11/21/24
April 19, 2008
Have we returned to the days of 'Gladiators'?: The ice at Montreal's Bell Centre, home of the Canadiens, will be replaced tonight by an eight-sided, chain-link cage that will hold two incredibly fit men using an arsenal of fighting skills and raw violence to pummel the other into submission. Watching the men in the cage - their muscles clenched and red-faced with adrenalin - it is easy to see the comparison to the blood sport of ancient Rome.Mixed martial arts, and especially UFC, the largest purveyor of the sport, is moving from cult interest into the mainstream. Tickets to tonight's event sold out within a minute. CBS is to begin airing fights in prime time next month.
posted by tommytrump to culture at 12:31 PM - 62 comments
Still, the people who get off on MMA will be the great-grandparents of American Idiocracy in the future Dude I think you need to take it down a notch with that "MMA fans are stupid" shit. I was a boxing fan until the gross corrupt and diluted talent of the sport turned me off. I look to MMA to fulfill my combat sport jones. Look, the sport has progressed from having like 3 rules to over 30 well outlined infractions. The fighters safety is a big concern when it comes MMA (UFC in paricular) and to think that it is just two guys pummeling each other is kind of idiotic and shows that you haven't watched a fight or only taken away what was convenient to fit into your view of the sport. I am probably not the smartest or most articulate MMA fan on this site but I do have a problem with people bashing the sport without understanding it and thus felt the need to rush to its defense with this hasty post.
posted by HATER 187 at 02:09 PM on April 19, 2008
America is a war nation. Always has been . . . Still, the people who get off on MMA will be the great-grandparents of American Idiocracy in the future -- assuming it hasn't already arrived. Yes, those blood-thirsty Americans in Montreal.
posted by holden at 02:27 PM on April 19, 2008
Yes, those blood-thirsty Americans in Montreal. Oh -- MMA is a Canadian import? Well then, I take everything back. Imagine me thinking that war and war-related sports are popular in America.
posted by afl-aba at 02:47 PM on April 19, 2008
Well said holden. afl-aba, you need to get an atlas (book of maps) or a globe and find Montreal. I'll give you a hint, look north. Or maybe you should read the article. Besides, the American Idiocracy of the future has been assured by Nascar and the WWE.
posted by Tinman at 02:50 PM on April 19, 2008
I look to MMA to fulfill my combat sport jones. Who's stopping you? Jones out to your fullest desire. I used to fight in karate tournaments, and bristled at their tight restrictions. My friends and I then conducted Fight Club-type matches in basements and garages. I'm familiar with the impulse.
posted by afl-aba at 02:52 PM on April 19, 2008
afl-aba, you need to get an atlas (book of maps) or a globe and find Montreal. Thanks for the tip. I guess that CBS stands for Canadian Broadcasting Service.
posted by afl-aba at 03:10 PM on April 19, 2008
I used to fight in karate tournaments, and bristled at their tight restrictions. My friends and I then conducted Fight Club-type matches in basements and garages. I'm familiar with the impulse. So how are you any different than the people who get off on MMA [that] will be the great-grandparents of American Idiocracy in the future?
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 03:17 PM on April 19, 2008
So how are you any different than the people who get off on MMA [that] will be the great-grandparents of American Idiocracy in the future? Because I no longer get off on this crap. Testing oneself physically is one thing; participating in corporate-funded distractions is another. Am I the only one here put-off by the slobbering jackasses who hoot and holler at these matches? It's Rollerball/Running Man time.
posted by afl-aba at 03:29 PM on April 19, 2008
Oh -- MMA is a Canadian import? Well then, I take everything back. Imagine me thinking that war and war-related sports are popular in America. My point is not that Americans don't eat up MMA, it's that it is by no means a uniquely American phenomenon and your facile pop anthropology is crap. There are a host of "violent" sports (hockey, rugby, Aussie rules football, Muay Thai, etc.) that have their origins in, or are widely popular in, countries outside of the U.S. Plus America has nowhere near the level of fan violence that accompanies certain sports in other countries.
