7/30/2009 12:46pm, #1
Joe Lauzon Opinion Piece: A Poor Comparison (@joelauzon)
UFC top lightweight and quasi-sort-of moderator (because we never bothered to take him off the list) Joe Lauzon just filed a post on his blog where he breaks down some of the nonsense and misrepresentation of the sport by the mainstream and conventional media.
To the uninformed, people who arenít into MMA (Mixed Martial Arts), the fights seem unconventional compared to more widely accepted arts like boxing, wrestling and karate. Oddly enough, MMA is a combination of the three with elements of many other arts incorporated. The sport has evolved many times over to most effectively control, submit or knock out a true resisting opponent.
I compete in the Ultimate Fighting Championship, which for most involved with the sport simply call the UFC. Itís not the Ultimate Street Fight and itís not the Ultimate Dog Fight. I might be offended by the writers comments if he were more informed or took the time to actually research the facts. If the writer knew how much safer the UFC was than boxing, he would not have likened it to dog fighting...
Read the full post here!
7/30/2009 1:08pm, #2
- Join Date
- May 2007
- Bethlehem, Pa
Hats off to you J-Lau. You are truely an asset and a great ambassador for MMA. We need more people like you to promote MMA and its athletes. Very well written.
7/30/2009 4:05pm, #3
Good work Joe. The uninformed never cease to amaze me.
7/30/2009 4:48pm, #4
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Bedfordshire England
Well, I read the article, must say I find it slightly frustrating that the people who write this biased and blinkered sort of "j'accuse" are rife in every part of the western world's media.... look at the fuss made in many of the tabloids about immigration, viruses, street crime and terrorism.
On the plus side, on day's sensational story is tomorrow's bird cage liner (a nice role reversal - used to keep **** from spreading rather than spreading **** around).
It is something that is becoming the bane of the modern age - no body seems to do actual research, it is just a case of skipping from site to site and finding two sites saying the same thing and concluding that must be the truth....
Why don't these people try to look at the facts as many as they can dig up - maybe even interview a few people involved in such an event... not just the promoters and fighters, but the referees... the medical support staff... the physiotherapists and so on... anyone involved from fans to people who are 100% anti-violence... to try to get a more rounded viewpoint and more detail about the subject as a whole?
That, however would not sell papers, or get their 'news' story as much attention.... which sadly is all that matters to the hacks that churn this crap out.
After all, didn't someone one tell journalists not the let the facts get in the way of good story?
About time someone tried (very well I may add) to redress that imbalance.
7/30/2009 6:04pm, #5
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
Reading the comments left on the original Funt article it was noticable how much greater the standards of articulacy and reasoning were amogst the pro MMA camp than with Funt himself.
7/31/2009 6:32am, #6
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
It's 2009 and I'm bored of reading articles like Funt's. At this point, I'd settle for reading anti-MMA op-ed pieces that call for MMA to be banned because I dunno... it looks gay, or something. Reading 'bloodsport' arguments makes me yawn and pity the testosterone-deprived pantywaists that keep foisting this tripe upon us.
7/31/2009 3:24pm, #7
I'm tired of reading articles that sing to the tune of "Oh my god! People are beating each other up! For sport! Doesn't that make you mad?!"
Good job takin' em down a peg, Joe.