The Mythologizing of Black Belts
Let's talk about how people keep assuming anyone with a black belt are an authority on anything but grappling.
A while back, a social media post by Jeff Glover (a formerly “well known” grappler) made its way across my timeline. He was whining about how black belts used to be meaningful and now they are worthless because people he thinks aren’t “real black belts” are being promoted.
This is, frankly, a stupid argument to believe in but given Glover’s long history of saying dumb things, along with being a racist bigot, I’m not entirely surprised. You may ask “why do people bother to listen to him?” Well, it has to do with the color of belt he wears around his waist. In a future post I’ll come back to this specific topic of the supposed “devaluing” of the black belt. However, this post does help segue into a specific discussion I want to make about the “mythologizing” of the black belt itself as well as those who hold it.
As anyone can tell you, few symbols in martial arts carry as much reverence as a black belt does. It’s a symbol showing that person’s knowledge and skill in a martial art. In jiu jitsu it is the culmination of what often is a decade of consistent training and immersion into the grappling community.
But, as jiu jitsu has grown from a relatively niche martial art into a globally practiced sport, the way people see a black belt has, in ways, taken on a mythic quality that oozes off of the mats and enters into the social fabric that a gym is typically built with. Gyms then become a place where black belts are treated not just as experts in a sport, but as de facto leaders of a social group. Their status as a black belt grants them, by those who mythologize them, a place of authority on topics far beyond the scope of grappling. They are crowned as an expert on topics that have mostly centered around politics, gender relations, economics, ethics, and even philosophy. The means in which we understand and manage our society.
This is a dangerous fallacy to fall into, and it ultimately leads to harmful, toxic results within the sport. Which is, ultimately, thanks to a widespread epistemic error: the assumption that technical skill in one area of expertise makes you an expert in other areas.
Let me be clear, the problem is not that there are black belts who have opinions on things. That’s, actually, quite normal and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. The problem is that their opinions are treated as inherently more valid, simply because of that colored belt or rash guard they wear. This, in turn, creates a dangerous feedback loop, where charisma and technical skill reinforce each other, and dissent is silenced. This has been talked about by various people in sports in general, and about a decade ago Ryan Hall penned this very well crafted open letter about hero worship in jiu jitsu that is worth rereading.
Today, I want to continue that discussion.
Fallacy of Authority
To start, I think it’s worth first clarifying what exact fallacy is happening here. Like I said, the fallacy of authority is when someone is believed to be a credible speaker on a topic simply because they hold some expertise in another, typically unrelated field. Here’s a quick and good example, a commercial comes on the TV and it claims that that particular brand says it is the best meal because Michael Jordan himself says that he has it every day. In that scenario, Michael Jordan’s status as an NBA legend is the authority that you’re assuming means he can’t be wrong about that cereal.
In martial arts, this is rampant. A jiu jitsu black belt is, in a very simplified way, just an expert in using grappling on someone. That’s it. They are not, and it somewhat irritates me to feel the need to say this out loud, an expert in politics, sociology, or economics. Unless they, legitimately, are thanks to their education or work. But their experience and knowledge in that field is what makes them an expert. I’m going to listen to Josh Hinger talk about jiu jitsu and economics, since those are his jam. I would of course double check the things he is saying and also would say I don’t think he’s necessarily someone to solely rely upon for information on, say, vaccine science. And yet, again it irritates me to have to say this, there are those who treat black belts as if their opinions on these topics are inherently more valid than others’. This even extends to fans, as you can see displayed in the MMA community. But we’ll get to that example later.
This conversation we’re having about all of this is not new. In fact, there has been enough research on this situation that there is even a fancy word for it. It’s called epistemic trespassing and it is quite dangerous, especially because the kind of person who ends up in this situation will oftentimes be unable to distinguish between legitimate expertise and misplaced confidence. It’s that latter one that is the culprit. When a jiu jitsu athlete who is of notoriety or even simply someone with a black belt speaks on politics or gender issues or whatever, their audience may mistakenly assume they have authority on the matter, when in reality none exists at all.
Some researchers have argued that a degree of intellectual humility requires recognizing the limits of one’s expertise. Yet, in the culture of martial arts, the opposite of this is considered the ideal. There is a belief that mastery of the body results in mastery of the mind. Which is a literal trope.
This conflation leads to a dangerous dynamic where someone’s own charisma and technical skill are mistaken for being well read and an expert on a topic.
