While we’re talking about shows, why have we suddenly become so sadistic?

Sports fans like me have always watched events in which people got hurt.  In some cases, hurting the opponent is the point (boxing, MMA).  But the events were played by people dedicated to their sports who were striving to be the best they could possibly be at their level, be it high school, college, pros, Little League, whatever. 

Now, though, as a society we’ve developed a taste for completely pointless blood.  I’m thinking of things like the Jackass movies and the Wipeout TV show.  For those who don’t own TVs, Wipeout is basically a competition between ordinary folks trying to do impossible things and risking life and limb in the process.  Entertainment Weekly recently described Wipeout as “sadistically hilarious” and quoted one contestant as exclaiming, “I’m on television and America is about to watch me get hurt!”  EW gave the show an A, its highest rating. 

What on earth is going on here?  Can Christians and lions be far behind?

Be Sociable, Share!
  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    This is society channeling young male aggression into harmless pursuits. Normally this is channeled into raiding or warfare, which brings in money and other goods, including captive women.
    That’s no longer accepted practice. For America, at least. So you have something else. If you are dissatisfied, find a better solution. Because it’ll be war once more that solves humanity’s problems definitely, one way or another.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Btw, entertainment gurus don’t understand what true sadism is. They’re just making a word play, like saying Sarah palin can see Russia from her house. Means whatever they think it means. Which isn’t much.
    People that don’t understand sadism, should stop pretending to know what it is and attempt to sound cool by using it in place of intensity. They mistake intensity for truth.

  • recneps

    I’ve been reading this blog for a little over three years.  I’ve often felt like commenting, but the whole registration thing was just a bit much. However, This particular post shows such complete ignorance that I decided to forgo anonymity and make a reply.
    “Now, though, as a society we’ve developed a taste for completely pointless blood. I’m thinking of things like the Jackass movies and the Wipeout TV show.”
    I have never seen Jackass.  I never watched it on TV, I’ve never seen any of the movies.  From what little heard, the name applies to the viewer, rather than the show.  I’ll leave my comments about Jackass at that.

    However, I will draw the line at Wipeout being about “pointless blood”.  Have you ever actually watched the show?  There is no blood.  If the contestants do get injured, you could not prove it by what is televised.  Unlike football that will show the same replay of a broken leg 30 times during a broadcast, and then thousands more times in highlight reals, Wipeout makes it impossible to tell if someone actually got hurt.  Yes there have been times that I’ve though “ouch, that had to hurt”, but the person gets up, shakes it off and keeps working the obstacle course.  The obstacles are foam pads on a platform that is suspended over water.  It may not be perfectly safe, but it’s far better than the boxing or MMA you hold so dear.  In reality, Wipeout rewards determination, stamina, and agility with a $50,000 prize.

    Now, let’s take a look at those two things.  MMA and boxing are violent for violence sake.  Nothing more.  Boxing is the “gentleman’s” way of fighting to settle a difference of opinion.  MMA came to be because boxing was no longer violent enough.  In both these sports people get hurt, crippled and killed.  My question to you is, what is the point of that blood?  What was so vital to the interests of the audience that a person has to die or become paralyzed in the ring?

    It shows a complete disregard for reality for a person to hold up an example of pointless blood a television show that has absolutely no blood in it.  It is completely mind boggling that the example of honorable combat is a sport that was created specifically to be more bloody and violent than its predecessor.
    It is rare that this blog make a post that is so utterly ignorant.

  • Danny Lemieux

    It isn’t just violence but also sex, communication and behavior that have been coarsened.
    I suspect that part of it is the “entertainment” media – movies, comedians, actors, playwrights have run out of of ideas so the only way they can grab our attention is by pushing the envelope of decency. Government subsidized “arts” and the modern commercial media has made it too easy for any mediocre artist-wannabee to clamor for attention and the best way to get attention is to emphasize violence, sex and degradation, like monkeys throwing feces. This breeds its own following: take rap, for example. Some of it (a tiny bit of it) is amazingly creative and poetic, requiring true talent. But it is a lot easier for those without talent to make a quick buck by “épater la bourgeoisie”.
    The problem with this of course is that deviancy gets defined lower and lower (to use Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s immortal quote). I just worry about where this will inevitably lead.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com David Foster

    “Can Christians and lions be far behind”…..I’ve wondered the same thing.
    And it’s not just about young males. I was waiting at the drs office a few days ago, and the TV was turned to some women’s channel. The program was a bunch of well-dressed, fairly attractive women accusing each other of being awful bitches. When the segment ended, the soap opera that came on sounded like Shakespeare by comparison.