posted by holden at 03:30 PM on April 19, 2008
My point is not that Americans don't eat up MMA, it's that it is by no means a uniquely American phenomenon and your facile pop anthropology is crap. There are a host of "violent" sports (hockey, rugby, Aussie rules football, Muay Thai, etc.) that have their origins in, or are widely popular in, countries outside of the U.S. True, but I don't live in those countries. I live in the US, and so this is my main concern. One can always point to other countries in order to downplay one's own (a time-honored, popular tactic), but it ultimately begs the question, one that you seem to dodge. "Plus America has nowhere near the level of fan violence that accompanies certain sports in other countries." I'll keep that in mind when wearing NY Giants gear at an Eagles home game. More than that, we in the States must endure "tributes" to the military before big games like the Super Bowl. While we're slaughtering foreigners in their beds, we cheer F-16s screaming above a stadium at home. I'm guessing that fighter jets kill more people than do soccer riots.
posted by afl-aba at 03:43 PM on April 19, 2008
True, but I don't live in those countries. I live in the US, and so this is my main concern. One can always point to other countries in order to downplay one's own (a time-honored, popular tactic), but it ultimately begs the question, one that you seem to dodge. I'm not dodging anything; my original point was that you have taken an article from a Canadian publication about an event to be held in Canada to rail against American militarism. It just seems incongruous, is all. Like you had a point you wanted to make and you shoehorned it into a thread in which it's not a natural fit. Based on your reasoning that Americans love MMA because Americans are a war-loving country (which is how I interpret your first comment after the FPP), it seems to follow that Canadians would love the sport because they are war-loving as well. But I don't know of many who would characterize Canadians as militaristic. I don't see why I have to engage the substance of your criticism of America (which is really unrelated to the FPP) when all I was trying to point out is that your logic is flawed.
posted by holden at 04:22 PM on April 19, 2008
to think that it is just two guys pummeling each other is kind of idiotic and shows that you haven't watched a fight or only taken away what was convenient to fit into your view of the sport Hey, I'm a huge fan of the "sweet science" or the "pugilist art" of boxing myself. But to say that boxing or MMA can't be boiled down to two guys (um, there are women in both sports too) pummeling each other is just denial. Bloodlust is an undeniable phenomenon in our society ... and always seems to have been. Likewise so has the moral outrage at this type of thing as "sport". But the one thing I'm reluctant to concede is that just because "it's always been that way" (which is a myth that needs nuanced recollection), doesn't mean that it will always continue to be that way. Personally, MMA really disgusts me. But ironically, it's revived my fondness for boxing. Figure that one out. And re: MMA as a favourite Canadian bloodsport? It's got to get in line behind hockey, folks!
posted by Spitztengle at 04:28 PM on April 19, 2008
Right. Because repeatedly punching someone in the head until they fall down is more sportsmanlike than maneuvering them into a submission hold that results in a tap-out. UFC fights are exciting, they pit talented athletes against each other, and I don't believe there's any evidence that they are more dangerous than boxing (I'd think they were safer, really, in terms of cumulative damage to the participants). Bemoaning the UFC as an indicator of America's "war-like" culture is just a kind of self-satisfied armchair sociology. Can't you say you find it distastefully violent, and leave it at that? That's fine, that's your opinion, but to then draw a line from the UFC to US foreign policy is specious reasoning of the most fuzzy-headed sort. True, but I don't live in those countries. Last time I checked, Americans were playing and enjoying watching hockey, rugby, and Muay Thai.
posted by BitterOldPunk at 04:29 PM on April 19, 2008
I'm not dodging anything; my original point was that you have taken an article from a Canadian publication about an event to be held in Canada to rail against American militarism. It just seems incongruous, is all. This event is also, and most primarily aimed at, the American public. Of course there are violent knobs in Canada. So what? Last time I checked, Canada isn't invading or occupying numerous countries. Not on the US scale, anyway. Canada and the US, in many ways, share a common culture. But in terms of global impact, who has the upper hand?
posted by afl-aba at 04:32 PM on April 19, 2008
[B]ut to then draw a line from the UFC to US foreign policy is specious reasoning of the most fuzzy-headed sort. Agreed. So far, the UFC hasn't used cluster bombs -- yet. Besides, the NFL is much closer to domestic war games than anything else. Last time I checked, Americans were playing and enjoying watching hockey, rugby, and Muay Thai. Yes. I just registered my son in the local Muay Thai group.
posted by afl-aba at 04:38 PM on April 19, 2008
I'm not a big fan of the MMA, even though I earned a black belt in my younger years, but it's much more tolerable than hockey. At least in MMA, there is no pretense of any other aim, and they aren't trying to fight on ice. Hockey makes far less sense than MMA! Canadians, rethink your revulsion in light of your own senseless national sport. At least MMA is a fringe sport.
