I would be more impressed if the matador faced an unharmed, unexhausted bull ... and without any weapons.
You mean he would almost always be killed outright if an unexhausted, unwounded bull actually attacked?
The reality as it IS.
Just try to imagine the “entertainment” value of this scenario instead: Idiot antagonizes living death.
Bring out the next idiot.
In modern times we generally assign “Darwin Awards” to such behavior - not "honor".
The Spanish bullfight stabs, cuts and exhausts the bull down to the level of the “elegant” primate who, with "grace" and "courage", sometimes still gets chopped down.
So the point of the bull fight is to see how bravely and gracefully the matador can move close to a still dangerous, but bleeding and exhausted animal?
I see the same old preconscious assumptions behind all this.
People afraid of their own mortality wish to see death “in the flesh”.
If the matador can bravely face death and live, then this symbolic contest will magically enable the audience member to somehow "defeat" death - by proxy?
This never works however.
Blood sacrifice is a fundamental to the bull killings of Mithras (from which bullfighting stemmed) and is an integral part of the theology of Christianity (the shedding of Christ's blood for the remission of sins), but is hardly Satanic.
Curiously those who have actually faced uncontrolled violence and experienced death up front in their real lives (as in military action, for example) usually do not exhibit this desire and do not find such spectacles “entertaining”.
It is however sadistic and unnecessarily cruel.
Historically, the bullfights are what remain of the old Roman circus. That is a fascinating fact. It remains an atavistic piece of the past that shames the cultures that still practice it as public entertainment.
The herd enjoyed seeing violence and blood then as well.
From the stands.
However I see bullfighting as a cowardly sport in need of severe improvement:
Naked, weaponless single matador versus healthy, undamaged bull.
But the outcome would be obvious.
Generally your posts have been witty and interesting.
This one causes me to raise both of my eyebrows, however.
This religion is named “Satanism”, not “sadism”.
Just a reminder to any who might read this.