  • suek

    >>The program was a bunch of well-dressed, fairly attractive women accusing each other of being awful bitches.>>
    I’m with Y on the first part of this…but the second…!  I think we have too much.  Too many of us have too much – there are always those who don’t – and the result is the old “Idle hands are the devil’s workshop”.
    We are imperfect beings.  For the vast majority of us, if we don’t have constructive things to do, we’ll do destructive things.  Better to have to work than have too much time to be idle.  I think that’s where we’re headed – burn the house down so we have something to do – build it again.
    Buckle up.

  • http://photoncourier.blogspot.com David Foster

    Suek…”burn the house down..build it again”
    “The closer men came to perfecting for themselves a paradise, the more impatient they seemed to become with it, and with themselves as well. They made a garden of pleasure, and became progressively more miserable with it as it grew in richness and power and beauty; for then, perhaps, it was easier for them to see that something was missing in the garden, some tree or shrub that would not grow. When the world was in darkness and wretchedness, it could believe in perfection and yearn for it. But when the world became bright with reason and riches, it began to sense the narrowness of the needle’s eye, and that rankled for a world no longer willing to believe or yearn. Well, they were going to destroy it again, were they—this garden Earth, civilized and knowing, to be torn apart again that Man might hope again in wretched darkness.”
    -Walter Miller, A Canticle for Leibowitz

  • Danny Lemieux

    I think that’s where we’re headed – burn the house down so we have something to do – build it again.

    Buckle up.
    Yes, Suek. Sadly, I agree with you.
    David Foster, you could not have presented us with a more perfect quote.

  • Oldflyer

    I suppose the question of whether these sadistic shows reflect the culture, or whether they drive the culture, could be debated indefinitely.  It is beyond my intellectual capacity.  Still, this being 21st century America, I can have an opinion whether or not  I have actual knowledge or expertise of the subject. And of course my opinion is as valid as any, because to say otherwise would judgmental, and might damage my self-esteem.  So, I believe they are a detrimental influence.  My wife says they are simply broadcasting what people want.  Who knows?
    I don’t watch any of the programs cited here.  Another one I don’t watch, although it is often playing in my home, is “America’s Funniest Home Videos”.  By comparison, it may be benign; but, it is actually pretty sadistic.  Somehow when people do stupid things which clearly causes pain, or injury, it is funny?
    I noticed the Rose Parade had a float saluting the xxx anniversary of  PACMAN.  Could this seemingly harmless entity that devoured everything in its path have actually triggered the “game craze”, which has morphed into what we see our desensitized children engrossed in today?  It is no surprise that absence of empathy has leeched into the entertainment mainstream.
    Maybe it should be a refreshing thought that many of our troops are still distressed and traumatized by the  horrors they see on the battlefield.  It seems to imply that at least some still separate fantasy from reality.  I would not have been certain of that.
    I am developing a headache.  Maybe I will go watch some relaxing TV. Oh, wait.

  • http://ruminationsroom.wordpress.com Don Quixote

    recneps, I’ve approved your comment (sorry, I didn’t see it pending and waiting for approval) even though I do not much appreciate being called ignorant (as Y-man can testify).  I tried to watch Wipeout once and couldn’t see the point of it.  Yes, I didn’t see any blood, but the entire show is pitched in ads as being all about hurting and humiliating the contestants, supposedly for our pleasure.  It is only a matter of time until someone gets serious hurt. 

    Your analysis about boxing and MMA is actually correct.  However, there is a difference, I think.  Participants in those sports are professionals who train and take the risk of the sport in the hope of great riches.  At their highest levels, boxing and MMA require extraordinary skill, well worth watching (though, in truth, I haven’t personally been much of a fan since the Muhammad Ali days).

    Wipeout contestants are just average folks who are willing to be hurt and humiliated for a chance at $50,000.  If these same folks laced ’em up and entered a boxing ring I wouldn’t be the slightest bit interested and I can’t imagine why anyone would be interested in seeing them on Wipeout. 

    By the way, I’m not about to watch it, but the winter version of Wipeout is being advertised as being ever so much more dangerous than the summer version.  Apparently, that lack of blood that supposedly proves my ignorance was a problem for the producers, too.

