I know I'm walking a fine line here, but I think this is something worth talking about. This isn't an idea that is exclusive or limited to fighting by any means, but that is sort of what we do here, so I'll keep it limited to that. It seems that today, maybe more than ever, it has become more clear that athletes really aren't any different than you and I. They make mistakes and do things that sometimes we don't like or don't agree with. In the worst cases, these actions can cause some of us to question our fandom of that individual. The question that I want to pose to you guys is how do you deal with this? You've probably heard the concept of separating art from artist when it comes to musicians like Kanye West or a comedian like Bill Cosby. I think that this is probably the best course of action to take if you can. I don't judge anyone who still consumes their content because if what they created makes your life better and more enjoyable, then I think you should continue to do those things. Sometimes though, the individual may have done something that you determine is just too far and you feel the need to stop supporting them for it. My question lies somewhere between those two stages. How do you go from enjoying the art but separating it from the individual to feeling like the art is actually ruined by what the creator did in some unrelated situation? This isn't the type of thing I normally write about here, but hear me out for a minute. I normally like to write about things where I propose a potential solution, but I don't have that here. I am posing the question and have some thoughts that I wanted to discuss. I am looking for feedback on this one more than ever. I am genuinely curious on how you guys think about and approach situations like these.
It is hard to discuss these things without getting into how I feel personally about some things. I'm not going to impose or even share any more of my personal feelings on certain situations more than necessary because that isn't the point. In my mind, there are three different categories of situations that will lead me to question how I support a fighter in terms of fandom (not how I talk about them on here). Those categories are crimes, crimes against the sport, and questions of morality. Each of these presents different issues and levels for me. I'm going to go through and try to explain how I look at it and what they mean to me. I'm really looking for feedback and how you guys view things and situations though, so please comment on this one.
I think the crimes category is the most straight forward for me. By crimes, I mean any legal troubles or situations a fighter can find themselves in. For me, I have this category on a scale. On one side of the scale is the crime that a fighter committed and on the other side is the remorse they show and responsibility that they take. Obviously there are crimes in the world that are more severe than others. Jared Gordon is a fighter who has a long history of problems in his past. He had his struggles with drugs and ended up having charges for a home invasion and a battery. Those are sort of middle of the road crimes in my mind. Small drug charges are something that I don't personally hold against fighters very hard, but I don't see his home invasion on the same level as serious abuse, assault, or murder either. I personally don't find myself having to separate the fighter from the fight for Gordon because he takes his actions very seriously. He shows remorse for what he did and stresses that he was a bad person at that time and is now changed. He takes responsibility for what he did and has learned from those mistakes to become a better person. In my opinion, I think Gordon's honesty and realness in the situation has shown real growth and I view that as outweighing what he did in the past. Someone like Greg Hardy on the other hand is more difficult for me. Hardy had issues with domestic violence and I don't feel the need to get into those details here. That is a crime that I view as much more serious of an issue. On my scale, I think Hardy is just sort of breaking even. I don't find myself really rooting for him, but I don't actively root against him either. I think what he did is horrible and probably wouldn't have interest in being his friend in my personal life, but he is doing well with his second chance. He hasn't had any problems with domestic violence since and while he hasn't shown enough remorse for my taste, he doesn't really try to justify himself either. At the very least, I think he was humbled enough that he just sort of goes about his business and we only hear about him when he's on the schedule. Of course, his standing within the sport makes it pretty easy to ignore him whenever he's not actively fighting because he's not really relevant in any title conversations. These conversations are so layered that it really is hard to cover everything, so keep that in mind. I would prefer that domestic abusers weren't afforded amazing opportunities with little repercussions, but at the same time, I believe most people deserve a second chance. Hardy hasn't really done much to redeem himself, but he hasn't made it worse either. I view him as just another guy on the roster who is trying to make a living and considering where he came from, I think that may be the best case scenario for him. He's the kind of guy where I can separate the fighter and the fight. I don't really like Greg Hardy as an individual, but when he's in the cage, I can still just watch the fight for what it is. The final side of the scale is someone who has it trending to the side of the bad, which is where I have Jon Jones. At this point, Jones isn't someone who I can separate. With Jon, it isn't just one incident either. His laundry list of issues with the law has just added up in a way that I can't ignore anymore. His last issue with domestic violence and the details surrounding that case and the involvement of his children were particularly sad to me. That is really only the tip of the iceberg with him and I don't care to get into more details than that. While his crimes are pretty bad, I did just say that I think everyone deserves a second chance. The way I see it with Jones is that he's not only used his second chance, but also his third and fourth chances. On top of that, he refuses to take responsibility for his actions and show even an inkling of remorse for what he's done. He consistently deflects and uses phrases like "god's plan" to justify why these things keep happening to him. I don't hate Jon or wish anything bad on him or his family, but I'm just sort of over him at this point. I just don't take joy in talking about him anymore. If you're a returning reader, you probably notice that I really don't mention him very much other than when completely necessary. Don't get it twisted though. If he comes back and is competing again, I'll be interested to see it and I'll definitely talk about it, but just not with the same excitement as I would have a few incidents ago, that's all. I can no longer separate fighter from fight with Jon and that is really a shame. Of course on the day I plan to release this he is in the news again with his tweets regarding his fiance. I just hope for his own sake he can figure things out.
