Seven assault convictions, yet a 'champion' in the boxing ring -- Floyd Mayweather

Great Debates
1

Millionaires, celebrities, ‘people of import’ all turned up to the Pacquiao-Mayweather “Fight of the Century”. Vegas airport terminals were literally ‘traffic jammed’ with private jets, all clambering to get their money junkie occupants to their exorbitantly priced ringside seats. Untold millions around the globe tuning in; many paying upwards of US$100 to access the television coverage of the bout in question. 15,000 households in the Philippines putatively having to switch off their refrigerators in order to conserve electricity just so they could watch the fight… :rolleyes:

What does it say about society that the literal criminal, arguable misogynist and proven recidivist woman beater could not only draw such crowds to a boxing match, but that he was permitted to continue in the sport after such a dubious societal track record? Are females really held in such low regard in today’s world?

If someone were to assault people based on race - punching everyone they saw who they did not like base purely on their racial derivation - would they be allowed to continue in a vocation where they are clearly a role model for impressionable youth? If someone clobbered the elderly because they were ageist, would they be accepted as influential members of society?

I wager the answers to the above questions is a resounding No!. So, why does Floyd Mayweather seemingly get a pass? Because he’s served his time, as the law saw fit? Because his in-ring persona is somehow removed from his private self? Because they were ‘crimes of passion’? Hmmm… :dubious:

And what of the aforementioned slew of celebrities, who themselves are role models – what kind of example did they set by appearing at this boxing match? Do these people not have a responsibility in their character as celebrities to present a public image which conveys a positive example to those who are invariably influenced by them? Or are they paid only to prance around in front of cameras and the like, and thereby, somehow in doing this, divest themselves of all responsibility to society?

Now, I appreciate the character in question has spent his life being punch in the noggin and almost certainly suffers a degree of brain damage. So, as with NFL or WWE stars-turned-murders / spouse abusers / general misfits, this has likely a lot to do with Floyd Mayweather’s away-from-the-ring disposition (see: Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy). But this does not excuse the guy’s actions and nor does it exonerate the sport he prospers from of culpability.

Mayweather was refused an entry visa into Australia based on his criminal record – how low are the boxing authorities’ standards set for those they employ? Granted, boxing is hardly a sport of integrity – did not Mayweather cherry-pick the referee, judges, venue and even negotiate the prize money for the bout in question…? Notwithstanding, those who govern boxing must surely be held accountable for the governance of their own sport… no? And if so, what kind of sport effectively promotes the abuse of females?! :dubious:

2

It shows society’s general disdain for women and the casual attitude it has, in general, towards violence against women. In my view, a domestic abuse conviction should have nearly the same sort of cultural and societal shame attached as a conviction of child molestation.

Perhaps society should legally require that convicted domestic abusers register and inform all of their neighbors just like convicted sex offenders.

3

Putting aside that the “boxing authorities” were probably only involved in rubberstamping the license to fight, for which Money M could have shopped around for an accomodating jurisdiction, at this point this has more of the attributes of a rhetorical question – boxing’s standards are pretty goddamn low.

Now, should Beyoncé and JayZ, Bieber, Charles Barklay, Magic Johnson, Mary J. Blige, Paris Hilton, Michael Keaton, Christian Bale, Bradley Cooper, etc. be sitting at the venue “enjoying” the party? Well, consider these celebs are likely to also attend shindigs honoring other fellow-celebs with varied criminal records…

The sense of separating being a slimebag of a person from being a gifted performer to the extent of continuing to celebrate and patronize the slimebag’s performances and shoving aside the negative record does seem to still be uneroded in the case of gender violence and boxing.

4

Who gives a shit if he beat up a women. I expect the juridical system already dealt with that. He’s a boxer not a role-model of anything. People go to see him box, not to hear him espouse on various political or philosophical insights he might or might not have. You gotta keep things in separate boxes. People can be good at something making them worthwhile to watch for that reason, but still be horrible persons. I should rather ask for what reason you think he is a role model? What has he done to earn that title?