    Anyway, thanks for writing.  I enjoy reading a different perspective.

  • jj

    I don’t know “suddenly” become sadistic – blood and circuses have been going on since the Roman Empire, which is now 1,500 years ago.  The Olympic Games go back even further, and often involved gore and death as originally formatted.  On this continent, particularly in the east, our aboriginal forbears came up with lacrosse, though they played it a little differently than  we do these days: their games could go on three or four days and they weren’t at all shy about killing the guy with the ball. So this all doesn’t seem very “sudden” to me… but rather human.

    I have never seen an episode of any of the shows you mention, but that they exist and flourish is not a surprise.  In  Europe through the 10s, 20s, 30s, second half of the 40s and throughout the 50s, the sport of road racing came into being, and flourished.  In those days it tended to be very upper class, and, given that the concept of safety was pretty much not even a passing thought, there was plenty of blood, as well.  The drivers were seen as heroes, exhibiting extraordinary courage and skill, and great chivalry, too – (though really they were just trying to stay alive, as they knew perfectly well that two cars couldn’t occupy the same space at the same time, so they figured out quickly who was fast that day, and let them through.  As opposed to American racing, like Indianapolis, where elbows in the ears were common, and even if you were slower you fought to keep the position.)  The death the sport involved was deplored publicly, but you didn’t (and don’t to this day) need to be Freud to figure out that a whole lot of the spectators would enjoy the day’s contest if somebody crashed.  Badly.

    And this was – in Europe –  very nearly the peak of civilization – the races were, often enougfh, royal occasions, and Alphonse, Marquis de Portago and Wolfgang, Count Von Trips were both killed while turning in a day’s work for Enzo Ferrari.  Trips was right out front about it, too, noting that it wouldn’t have been nearly as exhilirating a sport for participant or spectator without the danger.  (He certainly didn’t care about the salary Ferrari paid him.)

    So I have to say, idiot TV shows featuring idiots being idiotic are not a suprise.  We haven’t evolved to become coarse: I suspect we always were.  Hell, there was a time I know NBC (and probably the other two networks as well, though I cannot say I know it) looked into the possibility of televising executions – the ultimate occasion for bloodless blood, and very easy to turn into a circus.  They backed off the idea fairly quickly – not nearly as quickly as you’re all supposing, I bet – but I’m quite sure it’s an idea whose time will come again.

    It always does, one way or another.

  • suek

    >>…the ultimate occasion for bloodless blood, and very easy to turn into a circus>>
    Need I point out the crowds that gathered for hangings, guillotinings and other means of dispatching perceived criminals in days of yore??
    The conclusion is that we have those tendencies innately, and suppressing them is what we call “civilization”.  The fact is also that in our boredom and need to be entertained, we become less civilized and our primitive, savage natures come to the fore.  The more we suppress our Judeo-Christian culture in preference for our “natural” selves, the more likely this is to increase until something – either a renewal of our religious principles or a crushing government – puts a stop to it.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    MMA wasn’t originally a sport at all. It was originally a blood sport, designed as a way to test style vs style claims of superiority. Que BJJ’s Gracie family founders.
    When Dana White bought UFC, it started changing into more mainstream audiences such as pro wrestling or boxing,  and away from the bloodsports crowd. This is all due to the addition of weight classes, rules, time limits, and so forth.
    The difference between being ignorant while having an opinion that differs from others, and simply having an opinion that differs, is that people have to fundamentally lack experience in a subject yet still want to quote off opinions like they know what they are talking about, for it to count as being an opinion based upon ignorance. Not simply a disagreement over subjective criteria. A subjective disagreement is when two people see a dress and one says it looks nice and the other person says it is ugly. An ignorant opinion is somebody who sees the dress and says it is nice, while the other person never saw the dress, only heard a comment about it, and then claim the opinion that the dress was bad. You may even say that they came to the opinion based upon the number of people complimenting the dress, rather than the dress itself.
    playwrights have run out of of ideas
    Those people are made up of 95% LibProgs, Danny. Are you telling me the LibProgs once had an original thought? Amazing. I find that hard to believe. Thus I find it unlikely that they had run out of ideas. It’s more like they never had any ideas in the first place.
    Yes, I didn’t see any blood, but the entire show is pitched in ads as being all about hurting and humiliating the contestants
    And American Idol and reality shows aren’t? It’s the same gig. It’s also seen in MMA and pro wrestling. It’s called dramatic effect, or soap opera for the modern times. This has nothing to do with love of blood and violence.
    Participants in those sports are professionals who train and take the risk of the sport in the hope of great riches.
    Boxing and UFC have become extremely safe. Permanent injuries or crippling have been decreased markably over the decades.
    If these same folks laced ‘em up and entered a boxing ring I wouldn’t be the slightest bit interested and I can’t imagine why anyone would be interested in seeing them on Wipeout.

