when you think of the tremendous technological progress we have made, it's amazing how little we have developed in other respects. we may speak contemptuously of the poor old romans because they relished the orgies of slaughter that went on in their arenas. we may despise them because they mistook these goings on for entertainment. we may forgive them condescendingly because they lived 2000 years ago and obviously knew no better. but are our feelings of superiority really justified? are we any less blood-thirsty? why do boxing matches, for instance, attract such universal interest? don't the spectators who attend them hope thy will see some violence? human beings remain as blood-thirsty as ever they were. the only difference between ourselves and the romans is that while they were honest enough to admit that they enjoyed watching hungry lions tearing people apart and eating them alive, we find all sorts of sophisticated arguments to defend sports which should have been banned long ago ; sports which are quite as barbarous as, say, public hangings or bear-baiting.
it really is incredible that in this day and age we should still allow hunting or bull-fighting, that we should be prepared to sit back and watch two men batter each other to pulp in a boxing ring, that we should be relatively unmoved by the sight of one or a number of racing cars crashing and bursting into flames. let us not deceive ourselves. any talk of ‘the sporting spirit' is sheer hypocrisy. people take part in violent sports because of the high rewards they bring. spectartors are willing to pay vast sums of money to see violence. a world heavyweight championship match, for instance, is front page news. millions of people are disappointed if a big fight is over in two来源：作文地带整理。
