Savannah "The Gypsy Queen" Marshall vs Claressa "T-Rex" Shields - Who you got?

Really good post, and spot on.

 

A pretty good post. Women's boxing being shallower ensures that there is more competition and theoretically less politics than the men. That being said I don't mind Bridges fights, she seems up for a scrap.

 

Certainly less politics than the mens. But as money grows, I am sure the politics will grow unfortunately.

 

A Sky PPV card involving Eubank Jr vs Williams and Marshall vs Shields would get my money.

Sky's machine would hype up the Marshall vs Shields fight as the female version of Mayweather vs Pacquiao. Top 2 P4P facing off.

 

I have no issue with women boxing for fitness or to acquire some defensive capability. I do find the idea of womens' professional boxing somewhat vile, yeah. That sensibility is not really what's informing my position, though. I'm talking about this situation we have where a much inferior version of the sport is being forced on fans who haven't asked for it and by and large aren't interested in it, instead of being given its own TV slot and left to create its own buzz (or not, as the case may be).

Why does it have to piggyback on the male sport if it's really worth seeing? Why do we need to sneak a woman into a headline slot when a man is selling the tickets, à la Crolla/Taylor? Because, in the case of Sky, it's about this subversive march through the institutions and a prevailing social agenda to push women into every field where female representation is minimal, even where that lack of representation is attributable to the vast majority of women being completely uninterested in those fields. Or, in the case of someone like Hearn, it's about a dollar — the women are cheap and easy, which makes us (the fans) cheap and easy.

This is my 2¢, you don't have to agree, but I don't believe it's worth encouraging the BS for the sake of one fight, especially when (if we're being honest) most of the appeal is driven by personality. It's a novelty fight whose big hook is the promise of seeing some loudmouth harpy get her comeuppance, when the best comeuppance would be to deny her the bag she doesn't deserve.

Because most of them are dykes or else waiting 'til after their fighting careers are done to have kids?

A lot of things **** me off about the business of boxing (I'm hardly alone in that), this is just another. I think you're underestimating the amount of distaste for womens' boxing that exists among fans of the sport. It's not just crumby matchmaking I'm seeing criticism of in fan circles, it's the very idea of women taking up space on TV boxing cards at all.

When I describe the womens' game as "a much inferior version of the sport", I'm not just talking about the talent pool, I'm referring to the best female fighters. Women are not nearly as good at boxing as men, due to physiological differences, like deficits in testosterone, blood hemoglobin counts, bone density, coordinative capacity (e.g. visually-guided movement, visual spatial processing, precision in large muscle movement, all areas in which male superiority has been confirmed by scientific study), etc. There are sports where the physiological differences between men and women do give women an edge over the men, but boxing is not one of them, not even close. As someone who's been watching boxing for twenty-four years (close to 80% of my life), when I set eyes on womens' boxing, I can tell that I'm watching a deeply inferior version of the sport, even when the girls are relatively good.

Incidentally, I'm guessing you meant Mitchell-Courtenay? Guys here just assumed that was a gimme for Courtenay because Mitchell is in her thirties and had nobody with a winning record on her own ledger (I actually watched some amateur film of one of Mitchell's prior fights, for betting purposes, and fancied her chances enough to put money down on her). In reality, Mitchell-Courtenay wasn't all that less worthy than this one. Who have Marshall and Shields, two world champions, beaten besides a bunch of care workers, bassoonists, part-time baristas and cosmeticians? You yourself made reference to the shallow talent pool. That, too, is down to biology as much as anything else, the inherent differences between men and women, their instincts, desires, hardwiring, which brings me back to this subversive drive to compel women into professions they are (in great majority terms) not the least bit inclined to show interest in.

Katie Taylor will encourage no more than a few girls to unwisely enter a profession where their health will be compromised for paltry reward on account of a lack of market interest in seeing broads fight. Jane Couch's tale is a cautionary one and should be heeded. I know guys who've gone out and had bruising wars that left them aching for weeks for purses that amounted to less than a grand. Why would we wish that on women, society's child-rearers and nurturers? It's not as if gender roles and natural law aren't being assaulted enough already.

Even if Marshall and Shields get paid as a result of this attempt to brute-force the womens' sport into public favor, that kind of false economy won't be sustainable. The PPV won't do numbers if Sky really are fool enough to put it on Box Office, the female half of the sport won't explode as a result of the fight, the tangible demand to see women box each other will be as slim-to-nonexistent as ever, ditto female prospects of making a real living out of the game.