    I can imagine a lot of things. I don’t see why you are unable to.

  • excathedra

    Boxing, wrestling (which even with its cartoonish theatricality requires real skill and courage) and MMA are all common forms of rule-bound male aggression. It’s nature, IMHO. The place where I see a corrupt and corrupting form of Lions and Christians has been the loathesome performances of Jerry Springer and Maury Povich, where the scum of the ghettoes and trailer parks parade their devolved lives for the combined entertainment and opprobrium of an equally corrupt viewership. If there are expressions which stress my First Amendment values, it is these. Basically dog or cock fighting with humans instead.

  • http://ruminationsroom.wordpress.com Don Quixote

    I agree completely with the folks who said that there is nothing new about human sadism.  But, for a time, we had seemed to moving, in fits and starts, toward a more civilized, compassionate, society. Now, it seems we are regressing.  This is just a subjective opinion, of course, but the popularity of these shows (and the increasing crudeness of the society in general, which several people pointed out) must mean something.

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    No, it’s the fact that the more you progress to a civilized, “compassionate”, society. The more you see these kinds of things.
    It’s only in peace and plenty that people develop what is called decadence. The same was true for Rome as well. It was Britons and the legions in Africa, the border lands, keeping the peace. Those at Rome just got fat off the riches flowing in.

  • http://home.earthlink.net/~nooriginalthought/ Charles

    I’m not so sure that we have “suddenly” become more sadistic.  Perhaps, it just seems so because there is so much more to see (i.e., hundreds of TV channels).

    Also, in the past with only three major TV channels the broadcasters really tried to keep things “civilized” or else they could lose TV viewership.  Yet, despite that, TV westerns in the 50s always had people being killed, being hanged, being whatever; the Three Stooges were always hitting each other over the head, and pulling noses and ears;  Wile E. Coyote was always trying to get that roadrunner with ACME bombs and then blowing himself up by mistake.  And the whole time we laughed at it.  Did that make us less sadistic than today?

    Today, with TV viewership on the decline (the civilized, intelligent folks are too busy reading Bookworm room to watch the trash on TV) the broadcasters are trying to attract the lowest of the low to make up for lost revenue.  “Controversy,” “conflict,” etc. are what attract folks to watch.  So, sex and violence sell.  Nothing new, really.

    What I think is different (and DQ you sort of say so) is that more folks are visibly willing to “play the fool” for the sake of money, fame, etc. This really is a continuation of a previous post by Book (or was it one of DQ’s or Danny’s guest posts?) stating that more folks seem to lack a sense of shame.

    I’ll play poliitcal pundit here and say that, despite all I have said above, we only need look at our current President to say that “yes our society is getting cruder.”  I mean, really, giving Hillary the finger, telling supports to “get in their faces” when talking about political opponents, The police acted “stupidly,” etc.

    P.S.  I did watch and enjoy Wipeout when it first aired.  Not because of the “sadistic” nature of it.  I thought the challenge of it was something enjoyable.  Unlike professional sports or the Olympics the obstacle courses that contestants had to do looked like something that I would like to try.  A little skill and whole lot of luck involved.  Then they started to get, as you so accurately state, “sadistic.”  So, I pretty much stopped watching.  Really there is nothing “fun” about watching someone get hit in the face with some sort of “ketchup” or other yucky stuff.  I also stopped watching AFV for the same reason after a couple of decades of groin hits the joke is no longer a novelty.  Also, there is that TV show “House” that so many of my family and friends like so much and I cannot watch even one whole episode – the guy is just such a jerk.  But, I guess, that’s why people like to watch.