posted by Toad8572 at 04:57 PM on April 19, 2008
This event is also, and most primarily aimed at, the American public. Of course there are violent knobs in Canada. So what? Last time I checked, Canada isn't invading or occupying numerous countries. Not on the US scale, anyway. Canada and the US, in many ways, share a common culture. But in terms of global impact, who has the upper hand? This event is being held IN CANADA, the article was taken from a CANADIAN paper. If you read the article, there are no references to anything geo-political and only vague references to its US audiences. You strike me as the kind of knob that would wear Giants gear to a Philly home game or sports bar and be one of the slobbering jackasses who hoot and holler against the home team just to see if you could get a rise out of anyone around you. Anything to be contrary. That practice is known as poking the beast. When it lands you in the hospital, don't pretend you didn't know any better. Incidentally, try telling a Canadian that we share a common culture. Poke the beast, poke it.
posted by Tinman at 04:59 PM on April 19, 2008
afl-aba, Thanks for the tip. I guess that CBS stands for Canadian Broadcasting Service. No, CBS stands for Columbia Broadcasting System. Just in case you're unaware, CBS is available in Canada, both as an over-the-air, and on basic cable televison. Here in Canada we do have a television network referenced by the call letters CBC(Canadian Broadcasting Corporation). Perhaps that's why you were confused. America is a war nation. Always has been. As is Canada, in World War I, Canada suffered casualties(dead and wounded) of over 3% of her population, in comparison, the U.S.A. suffered losses of 0.35% of hers. In World War II Canada suffered casualties of about 1% of her population, in comparison the U.S.A. had casualties of about 1.17%. Canada has fought in Korea, and now in Afganistan suffering brutal losses as well. Wow, we are a bloodthirsty bunch up here. Maybe this explains hockey after all.
posted by tommybiden at 06:00 PM on April 19, 2008
More than that, we in the States must endure "tributes" to the military before big games like the Super Bowl. While we're slaughtering foreigners in their beds, we cheer F-16s screaming above a stadium at home. What an idiot. The word "endure" really pisses me off. When I was over there living in a tent, away from my family and worried about getting my ass shot off and orphaning my daughter, I wasn't doing it for you.
posted by smithnyiu at 06:21 PM on April 19, 2008
Americans = Bloodthirsty Warmongerers
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 06:45 PM on April 19, 2008
When I was over there living in a tent, away from my family and worried about getting my ass shot off and orphaning my daughter, I wasn't doing it for you. So, just out of curiosity, who were you doing it for?
posted by Spitztengle at 06:59 PM on April 19, 2008
I'll keep that in mind when wearing NY Giants gear at an Eagles home game. You will get jeered and yelled at by drunk jackasses in Philly, but as long as you don't engage them, you'll be fine. On the other hand, try wearing a Rangers jersey at Celtic Park in Glasgow. If you make it out alive, give me a call. Seems like a you need to get off your high horse. Most sports are almost by definition violent, each somewhat more or somewhat less regulated, but each in effect a mini-war. Certainly Americans enjoy violence, but to say that this is a particularly American phenomenon or something new that highlights the "American Idiocracy" (heh heh, Southerners are stoopid) is just as holden pointed out "facile pop anthropology".
posted by Chargdres at 07:07 PM on April 19, 2008
Certainly Americans enjoy violence, but to say that this is a particularly American phenomenon or something new that highlights the "American Idiocracy" (heh heh, Southerners are stoopid) is just as holden pointed out "facile pop anthropology". I never said that this was an exclusive American concept. I said, quite clearly, and in English, that being an American, living among other Americans, that the homeland variety was my chief concern. Easy to scoff at those you don't live among or where you don't pay taxes. One's own turf should be one's primary focus.
posted by afl-aba at 07:15 PM on April 19, 2008
Americans = Bloodthirsty Warmongerers Close. Not all, of course. Just those who don't give a shit about our violence or worse, cheer it on. You might add hefty and uneducated to that statement.
posted by afl-aba at 07:17 PM on April 19, 2008
What an idiot. The word "endure" really pisses me off. When I was over there living in a tent, away from my family and worried about getting my ass shot off and orphaning my daughter, I wasn't doing it for you. Finally -- some honesty. As a veteran of the U.S. Army, I thank you for that.
