Fkin Triple H :clap:
Fkin Triple H :clap:
Trying to flog the fact they have WWE rights now. Quite why anyone watches WWE is beyond meQuote:
Originally Posted by Tony C
It's always mystified me, but I've known some otherwise quite sensible people who like it. Mind you, I used to quite enjoy going to the wrestling at the Fairfield Halls, Croydon when I was a kid.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
And Fury has been on WWEQuote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
It's truly bizarre that in an allegedly civilised society, there are people prepared to pay money to watch two men batter each other senseless. Why not chuck a couple of lions in with them to make it more interesting? How about one of them gets a sword and the other a net?Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony C
It's fúcking mystifying.
You don't actually think we as people have changed one iota in the intervening millennia, do you? No, it's just the moral landscape that's changed. We still love a bit of blood. It's just that the killjoy priests wagged their virgin fingers and took away our fun. :-(Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Thou hast conquered, O pale Gallilean.
The world has grown grey with thy breath;
We have drunken of things Lethean,
And fed on the fullness of death.
Well yes, I think we absolutely have changed. The type of cruelties towards animals and people which were considered entirely normal in, say, the 16th century are now completely beyond the pale. Very few 'civilised' human beings would argue in favour of bear-baiting or ducking stools - but enjoying the sight of two morons beating each other bloody seems to remain palatable to a section of society. Perhaps the less evolved?Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
Pugilism is a fine art, thought you'd have been right behind Marquis of Queensbury.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
MMA, less so
:hehe: Attempting to batter someone unconscious isn't art, p. It's brutality.Quote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
Watching it is a strangely voyeuristic way to enjoy your sadism.
But we have simply sublimated these desires into other areas - not the least of which is organised sport. Have you ever looked at the contorted face of a football fan as he screams impotent abuse at some hapless player or official? Do you think those reactions or the instincts that provoke them are 'civilised'? Of course not. They're the same atavistic, cathartic impulses as those that possessed the spectators in the arena or crowds at a cockfight. The only difference lies in what they're looking at.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Boxing is a classic case of this sublimation. It just happens to be the one closest to its origins because there's actual violence, blood, pain and - on occasion - death. This makes it (when it's good and the blows and blood are flying) much the most viscerally exciting of all sports because that is who and what we are. Deny it all you like and decry the idea all you like.
I don't believe in 'civilisation' in the sense you mean. Civilisation is something we create, it's not something we are. If the civilisation of humans actually moved along the path you suggest, we'd actually get rid of the need to experience these things altogether and spectator sport would wither and die. It's not going anywhere, though, because it meets a need. It's the methadone we need to keep us off the real thing.
Surely it's preferable to indulge one's sadism vicariously?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Whatever. Bored now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
You really ought to read the Cazalet Chronicles, you know. 20 years of family history in which... nothing much happens at all. :cloud9:
God no. If you're going to wallow in your bloodthirstiness, yoiu could have the simple dignity to go and smash someone in the face yourself and risk a good hiding, otherwise you're a coward as well as a beast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
But if civilisation is anything it is the triumph of cowardliness. It places less value on physical strength or courage and places more on low cunning and a finely-honed instinct for self-preservation. You can't seek the milksop civilisation of no organised violence and kindness to animals and so forth and value the manly barbarian virtues of courage and honour. The two mindsets are on sharply-divergent paths. Indeed, one could make the argument that the kinder as a society we have become to animals, the more effeminate and cowardly we have become in other areas.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
And no, I'm not reading it. It's for chicks.
As opposed to being right behind the Marquis of Queensbury's son which is what got Oscar Wilde into troubleQuote:
Originally Posted by PSRB
Bad Oscar :dogs:Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
Yes, although the M of Q was under the rather odd impression that the word in question was 'somdomite' and that young Bosie was being 'somdomised' by Oscar.Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
Too many rounds in the ring so to speakQuote:
Originally Posted by Burney
:nod:Quote:
Originally Posted by Luis Anaconda
"What did God do to the Sodomites, children?"
"I don't know, father, but it can't be much worse than what they did to each other."
Change 'at' for 'outside' imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney