A thought-provoking article on boxing

I just read an article in The Washington Post, written by Benjamin Wallace-Wells, entitled "Battered Women and subtitled "Female boxing is brutal and hopeless." It really made me think. Wallace-Wells would piss me off in one sentence, but then have me nodding to myself in agreement the next. As far as his disgust with women's boxing, I couldn't help but agree:

The worst male fighters know how to play defense, but these girls looked like they'd never been trained. They didn't even try to protect themselves. There was no effort to dodge, no shifting of weight, no clever, calculated movement of feet. Both girls just kept charging, swinging both fists at the same time. It was like watching six-year-olds fight before they're old enough to realize that they might be hurt: All you want to do is make it stop. The action in the middle of the ring was an inchoate tangle of limbs and fists.

Honestly, Leila Ali is the only woman I've ever seen fight who actually looked like she'd been properly trained. She's not just a fighter, she's a boxer.

I'm including a link to the article here: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2005/0503.wallace-wells2.html because it's a good read whether you agree with it in whole or in part, or not at all.

Wallace-Wells' bizarre love-hate relationship with the sport goes beyond his indictment of women's boxing. He paints an entirely oppressive and disgusting picture of the sport on both sides of the gender line, but remains a fan nonetheless. And I can't figure out why. I may email him and ask.