posted by afl-aba at 07:19 PM on April 19, 2008
No, CBS stands for Columbia Broadcasting System. Just in case you're unaware, CBS is available in Canada, both as an over-the-air, and on basic cable televison. Here in Canada we do have a television network referenced by the call letters CBC(Canadian Broadcasting Corporation). Perhaps that's why you were confused. Ha ha. Get literal much?
posted by afl-aba at 07:21 PM on April 19, 2008
The problem with MMA right now is MOST people take it at face value. By far the DUMBEST FUCKING THING UFC did was put them in a cage. If it was a regular boxing ring, you wouldn't get half the hyperbole, but the cage adds a metaphor that fuckwit journalists latch onto. Secondly, what is peoples first taste of MMA? Generally it'll be some highlight of someone getting owned. So once again that violence aspect is enforced. Which means, sadly, the reality of MMA, that being that these are very physically fit athletes for the most part, and that it requires a great deal of skill, is lost. I think MMA is a LOT more tactical than boxing. Gladiators were a staple of Rome. The Roman's were incredibly advanced for the time. So using the "return" of gladiatorial sports as some sort of jingoistic jumping off point about a cultures stupidity is moronic. As for the idiocracy being enforced by NASCAR and the WWE, I agree. I love pro wrestling, but almost NEVER watch the mainstream US product since Vince's vision of what wrestling is is so far removed from what I enjoy that even Satan couldn't find it with a telescope. (TNA is just retarded and not worthy of consideration). Mostly a puro fan. And I'm a wrestling fan for the theatre of it all. In fact UFC is very much taking the best elements of wrestling in their promotion and doing far better with them than Vince ever has. As for NASCAR, I'm a huge racing fan, but like my cars to turn right. I love Le Mans and follow the whole 24. I follow the whole of the 24 Hours of the Nurburgring. I can't get through 24 MINUTES of NASCAR without being bored rigid. Now I guess I have to avoid this thread lest the UFC event is spoiled for me before I get a chance to see it. *sigh*
posted by Drood at 08:11 PM on April 19, 2008
Ha ha. Get literal much? Got milk? Engage in hyperbole and exaggeration much? I said, quite clearly, and in English, that being an American, living among other Americans, that the homeland variety was my chief concern. Easy to scoff at those you don't live among or where you don't pay taxes. One's own turf should be one's primary focus. I'll point it out again, though others already have. This is an article in a Canadian newspaper, about an event in Canada. How you grasp at this to tear at the U.S.A's military excursions is clutching at straws at best.
posted by tommybiden at 08:27 PM on April 19, 2008
It's not like Japan doesn't have K-1 fighting. Brazil doesn't have Ju-Jitsu. Koreans aren't known for traditional martial arts or anything. And I've never seen Muay Thai fighting around Thailand. That is not bloodthirsty at all. So, yes, please carry. The fact people enjoy MMA and other sports naturally means we're bloodthirsty warmongers, nevermind that most of our martial training&expertise comes from other countries. (as an aside, having done martial arts in the past, I've found that people who actually practice the sports tend to be calm and able to avoid physical contact better than most people).
posted by jmd82 at 09:22 PM on April 19, 2008
Close. Not all, of course. Just those who don't give a shit about our violence or worse, cheer it on. You might add hefty and uneducated to that statement. posted by afl-aba Hefty and uneducated? Please try and stay on topic. If you have an axe to grind please take it elsewhere.
posted by justgary at 09:29 PM on April 19, 2008
I'll point it out again, though others already have. This is an article in a Canadian newspaper, about an event in Canada. How you grasp at this to tear at the U.S.A's military excursions is clutching at straws at best. I was talking about MMA overall, using that article as a jumping off point (and the fact that CBS, an American network, was mentioned). But hey, I understand why some try to play down the militaristic aspect. Much nicer to pretend that it's all a game, disconnected from larger cultural context.
posted by afl-aba at 09:29 PM on April 19, 2008
afl-aba.... reading your other posts, you Sir are a troll of the highest order. Please go find a nice, in your case, liberal politics board to vent your venom.
posted by firecop at 10:47 PM on April 19, 2008
reading your other posts, you Sir are a troll of the highest order. Please go find a nice, in your case, liberal politics board to vent your venom. Liberal?!
