# UFC Fans Racist?



## Adamm411 (Apr 5, 2007)

Or, is there more sympathy or support for white fighters amongst UFC fans? I can't remember the article but one sportswriter claimed that the surging popularity of UFC is due in large part to the fact that the majority of MMA competitors are caucasian. 

I have noticed that caucasian champions tend to be cheered much more loudly. For example, UFC fans roar their approval when Liddell knocks out an opponent. Whereas Quintin Rampage Jackson receives a polite golf clap after defending his title against Henderson. Spider Silva is booed and jeered after beating Rich Franklin decisively, but Franklin is cheered after his every victory. Kongo wins decisively against Cro cop but is barely acknowledged by the crowd. Couture is cheered as if he were a conquering hero. 

Opinions yay or nay?

Edit: I am referring more to the preferences of live audiences, not members of this board.


----------



## Biowza (May 22, 2007)

I tend to agree, but I wouldn't go as far as calling them racist. I just think the majority of people who go to UFC events are there to cheer the American, get drunk and see a bloody knockout. I don't really think it has that much to do with the colour of their skin.


----------



## Kreed (Feb 5, 2007)

when they travel to places like london or dublin the reactions are still the same that tells me there is a problem


----------



## Truuuax (May 22, 2007)

*I dont care about race, that doesnt make a fighter. Yes, 95% of my favourite fighters are white and probably because of the same reason they are with every other MMA fan. Because they speak english and live here, and were raised in North America. It's easier for us "racists" to relate to that.

As far as Rampage getting a golf clap, where the hell were you when he KO'ed Chuck? lol that crowd was off the chart!*


----------



## royce81 (Jun 26, 2007)

This is a stupid thread, why even bring this up?!?!
The fans arent cheering because of the colour of the fighter, they cheering because they like the fighter.
Both the fights you mentioned Franklin/Silva and Chuck/Page in both cases the white fighters were far more popular and Rampage and Silva were relative unknowns in America. Once the fans get to know the fighters and see how good they are they will be cheering just as loud.


----------



## JuggNuttz (Oct 5, 2006)

royce81 said:


> This is a stupid thread, why even bring this up?!?!
> The fans arent cheering because of the colour of the fighter, they cheering because they like the fighter.
> Both the fights you mentioned Franklin/Silva and Chuck/Page in both cases the white fighters were far more popular and Rampage and Silva were relative unknowns in America. Once the fans get to know the fighters and see how good they are they will be cheering just as loud.



i think that hit it on the head, and same with Houston and Jardine, Jardine was on TUF and just came off a knock out of Griffen. No one even had heard of Houston Alexander.


----------



## cdtcpl (Mar 9, 2007)

royce81 said:


> This is a stupid thread, why even bring this up?!?!
> The fans arent cheering because of the colour of the fighter, they cheering because they like the fighter.
> Both the fights you mentioned Franklin/Silva and Chuck/Page in both cases the white fighters were far more popular and Rampage and Silva were relative unknowns in America. Once the fans get to know the fighters and see how good they are they will be cheering just as loud.


You stated exactly what I was going to. +rep


----------



## looney liam (Jun 22, 2007)

i dont think its entirely down to race. every fighter you mentioned was relatively unknown when they got their victory. silva was in his second fight with ufc; hardly any ufc fans wanted to see an unknown win the belt. i think silva has grown on them now that they know hes the real deal. kongo again, and unknown fighter, up untill the cro cop fight hardly anyone knew how good his standup even was.
when rampage beat henderson im damn sure i heard alot of laughs during his post fight interview.


----------



## Wise (Oct 8, 2006)

So by this logic wouldnt hockey be like the most popular sport in america?


----------



## Kreed (Feb 5, 2007)

If this theory for silva/rampage was true then how come the London fans were booing rampage and cheering Henderson. When Henderson is an unknown to the average ufc audience. OF course its a white and black thing you just have to re-watch ufc71 to hear the reaction for all the black fighters

stop being naive


----------



## royce81 (Jun 26, 2007)

Kreed said:


> If this theory for silva/rampage was true then how come the London fans were booing rampage and cheering Henderson. When Henderson is an unknown to the average ufc audience. OF course its a white and black thing you just have to re-watch ufc71 to hear the reaction for all the black fighters
> 
> stop being naive


What you are forgetting is that the English fans (myself included) are far more familiar with the Pride fighters than Americans are, Hendo and Page are very well known fighters here.


----------



## 70seven (Mar 5, 2007)

Anderson Silva is not as popular at Rich Franklin, Silva won the title on his second UFC match, still unknown to the average UFC fan.

Rampage is not as popular at Chuck Lidell, Rampage won the title on his second UFC match, still unknown to the average UFC fan.

Kongo is not popular.

Everyones loves Randy Couture.


There goes your theory, nice try.


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

royce81 said:


> What you are forgetting is that the English fans (myself included) are far more familiar with the Pride fighters than Americans are, Hendo and Page are very well known fighters here.


I'm English and am more familiar with UFC, and I was in Japan to watch CC take out Bob Sapp, and Sakuraba submit Gracie (though now I cant remember which). Pride is only available in Eng on DVD but UFC is on Bravo, so...

I'm sure pride is bigger in Europe though


Are UFC fans racist... yes, let's admit many are stupid dicks full of anger looking for a fight


----------



## capt_america (Apr 16, 2007)

not all but most.. i also noticed they always want to see a brawl than a scientific mma fight. :confused05:


----------



## leviticus (May 27, 2007)

ufc fans are representative of a cross section of the american population and the world more generally. If they are or are not racist then it is a reflection of a sizable portion of society. If ufc fans are racist, and that concerns you, then you should enjoy the action a focus your concern about racism in more productive ways with society at large.


----------



## FredFish1 (Apr 22, 2007)

This topic gets brought up every once in a while. Some fans are openly racist and thankfully it's a small minority of idiots. The rest are just there wanting to see a bloody brawl- not racist, but ignorant of MMA science. Don't confuse the two. The reasons you gave earlier are all easily countered with simplicity. I.e those fighters you listed were all relativly new and coming in against home champions. The MMA fanbase is majorly caucasian and I'd go as far as sayin the majoirty of fighters are caucasian. Because it's an American organization. 

