| |
Sponsors
Joe Riggs: 'Sarah Kaufman is lucky to be on TV, the men are what people are here to see'
Joe Riggs: 'Sarah Kaufman is lucky to be on TV, the men are what people are here to see' |
| Posted By |
Message |
TimW001
MMA Sensei
Career record: 502-330
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Canada BC
|
Posted by machodog76
Posted by bjj1605
Some people enjoy Clay Guida fights. I can't stand Clay Guida fights. I think that he is lacking in technique and finishing power. Same reason I don't like women's MMA.
differences between the sexes.
John Fitch is much more technical than Guida and fights at a higher level, but I think Guida is 10 times more exciting to watch I'm surprised you hate watching his fights. To each his own. In his defense he did finish his last fight and broke the guys jaw in the first round.
I don't like watching Clay either.
|
|
Post #46 8/16/10 2:05:56PM
|
|
|
Jackelope
Go ahead, MOD my day
Career record: 586-330
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Getting choked out or arm barred
|
It may be late, but I just want to weigh in by saying that I don't particularly enjoy women's MMA, either. I can't ever see myself buying an all women's PPV. I support their right to fight for sure, and I have seen some entertaining women's MMA fights, but it's not something I am personally going to invest money in. Or time really.
I also want to add that If that makes me sexist then I'm OK with it   I like to burp, fart, eat greasy food, shotgun beers with my friends, and occasionally stare at chick's boobs. (Occasionally = Any time there is a sweet pair in my line of sight) I'm enlightened in some areas of my life, but I don't resist the urges I get from mother nature!
|
|
Post #47 8/16/10 2:40:12PM
|
Advertisement |
|
machodog76
Belt Contender
Career record: 942-601
Season: 35-24 (#773)
Location: portland
|
No love for Clay on the playground. is it the hair?
Last edited 8/16/10 4:37PM by machodog76
Edit note/reason: n/a
|
|
Post #48 8/16/10 4:16:50PM
|
BlueSkiesBurn
Heavyweight Champ
Career record: 490-347
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location:
|
Posted by machodog76
No love for Clay on the playground. is it the hair?
I love me some Clay. Dunno why he's getting all this hate.
|
|
Post #49 8/16/10 5:00:46PM
|
AchillesHeel
Heavyweight Champ
Career record: 594-345
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: In the cheap seats.
|
Posted by Aether
[...]the vast majority of people want to see the best of the best. Only a very select group of people watch undercard fights, watch 145 pound male fights, or even watch any fight that doesn't involve two contenders.
Just wanted to focus in on this point, for a moment.
My question to anyone who's a fan of MMA is, "Should someone who enjoys MMA be dismissive of undercard fights, of Featherweight fights, or of non-title-contender fights?" I would expect the answer to be an emphatic "no."
Are Featherweights, by definition, inferior fighters? Clearly not, and I think that's true regardless of how you define "inferior." In terms of athleticism, excitement, depth of talent, and technical skill in standup and in grappling, Featherweights are the equal of any other weight class. And I think Jose Aldo has to be on any respectable Top-10 Pound-for-Pound list, replacing Urijah Faber.
I would also caution a new viewer of MMA against dismissing undercard fights and fights between non-contenders out of hand. Almost by definition (almost), those fights will have less-accomplished fighters, but it would be a mistake to confuse "less accomplished" with "less skilled" or "less exciting." In so young a sport, the cream hasn't yet risen to the top. If a longtime fan of MMA was dismissive of Featherweights, undercard fights or non-contenders, I would think that person is an idiot.
More to the point, that person has a prejudice against featherweights, undercards, and non-contenders, and could accurately be described as "featherweightist", "undercardist" and "non-contenderist."
However, there are two big reasons being featherweightist doesn't really compare to being sexist (or racist, or ageist, or homophobic): First, a fighter's weight-class, his spot on the card, and his place in the title contention picture are not immutable characteristics. Second, weight-classes and cards do not carry larger social implications and histories with them. There's never been, to my knowledge, commonplace and legal discrimination and violence against Featherweight MMA fighters. The above-mentioned idiot isn't a dangerous idiot invoking a much larger and damaging social problem.
By way of analogy, a person could say that they don't much care for watching Black fighters, and three things would immediately be true:
1 - They're entitled to their opinion, and no one could or should ever force them to watch Black fighters.