If you’re doing celebrities as role models, you’re doing it wrong. Skanky sluts and drug addled playboys is closer to the mark.

5

What’s with the infantilizing of women? They can walk away, children cannot. Domestic abuse is more like a pub brawl or street mugging or something. Pretty lousy things to be involved in, but nothing anywhere near child molestation.

6

Disagree. Domestic abuse, especially when habitual, can have very damaging long-term psychological effects on people. I don’t think it’s quite as bad as child molestation, but it’s very bad, in my view, and considering how common it is (based on my understanding of the statistics), it may be as harmful to society.

7

women, plural. And hey, maybe you don’t give a shit but I do. I don’t like to think that I’m lining the pockets of someone like that.

8

he was convicted seven times for assault? I thought it was once

9

Only one conviction and jailing (for the multiple attacks on the mother on his children) but there seems to be no debate that he has done this to other women as well.

I personally think the one conviction is enough but have a read here if you want to know more.

10

He was convicted of assault and thrown in prison, that seems to indicate that society takes violence seriously. Now he has paid his debt to society and is going back to his job. Should we not allow anyone with a criminal record to work again? His job is to provide an hour of boxing entertainment, not teach life skills. He seems like a scummy person and his a horrific role model, but that does not mean he should not be allowed to work.

11

Who says he “should not be allowed to work”? Convicted child-molesters are “allowed to work”, but I imagine that if one was a talented athlete than they would have a lot of trouble getting endorsement deals and fans willing to shell out big bucks to watch them compete. I think it should be similarly so with convicted domestic abusers – they should be similarly shunned (if they choose to put themselves in the public eye) by society.

12

Perhaps some of those people paid for the fight knowing that Mayweather was a serial abuser because they hoped Manny would kick his ass?

13

But who’s supposed to ban him from boxing?

Boxing isn’t like the NFL. There isn’t a commissioner who can rule that a guy is ineligible to compete. As long as Mayweather is able and willing to fight, and somebody is willing to pay to watch him do it, he’ll keep doing it, and nobody can stop him.

14

This is why we have the court system. He was accused of assault, he was tried for it, he was convicted, and he received the punishment that we, as a society, have decided is appropriate for perpetrators of assault. One might argue, of course, that the punishment we have chosen is inadequate, and that assailants ought to be locked up longer, but that has nothing to do with the assailant’s livelihood. One might also argue that it is barbaric to derive entertainment from watching people beat each other up, and that all boxing should be banned, but that’s unrelated to the fact that some boxers also beat up people outside of the ring.

15

I know it wouldn’t happen without public outcry (and the possibility of financial loss), but ideally, in my view, arenas and the various organizations that hand out title belts would refuse to allow him (or other domestic abusers) to fight in/for their arena/recognition because they’d be afraid of boycotts and the like.

16

Not many people care. They want to see a fight. If anything, it adds excitement to the narrative. Now you can root against the heel. If you sat on your high horse and tossed out athletes without squeaky clean personal lives there wouldn’t be much left to watch.

Celebrities aren’t role models. Barkley cleared that up back in the '90s. They’re modern day aristocracy, or tabloid fodder we watch self-destruct from afar while feeling smugly superior about our own boring lives.

17

Here’s one vote on the subject:

I didn’t watch, I never will watch him fight. I do let his record on domestic violence affect my opinion of him. Just like it does for Adrian Peterson and Ray Rice, and likewise Ray Lewis for his different type of violence.

But I am one person. I can’t not watch any more than I am already not watching. Sadly, I don’t think these people notice my lack of contribution to their bottom line.

18

For what it’s worth, Mayweather doesn’t endorse anything.

19

I didn’t pay for the fight, or even watch it. But I was hoping on some level that Mayweather would be carried out of the ring bleeding from the ears.

Regards,
Shodan

20

Same here. I don’t like Mayweather, but I like even less the current trend that anyone committing a PC hot-button crime deserves to lose their entire career.