In short, racism does exisist, but no where near the levels you think. Don't bring this up again in to another heated arguement that leads to 50 pages. It's been said before save your self some time.


----------



## royalking87 (Apr 22, 2007)

racist no look at the champions 2 of them are black and get cheered for there is no way ufc fans are racist


----------



## MMAmatt (Apr 8, 2007)

i dont think so, when Franklin lost to Silva i was at a huge bar, this place is massive, so lots of fans... people were going nuts i mean nuts when silva won the fight.

Quinton is another story, hes fought a fan favourite, and next he fought a mma fan favourite again so many of the people arent going to go nuts to see him win they wanted the other guy to win. 

plus quinton can be a tad annoying, his comments borderline cheezy not funny. imo


----------



## Acoustic (Feb 4, 2007)

UFC fans are just that, fans. They'll eat what's fed to them.

Dana goes over the top when it comes to hyping up his franchise guys, that all happen to be white, and completely smothers anything else.

Anderson Silva and Quinton Jackson are champions, not because of Dana and Zuffa, but in spite of them.

They're a middle finger salute to Mr White and that's why he's probably hoping to Bisping Silva in front of a "Hostile Territory", ie. Franklin's hometown, Cincinnatti.

Good luck Spiderman! raise01:


----------



## Zender (Dec 15, 2006)

While there are going to be a small minority that are racist (law of averages) every fight given there were won by the so called 'underdog' to the average fan. Sometimes being stunned at the outcome can mute an audience.


----------



## Acoustic (Feb 4, 2007)

Zender said:


> While there are going to be a small minority that are racist (law of averages) every fight given there were won by the so called 'underdog' to the average fan. Sometimes being stunned at the outcome can mute an audience.


Particularly if that underdog was...


----------



## khaldun007 (Oct 15, 2006)

i think there are many other factors that go into it. the popularity of the fighter, the way the crowd sees the fight going, etc. 
however, i do think that a lot of mma fans ARE the stereotypical drunks that are the ones you hear in bars saying "wtf why doesn't he just pull his arm out and bash the guy" when someone is in an armbar. racism may be a factor for some fans, but i would hope that for the more educated fans, it is not really a consideration.


----------



## Acoustic (Feb 4, 2007)

If anything, it's Dana White and Zuffa that are the problem.

They can only keep their franchise fighters so "pure" for so long. Professional pragmatism ahead of favoritism (Chuck Lidell and Rich Franklin) must come first at some point in time.


----------



## Acoustic (Feb 4, 2007)

I once stated to a cousin of mine that I was a UFC fan and the response was, "You watch that ******* shit?" The truth is, that's the overall image of the UFC. The fans are meant to be common, foul, simple-minded, drunken and dull.

I think, commercially speaking, the UFC is doomed to be a sideshow niche. It's very successful within the affromentioned niche, but if it's going to expand beyond that, they must promote the best fighters in the world, regardless of their appearences, not just those fighters popular with their current budwiser sucking belligerent niche.

They currently have two champions they seem less than eager to showcase as the face of the UFC. The more "pigmentally" appealing Liddell, though IMO, hardly deserving his hype, is still the most promoted fighter in the UFC, along with the equally overhyped Rich Franklin.


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

*That ******* shit*. Yeah my friends think the same, I tell them that theres prob more injuries in Rugby or horse riding, but for some reason they can't think of it as a sport.

*Why doesn't he pull his arm out and hit the guy?* Yeah took me training submission wrestling to stop calling them weak for not standing up when on the bottom.


----------



## Calibretto9 (Oct 15, 2006)

I don't think it's "race" so much as it is the UFC's promotion of its poster boys. The OP mentioned Franklin and Liddell being cheered over Rampage and Silva, but look how much more publicity the former champs got. I think racism exists everywhere and in everything, but I don't think it exists any more so within the UFC. It has more to do with who is promoted in the media, who the fans see more often, and honestly who the better showman is.


----------



## Zender (Dec 15, 2006)

Acoustic said:


> Particularly if that underdog was...


....?

Chuck was the belt holder which many thought was invincible when he fought Rampage II. Rampage could well have been looked upon as getting the 'lucky punch' so when fighting Dan Henderson, PRIDE champ etc. he was going to get found out. Same could be said about Houston. Silva was virtually unknown to the average UFC fan while Franklin was always given such a big write up that the way he was beaten was quite astounding. Crocop V Kongo, well that was Crocop supposedly going to be the best he's ever been against a so called 'can'.


----------



## Ble55ThaREaL (Sep 17, 2007)

royce81 said:


> This is a stupid thread, why even bring this up?!?!
> The fans arent cheering because of the colour of the fighter, they cheering because they like the fighter.
> Both the fights you mentioned Franklin/Silva and Chuck/Page in both cases the white fighters were far more popular and Rampage and Silva were relative unknowns in America. Once the fans get to know the fighters and see how good they are they will be cheering just as loud.


Yeah I agree. I'm tired of all this "racist" sh*t. The race card is WAY played out.


----------



## ajitator (Feb 5, 2007)

this thread is stupid. by this logic, then all opposing countries at the olympics are racist.

japanese people cheer for japanese fighters
canadians cheer for canadian fighters
brazilians cheer for brazilian fighters
americans cheer for americans.

i'm filipino so naturaly i'll cheer for brandon vera. it's not about being racist, it's just finding a fighter that you have some sort of similarities/connection with.


----------



## XitUp (Jan 11, 2007)

ajitator said:


> this thread is stupid. by this logic, then all opposing countries at the olympics are racist.
> 
> japanese people cheer for japanese fighters
> canadians cheer for canadian fighters
> ...


Stupid comparison. The Olympics is nation against nation, the UFC is not.


----------



## Ape City (May 27, 2007)

Acoustic said:


> UFC fans are just that, fans. They'll eat what's fed to them.
> 
> Dana goes over the top when it comes to hyping up his franchise guys, that all happen to be white, and completely smothers anything else.
> 
> ...



Ya because White got both fighters into the UFC and set them on 1way collison courses with the champs in hopes they would be defeated. White had no intention of creating solid, well rounded divisions consisting of the worlds best fighters, thus monopolizing mma (and making heaps of cash). 

Dana White is a racist and di everything in his power to keep the black man out of UFC.