There is another layer to this that I want to mention. I think at least part of the reason I see Jon and Greg Hardy differently is their standing within the sport. I think it is much easier for me to separate the fighter from the fight with Greg Hardy because I don't really have to think about him much. Greg Hardy's fight announcements aren't a big deal. Most people don't even know he is on the schedule until the broadcast shows the card for the following week. Greg Hardy just doesn't hold that level of relevance within the sport. His name is only brought up for 2-4 weeks a year when it is his fight week and even then, his fights aren't impactful in the division. He's not fighting ranked opponents or anything of the sort. It is much easier for me to separate fight from fighter when he's fighting someone on the prelims and then the fight is over and that's it. Jon Jones on the other hand is the exact opposite. You can't tell the story of MMA without mentioning Jon Jones multiple times over. His name holds weight both in the past and present. I think there is something to the idea that I have to think and talk about Jon Jones much more than contributes to my frustration and annoyance with him. I just wanted to include that because I do think it is a contributing factor.
The next reason to have to separate fight from fighter is what I called a crime against the sport. This is sort of the weird one for me. Obviously, cheating at a sport isn't on the same level as some sort of domestic violence or other crime, but at the same time, we are talking about people within the context of the sport. Of course, Jon Jones falls into this category as well, but I'll give him a break this time. Other fighters who have tested positive for PEDs are Anderson Silva, TJ Dillashaw, and Vitor Belfort. I think Dillashaw has gotten hit the hardest from a public perspective, so I guess I'll focus on him here. I think it is almost impossible to separate fighter from fight here because the fight is actually spoiled by the action in this case. It is hard to watch any of these guys fight or even rewatch their greatest moments because you either know the fight is dirty or you know it may be dirty. Even the fighters who have come back after their suspensions, it just doesn't feel the same. It is impossible to separate the fight from the fighter here for me because what they did wrong is actually within the fight itself. An additional layer to this is that cheating in combat sports has much more significant consequences than it does in other sports. Cheating in any sport is obviously wrong, but there's a different level of risk here. I need not point any farther than what happened to Michael Bisping at the hands and feet of Vitor Belfort. For anyone who doesn't know, Belfort was using TRT in a weird situation with exemptions, but it is now illegal. Belfort lands a head kick against Bisping for the knockout win and we know now that it was the beginning of what would eventually result in Bisping losing his eye. I can recognize that cheating in MMA isn't as bad as an actual crime most of the time, but at the same time, I don't think it is possible to watch a fight and disregard what those fighters did because it is actually impacting the fight itself. I think I'll just leave it at that for this. These fighters have clouded their legacies because it is impossible to know what was clean and what wasn't. I don't really think of any of these fighters as the very best anymore because I can't say what would have happened if they actually competed on a level playing field.
