Do you see a moral difference between violence-as-a-byproduct of a goal and violence-as-the-goal? If not, do you see how someone else might? Are you familiar with the tu quoque fallacy?
I will of course not convince you of much via a HN comment thread, this is for the others.
>Do you see a moral difference between violence-as-a-byproduct of a goal and violence-as-the-goal
Yes. I just don't think it applies to the UFC. Violence is not the goal of the UFC. It isn't a bloodsport, it isn't cockfighting. Moral arguments hold no water with me in regards to the UFC.
If you tune in to the UFC just to watch someone get the shit kicked out of them, you're missing the point entirely.
Personally, I watch the UFC to see two athletes of equal skill compete in what I consider a sport. Many fights end with zero blood. Some fights end in seconds. Blood is a very much a by-product IMO, not the end goal.
I think its disingenuous at best to say this is the reason most people watch NASCAR... I only know a few die hard NASCAR fans myself, but they are far more interested in the technical skills of the drivers than seeing someone potentially harmed for a little fireworks show.
I will of course not convince you of much via a HN comment thread, this is for the others.