/sarcasm off.:thumb02:


----------



## Ape City (May 27, 2007)

ajitator said:


> this thread is stupid. by this logic, then all opposing countries at the olympics are racist.
> 
> japanese people cheer for japanese fighters
> canadians cheer for canadian fighters
> ...


I agree with you 100%. I grew up 2 hours from where GSP lives; guess who my faverite fighter is?

Honestly I think UFC fans, on average, cheer for the people they have seen knock opponents out, and cheer for opponents they can relate to.


----------



## pibmac (Sep 9, 2007)

Ok this is quite stupid in my mind, did nobody ever think that most of this world is white? 

China/Japan territory, got more then anyone in the world but its tiny, and they tend to stick to japan...

Asia, don't see many fighters come out of Asia being honest...

Africa/Jamaica, plenty of black fighters in the UFC and never judged against...

...but for the rest of the world, there all white nations? tanned, maybe but still white people, exposing something for racism because the worlds popularity, most of the worlds nations are natural Caucasian (tanned) is kind of ridiculous to me...

apologies if i left any countries out, off top my head...


----------



## HexRei (Apr 27, 2007)

Kreed said:


> when they travel to places like london or dublin the reactions are still the same that tells me there is a problem


they hold most of their events in nations that are predominantly white, they haven't had an event in brazil or japan in a really long time. I think most populations are generally a little biased toward their own. Maybe I'm wrong though.


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

well most ufc fans fall under the white male middle - lower class demographic...

is that really racist cheering white people on? i mean, if you went to downtown Harlem and had a 1 on 1 tournament w/ a black guy against a white guy...uh there going to cheer the black guy and boo the white guy...it's not just white people

i wouldn't get too wrapped up in your theory cuz it goes no where. it's a victimless crime


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

and i'm sure there will be lots of black americans cheering for rich franklin in cincinatti at ufc 77....

i go to university and it seems that alot of the blacks have alot of black friends, whites have alot of white friends, asians have ALOT of asian friends....but no one goes around picking fights w/ racist intentions...


----------



## Ble55ThaREaL (Sep 17, 2007)

Aaronyman said:


> and i'm sure there will be lots of black americans cheering for rich franklin in cincinatti at ufc 77....
> 
> i go to university and it seems that alot of the blacks have alot of black friends, whites have alot of white friends, asians have ALOT of asian friends....but no one goes around picking fights w/ racist intentions...


AGREED. That's just the way the world works, and it won't ever change.


----------



## medulaney (Oct 15, 2006)

pibmac said:


> Ok this is quite stupid in my mind, did nobody ever think that most of this world is white?
> 
> China/Japan territory, got more then anyone in the world but its tiny, and they tend to stick to japan...
> 
> ...


I read the posts on this forum and don't post, however, this is one of the most uneducated statements I have every heard in my life. There are more people in china and India then there are white people in the world. One thing that makes this world great is its diversity. Its people who don't understand the great diversity in this world that cause much of the racism and discrimination today.

As far as UFC fans being racist its more about institutionalized racism than anything else. We are still taught today that black, brown, red, and yellow people are the enemy. White is good and black is bad, that has been the overwhelming message in society for centuries. It is up to each individual to take a critical look at how they view and treat other people in daily life.:thumb02:


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

medulaney said:


> As far as UFC fans being racist its more about institutionalized racism than anything else. We are still taught today that black, brown, red, and yellow people are the enemy. White is good and black is bad, that has been the overwhelming message in society for centuries. It is up to each individual to take a critical look at how they view and treat other people in daily life.:thumb02:


well this is one of the dumbest things i've read too there champ

not once was i taught by any authortative figure that a black, brown, red or yellow people are the enemy.

i think it's more these people come across as being the enemy...gangs shooting innocents...extremists blowing up buildings...red's being alcoholics...yellow's...well they don't do much harm it seems and maybe that's why they aren't feared.

don't go around saying america is racist becuz of ignorant teachers, when in fact your wrong

just treat everyone w/ respect and judge each person individually...


----------



## tecnotut (Jan 2, 2007)

Adamm411 said:


> Or, is there more sympathy or support for white fighters amongst UFC fans? I can't remember the article but one sportswriter claimed that the surging popularity of UFC is due in large part to the fact that the majority of MMA competitors are caucasian.
> 
> I have noticed that caucasian champions tend to be cheered much more loudly. For example, UFC fans roar their approval when Liddell knocks out an opponent. Whereas Quintin Rampage Jackson receives a polite golf clap after defending his title against Henderson. Spider Silva is booed and jeered after beating Rich Franklin decisively, but Franklin is cheered after his every victory. Kongo wins decisively against Cro cop but is barely acknowledged by the crowd. Couture is cheered as if he were a conquering hero.
> 
> ...


Liddell and Franklin _were_ known more by UFC fans than Jackson and Silva, so that's why they cheered more for them. Most UFC fans probably don't even know who Fedor is. Jackson's bravado and charisma, however, has already made him very well known by now.


----------



## medulaney (Oct 15, 2006)

Aaronyman said:


> i think it's more these people come across as being the enemy...gangs shooting innocents...extremists blowing up buildings...red's being alcoholics...yellow's...well they don't do much harm it seems and maybe that's why they aren't feared


Exactly my point. Is it that these groups of people are doing such things in greater frequency than other groups of people (namely white people)? Or is it that is what we are fed by the media. Do you believe the world is as it is portrayed on television? The media publicizes the bad that these groups do much more than the good. However, when it comes to white america many times it is just the opposite. Or maybe you do believe everything you see on television. Just one person's opinion, and by the state of the world, it is obviously in the minority.


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

Aaronyman said:


> well most ufc fans fall under the white male middle - lower class demographic...
> 
> is that really racist cheering white people on? i mean, if you went to downtown Harlem and had a 1 on 1 tournament w/ a black guy against a white guy...uh there going to cheer the black guy and boo the white guy...it's not just white people
> 
> i wouldn't get too wrapped up in your theory cuz it goes no where. it's a victimless crime


Downtown Harlem? I know in Harlem the white population is growing and they don't seem to be living in fear. Also while i agree that the black guy would be cheered more, i don't agree that the white guy would get booed. The agreestion towards each other has never been equal.




