Why Boxing and Equestrian Dressage Should Leave the Olympics
This essay presents a moral argument for removing boxing and equestrian dressage from the Olympic Games. Drawing on the Olympic Charter's stated ideals of human dignity, peaceful development, and respect for universal ethical principles, the paper contends that both sports are fundamentally incompatible with Olympism. In boxing, athletes must deliberately harm opponents to succeed, conflicting with the moral principle of welfare for others. In equestrian dressage, high rates of rider injury and death — alongside harm to horses — raise serious ethical concerns. Through analysis of the Olympic ideal, sport-specific evidence, and philosophical frameworks, the essay concludes that both sports ought to be permanently removed from the Olympic program.
- Introduction: Background on boxing and dressage controversies
- The Olympic Ideal: Olympic Charter values and Olympism defined
- Olympic Boxing and the Ethics of Harm: Boxing's conflict with welfare and dignity principles
- Olympic Equestrian Dressage and Its Dangers: Injury and death risks to riders and horses
- Conclusion: Both sports should be removed from Olympics
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The argument is grounded in a primary source — the Olympic Charter — giving the ethical critique an authoritative foundation rather than relying solely on opinion.
- The paper addresses two distinct sports separately, allowing each case to be developed with sport-specific evidence, including recorded deaths, injury statistics, and named examples.
- A named philosophical principle (welfare for others) is introduced and consistently applied throughout, giving the essay a coherent ethical framework.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper uses a normative ethics framework — the principle of welfare for others — to evaluate empirical sporting practices. By establishing the Olympic Charter's stated values first, then measuring each sport against those values, the essay demonstrates deductive moral reasoning: general principle applied to specific cases to reach a policy conclusion. Counterarguments (e.g., that boxing builds resilience) are acknowledged and then refuted, which strengthens the overall argument.
Structure breakdown
The essay follows a classic argumentative structure: an introduction that identifies both sports and the moral lens to be applied; a section establishing the normative standard (the Olympic ideal); two body sections analyzing boxing and equestrian dressage in turn; and a conclusion that synthesizes both cases into a unified recommendation. This parallel structure makes the comparative argument easy to follow.
Introduction
Boxing has long been one of the main sports featured among the dozens of Olympic disciplines. It has been part of the Summer Olympics since 1904. However, eight years before boxing was featured in the 1896 Summer Olympics in St. Louis, the International Olympic Committee had removed the sport from the Olympic program, arguing that it was too dangerous. The sport was very popular in the United States, and was therefore re-introduced for the 1904 Games. Controversy has surrounded boxing's presence in the Olympics ever since, with many calling for its complete removal. This essay examines the moral perspective that would support such a removal (Matthews, 2011).
Another sport that has generated disagreement among committee members is equestrian dressage — an event that involves the use of horses to show-jump and navigate a course with different obstacles. Though the sport is often enjoyed by the wealthy, it is perhaps one of the most dangerous events to both rider and horse in the Summer Olympics. A slight miscalculation when jumping an obstacle can cost a rider his or her life (Cooke, 2012).
The Olympic Ideal
The Olympic Charter states that Olympism is a way of life that exalts and tests the mind, body, and will. Olympism combines sport with education and culture, creating a competitive program that rewards effort while focusing on respect for fundamental moral principles. The Charter further states that the objective of Olympism is to use sport for the peaceful development of humanity, with the aim of developing a harmonious society that focuses on the preservation of human dignity (IOC, 2015, p. 13).
One can readily observe, however, that equestrian dressage and boxing expose sportsmen and women to injuries that can be potentially life-threatening. Competitors in these events must fight and likely harm their opponents in order to be rewarded. How, then, can these two sports be in harmony with the Olympic Charter? (Matthews, 2011)
References
Ball, C. G., Ball, J. E., Kirkpatrick, A. W., & Mulloy, R. H. (2007). Equestrian injuries: Incidence, injury patterns, and risk factors for 10 years of major traumatic injuries. American Journal of Surgery, 193, 636–640.
Cooke, S. V. (July 28, 2012). OLYMPICS, Equestrian eventing: The Olympics' most dangerous sport? TIME.com.
Davis, P. (1993–94). Ethical issues in boxing. Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, XX–XXI, 48–63.
IOC. (September 2015). Olympic Charter. Retrieved from on 26 January 2016.
Matthews, C. (2011). 'The thrill of the fight' — Sensuous experiences of boxing: Towards a sociology of violence. Doctoral thesis.
Morgan, W. J. (2006). Why sports morally matter. London: Routledge.
Wacquant, L. (1992). The social logic of boxing in Black Chicago: Toward a sociology of pugilism. Sociology of Sport Journal, 9, 221–254.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.