posted by afl-aba at 10:56 PM on April 19, 2008
From the article: "This kind of competition hardly constitutes a sport," said Dr. Vivienne Nathanson, head of science and ethics at the British Medical Association, which last fall called for a complete ban of mixed martial arts. "The days of gladiator fights are over and we should not be looking to resurrect them. As a civilized society, we should be campaigning to outlaw these activities." Is Dr. Nathanson trying to ban boxing as well? Probably not. And that's what I don't understand. Don't get me wrong. I'm a fan of both sports. But Boxing is deadly. I watched Boom Boom Mancini beat Duk Koo Kim to death. Kim is far from alone. According to this guy boxing is responsible for more deaths per year than MMA. Even if his data is questionable, I think it's hypocritical to judge MMA any different than boxing. The only question I have is: UFC Champion against Heavyweight Champion. Who wins?
posted by cjets at 11:18 PM on April 19, 2008
Depends on the rules.
posted by BoKnows at 11:27 PM on April 19, 2008
You think the rules would matter to a young Mike Tyson?
posted by cjets at 11:31 PM on April 19, 2008
I thought you only had one question.
posted by BoKnows at 12:12 AM on April 20, 2008
It's a followup to my first question. Be nice or I'll talk about our hefty and uneducated war mongering nation.
posted by cjets at 01:31 AM on April 20, 2008
Be nice or I'll talk about our hefty and uneducated war mongering nation. Oh dear God, don't do that. Wise folk know that this is a troll-inspired fantasy. America is peaceful, highly-educated (especially in geography and history), and in peak physical condition. Just look around at any NFL or NCAA tailgater.
posted by afl-aba at 07:40 AM on April 20, 2008
afl-aba: I don't think you are a troll, but I do think that your posting history suggests that you often take the opportunity to comment to make points about cultural/sociological phenomena that comes across as axe grinding. The vast majority of your posts are about, or responding to others regarding your prior posts about, your perceptions of America and the nativism/militarism/stupidity/etc. of its inhabitants. While I appreciate that sports take place in a larger cultural context, we get the point. I think you have a lot to add to the discussions around sports here generally (and have found your thoughts regarding the ABA and AFL interesting), but using every thread as an opportunity to rail against some mythical, monolithic American populace that is stupid, loves NASCAR, loves war, and loves violence is tiresome.
posted by holden at 08:46 AM on April 20, 2008
It's a followup to my first question. Okay then. No rules. Tyson vs. (MMA equivalent) MMA guy wins, easy. Tyson has NO ground game at all.
posted by BoKnows at 09:49 AM on April 20, 2008
Holden is nicer than I am. You are a troll. Might I suggest you visit, and stay in, one of Bill O'Reilly's forums. There you can troll away to your malcontented heart's delight.
posted by Tinman at 09:51 AM on April 20, 2008
Tyson vs. (MMA equivalent) MMA guy wins, easy. I'd have to disagree. A young Mike Tyson was a freak of nature (and a street fighter before he became a boxer). I think he'd destroy all comers.
posted by cjets at 11:36 AM on April 20, 2008
I don't think a MMA fighter would be prepared to fight someone so skilled with using their teeth in close combat.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 11:45 AM on April 20, 2008
I call that the intimidation factor.
posted by cjets at 12:09 PM on April 20, 2008
I'd have to disagree. A young Mike Tyson was a freak of nature (and a street fighter before he became a boxer). I think he'd destroy all comers. Absolutely. Still to this day I watch the early Tyson fights and feel like he was the most gifted inside fighter ever to step in the ring. Very short, powerful shots, then moves so quick ducking a counter. I'd give the nod to Tyson against anyone. Liddell or Couture would go for the takedown, Tyson would pop him three times as he is reaching for the legs. pop pop pop ... man down. Can't visualize it any other way.
posted by smithnyiu at 12:11 PM on April 20, 2008
Tyson is a brawler/boxer. He would be clueless if he was put in a rear naked choke or a triangle. I'd take Tyson in every type of fight there is, except against a skilled MMA fighter. There are just too many variables to consider.
posted by BoKnows at 12:14 PM on April 20, 2008
There are just too many variables to consider. Some of the variables I would consider are Tyson's apparent lunacy and ansence of a conscience. I admit that I'm not any kind of qualified professional, but Iron Mike is just plain bonkers. And you never fight the crazy ones!
