twitter google

Debunking MMA as a blood sport

I miss the days of Luke Thomas reaming the mainstream press for their regular “Human Cockfighting is evil!” articles in proper newspapers around the world. Sure, it was akin to raging against the machine, but someone needed to make a comment in the annals of history pointing out that Leonard Shapiro from the Washington Post is a know-nothing cocksucker.

Anyways, it’s been a while since the last good shredding so I’m turning to Matt Pack for my fix. Here’s Metro International’s headline: Real issues can wait; N.Y. eyes blood sport; Gay marriage, property taxes wait, Ultimate Fighting advances.

And here is Pack’s response:

Of course, regulating athletic competition is a “real issue,” regardless of its importance relative to other issues.  However, the real problem here is that before he’s even in the body of the article Patrick Arden has referred to MMA as a “blood sport.”   Which is, in addition to being an extremely loaded term, not true.  Blood sports are activities where animals are killed for entertainment –  like dog fighting, bear baiting, and yak murdering.  MMA is a “combat sport” – a category that also includes sports such as boxing, amateur wrestling, and fencing.  Anyone with access to Wikipedia or even a dictionary should be able to avoid this mistake.  But “blood sport” is a scary term that evokes images of Jean Claude Van Damme covering his fists with broken Pepsi bottles, so why let accuracy get in the way of that, right?

He goes on to tear the entire article apart line by line in equally entertaining fashion. It’s the literary equivalent of Cerrone-Krause … what, don’t get that reference? Then you should probably check this out too.