I would like to understand why, when ask these questions, which demand a sober, reflective response after some internal dialogue, we stop there, and seem to gloss over what I consider important follow ups:

Why in the fuck do we have a thing called "Ultimate Fighting Champion" and still think men should be treated with any degree of seriousness?
Have we considered that there is actually enough fighting already and being an ultimate champion of it is not the flex some think it is?
Having considered the first 2, why would anyone care about/admire/wish to be seen in the vicinity of the winner of this thing, let alone any rando participant?
Have we considered there might be a causal connection between his rapey-ness and his ultimate fighter champion-ness? Sex and violence do go to the same concerts a lot...

I can't think of a single thing that would make my wish I had my time back more than spending 30 seconds watching this fucking drivel. It's pig swill distilled into electromagnetic waves meant for things with a lot less folds in the cerebellum.

[–] winkledinkle@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

men should be treated with any degree of seriousness?

Regardless of gender, if you're sexist you should never feel like you're taken seriously.

On that note, LOL.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It’s a little funny you’re commenting this on a post where McGregor is clearly being taken seriously.

[–] Linktank@lemmy.today 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ah yes, one man bad means all men bad. Good argument from OP and that other mouth breather.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You’re the only one resorting to name calling though.

No one said McGregor represents all men. You are the only one to conflate this man with all men.

[–] Soulg@ani.social 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

That other commenter was very clearly attacking men as a gender when whining about the UFC. I don't even like the UFC but it was blatantly sexist.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Regardless of gender, if you're sexist you should never feel like you're taken seriously.

And I was replying to this line directly.

McGregor is being taken seriously despite being sexist. And a rapist.

[–] winkledinkle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why are you conflating that with me taking McGregor seriously? I think he should get hit by a bus and lose everything that makes him special.

[–] velma@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I was just expanding on your comment, I should have noted specifically that you’re correct but that McGregor is proof we’re not there yet as a society. I agree with your statement. Apologies my comment wasn’t clear.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

I'm not one to defend the UFC, I think Dana White is a piece of shit. But as someone who used to be into it, this just seems like a complete misunderstanding of MMA.

Also, women do it too fyi. So not sure why you think this only reflects on men.

Boxing has existed for literally thousands of years. Wrestling and Pankration even longer I believe. The latter was an event in the first Olympics, and it's very similar to modern MMA.

This particular event was a travesty, but not because of mixed martial arts. You're angry at the wrong people.

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Appealing to history isn't as strong as you might think, when we are talking about whether or not society should promote a social activity.