Hacker News Reader

Comment by atom-morgan | Hacker News Reader

This is controlled, isolated, and voluntary violence. Why would it make you sad? I think it's fantastic.

I can't speak for the GP, but it's (apparent) popularity worries me. It is a brutal sport, with some of the dregs of society participating at the highest levels (here's an interview between two competitors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTzhVVIjLCE). I don't think I would have an issue with UFC etc. if the fighters could show a little class and some respect for each other. As it stands I think it supplies very bad role-models for teenage and 20 year old males it is surely popular with.

Those interviews are all for show and to build up hype, they don't actually dislike each other.

I'm not sure which is worse.

I think the worst part is that the fake hype works :/

It's funny you mention class and respect considering that aside from promoting events you'll never see a higher level of sportsmanship outside the UFC. "In Octagon" behavior really doesn't even compare. (Watch Conor McGregor immediately after he lost to Diaz)

There is no reason why their behavior while promoting events should be excluded when considering their character. I don't believe I have ever seen another sportsman threaten to kill a competitor, or gloat about having inflicted a career-ending injury. Not to say that it doesn't happen, but it's more visible in UFC.

This was the first incident that came to mind from my own sports knowledge. There are certainly others:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Martin_(American_footb...

> role-models

Are you kidding? It's a social activity, just like NFL in the days of yore, that people partake in.

Discussions about who's in the next big fight are what's on people's minds, not their criminal background. Sure, issues like domestic abuse and drug consumption will come up in conversations, but I think you're overestimating how many people look up to these guys and gals.

How do you feel about the gladiators fighting? They were slaves who risked life and limb for the entertainment of others. While UFC fighters get paid, others have pointed out here that it often isn't much.

The key word of atom-morgan's comment is "voluntary".

Correct. I have no problem with voluntary violence. To many in the sport becoming a great fighter is no different than aspirations in this community to start a great startup. The only difference is people on HN wouldn't do what they do at their salary. Value is relative.

There is an ethical nexus in play. The US military is "volunteer" but we all know how that plays out in reality.

You're obviously implying something here, make it explicit. Explain how the military is "voluntary". Explain "how it plays out in reality". Your implied arguments are a waste of space.

How many scion of old money families participate in UFC? In the US military? How many children of the nouveau upper middle class do?

How it plays out in reality is that the money involved looks better to people who have fewer choices. Of course, there will be exceptions. But in a meritocratic society, status is not as derived from violent activity as was true of societies with an honor culture.

I know for a fact that it's possible to develop a deep and abiding love of American football as a player. I presume the same is true of UFC. But the risks will dictate whether or not the money is worth it depending on a persons status.

Edit: nouveau

Does "voluntary" make it a great role model for teenagers?

No, other than teaching them the importance of voluntary associations. Why is it a default that these fighters have to be good role models for children?

"Just because I dunk a basketball doesn't mean I should raise your kids." -Charles Barkley

Reply on news.ycombinator.com