I've kept my genes all to myself, and I'm quite happy with that arrangement. |
|
22 Nov 11 - 10:22 PM (#3261850) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor I think bigblock is arguing my previous point. About generalized attacks being personal, albeit generalized. |
|
22 Nov 11 - 10:30 PM (#3261852) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk Hmmm. Well, possibly. Generalized attacks are just a comment on the human condition, aren't they? That doesn't necessarily translate into a personal attack on some individual....but it could if the poster was intending it to. |
|
22 Nov 11 - 10:32 PM (#3261854) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: BTNG It can't spell either, though it may come back and say it, "pethetic" was a typo. Genes? Nope you're not getting any of mine, humankind is fad, a fashion trend, it'll never last.... |
|
22 Nov 11 - 10:57 PM (#3261862) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor No they are NOT comments on the human condition. They are criticisms of groups of people. If you are in that group they are criticisms of you. Bigblock was pretty much being as offensive as he could without naming an individual. The only difference between insulting a person and a group is the size of the group. The group could be the whole world, or that part of the world that supports boxing, or the foppy limp wristed coward bitching sick hippies on this thread, Or just you and me or just me. Its still an attack and if you are in the group, the attacker intends you to be in the group it is an attack on you and an an attack like that is personal. If some twisted mid western car nut drove his detriot land yacht though the front window of a crowded Wendy's do you think the families of the victims would forgive the guy because the victims were chosen for the place and the time of day they chose to eat fast food? |
|
22 Nov 11 - 10:59 PM (#3261864) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor Little Hawk, It seems that at least one moderator agrees with my opinion that it was a personal attack. |
|
22 Nov 11 - 11:51 PM (#3261877) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Little Hawk Oh, okay, I see what you're referring to. We have no argument here, Jack, I thought you were talking about something else. I found Bigblock's vanished comment so hilarious in its blustering idiocy that I kind of miss it now that it's gone. I think he was attacking not just one individual here, but pretty much all of us collectively, dreadful leftist unregenerate limp-wristed war-hating unpatriotic hippies that we are! I'm being humorous when I say that, Jack...but NOT at your expense, I hasten to add...my comments about Bigblock have nothing to do with you whatsoever. |
|
23 Nov 11 - 08:15 PM (#3262401) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu JtS... "No they are NOT comments on the human condition. They are criticisms of groups of people. If you are in that group they are criticisms of you." Yes they are... that is the thrust of the OP. That is the debate. It is not a personal attack. It is an attack on the morals of a society which allows and promotes violence. Your attempt to personalize the thread as being about you is unjustifiable. Again, I think you are are a good guy, but you are way off base on this one. It ain't about you. It's about boxing... read the title of the thread eh b'y??? Maybe you should start a new thread to discuss YOUR hypothesis. |
|
23 Nov 11 - 08:54 PM (#3262414) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: GUEST,999 No offense, but when someone takes a swipe at me I deal with it, one way or t'other. I agree with Gnu. It's easy to be tough. It's better to walk away. Always was, always will be, imo. |
|
24 Nov 11 - 01:34 PM (#3262785) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor No offense, but when someone takes a swipe at me I deal with it, one way or t'other. No offense taken, but if I don't take your advice please don't be offended. I haven't asked for it. I don't need it. You do what is right for you. I will do what is right for me OK? Gnu. You didn't read what bigblock wrote did you? The moderator thought it offensive enough to delete, yet it was an attack on a group. |
|
24 Nov 11 - 07:02 PM (#3262979) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Stringsinger In my early youth I learned about boxing from an instructor that taught kids. I used to attend fights at various arenas with him. There is an art here. There is a difference which has become obliterated, that of a boxer requiring physical skill with coordination and footwork and a fighter, someone who just ploughs his way with only brute force and without much skill. Apparently Ali and Joe Louis were both fighters and boxers. As for blood sports, it seems to me that football is worse for it's brutality although I'm not a fan of either sport, boxing or football. What is really cruel, primitive and nauseating is how some cops are treating Occupiers and students. |
|
24 Nov 11 - 07:32 PM (#3262998) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor The most dangerous sporting occupation is as a jockey. The most deadly is auto racing. Are they cruel, primitive & nauseating? |
|
24 Nov 11 - 08:35 PM (#3263026) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: gnu Horse and auto racing? Yer shittin me buddy... keep diggin. Have fun. |
|
24 Nov 11 - 09:44 PM (#3263049) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Ed T Jockeys Jockeys on the plain |
|
24 Nov 11 - 11:38 PM (#3263077) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor "Horse and auto racing? " I heard that stat on NPR (National Public Radio) a couple of years ago. It was an insurance industry report I remember because it seemed so unlikely. But they explained that when a horse falls, which is very common that it falls on the jockey. The math is compelling. 1200 pound horse, 120 pound man who starves himself to minimize his riding weight. Also there just aren't that many men making a living as Jockeys. Pro auto racers are even more rare. An Indy driver died this year. |
|
24 Nov 11 - 11:48 PM (#3263079) Subject: RE: BS: Boxing; cruel, primitive & nauseating From: Jack the Sailor http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AZCPBTZvsg&feature=fvsr |