Academic Essays

In Defense of Boxing: A Counterattack

"Life should not be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside in a cloud of smoke, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming "Wow! What a Ride!"

-Hunter S. Thompson

For those of us who grew up watching Rocky, idolizing Ali, and making jokes about Frazier, boxing is more than just a sport. Admittedly, I was born too late to see Stallone in theaters or Ali in the ring, but in their own ways, these great American heroes hold a special place in my heart. Of course, they were more than fighters—Rocky, a chaser of the American dream and Ali, a prominent civil rights activist. When I hear the discourse on boxing today, I wonder if maybe the glory days really are over. Maybe boxing is too violent, too dangerous, too primitive to endure the test of time. Rather than sit around and ponder, I did what I do best. I got to work researching, reading, and attempting to discern—to the best of my ability—whether my next column, the one you are reading now, should serve as a searing critique or a robust defense. Having fairly considered the evidence at hand, I have come to realize that boxing is most assuredly a morally permissible endeavor. So buckle up, because in today's analysis, those who seek to ban, illegitimatize, and scorn boxing will be my Frazier. In the spirit of a good bout, I will take a few hits, acknowledging some common objections and discussing their virtue. Then, when the time is right, I will march a Trojan horse through the gates of these objections and expose them as the paternalistic, liberty-violating, morally illegitimate arguments that they are. Given all the controversy, confusion, and scorn in the discourse, it is time that somebody hit back. Consider this a counterattack.

There are those who would argue that the premise of boxing is fundamentally immoral. While a match can be won on points, after all, the golden snitch is the knockout. Rendering an opponent unconscious or disorienting them to such an extent that they cannot continue wins a contender match, belt, and glory. In the kerfuffle of all this celebration, the haunting reality of what is really happening might get lost. When a projectile collides with another object, there is a transfer of energy. In the case at hand, the projectile is a fist, the object a skull, and the transfer of energy great enough to inflict serious brain damage on the recipient. More specifically, explains University College London neuroscientist John Hardy, the "rotational acceleration of the cerebral cortex" may well result in a torn blood vessel, a subsequent hemorrhage, and increased exposure to the likelihood of being reduced to a comatose state or perhaps even death. Surely, fighters are not collapsing every time they get hit, and knockout punches are few and far between. The vast majority of fights, after all, are won on points, hence my describing the famed knockout as a golden snitch. The risk, however, exists nonetheless, and that is something which many find problematic. Hardy is among those who deplore the sport. He finds the practice of boxing despicable, arguing that no "other sport has the express goal of causing injury to the brain." There is no doubt about it: knockouts win matches, and to this end, the surest way to victory is essentially to hemorrhage your opponent's brain. At their core, that is what knockouts are designed to do, and about this, there should be no quarreling.

A similar objection to boxing as sport exists in its long-term effects—in the scars that follow fighters long after they leave the ring. Snapped blood vessels in the frontal cortex cause hemorrhages in the short term. Microtears in these vessels are much more insidious, if for no other reason than that their potential effects are devastating and may not manifest in physiological symptoms for years. Often cited by detractors like Hardy and most feared by boxers is chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), a degenerative disease to which frontal cortex damage gives rise. Reviewing the work of Stern et al. in a massive meta-study on the consequences of repetitive head impacts and multiple concussions, researchers rather bluntly stated that clinical "features of CTE include the progressive decline of memory and cognition, depression, suicidal behavior, poor impulse control, aggressiveness, Parkinsonism, and dementia." The authors ultimately went on to conclude that "boxing is associated with possible long-term cognitive decline and axonal injury." The risks of choosing to participate in boxing, in this way, are not at all insubstantial, and may well follow a fighter long after they retire and move on with their life. The ring breeds injury—short and long term—and fighters expose themselves to it every time they enter a bout.