We constantly face decisions as to how much we are willing to cooperate with evil. Will we wear clothes produced in sweatshop conditions? Will we consume meat and dairy products produced in ways that are cruel to animals? Will we indeed be entertained by watching brutality? What do we think of those who attend dog fights? What do we think of those who issue bloodthirsty calls at boxing matches?
Now comes Lisa Fullam at dotcommonweal. She argues: "Now it’s inescapably clear that football has long-term neurological sequelae that include syndromes that mimic Alzheimer’s and ALS. (See today’s Boston Globe for one such report.) This is trickier–it seems that getting clonked in the head is unavoidable in the sport. Helmets don’t seem to help. And the problem isn’t only among the pros, where the guys clonking each other are often 300-plus lbs. of solid muscle, but even among high schoolers.
"My question isn’t whether football should be banned. My question is whether, knowing this about the long-term risks, it is ethical to watch it, knowing that those brilliant young athletes have a many-times multiplied risk of truly horrific neurological complications in their futures."
If you think about it seriously, you will doubtless conclude that sex is far more dangerous than football. I couldn't begin to name all the diseases and disabilities you can get from sex that you can't get from football.
Bad football does not lead to divorce and shooting or poisoning your fellow players. Good football does not pollute the world with what we need least: human brood that devastates forest, plain, air and sea.
If anyone should be wearing helmets, it's the breeders.
Posted by: Jimbino | 08/23/2010 at 01:38 PM