BOXING and the Deterioration of Society...

No problem. I'll use another example to illustrate.

One of the rules (as far as I know) was to avoid sexual scandals. Not just with white women, but generally.

Avoiding sexual scandals is not a bad idea for anyone. Especially when they are married, as Joe Louis was. I think you and I agree that it's bad to cheat on your wife.

Where it gets oppressive is that society would have punished Joe Louis far more harshly for infidelity than it would punish a white man for exactly the same thing. The unequal enforcement on the basis of race makes it unfair.

Some of the rules were racially specific, and thus oppressive on their face. Others were oppressive because they were unfairly enforced.

 

“Proper” decorum changes with society.

We can make the same video about music and show these clean-cut musicians of the orchestra era vs. the long-haired Beatles and say how society deteriorated … but did it? Or did decorum change?

The society OP longs for seems to be one where races are separated, basic human rights are denied to people based on the color of their skin — if they aren’t outright lynched … murdered for the transgression of being born and ‘not knowing their place’ — a larger percentage of people living below the poverty line and even having access to basics like nutrition and education.

THAT is better than what we have today? Because boxers didn’t blather on at press conferences to sell a fight?

I’d say in very measurable ways society is much better today than in those days. That’s not my definition of deterioration. It’s progress.

And we still have a LONG way to go.

 

Yeah, so the loveless marriage question raises a wider vista of issues. That said, Joe Louis himself did marry the same woman twice, so I assume he got something out of the deal. I also doubt that most philandering among pro athletes emerges from despair at a loveless marriage. The more common motive seems to be because they want to have sex with attractive women. (An understable motivation, to be fair.)

As a broader matter, most people would agree that if you're married to someone, you probably shouldn't cheat on them in the overwhelming majority of cases, since: (1) you chose to marry them in the first place knowing the risks, and (2) you could just divorce them. Or in Joe's case, you could divorce the same woman twice.

Most people would also find the decision *not* to cheat on one's wife to be an admirable one in most circumstances.

 

The "I don't think any man had the right to tell another person what to do unless he's a judge or paying him" raises the separate question of enforcement.

I'm not sure this thread is focused exclusively on enforcement. Not all bad behavior gets punished.

But if a guy cheats on his wife for funzies, his rights don't extend so far that they prohibit us from thinking he's a jerk. Or saying he's a jerk, even though he might find our saying so embarrassing.

Similarly, if a guy stays faithful to his incredibly ugly but loving wife, dodging legions of adoring models in the process...well, that's admirable behavior.

I'm not proposing the government set up the Boxing Morality Police, if that's what you're asking.

 

Boxing just reflects society.
Standards of behaviour and decorum have been deteriorating since the sixties it’s a totally different world.

 

It's definitely more entertaining to see fighters trading barbs. Jerks are entertaining people as long as you're a spectator. I think that's undeniable, judging from the success of the "angry press conference" business model.

But that may be a different issue from the original thread question of whether boxing antics reflect some sort of degeneration in society.

Societies that expect and admire boring, "Hello, fellow citizen. Let us have a fine fight tonight." press conferences are probably more polite and less tolerant of jerks.

You and I seem to agree that some jerkish antics from professional athletes -- cheating on your wife for fun, for example -- are immoral and undesirable. We also seem to agree that steering clear of some jerkish behaviors is admirable. A world of people who actually behaved like Joe Louis pretended to be in public might end up with incredibly boring press conferences, but would also have more stable marriages and fewer traffic jams.

Perhaps a bit like some modern East Asian countries, actually.

Now, should anyone go out and *enforce* that? That's a separate question, and purely academic, since it ain't happening.

 

Clearly a case of "Do as I say, not as I do."

Still, the civilization of Louises wouldn't mistreat their cars as badly as those Larrylanders with their custom of running across parked vehicles to dropkick people.

 

True. I had forgotten the Larrylanders' verging-on-Lowland-Scots thriftiness.