(UPDATED 12/19/16) UFC's New Heavyweight Cody East: Past Includes Assault, Child Abuse, Rape Charges

Besty_Tiocfaidh_Ar_La said:
I also see you're point mate but call me old fashioned if you want but I'd have nothing to do with the guy. I was once a kid/teenager not once did I make a mistake like that nor did the thought of abuse or rape run through my head. We all make mistakes yes but shit like that is beyond a mistake especially more than one. If it was you're daughter involved with this guy you'd not be saying the same let's be honest lol.
Click to expand...
Look I don't think this guy raped anyone. But yeah I can understand your POV, I wouldn't hire anyone with a criminal record to my business. I just don't see how what he did matters if he is fighting. It would matter if he was applying for nanny or something.
 
if ufc fighters are rated as the baddest in the world then it is unfair not to let some people compete, its prize fighting and it shouldn't matter what the fighters past is, ATM UFC=Showponies
 
Anyone else think it is skeavy as fuck that MMA media make routine background checks on fighters? How many people would know or even give a fuck had they not seen this shit? Zero people, that's how many.
 
Team Sleep said:
The church choir would care only about your willingness to sing, not your past. Case in point... The Apostle Paul was a murderer. So was King David. People can change. I got in all kinds of fucking trouble up until I was 19. I'm not doing the shit I was doing.
Click to expand...
Wow, you've really missed the point here. You made the comparison "this is prize fighting, not church choir" implying that one should care about the moral judgement of its participants and the other shouldn't because of what its perceived to be. Now you're actually talking about whether the church group would accept this guy,lol. That's not what we're talking about, we're talking about holding both to equal standards, and not arbitrarily dismissing the idea of not having potentially morally repugnant individuals competing just because "it's prize fighting".
 
Ah his color may explain why Dana does give a crap if he even chopped heads for ISIS

Cody-East.jpeg
 
I hope he's good! The HW division needs new blood.
 
Team Sleep said:
Times like these I wish that the UFC wasn't worried about legitimacy in the eyes of the general public. It's prize fighting, not a church choir.
Click to expand...
Weird, I always thought it was martial arts, and the subsequent disciplines of respect, humility and professionalism that goes along with it. Well at least that's what I learnt in my dojo.
 
12ga. said:
Ah his color may explain why Dana does give a crap if he even chopped heads for ISIS

Cody-East.jpeg
Click to expand...

You saying Dana's racist. He'd only mind if the guy wasn't white?
 
We ain't gonna agree on this lol. I get you man I do but I don't know about the but fuck it. As you said I also wouldn't employ the dude but I don't own the ufc so that's their choice. All I can say is I'll be rooting for the other guy every time lol.
 
Sturmgeshutz said:
Weird, I always thought it was martial arts, and the subsequent disciplines of respect, humility and professionalism that goes along with it. Well at least that's what I learnt in my dojo.
Click to expand...
Conor...
 
basementdweller said:
alright, my point isn't that they shouldn't care because it's fighting. they shouldn't care as employers because his criminal record has nothing to do with his job in this particular case.
Click to expand...
That's a better argument, but still not a great one in my opinion. People with a particular type of violent past probably shouldn't be allowed to work in an industry which allows a measured and controlled level of violence, particularly one which operates constantly within the public perception. That's the reality of the situation.

However, this was not my point, my point was not to dismiss the concept of holding your employees to the same standards of other industries, just because of what the content of the role requires. None of this "who cares, it's fighting" crap.
 
Upchuck22 said:
You saying Dana's racist. He'd only mind if the guy wasn't white?
Click to expand...
Nah I dont think dana is racist but I think the white fighters are promoted, paid, and protected more because fans of MMA are and its good for bottom line
 
Break Brick said:
That's a better argument, but still not a great one in my opinion. People with a particular type of violent past probably shouldn't be allowed to work in an industry which allows a measured and controlled level of violence, particularly one which operates constantly within the public perception. That's the reality of the situation.

However, this was not my point, my point was not to dismiss the concept of holding your employees to the same standards of other industries, just because of what the content of the role requires. None of this "who cares, it's fighting" crap.
Click to expand...
you're stretching in the first paragraph. If things had these standards we wouldn't have Mike Tyson for instance. Wanting the fighting world without overly aggressive people is utopic and quite frankly not the way to go, is it?
In the second paragraph, that's cool but that was never my point. You were responding to me so I thought you were replying to something I said. Also, different industries should definitely have different standards for hiring. I would never hire someone with a criminal record to my business because my business requires a big level of trust between me and my employees. If the standards of my line of work were applied to the UFC, many current fighters, champions and whatnot would not make the cut.
 
basementdweller said:
you're stretching in the first paragraph. If things had these standards we wouldn't have Mike Tyson for instance. Wanting the fighting world without overly aggressive people is utopic and quite frankly not the way to go, is it?
In the second paragraph, that's cool but that was never my point. You were responding to me so I thought you were replying to something I said. Also, different industries should definitely have different standards for hiring. I would never hire someone with a criminal record to my business because my business requires a big level of trust between me and my employees. If the standards of my line of work were applied to the UFC, many current fighters, champions and whatnot would not make the cut.
Click to expand...
I wasn't responding to you i was responding to team sleep, your notifications on the fritz?

You're sort of conceeding my point here. you're saying an employer should make value judgements based on objective morality, likelihood of how their history will affect their ability to perform the role to how you want them to perform or appear. Especially seeing as you have implied that criminal record suggests to you cause for mistrust, without specifying whether the crime would have to directly relate to the role in hand ( paedo child minder or what have you).

I'm saying that given what the role entails, being in the public perspective in a sport where violence needs to be measured and cerebral, an employer has every right ( and would be wise to) consider the negative implications of hiring individuals with violent criminal records. I'm also saying that just because the ufc's employees role is to fight, does not disqualify them the same right as you to consider trust or character when employing people, as their brand and their business is just as (or more so) at risk if they hire individuals such as this guy.
 
Break Brick said:
I wasn't responding to you i was responding to team sleep, your notifications on the fritz?

You're sort of conceeding my point here. you're saying an employer should make value judgements based on objective morality, likelihood of how their history will affect their ability to perform the role to how you want them to perform or appear. Especially seeing as you have implied that criminal record suggests to you cause for mistrust, without specifying whether the crime would have to directly relate to the role in hand ( paedo child minder or what have you).

I'm saying that given what the role entails, being in the public perspective in a sport where violence needs to be measured and cerebral, an employer has every right ( and would be wise to) consider the negative implications of hiring individuals with violent criminal records. I'm also saying that just because the ufc's employees role is to fight, does not disqualify them the same right as you to consider trust or character when employing people, as their brand and their business is just as (or more so) at risk if they hire individuals such as this guy.
Click to expand...
The UFC doesn't do anything objectively at all. They are arbitrary as fuck to be completely honest.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,690
Messages
55,434,798
Members
174,775
Latest member
kilgorevontrouty

Share this page

Back
Top