  • MacG

    Jan’s idear of we have always been that way is along the lines that I was thinking so I want to ask not Why have we gotten so depraved as it were but why were we so far above where that which we see now as depraved?  How did we get to the heights from which we have fallen?   Was that height merely perceived?  It has been said that we do not watch that which we want but rather the least objectionable programming.  This I think is what is called the slippery slope.   I think the slope is this: we used to have a lot more people that regularly read the words “Love the Lord your G-d with all your heart, soul, Mind and strength and the second commandment is like it Love your neighbor as yourself”.  There were so many in fact that the book that these words came from could be read without controversy in public schools.  Thomas Jefferson even thought it should be taught in public schools.  This idea that there is a being to which we will have to give an account of how we treated our neighbor was in the schools.  A being that made all men equal when He made them in His image.  Who are we to make fun of the creation of G-d much less suck that “glob of cells” out of a womb?  Well that is just too repressive of an idea (the G-d idea) that we had to get rid of it.  The Ten Commandments of G-d were out with the phrase “Question Authority”*. Well they weren’t supposed to question the teacher’s authority…With that they lost control without a unified authority a unified source of what is decent, a unified source of how we ought to have respect for not only that which is greater but also that which is equally created regardless of performance or appearances.  Therefore survival of the fittest reigns.  We applaud the athletically strong and laugh at (kill) the weak.  We watch these “fail” shows to feel better about ourselves while those trying to win a Darwin Award perform for us.  With no one above us there is no need for humility or compassion.  Because we have thrown the baby Jesus out with bath water of the church we have lost the supreme example of humility, first Jesus coming down and donning flesh not hanging on to His glory and then submission to the Father’s will/plan not his own.  Even if in the end it turns out to be myth it is powerful literary food for thought.  Too bad political correctness has ground it up in the disposal.
    *later Ted Turner the media god (little g) tried to replace the Ten Commandments with Ted Turner’s Ten Voluntary Initiatives.   Nice try Ted.

  • recneps

    First, let me preface this by telling you that I never called you ignorant.  I said your comments were ignorant.  There is a difference, you should not take things so personally.  And while it’s not readily obvious, ignorance does not equate to stupidity.  Ignorance is a lack of education in a subject.  It’s easily fixed by taking the time to learn something about the subject in which you are ignorant.  Stupidity, well, you can’t fix that.
    Now, my point:  I disagree with you completely on this point: “If these same folks laced ‘em up and entered a boxing ring I wouldn’t be the slightest bit interested and I can’t imagine why anyone would be interested in seeing them on Wipeout. ”
    I’m certain that you’ve seen the local version of extreme fighting/MMA.  In my area it’s called the “Tough Man Competition”.  It is people off the street strapping up and getting into the ring.  The inexperienced get in the ring and get the snot beat out of them in the hopes of winning prize money.  This has been common in boxing and many other sporting arenas for many years.  Often these events play to a packed house. So your point falls very, very flat.
    Additionally, I would point out that people flock to opportunities to humiliate themselves in the hopes of winning some cash.  Is that the fault of the audience who pays to see the humiliation, the event organizer, or the participants?  Take any single element out, and it would not happen.
    There’s a reason that FOX shows the horrible auditions on American Idol.  It’s the same reason they show people take a header into a pool of water on Wipeout.  People are willing to do it, and People are willing to pay to see it.  It’s possible that it’s a collective sense of schadenfreude.  I honestly don’t know.
    However, I believe your supposition that we do/watch because we are collectively sadistic is way off base.  Every individual make his or her own decision as to why they participate in an activity.  For you, MMA is great because you want to see someone be the best.  To me, MMA is about nothing more than one guy beating another silly.  If you think there are not people in your MMA audience who are hoping to see someone die or get seriously hurt, you are kidding yourself.
    I like Wipeout because I like to see a select few people overcome a very challenging obstacle course.  And yes, it’s fun to see the people who don’t do so well bounce off really big balls.  And that’s the point, when someone fails in a competition like wipeout, they walk away unharmed.  That is never the case in MMA or boxing.  (Which is why I avoid MMA and boxing.  The cost to the looser is just way too high.)
    Does this make me a sadist?

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    There is a difference, you should not take things so personally.

    People like associating their identity with their beliefs. Thus an attack on their beliefs is seen as the same as a personal attack.

    This is often seen in identity politics and such.

    I often see it in cases where people intensively believe something to the point where they confuse intensity, their own emotions, with the truth. That has nothing to do with reality. Reality doesn’t care how much faith people put into their beliefs. Wrong is wrong. Dead is dead. Physics is physics. None of that is going to change regardless of how much people “feel” they are right.