The final category is the actual hard one. I called it questions of morality, which in 2022, is mostly related to politics. There's plenty of other things that could fall into this category as well. In general, it is just meant for fighters who do or say questionable things that may make you feel awkward and uncomfortable depending on what the topic is and what issues you are particularly sensitive to based on your own beliefs and experiences. One nonpolitical example is what Sean Strickland was saying in his lead up to his fight against Luke Rockhold that didn't end up actually happening. I was able to watch Strickland fight Jack Hermansson without issue, but what he was saying definitely made me a little uneasy at times. One thing that I think he has going for him is that he's actually being honest. I kind of mentioned this yesterday, but that is a huge thing working against Colby Covington. Colby is known to support controversial business man turned politician Donald Trump. You guys don't want to read about politics, so that isn't what I'm going to rant about. While some people will just hate him for that fact alone, I think most people really don't care about it that much. He has crossed the line a couple of times, one of them being when he mentioned using smoke signals because Kamaru Usman is from Africa. I don't need to explain why that is an offensive comment that shouldn't have been said. I think what really hurts Colby is that he's kind of let us in briefly and we know he really isn't the guy he pretends to be. He does and says all of these controversial things at times to keep the attention on himself. Colby, despite being annoying at times, is a guy that I can still separate fight from fighter for. I don't find myself questioning things he says during the actual competition. I think for me, I draw the line at going after people who aren't involved. Insult your opponent all you want. When their ethnicity or country or race gets involved, I just don't see why that is necessary. The final person I want to touch on and the inspiration for this post is Bryce Mitchell. If you haven't heard his interview from the Monday episode of the MMA hour, then probably go back and listen before continuing to read. I'm not hear to attack his politics. He has his beliefs about the vaccine and gun control laws and all of that stuff. He did a good enough job of disproving his own points with certain things and this isn't a political website. What really bothered me about what he said is when he started to question the people who were killed in mass shootings. Say what you want about politicians, policies, laws, regulations, and whatever else you want. When you start to dismiss the lives of people who were someone's family member, that's when I sort of check out. I'm not going to go on a long diatribe here, but I just think you need to be more careful with your words when you start talking about people who died. Using those events where innocent people were shot and killed as part of a political statement just rubs me the wrong way and seems slightly disrespectful. Having and showing respect is something that is really important to me as an individual, so when I sensed some disrespect it really turned me off. There was an additional level of disrespect when he basically hijacked Ariel's show. It was clearly a planned thing by him and I just don't really like the idea of using someone else's platform to push your own ideas. Ariel built that show from the ground up and has made it into what we see now. He asks those fighters to come on for their own benefit and to use that interview and to flip it on him... I don't know, it just seems disrespectful to me. Like I said, I am sensitive to the concept of respect, so I am open to the idea of being completely wrong and off base, but those are just my thoughts. What does that mean for how I view him in the future? I honestly don't know. Obviously, this one is still fresh, so when he fights in couple of weeks, I'll have a much better idea of how I will go about separating his comments from his performance. I'll probably do a preview on that fight and I more than likely won't mention anything of that interview there if this isn't really your cup of tea. I was really looking forward to seeing him fight again and I would be lying if I said I wasn't a little disappointed or maybe have a little bit of a bad taste in my mouth after that. Of course I still want to see him fight, I'm not going to boycott or anything of the sort.
Maybe that wasn't as clean of a post as I really wanted it it to be, but I guess that comes with the territory. I'm really looking for feedback on this one. How do you guys go about watching fighters who have done or said things that you don't like. Of course, I haven't made an exhaustive list of fighters or issues. Everyone will have actions, topics, or subjects that are more important to them. Our personal experiences will dictate what issues are touchy for each of us and what we can forgive a fighter for and what they can't come back from. I also want to stress that I really try to keep my own personal opinions to a minimum on here. Of course a lot of them are on the harmless side, like when I picked Whittaker to beat Izzy against my better judgement. I have fighters who I really like such as Robert Whittaker, Jamahal Hill, Tai Tuivasa, and Max Holloway. I try to keep those things to a minimum and be as fair as possible to their opponents. Similarly, there are fighters that I don't really like very much. I'm not going to list them out, but I try to be as fair as I can be to them. I'm not a real journalist with a capital J, but I think that is important. Maybe if you read between the lines, you may be able to pick out some people that I don't like, but I'm still only human. I want to be able to say good things about fighters I don't prefer because they've earned that. I also want to be able to criticize fighters that I do like because I still have to keep it real. I really want to know your process for this. How do you go about balancing a fighter's out of the cage actions with watching and enjoying their fights on Saturdays? Please comment below and be respectful of everyone's perspective. Thanks for reading and have a good one.
Comments
Post a Comment