> i think it's more these people come across as being the enemy...gangs shooting innocents...extremists blowing up buildings...red's being alcoholics...yellow's...well they don't do much harm it seems and maybe that's why they aren't feared.


Lets not forget the majority of the biggest crimes committed in the last 500 years committed by the white populous.


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

Buckingham said:


> Lets not forget the majority of the biggest crimes committed in the last 500 years committed by the white populous.


lol that's hilarious hahaha


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

Aaronyman said:


> lol that's hilarious hahaha


How about this side of the world? Or is that hilarious also?


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

medulaney said:


> Exactly my point. Is it that these groups of people are doing such things in greater frequency than other groups of people (namely white people)? Or is it that is what we are fed by the media. Do you believe the world is as it is portrayed on television? The media publicizes the bad that these groups do much more than the good. However, when it comes to white america many times it is just the opposite. Or maybe you do believe everything you see on television. Just one person's opinion, and by the state of the world, it is obviously in the minority.


hmm...well you can choose to say what you want. 

last year was toronto's "year of the gun"...alot of shootings and such...a magazine produced pictures of all the victims and killers ....

you'll be totally ASTONISHED that like 2 of the killers were white...out of 50...the rest were black, and most of the victims were black as well....

don't feed me this "the media portrays"..no, no they don't. they don't go looking for crimes commited by blacks and report them moreso. they go looking for crimes and report it.


----------



## mikehmike (May 28, 2007)

Thats silly, I would have to say nascar has more of a problem with racism than the UFC


----------



## Aaronyman (Mar 1, 2007)

Buckingham said:


> How about this side of the world? Or is that hilarious also?


was your definition of crime including international wars ?


----------



## DropKick (Apr 19, 2007)

:thumbsdown: So what is the point of this rediculous thread? To the OP, you fail at trying to make the UFC look bad. :thumbsdown: 

Some UFC fans are racist

Some Pride fans are racist

Some K-1 fans are racist

Some NFL fans are racist

Some MLB fans are racist

Some NHL fans are racist

Some NBA fans are racist

Some NCAA fans are racist

Some Boxing fans are racist

Some EPL fans are racist

Some NASCAR fans are racist

Some Forumla 1 fans are racist

Some FIFA World Cup fans are racits

Racism exists in the world, it's not limited to the UFC or even the United States for that matter. If you are trying to say the UFC is racist I disagree. And whoever said that Zuffa and Dana White are the cause of this percieved racism really should come back to planet earth. If they were trully racist, no minorities would be getting title shots period. In fact, I could argue that MMA in general is probably the most diverse sport there is.

Please close this thread.


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

Aaronyman said:


> was your definition of crime including international wars ?


Umm i don't want to go too much into it since this is a mma site but:

-Trans Atlantic slave trade
-Near Genocide of the Indigenous North american
-The hostile take over of the indigenous South american
-the Hawaiian take over
-World War 1
-World War 2

That's just to name a few. I mean when crimes are brought up these events always seem to never be mention since most of the people reporting/discussing issues are the beneficiaries of these huge events. I think the "red man" being drunk doesn't even come close to the crimes listed above.


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

DropKick said:


> :thumbsdown: So what is the point of this rediculous thread? To the OP, you fail at trying to make the UFC look bad. :thumbsdown:
> 
> Some UFC fans are racist
> 
> ...


I don't think the original poster mean that only the ufc fans are racist but was asking if the ufc fan base is more racist then the normal. Also disagree with "no minorities would be getting title shots" arguments because if that was happening then the UFC would cease to exist. I don't think Dana or the Zuffa dislike non white champions but i do believe they like having marketable white champions and they should(good for businesses).


----------



## Flak (Jul 1, 2007)

There's enough problems with racism in this world without trying your best to look for it or manufacture it.

No, UFC fans are no more racist than any other fan base. You're stretching too hard.


----------



## DropKick (Apr 19, 2007)

Buckingham said:


> I don't think the original poster mean that only the ufc fans are racist but was asking if the ufc fan base is more racist then the normal. Also disagree with "no minorities would be getting title shots" arguments because if that was happening then the UFC would cease to exist. I don't think Dana or the Zuffa dislike non white champions but i do believe they like having marketable white champions and they should(good for businesses).


I think it's more racist to say that Lidell, Couture, Henderson, Hughes, GSP, Fanklin etc. are marketed because they are white and not because they are good fighters. People who say it's racist like to ignore the fact that all these guys are or were at the top of the sport. Maybe that has some bearing on their popularity? Just a thought, but I could be on to something here...


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

DropKick said:


> I think it's more racist to say that Lidell, Couture, Henderson, Hughes, GSP, Fanklin etc. are marketed because they are white and not because they are good fighters. People who say it's racist like to ignore the fact that all these guys are or were at the top of the sport. Maybe that has some bearing on their popularity? Just a thought, but I could be on to something here...


Well from a business prospective it is great to have good white fighters or athletes for a young growing sport in a country of 300 million people which 70% are white. I live in NY and on the Knicks is a player named David Lee. He is a nice young player and is white. He is by far the most popular player on the knicks even though he is by far not the most talented. If he was traded for anybody short of a superstar Issiah would lose his job. Now for businesses it's just smart to keep the guy. He's young, hard working(defense lacks), basketball smart(i guess), good with the media and white. What more can you ask for from a business prospective(beside the obvious great athlete you wins championships)?


----------



## IDL (Oct 19, 2006)

ajitator said:


> this thread is stupid. by this logic, then all opposing countries at the olympics are racist.
> 
> japanese people cheer for japanese fighters
> canadians cheer for canadian fighters
> ...


Finally someone who get's it. It's a natural tendency for someone to go for those who they identify with the most and there is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't warrant the old R card 

Rep!


----------



## Flak (Jul 1, 2007)

People need to learn the difference between nationalism and racism.


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

I agree that people pull for people who look like them, but booing is much different. I also think the race card is a myth.


----------



## IDL (Oct 19, 2006)

Buckingham said:


> I agree that people pull for people who look like them, but booing is much different. QUOTE]
> 
> I agree, if you are actually booing simply because of someones race then that crosses the line.
> Same goes with booing because someone is of a different country


----------



## IDL (Oct 19, 2006)

Flak said:


> People need to learn the difference between nationalism and racism.


