The gentle art of boxing

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail....-publicity-stunt.html

We hear of footballers being suspended for a number of matches, others arrested and charged by the police, and their captaincy taken off them, all for allegedly using abusive words.

So what should happen to thugs such as these, should they be banned from ever boxing again?

[NOX]

That's a pretty rude and ignorant statement andy- I boxed ( recreationally granted) but I have two degrees and I consider myself to be a reasonably tolerant and sensible individual and the Klitscho brothers certainly are. It's like me saying all music journalists are waste of space stoners who ought to get a real job isn't it really?

[andy-hughes]

ummmm - because the action of letting someone hit you around the head while you hit them around the head - however 'supervised by rules' that activity might be - is not the behaviour ofan intelligent person.

[Ankou]

ummmm, "according to brain surgeons, over 80 per cent of professional boxers have serious brain scarring". surely that must bounce arouns some of the cells that require bright thinking ?!

anyhow, the whole episode reminds me of the recent aog / andy hughes incident, except without the hair pulling, scratching, calling each other sir and the throwing down of gloves.

[andy-hughes]

NOX - my apologies if I caused any offence.

I stand by my view though, that boxing is not an activity for most people who are aware of the dangers caused - not matter how much of a sport it is, and with strict rules, the object of the exercise is to cause harm to another person, and their complicity in that action does not make it something with which I am comfortable.

Regarding your comment about music journalists - you are absolutely bang on!

But as we both know, with both activities, there are exceptions, and we are evidence of that.

[andy-hughes]

Ankou - can't speak fopr AOG but 'hair-pulling'? Chance would be a fine thing!!

[EvianBaby]

Andy, were you listening to Radio 2 today by any chance?

[andy-hughes]

No - did I miss a discussion?

[Mick-Talbot]

That's a pretty rude and ignorant statement andy

hear hear NOX.

Boxing, like it or not, is an art.

As the thicko Lennox Lewis says ... "The sweet science"

[EvianBaby]

You did Andy.

There was some woman on who made a statement very similar to what you said.

[Mick-Talbot]

Some people pluck the feathers from a chicken for a living,or shove fishfingers in a box for cap't birdseye but you wouldn't say
to them "
you're not especially bright are you ?"

[Mick-Talbot]

anotheoldgit
Question Author
Where's my logic? I think Gromit has answered you perfectly.


no he didn't.

[andy-hughes]

Mick-TalbotWhether or not boxing is an art is entirely in the eye of the beholder - because anything can be classed as art, but that does not make that statement true.

Remember when Spike Milligan smashed a window at the tate Gallery because an artist was exhibiting an installation which included catfish being electrocuted. It was advertised as art, but that again would be open to debate.

I stand by my observation. Hitting someone about the head and body until they are either unable to continue because yoiu have caused them sufficient physical damage to render them unable so to do, or because you have caused what may well be permamnent brain damage by concussing them into a state of unconciousness does not fulfil my understanding of the definitiion of art - but we must agree to differ.

[andy-hughes]

Mick-Talbot - your analogy is flawed.

Plucking chickens or boxing fish fingers for payment is not at all comparable to behaviour which, outside the confines of a boxing ring is a criminal offence known as 'Assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm' - so your comparison does not really stand up does it.

Being an enforcer for a loan shark - now that is a comparable occupation, but that's just being a thig paid to be violent isn't it?

[anotheoldgit]

"Oh yes he did".

But then I forgot the pantomime season is over, "bring on the clowns".

[Mick-Talbot]

Anyone can electrocute a catfish, no special skills needed there.
Even I, someone who is not 'especially bright' could do that tomorrow.


Could I go fight Manny Pacquiao tomorrow, a man much smaller than I ?

no!
why?
because he has spent years learning to box and even more years trying to perfect his boxing skills, and that is what they are 'Skills'


Could I be right in thinking your boxing knowledge starts and ends with Frank Bruno interviews andy?

[andy-hughes]

Mick-Talbot - my reference to the electrification of catfish was not connected to the skill involved in doing it, it was its exhibition as art - which was conteracting your point that boxing can be seen as art.

Art is what ever anyone wishes it to be - and if you see it as art, then to you, it is, and as i said previously, we must agree to differ.

I am not suggesting that boxing does not involve skill and commitment in terms of training, but that in itself does not justify the aim of a boxing contest.

I notice that you are keen to address the 'art' and 'skill's aspect of boxing, but you have thus far declined to comment on my repeaterd point that boxing is about hurting someone else with varying degrees of physical damage.

That is what a boxer enters a ring to do - he is not looking to be an artist, although he does employ a set of skills. The point is to hurt his opponent beyond the point of continuing, and I find that indefensible in a civilised soceity.

[Mick-Talbot]

'Assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm'

?

it wasn't about that though was it it was about
not being 'especially bright'

so my analogy makes perfect sense

[Mick-Talbot]

Boxing is a martial art.

[Ankou]

you don't have to bright to be useful,
but what useful purpose is boxing ?*





* and before you call me a cad and demand a duel, i think this about most sports where money is king.

[andy-hughes]

Miick-Talbot - re. your reference to being 'not especially bright' - of course I would not be so rude as to make that observation to someone in any walk of life.

But this is a debate about the concept of boxing, and it does not come down to personalities. My opinion that in order to want to participate in boxing as a profession, you may well lack an intuitive ability to see that what you are being paid to do is to hurt someone for eintertainment, and that is fundamentally wrong.

In my view, adding views like 'skill' and 'discipline' and 'sport' to this activity does nothing to escape the principle involved. You can excuse any violent behaviour under the premise of the skills involved in it. Fox hunting requires a high level of expertise in horsemanship, but the end result is to chase a fox to exhaustion and kill it, for the thrill of the chase alone.

Boxing is nasty, violent, dangerous, and sometimes fatal, and in the name of entertainment, I believe it has no more a place in modern society than bear baiting, or indeed foxhunting.