Then again, maybe the social engineering has more mileage than I think. It's clearly taken effect to some extent, given that (as I previously noted) a lot of the same guys who profess a fundamental distaste for womens' boxing seem to have been lured in to protracted discussion of it by the promise of seeing nasty girls get beaten up by nice(r) girls. Guess we'll see in due course.

The UFC, and MMA in general, caters to the most base quarter of the casual sports consumer market.

Even with that said, the womens' side of MMA is still living off the fumes of Rousey's YUGE crossover success (a great piece of marketing, but difficult to replicate). Heck, Christy Martin was a pretty big deal at one point, too, then womens' boxing faded back out again. Fads happen, then they run out of gas.

And, seeing as you mention it, even as a non-aficionado of MMA, I've lost track of the amount of times I've seen the guys over at Sherdog griping about the shallowness of the talent pool in womens' MMA. Pesky biology again.

 

I don’t get your point tbh. Are you referring to the likes of Campbell Hatton when talking about an inferior product being forced on fans?

It seems pretty backwards to dismiss women’s sport altogether. There are a few genuinely good fighters in women’s boxing, others that try to exploit their looks to make a few quid but then that also happens in men’s sport and life in general. If you don’t like it then don’t watch.

 

For someone who finds womens boxing vile you sure spent some time writing about it

 

Shields, Taylor, Marshall and Cameron all good to watch along with Shanny

 

I did allude to the fact that boxing already has enough deepening issues with product dilution without adding this forced prevalence/ascendancy of womens' boxing to the mess.

If you want me to criticize the Campbell Hatton farce, I could do that, too. In fact, I have. But, since the initial shock of his last giftwrapped victory died down, the kid hasn't really been discussed much since I came off my posting hiatus.

The infestation of womens' fights hitting televised boxing shows is not a remedy to travesties like Campbell Hatton. On the contrary, it is its own whole category of blight.

I guess I should note that it was Hearn/Sky who brought us both Campbell Hatton on PPV and Katie frigging Taylor 'headlining' the MEN.

Well, I'm not into progressivism for the mindless sake of it. I stated my reasons for wanting to see girly boxing segregated from the male sport — and I thought I was pretty magnanimous in suggesting that they could be given a chance to impress TV audiences on their own shows, perhaps on terrestrial television (Channel 5, ITV) if a deal could be struck, a platform which would give the girls a shot at actual widespread exposure and allow everyone to quickly ascertain whether their sport had any organic public appeal — you fellows are either misapprehending them, selectively ignoring them or skimming over them.

You don't have to read my posts if you find them overlong. These are my 2¢, I don't expect every reader here to stop scrolling, take a pew and pay reverent, hushed attention to every word when they see a sermon by @navigator. But I also don't usually respond to posts that I haven't thoroughly read and processed.

Sure, there're some girls who can box a bit. I'm capable of discerning as much (see the above post, where I briefly mention that I'd identified Jamie Mitchell as a legitimate threat to Shannon Courtenay, while others here dismissed the fight as some kind of set-up).

That some of them are technically more proficient/capable than others is entirely to be expected and not really my point. Yes, Natasha Jonas will look like a million bucks when put in with a glorified toilet cleaner like Terri #LoveIsLove Harper.

With the exception of a rhetorical jab at Baggaley's comedy fillers, I haven't objected to any of them selling some sizzle (the subversion of beauty standards is a whole other topic I won't get into). I'm objecting to the overall quality of the steak and its presence on the same plate as mens' boxing.

That's my point, it should be on its own shows. Then you white knights could fill your boots watching stuff even my girl (who enjoys the sport) isn't interested in watching, which would leave the rest of us more able to completely ignore it and continue watching men boxing each other instead of being patronized and lectured about how Ebonie Jones is breaking through the glass ceiling and proving that girls are just as good as boys (or even better!) at everything. We all dislike dishonest, manipulative commentary, right? Or are Adam Smith's lies suddenly palatable when he's shilling this BS?

I'm writing about how I'd like it to go away, Noel. If I were waxing lyrical about my anticipation of the Ball-Courtenay rematch or breaking down the Cameron-McGee style clash, you'd have more of a point.

Christ, is this really how hardcore fight fans argue?

 

Not an argument just an observation

 

Which I placed in perspective.

 

Should add that I was watching two girls spar in the gym just yesterday afternoon. I can't be that much of a backward misogynist.

 

You use a lot of words to talk bollocks, women in boxing is growing at an extremely fast rate. The only issue I have is females with big teats and a large Twitter following are getting a shot at titles they haven’t earnt.
You seem obsessed with the standard of female boxing when we are served dross on a weekly basis with the men