People identify with commonalities. Everyone does. That can be many things including country, region, race, religion, political perspective, age, gender, etc..


----------



## DropKick (Apr 19, 2007)

Buckingham said:


> If he was traded for anybody short of a superstar Issiah would lose his job. Now for businesses it's just smart to keep the guy. He's young, hard working(defense lacks), basketball smart(i guess), good with the media and white. What more can you ask for from a business prospective(beside the obvious great athlete you wins championships)?


Well, I'm a knicks fan and I can safley say that Isaiah is the worst GM in all of sports. If he hasn't lost his job yet, there isn't anything he can do to get fired, including trading David Lee.

Anyway, the two most marketable athletes in the last 50 years, Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods are both african american. So how can people really make the case that you need good white athletes for marketability?


----------



## americanfighter (Sep 27, 2006)

I dont really think that race is the reason they cheer for their fighter. guys like rich randy and chuck are guys that have been along for a long time and they are well known and thats why people cheer for them. guys like congo and rampage are still new.


----------



## ESPADA9 (Oct 13, 2006)

Buckingham said:


> Umm i don't want to go too much into it since this is a mma site but:
> 
> -Trans Atlantic slave trade
> -Near Genocide of the Indigenous North american
> ...


-Much of the Trans Atlantic slave trade was facilitated and run by North African Arabs and sub Saharan African tribal leaders, it was stopped by Caucasians (you loose 10 points).
-There are no people “indigenous” to North America if you mean the Indians (they were just here first) they enslaved and murdered each other as well, their methods were just more primitive and ineffective so if you are holding Europeans solely responsible for our success and giving the Indians a free pass you are being intellectually dishonest (loose 5 points).
-See above, in the case of the Aztecs, they were so overly imperialistic and hated by their Indian neighbors (because of hundreds of years of murder, genocide and human sacrifice) they actually JOINED the conquistadors just to get rid of the Aztecs (how do you think 500+ Spaniards were able to defeat over 500,000 Aztecs). (Loose 5 points).
-Hawaiians to my knowledge have just as much freedom as any other American citizen and if you’ve ever been to Maui you know they are taking their revenge financially. (tourism $$$ = BILLIONS loose 10 points).
-WWI, you mean the defeat of the Ottoman-Turkish empire, the same empire that committed the Operation Nemesis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ??? (Loose 20 points).

-WWII, Caucasians freeing the Jews, the Chinese, The Pacific Islands, North Africa? (Loose 20 points)

Any mention of this???

When Europeans Were Slaves: Research Suggests White Slavery Was Much More Common Than Previously Believed


----------



## jehu pitchfork (Feb 4, 2007)

royce81 said:


> This is a stupid thread, why even bring this up?!?!
> The fans arent cheering because of the colour of the fighter, they cheering because they like the fighter.
> Both the fights you mentioned Franklin/Silva and Chuck/Page in both cases the white fighters were far more popular and Rampage and Silva were relative unknowns in America. Once the fans get to know the fighters and see how good they are they will be cheering just as loud.


not only that, for the uneducated newbie fans, the jackson/henderson fight was "boring" because it didn't end in a spectacular finish. i wouldn't put too much stock in this argument of racism.


----------



## vader (Sep 16, 2007)

This is a case of looking for something thats not there. 

I think Houston got some rowdy cheers for his knockouts!!
People just like to see great fights and fighters. Most on here like Rampage, so the racist theory is just plain stupid.


----------



## Randy GNP (Nov 24, 2006)

Adamm411 said:


> Or, is there more sympathy or support for white fighters amongst UFC fans? I can't remember the article but one sportswriter claimed that the surging popularity of UFC is due in large part to the fact that the majority of MMA competitors are caucasian.
> 
> I have noticed that caucasian champions tend to be cheered much more loudly. For example, UFC fans roar their approval when Liddell knocks out an opponent. Whereas Quintin Rampage Jackson receives a polite golf clap after defending his title against Henderson. Spider Silva is booed and jeered after beating Rich Franklin decisively, but Franklin is cheered after his every victory. Kongo wins decisively against Cro cop but is barely acknowledged by the crowd. Couture is cheered as if he were a conquering hero.
> 
> ...


 I don't really think that that is fair to say. People didn't cheer as much for Rampage because he didn't finish Hendo and the fight could've been more exciting. Silva was booed not because he beat a white guy, but because he beat a crowd favorite. Franklin was really built up by the UFC and his fights were usually exciting, giving him a large fan base.
The two following reasons both apply to Kongo. He didn't knock out cro cop, he didn't do much damage, the fight wasn't that good, and he beat an international fan favorite.


----------



## hollando (Apr 11, 2007)

Adamm411 said:


> Or, is there more sympathy or support for white fighters amongst UFC fans? I can't remember the article but one sportswriter claimed that the surging popularity of UFC is due in large part to the fact that the majority of MMA competitors are caucasian.
> 
> I have noticed that caucasian champions tend to be cheered much more loudly. For example, UFC fans roar their approval when Liddell knocks out an opponent. Whereas Quintin Rampage Jackson receives a polite golf clap after defending his title against Henderson. Spider Silva is booed and jeered after beating Rich Franklin decisively, but Franklin is cheered after his every victory. Kongo wins decisively against Cro cop but is barely acknowledged by the crowd. Couture is cheered as if he were a conquering hero.
> 
> ...


i think your making to much of this...yes im sure there are ignorant people out there

but think about it chuck was the face of mma in states for wut three years....then bang....knocked out....not to mention page hasnt really made enuff funni comments....for those that dont know him....may just think that his image in the ring.....is that of a street punk....and a crazy man with the chain and the howls....

as for anderson silva....he knocked out a poster boy....who is gonna cheer for that....lol come on now man....ive also said this time and time again....if they cant speak english it makes it really hard to buy the fighter....nothing against anderson....but if he needs an interpreter....i kinda dont focus on what hes saying....

for kongo.....come on now who the **** knew about kongo....besides us keyboard warriors lol....and once again....he speaks a different language....not to mention he did just beat a heavily favoured fighter....and did accidently knee him in the twigs and berries....

in closing....yes i believe racism....exists in mma....but it exists everywhere....it is a fact of life forever...or until all of us blend into a sorta....white, black, red, brown sorta colour.....until then.....just hope for the best


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

DropKick said:


> Well, I'm a knicks fan and I can safley say that Isaiah is the worst GM in all of sports. If he hasn't lost his job yet, there isn't anything he can do to get fired, including trading David Lee.
> 
> Anyway, the two most marketable athletes in the last 50 years, Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods are both african american. So how can people really make the case that you need good white athletes for marketability?