  • http://ruminationsroom.wordpress.com Don Quixote

    recneps, your exact wording was, “shows such complete ignorance.”  Whose ignorance?  You don’t say, but it must be the author’s.  Who is the author?  Me, of course.  How can it show my ignorance unless I am — wait for it — ignorant? 

    But never mind that, I wasn’t the one who said Wipeout was “sadistically hilarious”; Entertainment Weekly was.  I wasn’t the one who said that the contestants got hurt; one of the contentants did.  I didn’t say I saw anyone hurt in the one time I watched the show,I said it was advertised (especially the winter version) as dangerous.

    I know nothing about tough man competitions.  As I said, I haven’t been a fan since the Ali days.  But they don’t sound like anything I’d be interested in seeing.

    Remember, though, that the original point of this post was to suggest that we’ve become a little cruder and less civil in recent years and to wonder why.  To the extent that things like the tough man competitions you describe are gaining in popularity, they illustrate the point.  Actually, if I adopted your view of MMA, I suppose the sharp rise in its popularity supports my original point about the growingly sadistic nature of the American viewing public. 

    Anyway, I was hooked on American Gladiator back in the day.  You could make the argument that it was more brutal and sadistic than Wipeout.  Certainly, the contestants, who were not professionals, got hurt more often and more seriously.  It just felt like more of a legitimate athletic competition than running an impossible course with foam fists punching at you, big balls to bounce off of and the like.  To each his (or her) own, I guess.

  • Spartacus

    I think there’s a couple of factors at work here: human nature and culture.
    Imagine human nature as the first term of a polynomial, and the term that predominantly drives y for any given value of x.  After that is culture — one could say that culture drives y somewhat less for any given value of x, but it’s more of a putter than a driver.  (OK, bad joke, but it’s another metaphor for making the point.)
    Human nature is basically fallen and depraved, whether you want to attribute that to a literal interpretation of Genesis 3, a figurative interpretaion, unfortunate side effects of natural selection, or whatever.  But culture tangibly exists, and drags very large numbers of data points (i.e. people) in one direction or another over a wide range of different and measurable attributes.  Some of these attributes add up to what others have referred to above as a coarsening.
    As MacG pointed out, we as a society have come a long way from the days when there was a common acceptance of Judeo-Christian values.  It has never been the case that everyone was a saint, but in the old days, there was within Western Civ a common framework of values that even rascals and miscreants generally acknowledged, even if they were disinclined to adopt it for themselves.  (But now, thank Gaia, we have diversity, and icky things like common frameworks of values are being swept away.)
    Go back a few decades, and you find that Hollywood operated under The Code, and cranked out a lot of family-friendly movies that way.  “Ah,” skeptics say, “but the movies were that way because they had to be.  We were no nobler then — the studios just didn’t have a choice.”  Ah, but why did the studios impose The Code on themselves?  To avoid having the government do it for them.  Can anyone imagine Congress busying itself today with prohibiting the display of bare breasts on film?  Of course not.  Because they answer to the voters, who have coarsened greatly.
    They say that with the classic addictions (alcohol, drugs, gambling, porn) that the addict’s satiation point keeps moving outward, as he or she becomes more desensitized — more, harder, more, harder, more, more, more.  Is that why we are driving our entertainment lower and lower, instead of turning our eyes back up toward God?  Do people need more sensation to fill their insulated and ostensibly meaningless lives?

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    But never mind that, I wasn’t the one who said Wipeout was “sadistically hilarious”; Entertainment Weekly was.

    Actors also have political opinions. Your point being?

  • http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com Ymarsakar

    Remember, though, that the original point of this post was to suggest that we’ve become a little cruder and less civil in recent years and to wonder why.

    That’s not how what the history says.

    Now, though, as a society we’ve developed a taste for completely pointless blood.  I’m thinking of things like the Jackass movies and the Wipeout TV show.

    I clearly see a thesis, a claim, backed up directly by a line of justification with two examples. What do you see here, DQ?

    How is the claim that society has developed a taste for completely pointless blood, backed up by an example that has no blood? Is this another one of those “common sense things” where “I think therefore I am right” issues.

  • http://ruminationsroom.wordpress.com Don Quixote

    Not going to engage, Y-man.  Sorry.