BOXING and the Deterioration of Society...

Good stuff McGrain! I couldn't agree with you more on all points. We have plenty of honorable world champions today.

 

I have no idea what happens behind closed doors, what crimes are committed away from the public eye.
You seem to have faith in things being better now.
They could all be one big ********** ring for all I know.
It's not something I can possibly accurately measure.

My comments are about what is being demonstrated in interviews, press conferences, public appearances, etc.

Point is, I don't care what they get paid, if they are getting millions they are lucky.

Behaving well can always be categorised as "pretence", if we judge any individual by their worst behaviour. This happens all the time. But I prefer to acknowledge good behaviour as good behaviour, even if th the person is probably a monumental ******* away from cameras.

The point is, bad behaviour wasn't wanted, wasn't glorified, was tolerated less. In the public image of the sport.
That's my point anyway.

 

Very interesting video…but I’ll disagree. I think most fighters behind the scenes are kind to one another. They put on a show like it’s wrestling because they’ll get more buys a bigger following and more money. I wish they’d just act like they do behind closed doors (I’ve met many people who’ve met Mayweather and other loud mouths and had nothing but kind things to say). Most fighters come with problems and if we went through their histories they all had blemishes but they did behave more gentlemen like pre fight and during. But I can’t blame a guy for wanting to earn a living. As soon as that behavior isn’t rewarded boxers will stop the clown antics

 

Boxing has always been seedy, and boxers have always behaved badly behind closed doors.

It's true, though, that the audience has changed. The fact that modern fighters are admired for acting like they do probably is indicative of a different type of audience. An audience that is more juvenile, superficial, emotional, narcissistic, and spoiled than in the past. To put it another way, we have more adults who think like teenagers, and our sports entertainment reflects that.

Boxing has always reflected different social pathologies, depending on when it existed. These days, it reflects ours.

 

Sure. But boxing (prizefighting) was a semi-criminal pursuit back then, in that place and time. But it has since moved towards being respectable sport. So let the psychopaths pretend to be gentlemen, let them TRY to be gentlemen, or not. It's better than not, in my view, but whatever.
I wasn't around to witness Britt and Papke, so I cannot comment specifically on them. I'm less concerned with psychopaths though, than with the possibility that is THIS ERA there are boxers pretending to be psychopaths, pretending to be thugs, acting like thugs, deliberately acting like they are bad man outside of the ring because that's what they do for attention.
Which is not authentic at all, anyway.

I'm not condoning the press's canonization of fighters on some false basis like that. I'm not condoning any canonization.

I'm just saying acting like an adult, shake hands with opponent, being well behaved in public, on those occasions when representing the sport, is better than acting like a moron on those occasions, even if the man is fundamentally a moron (or psychopath).
It's the same everywhere. If someone comes to the office and behaves properly and goes home and beats his wife, that's bad, But that doesn't mean I want him to be as much as an ******* at work, just to show his "authentic self". In fact, I'm saying his acting well in the office is a good thing, good for the company and overall better than being an ******* everywhere. And as a worker, he gets judged by what he does in the office. To me, that's obvious.

No. I haven't mentioned Joe Louis.
I regard Joe Louis as the greatest puncher of all time, a cold killer in the ring, a menacing presence out of it too. I think he was a man who didn't like to talk much in public because he wasn't very articulate. He liked to knock men the **** out, white men, black men, whoever. Let his fists do the talking. I'm sure that did upset a lot of white people. I don't know what "authentic Joe Louis" you might imagine, so I can't really address what he did wrong.

You seem to know more about it than I do.
I've never seen Joe Louis giving a "Yes sir, No sir" routine. I have never seen this subservient Joe Louis, this fawning Uncle Tom character that people speak of. I'm not saying it didn't happen, I just haven't seen it.
I just see/hear a man who was incredibly shy and inarticulate and polite, very young. He doesn't strike as a man who wanted to act differently or was capable of doing so. He was comfortable in the ring. He just wanted to win fights and knock mother****ers out cold.

 

The biggest difference from the "Old Days" and "Today"
is everyone now potentially is a reporter walking around
with a camera in their pockets.
Take for instance the many video's of black men killed
by law enforcement today. But that's nothing new
and in fact it was FARRRR worse when I was a kid
in the 70's.
I remember the Mcduffie riots in Miami. Broad day light, their were
many witnesses, many of them other cops. Yet every
law enforcement officer that had a hand in his death
were found not guilty. The beating and damage done
to Mcduffies body was beyond belief, officers allegedly
fighting each other for a chance to stomp him.
Does anyone believe they would get away with that
today? The only reason the riots happened was
because Mcduffie was a prominent and successful
member of society.
His worse crime was racing away from the police
because of a suspended DL.
The riots probably doesn't happen if it was Joe
Blow drug dealer from across the tracks.
Society hasn't really gotten worse, other than
rude children.
It's just theirs so much media now and bad behavior
is usually what gets attention.
How that relates too boxing is, guys that never would've
been heard of 20-30yrs ago get attention.
All these You Tube fighters can get away with making
millions without fighting serious competition in the ring.
As long as he/she says or does something outlandish .
Does anyone actually believe someone like Jake Paul
would've been heard of years ago?
And if someone on this site reading this wouldn't do
the same if they had the ability and media exposure
their lying to themselves.
I wish I was born in the mid-late 90's early 2000's
as opposed to the early 60's. with the fighting skills
I had in the 80's. lol.
Society hasn't gotten worse , it's only the availability
of mass media. And ignorant behavior that usually
draws attention that make it seem so.

 

It's an interesting topic this thread has opened.

As to authenticity, yes, people were far less authentic in some ways back then. We are less authentic in other ways now. Our public personas today are inferior to the public personas during the golden age of fakeness that McGrain theorizes about, though.

IMO, the wife- (husband- / girlfriend- / boyfriend-) beater's authentic, emotionally honest, 100% genuine behavior at home is precisely the problem.

I haven't met many people whose authentic selves are better, more likable, or more admirable than the fake ones they project. All things considered, I prefer living in an orderly society of inauthentic people. They're usually nicer and more civilized.

The reason modern people are more law abiding is probably simple cowardice. They are forced by ubiquitous surveillance to maintain a significant portion of their public facades even at home. So to the extent that this thread is pointing out improvements in society, you probably can thank inauthenticity for part of that.

The difference, IMO, is that the public masks worn by the 40s/50s people were more likable and admirable simulacra than the masks today. The current masks are worn all the time, but do not filter out their wearers' juvenile, annoying stuff. Just the overtly criminal and/or clearly taboo behavior.

 

We are talking about a sport where fighters knock each other upside the head and want to physically harm their opponents. Why do we expect civility, politeness, and sportsmanship then root for the fighters to bloody their opponent?

 

Hm...I don't really think that there's anything wrong with quiet people, but that aside, I am certainly not discounting any of the following:

* That some social roles are inherently dysfunctional (e.g., a crime boss is probably nicer to his kids than to the people whose legs he's breaking; professional wrestlers...and now boxers...are probably more reasonable when not mugging for the cameras; etc.)

* That some people are very nice in their private lives, and may be nicer in private than in public.

In general, though, I believe we'd find that people act a lot better on average when they're being watched. Which is after all why we consider all sorts of punishments -- criminal codes, informal social shunning and scolding, and so on -- to be necessary. To protect us when someone's authentic self decides it wants to go after someone.