posted by tahoemoj at 12:26 PM on April 20, 2008
I think you have a lot to add to the discussions around sports here generally (and have found your thoughts regarding the ABA and AFL interesting), but using every thread as an opportunity to rail against some mythical, monolithic American populace that is stupid, loves NASCAR, loves war, and loves violence is tiresome. Fair enough, and thank you for that. I can talk sports qua sports without problem. I'm a fan of many, used to play a few. But when the topic arises, I won't shy from tying sports to their larger cultural, at times political, function. In this highly-integrated world, most everything laps over something else.
posted by afl-aba at 01:18 PM on April 20, 2008
...when the topic arises, I won't shy from tying sports to their larger cultural, at times political, function. I'm sure you'll consider this splitting hairs, but, YOU brought your soap box and turned this thread into your personal political forum. YOU ignored the topic at hand. YOU who responded to nearly every post (sometimes multiple times) to remain off topic. If you want to talk politics, fine, do it in an appropriate forum. Here, if you can talk sports qua sports without problem,then do it. Leave the social commentary to Bryant Gumbel.
posted by Tinman at 02:06 PM on April 20, 2008
oh my goodness..... are we really trying to make a point about americans loving war from a discussion about a sport?? its actually a very interesting sport... and it takes a lot of mental strength as well as physical strength to be a great fighter !!!!! (maybe im not a good reference though...... being a woman who loves mens) I guess thats why God gave me 3 boys and no girls ....
posted by brandy at 02:07 PM on April 20, 2008
The South Park boys got it right. Blame Canada!
posted by giveuptheghost at 08:23 PM on April 20, 2008
If anyone wants to watch the GSP vs Serra fight, it's here (right now).
posted by grum@work at 10:53 PM on April 20, 2008
Thanks, grum!
posted by BoKnows at 11:05 PM on April 20, 2008
oh my goodness..... are we really trying to make a point about americans loving war from a discussion about a sport?? Well, yeah. Look, most people can't really look at the MMA thing and not try to explain or justify it (or, on the flip side, rail against it). When that happens, it's natural that the larger culture gets pulled in. Most people love to sit on their asses and watch other people fight -- it's not culturally unique to the USA -- but there are (duh) social and economic factors here that make "MMA" "succeed" here in the way that it has. It's simplistic to say that it's because USAians love war, but the fact that we do, as a culture, tend to praise violence as often as we condemn it, probably has a lot to do with it.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 08:06 AM on April 21, 2008
That article was troll bait to begin with, and posted to culture to boot. It's the same sensationalist anti-mma article you can find written in the weeks leading into or out of any UFC card. I am a five-foot tall dance enthusiast. I like musicals. I do not like sports - not to watch, not to play. I should write an article on musicals. Oh I don't like musicals, but I should write an article on why I dislike them. I'll give all the clichéd reasons too.
posted by tron7 at 09:51 AM on April 21, 2008
I hate baseball! Those guys carry bats! Bats look like clubs! Cavemen carry clubs! Americans are cavemen! Cavemen sell car insurance! Americans are car insurance selling cavemen! Worse yet, they are hefty, uneducated, war-mongering cavemen who sell car insurance! Wait a sec. I actually love baseball. Nevermind.
posted by THX-1138 at 01:53 PM on April 21, 2008
That article was troll bait to begin with That article was preapproved by administration. and posted to culture to boot. The primary focus of that article is what about the culture of the sport attracts and repells people from the event. Where pray tell should it have been posted?
posted by tommybiden at 01:54 PM on April 21, 2008
Where pray tell should it have been posted? Yikes! Loaded question for some folks, from the looks of this thread.
posted by THX-1138 at 01:59 PM on April 21, 2008
That article was preapproved by administration That doesn't neccesarily mean it isn't troll bait.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 04:40 PM on April 21, 2008
TT, tron wasn't saying that you were the one baiting. It was the author of the article. Your posting it and posting it to Culture seems fine to me. (Not that my opinion means anything, I'm just sayin.)
posted by BoKnows at 05:20 PM on April 21, 2008
America is a war nation. Always has been. Hell, ratting was a popular Colonial spectator sport, and I seriously doubt we'll see a mainstream return to that game. So some progress has been made. Still, the people who get off on MMA will be the great-grandparents of American Idiocracy in the future -- assuming it hasn't already arrived. Hoo-yeah!