They also happen to be the greatest in the sports. Isaiah isn't the worst GM that would be Detroit lions GM. Isaiah has brought it some nice young talent and had to deal with Scott Laden mess when he came in. Isiah just get a extra bad rep because of his history with Larry Bird.


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

ESPADA9 said:


> -Much of the Trans Atlantic slave trade was facilitated and run by North African Arabs and sub Saharan African tribal leaders, it was stopped by Caucasians (you loose 10 points).
> -There are no people “indigenous” to North America if you mean the Indians (they were just here first) they enslaved and murdered each other as well, their methods were just more primitive and ineffective so if you are holding Europeans solely responsible for our success and giving the Indians a free pass you are being intellectually dishonest (loose 5 points).
> -See above, in the case of the Aztecs, they were so overly imperialistic and hated by their Indian neighbors (because of hundreds of years of murder, genocide and human sacrifice) they actually JOINED the conquistadors just to get rid of the Aztecs (how do you think 500+ Spaniards were able to defeat over 500,000 Aztecs). (Loose 5 points).
> -Hawaiians to my knowledge have just as much freedom as any other American citizen and if you’ve ever been to Maui you know they are taking their revenge financially. (tourism $$$ = BILLIONS loose 10 points).
> ...


- The trans Atlantic slave trade was mostly ran by white europeans. The arabs and native africans(black and Berber) were middle men. Don't get me wrong they have blood on they hands also but that's like saying the african guy who guide the white hunters for elephant ivory is just as bad as the big western corporations. This world works on supply and demand and the Europeans had a HIGH demand for slaves so of course some corrupt people would supply it. I know U.S slavery was some of the worst in worlds history where the slaves had NO rights at all.

-The North american indian had wars also but was far more civil then european counter parts. Also how about instead of using the excuse "they had wars too", you should admit that the Europeans who lives were saved by the native americans should have returned the favor. The pilgrims sure returned the favor to the indians for saving them that winter. Also you should look up indigenous.

-Yes the Aztec were hated. How did the Spaniards return the favor for the assistants? Ok thank you

- What about the hawaiians to died just to they could control the land the lived on for years? Did America have any right to go into Hawaii? Also couldn't the same thing be said for any successful enemy(terrorist, nations etc). I mean the world wouldnt end if the U.S fell the Islamic terrorist, life would go own and many new people in america would benefit from the toppling of the previous government. Of course you wouldnt want that because you're going to look at it from your perspective.

- Its all about perspective and trust me ww1 wasn't fought for the good of humanity.

- I know i said this side of this world but damn the two most destructive war were started by what people?


----------



## ESPADA9 (Oct 13, 2006)

Buckingham said:


> - The trans Atlantic slave trade was mostly ran by white europeans. The arabs and native africans(black and Berber) were middle men. Don't get me wrong they have blood on they hands also but that's like saying the african guy who guide the white hunters for elephant ivory is just as bad as the big western corporations. This world works on supply and demand and the Europeans had a HIGH demand for slaves so of course some corrupt people would supply it. I know U.S slavery was some of the worst in worlds history where the slaves had NO rights at all.
> 
> -The North american indian had wars also but was far more civil then european counter parts. Also how about instead of using the excuse "they had wars too", you should admit that the Europeans who lives were saved by the native americans should have returned the favor. The pilgrims sure returned the favor to the indians for saving them that winter. Also you should look up indigenous.
> 
> ...


I can only say that you are a cultural relativist who eagerly passes judgement on Western culture and Caucasians (a culture you have the benefit of living in) but are unable to pass judgement on other cultures but instead chose to give them a free pass by claiming victim status. You can't have it both ways, and you can't escape the contradiction, as many pseudo-intellectuals attempt to do, by extending special dispensation to the West by defining it as the Great Oppressor in a world endlessly broken down into oppressor/victim dualities. Historians and social scientists of this stripe bend history all out of shape, or ignore vast chunks of it, to keep those Oppressor and Victim labels in place, especially to make certain the big Oppressor label stays attached to the West. I just watched a DVD documentary that attempted to trace the Victim-status of the Middle East back to the First World War while completely ignoring the previous Oppressor status of the Ottoman Empire. The Greeks, mercilessly brutalized by Ottoman rule until their liberation in the 19th Century were (had to be) depicted as Imperialists for attacking post-Ottoman Turkey. No mention was made of what had happened to the Greeks. This sort of nonsense is too common. 

The problem is that this new way of thinking, this perverse non-judgemental social science mind-set, needs to account for itself. It has not eliminated value-judgement, it has simply directed it all at a mutually agreed upon demonized culture--it's own--in order to spare itself the ordeal and the responsibility of critiquing other cultures. There is nothing logical or scientific about this and that should be no surprise since the roots of cultural relativism and ideas about adaptive-ness can be found in anti-Western Leftist politics, not responsible academic thinking. 


Enjoy your poorly constructed selective reality.


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

ESPADA9 said:


> I can only say that you are a cultural relativist who eagerly passes judgement on Western culture and Caucasians (a culture you have the benefit of living in) but are unable to pass judgement on other cultures but instead chose to give them a free pass by claiming victim status. You can't have it both ways, and you can't escape the contradiction, as many pseudo-intellectuals attempt to do, by extending special dispensation to the West by defining it as the Great Oppressor in a world endlessly broken down into oppressor/victim dualities. Historians and social scientists of this stripe bend history all out of shape, or ignore vast chunks of it, to keep those Oppressor and Victim labels in place, especially to make certain the big Oppressor label stays attached to the West. I just watched a DVD documentary that attempted to trace the Victim-status of the Middle East back to the First World War while completely ignoring the previous Oppressor status of the Ottoman Empire. The Greeks, mercilessly brutalized by Ottoman rule until their liberation in the 19th Century were (had to be) depicted as Imperialists for attacking post-Ottoman Turkey. No mention was made of what had happened to the Greeks. This sort of nonsense is too common.
> 
> The problem is that this new way of thinking, this perverse non-judgemental social science mind-set, needs to account for itself. It has not eliminated value-judgement, it has simply directed it all at a mutually agreed upon demonized culture--it's own--in order to spare itself the ordeal and the responsibility of critiquing other cultures. There is nothing logical or scientific about this and that should be no surprise since the roots of cultural relativism and ideas about adaptive-ness can be found in anti-Western Leftist politics, not responsible academic thinking.
> 
> ...