* It's important to note that opinions, by themselves, aren't nothing. An opinion is support for a position; if I say "Blade Runner is an awesome movie", I'm being an advocate for the movie, implicitly saying that everyone should watch it and like it.
2 - Most people will think they're a friggin' idiot.
3 - Black people - including those who aren't MMA fighters, who have nothing to do with MMA and know nothing of MMA - would be wary of them.
A fourth thing that often isn't immediately true, but should be, is that non-Black people would be a little embarrassed and question the person regarding their uninformed and potentially dangerous opinion. At the very least, they're denying themselves some great MMA fights for no good reason and implicitly suggesting that new viewers do the same.
|
|
Post #50 8/17/10 11:51:55AM
|
AchillesHeel
Heavyweight Champ
Career record: 594-345
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: In the cheap seats.
|
It occurred to me that in all of my talk about sexism, I didn't use the most apropos example: Joe Riggs' reaction to Sarah Kaufman's comments.
Joe Riggs
I don't know what that [Sarah Kaufman] is talking about. She's lucky to even be on TV. As long as [women fighters] don't say things like they don't want to be on the Challengers card and they want to be main events than they're good. We're the show. The men are what people are here to see.
First, I have to wonder about what "[Sarah Kaufman]" is editing out in this quote. Journalists and editors often use bracketed words to replace inspecific nouns or pronouns. For example, Riggs might have said "I don't know what she's talking about", and the writer needed to specify who Riggs was talking about for the reader. However, he didn't apparently say that. He apparently said "I don't know what that _____ is talking about." He might have said "that woman", "that girl", "that person" or something else equally innocuous. Then again, he might not have.
Second, the sentence "As long as [women fighters] don't say things like they don't want to be on the Challengers card and they want to be main events than they're good" smacks of old-fashioned "women should know their place" talk. It's not explicit, it's implicit, and it invokes a lot of... stuff. It's for a similar reason that you shouldn't call a Black male "boy", even if they are in fact a boy. I once had a colleague with a 7-year-old son, and if I'd called him "boy" instead of "kid", "dude" or "little man" I'm sure that he would have thought nothing of it. His mother, however, would have gone to DEFCON 4 - "increased awareness and heightened security measures." 
Third, his assertion that "The men are what people are here to see" is partly right and partly wrong. As we can see from this thread, there are plenty of people who enjoy watching some women fighters specifically, and women fighters in general. As a generalization that the bulk of MMA fans prefer men's fights to women's, I think Riggs is probably correct.
Finally, Riggs is implicitly advocating the position that people should be dismissive of female fighters, and that women's MMA matches should be regarded with less respect and awarded less money. And it doesn't really matter if that's what he meant to do (although, frankly, I think he did), it's what he's doing.
Last edited 8/17/10 12:19PM by AchillesHeel
Edit note/reason: n/a
3 total post edits
|
|
Post #51 8/17/10 12:16:18PM
|
DCRage
Representin' The MA's
Career record: 453-339
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Maryland
|
The ratings just came out for SF Challengers 10...time for Joe to STFU. The top draw in terms of ratings was a women's fight. But this of note: It was the women's tourney reserve fight.
|
|
Post #52 8/17/10 1:03:35PM
|
Aether
Heavyweight Champ
Career record: 929-503
Season: 18-6 (#1669)
Location: Edmonton
|
well I should point out that I'm not saying that I dislike these fighters or these kinds of fights myself. I admit I don't really enjoy women's MMA on the same level that I enjoy men's MMA, but I have enjoyed plenty of good female fighters, watch pretty much every undercard fight I can get my hands on, etc.
I just think these are the reasons that the public in general haven't embraced women's MMA and probably won't ever embrace women's sports on the level that they do with mainstream athletes.
-edit-
I also am not trying to defend Riggs' comments specifically, but rather commenting on the discussion about women's MMA in general.
Last edited 8/17/10 3:32PM by Aether
Edit note/reason: n/a
|
|
Post #53 8/17/10 3:30:14PM
|
Rush
Laying down the beats
Career record: 467-329
Season: 0-0 (#-)
Location: Canadian living in the SF Bay Area
|
Posted by crushedbacon
best women's player could maybe play Division 3 pro in Europe
See Hayley Wickenheiser.
|
|
Post #54 8/17/10 5:28:58PM
|
|
|
|