What he said.


----------



## tecnotut (Jan 2, 2007)

IDL said:


> People identify with commonalities. Everyone does. That can be many things including country, region, race, religion, political perspective, age, gender, etc..


I'm an Arab, and I _hate_ Danni Abbadi.


----------



## tecnotut (Jan 2, 2007)

americanfighter said:


> I dont really think that race is the reason they cheer for their fighter. guys like rich randy and chuck are guys that have been along for a long time and they are *well known* and thats why people cheer for them. guys like congo and rampage are still new.


That's exactly what I said.


----------



## DropKick (Apr 19, 2007)

tecnotut said:


> I'm an Arab, and I _hate_ Danni Abbadi.


lmao :laugh:


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

ESPADA9 said:


> I can only say that you are a cultural relativist who eagerly passes judgement on Western culture and Caucasians (a culture you have the benefit of living in) but are unable to pass judgement on other cultures but instead chose to give them a free pass by claiming victim status. You can't have it both ways, and you can't escape the contradiction, as many pseudo-intellectuals attempt to do, by extending special dispensation to the West by defining it as the Great Oppressor in a world endlessly broken down into oppressor/victim dualities. Historians and social scientists of this stripe bend history all out of shape, or ignore vast chunks of it, to keep those Oppressor and Victim labels in place, especially to make certain the big Oppressor label stays attached to the West. I just watched a DVD documentary that attempted to trace the Victim-status of the Middle East back to the First World War while completely ignoring the previous Oppressor status of the Ottoman Empire. The Greeks, mercilessly brutalized by Ottoman rule until their liberation in the 19th Century were (had to be) depicted as Imperialists for attacking post-Ottoman Turkey. No mention was made of what had happened to the Greeks. This sort of nonsense is too common.
> 
> The problem is that this new way of thinking, this perverse non-judgemental social science mind-set, needs to account for itself. It has not eliminated value-judgement, it has simply directed it all at a mutually agreed upon demonized culture--it's own--in order to spare itself the ordeal and the responsibility of critiquing other cultures. There is nothing logical or scientific about this and that should be no surprise since the roots of cultural relativism and ideas about adaptive-ness can be found in anti-Western Leftist politics, not responsible academic thinking.
> 
> ...


The world existed before western civilization or caucasian having a major role in it. This is the type of attitude people hate this "the native americans should be happy we slaughter them" view. I haven't given any other culture a free pass i just view it from a direct point of view and if the results doesn't always fall in line western culture then too bad. Why any other time it's ok to point out who the bad guys are(terrorist, Japan, eventually Germany) but when potentially the buy guy is amongst ourselves it ludacris to question anything? I mean i believe it was you(i will check after posting) that said something along the lines of "well views are form because blacks gangbang, red men drink and asians don't do anything so they are non threatening". I simply replied that if the people giving this judgement feel they are clean and didn't/have HUGE flaws.


O yea i don't subscribe to the ideology of left, right, dem or repub.


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

I think everybody know why stars are cheered but does that mean the un known should be booed? Maybe it's just my mentality. If you dont know somebody then i don't have a reason to boo. Also i didn't notice Gonzaga getting booed too much.


----------



## N1™ (Apr 8, 2007)

Adamm411 said:


> Or, is there more sympathy or support for white fighters amongst UFC fans? I can't remember the article but one sportswriter claimed that the surging popularity of UFC is due in large part to the fact that the majority of MMA competitors are caucasian.
> 
> I have noticed that caucasian champions tend to be cheered much more loudly. For example, UFC fans roar their approval when Liddell knocks out an opponent. Whereas Quintin Rampage Jackson receives a polite golf clap after defending his title against Henderson. Spider Silva is booed and jeered after beating Rich Franklin decisively, but Franklin is cheered after his every victory. Kongo wins decisively against Cro cop but is barely acknowledged by the crowd. Couture is cheered as if he were a conquering hero.
> 
> ...



hm... i dont think cheering for a white fighter if your white, black fighter if your black or asian if your asian etc. nesesarely meens your a racist. I think its natural to cheer for the fighter you can relate to the most, and the coulor of the fighters skin can of course meen you see yourself more in that fighter. Its nothing to do with thinking that that one race is superior the other. :dunno:


----------



## ESPADA9 (Oct 13, 2006)

Buckingham said:


> The world existed before western civilization or caucasian having a major role in it. This is the type of attitude people hate this "the native americans should be happy we slaughter them" view. I haven't given any other culture a free pass i just view it from a direct point of view and if the results doesn't always fall in line western culture then too bad. Why any other time it's ok to point out who the bad guys are(terrorist, Japan, eventually Germany) but when potentially the buy guy is amongst ourselves it ludacris to question anything? I mean i believe it was you(i will check after posting) that said something along the lines of "well views are form because blacks gangbang, red men drink and asians don't do anything so they are non threatening". I simply replied that if the people giving this judgement feel they are clean and didn't/have HUGE flaws.
> 
> 
> O yea i don't subscribe to the ideology of left, right, dem or repub.


Sounds like you have a bad case...

YouTube - WHITE GUILT


----------



## Flaw (Dec 28, 2006)

There is nothing about race that is involved i have to say. Rampage Vs. Dan wasnt really that great of a fight, and when Silva won alot of people like Franklin, It may be the case for some fans but definetly not all UFC fans. Racisim is everywhere so get used to it.


----------



## XitUp (Jan 11, 2007)

norway1 said:


> I think its natural to cheer for the fighter you can relate to the most, and the coulor of the fighters skin can of course meen you see yourself more in that fighter. Its nothing to do with thinking that that one race is superior the other. :dunno:


I'm a white European.
Only one of my favorite fighters is a white European. The rest are from totally different races to me.


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

ESPADA9 said:


> Sounds like you have a bad case...
> 
> YouTube - WHITE GUILT


Im pretty sure i don't.


----------



## name goes here (Aug 15, 2007)

I'm pretty sure you do. Either way the thread is about ufc fans, not whatever your point is


----------



## IDL (Oct 19, 2006)

Seems everyone has their own definition of what racism means. Makes arguing about it impossible in any sort of intelligent manner.


----------



## teachbug (Sep 18, 2007)

Why is it in NBA that a white guy gets any kind of award or honor it's a fluke? But if a black guy wins it's to be expected?
For that matter why is ok to have a "Black coach's association", and a BET magazine, and I don't see a "white coach's association, or WET magazine?

For that matter why is the louder, more aggressive pepper, black, and the more laid back, simple salt, all white?

Things that make you go........HMMMMMMMMMMMMMM!

:dunno:


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

teachbug said:


> Why is it in NBA that a white guy gets any kind of award or honor it's a fluke? But if a black guy wins it's to be expected?
> For that matter why is ok to have a "Black coach's association", and a BET magazine, and I don't see a "white coach's association, or WET magazine?
> 
> For that matter why is the louder, more aggressive pepper, black, and the more laid back, simple salt, all white?
> ...


Because the last two mvps have flaked out in the playoffs(Nash wasn't bad this year) and are by far not the best players in the league. For the rest the reason should be easy as hell for you to figure it out, for YEARS qualified black men(latin, asian) never got the opportunity to coach in a league that is 80% black. They were passed over for underqualified white counterparts. Hence any association or rules. I never heard of Bet magazine but the Bet network was made because there were very little opportunity for black or brown talent to make a mark on tv or behind the scenes. When the major networks are not working for you then you go make channel yourself if you can(Johnson could and did). I mean are people so naive that they don't realize this? Do they think Bet was created out of racism? Or things like affirmative action? You don't think if there was a even playing field from the beginning that these organization or rules would not be in place?

For every BET theres a Abc, Nbc, Cbs, Fox, CW, Mtv etc......

name goes here: Trust me im not. Bet your life on it.

IDL: Agree


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

They will lock a thread about FN not having sound for half a fight but leave this thread up LOL. :confused03:


----------



## ruban (Nov 9, 2006)

slapshot said:


> They will lock a thread about FN not having sound for half a fight but leave this thread up LOL. :confused03:


1) A thread like this is like a woman's period: comes around about once a month. And as long as folks discuss the issue properly then its all gravy.

2) Complaining about audio isn't as topical. I merged it into the FNL 11 thread so you can fulfill your desire to discuss said lack of audio. btw I enjoyed watching that first round without commentary.


----------



## teachbug (Sep 18, 2007)

Dude didn't catch the humor in my post at all, I did a total flyby on him.
I got a whole black-history lesson out of it, so its all good....and damn funny.

But you know I STILL don't get the salt and pepper thing, damn it


----------



## slapshot (May 4, 2007)

ruban said:


> 1) A thread like this is like a woman's period: comes around about once a month. And as long as folks discuss the issue properly then its all gravy.
> 
> 2) Complaining about audio isn't as topical. I merged it into the FNL 11 thread so you can fulfill your desire to discuss said lack of audio. btw I enjoyed watching that first round without commentary.


I didn’t mind it myself, the wife came in as the first round started and after a few seconds asked what was wrong w/the sound so I was like commentators mic's must be having issues. Her replay was "_ok thought so because I dont think Rogan’s ever been able to keep his mouth shut for that long in his life_“, lol.


----------



## N1™ (Apr 8, 2007)

Buckingham said:


> Mtv


i agree with everything you say but MTV !?!? i am a super metal musik fan and i havnt seen a meal/rock video for ages.. its only rap/r&b and stuff like that... and its almost only black people doing that kind of music.... so to say that MTV is a white persons BET is a little weird :confused02:


----------



## XitUp (Jan 11, 2007)

It's aimed at white kids. White kids buy way more r'n'b and hip-hop than black kids these days.


----------



## Buckingham (Apr 8, 2007)

teachbug said:


> Dude didn't catch the humor in my post at all, I did a total flyby on him.
> I got a whole black-history lesson out of it, so its all good....and damn funny.
> 
> But you know I STILL don't get the salt and pepper thing, damn it


I saw the joke part after i replied. Anyway a lesson can't hurt anybody.


norway1 MTV/BET wasn't created today. Both are over 20 years old and in the beginning the only black person on mtv was Micheal Jackson. Different time... Hip hop is king now(even most most good hip hop gets now air time)

Back on topic


----------



## famoussd (Nov 16, 2006)

At UFC 76, I heard one fan scream out to Shogun, "Go back to Mexico"!!

That guy was a complete moron. I should've elbowed him in the eye.


----------



## teachbug (Sep 18, 2007)

Adamm411 said:


> Or, is there more sympathy or support for white fighters amongst UFC fans? I can't remember the article but one sportswriter claimed that the surging popularity of UFC is due in large part to the fact that the majority of MMA competitors are caucasian.
> 
> I have noticed that caucasian champions tend to be cheered much more loudly. For example, UFC fans roar their approval when Liddell knocks out an opponent. Whereas Quintin Rampage Jackson receives a polite golf clap after defending his title against Henderson. Spider Silva is booed and jeered after beating Rich Franklin decisively, but Franklin is cheered after his every victory. Kongo wins decisively against Cro cop but is barely acknowledged by the crowd. Couture is cheered as if he were a conquering hero.
> 
> ...


Im not even gonna finish reading this before declaring it bullshit.
All that is , is racist minds pretending to not be racist. If thats what you think then thats what you are, people who feel that way need to evaluate their lives, not just what sport they like.


I cant believe this thread is still going, I thought it was NEW thread...same old racist crud, geez, close this one down.


----------



## grnlt (Oct 15, 2006)

I agree close it down. The reason people didnt clap or cheer as much as you say for Rampage and Silva is because people just liked and knew Liddell and Franklin a lot more than they did Rampage and Silva...but like someone pointed out when Liddell got knocked out that crowd was nuts!!

So yeah this racist crap is annoying people always act like its the white people being racist and no one else. CLOSE THE THREAD PLEASE


----------