Those Damned Gracies
This mythologizing of black belts has deep roots in the foundational history of jiu jitsu as a sport. We all know how the Gracie family took credit for “creating” jiu jitsu after they rebranded the judo techniques they were taught. The way they told it, they created it themselves from scratch and it was for a long time sacrilegious in the wider jiu jitsu community to talk about how they got the ideas from judo. They also used their status within the sport to convince people they were credibly skilled in other fields.
Helio Gracie was, on top of being a jiu jitsu practitioner, also involved in Brazilian politics in the 1930s. And if you know anything about politics in the 1930s in countries like Brazil at the time, then you won’t be surprised he was tied to fascist political movements. Which, given the stuff the Gracies have allegedly gotten up to, isn’t all that surprising. In the 1930s, Helio and his brothers were convicted for violently ambushing a catch wrestler, but received a pardon allegedly due to their political connections. A working relationship between right-wing thugs and law enforcement that proudly lives on today.
This incident highlights the political entanglements at the heart of jiu jitsu’s origin story. The Gracies, a family that really works hard at marketing themselves at all opportunities, made themselves seem as though they were superior beings—physically, morally, and intellectually. Again, a thing they really like to still do even in the 2020s. We all mostly know the general story, the Gracie clan would go around to various gyms in Rio de Janeiro and challenge people to a fight or sometimes just show up with a gang and demand a fight (read: start a brawl) right then and there.
When they were doing actual matches for money, or whatever the prize would be, their challenge matches and self-promotion created a narrative that Gracie Jiu Jitsu was not just a martial art, but a superior philosophy for life. This narrative persists today, holy God does it persist, with many black belts adopting the role of life coaches, spiritual guides, and political commentators. Again, we’ll get to that last one later.
The phrase “keep politics out of jiu jitsu” is often heard in gyms, but as the genuine great ambassador of the sport Stephan Kesting has repeatedly, and accurately, stated that jiu jitsu has never been apolitical. The very founding of how the sport started in Brazil and the manner in which Maeda taught the Gracies judo was a result of numerous political acts and choices. The sport of jiu jitsu is steeped in political violence, elitism, and ideological manipulation. To ignore this history is to simply live in an alternate reality. One, it seems people are rushing to relocate themselves in.
Personality > Morality
The cult of personality is a powerful force in martial arts. It is not uncommon for charismatic black belts in the competition circuit to gain celebrity status. This is basically how it works. The problem really is that along the way of becoming a notable name or person to listen to, people mistake the athletic skills of the person as justification to treat their words as gospel.
This is especially pronounced in MMA and boxing, where fighters like convicted rapist Conor McGregor and the Nazi admirer Bryce Mitchell have built entire personas around their ability to speak authoritatively on any topic thanks to their status as an athlete.
In jiu jitsu John Danaher is looked up to not just because of their technical knowledge, but for their philosophical musings. Danaher is a former philosophy grad and was doing that long before he was seen as an amazing coach in jiu jitsu. Yet, Danaher’s showing up on holocaust denier Jake Shields’ podcast, who has a history of maxing and promoting right wing extremist views, makes me question the limits Danaher’s intellectual thinking has.
We saw this when Joe Rogan spread numerous hoaxes, conspiracy theories, and outright lies on topics he has literally no expertise in. On top of consistently not really showing that deep of knowledge of jiu jitsu as the UFC broadcast likes to make you think.
We saw this when Bryce Mitchell talked about how Adolf Hitler was a “good guy” he wouldn’t mind going fishing with, and that schools turn kids gay, which is why he’ll be the sole arbiter of his children’s homeschooling.
We saw this when Jake Shields repeatedly used homophobic and transphobic slurs and repeated promoted holocaust denial talking points.
We saw this when Roberto “Cyborg” Abreu, Vagner Rocha, and their respective gym networks allowed Marcel Goncalves, a fellow black belt and coach, to continue to associate with and be employed by them for three years despite the fact Goncalves was arrested for sexually assaulting a minor. Abreu didn’t even bother to speak to the victim for three years until the wider jiu jitsu community was made aware of the assault (thanks to former ADCC organizer Mo Jassim).
And that’s just a quick list off the top of my head, and keeps happening both with notable celebrities, but even in local contexts.
Blind Obedience
Blind obedience to black belts can have serious consequences. It is what enables abuse. It leads to silencing any and all dissent or pushback. It perpetuates harmful ideologies. In recent years, the jiu jitsu community has grappled with scandals involving all of these things, which all come from a culture of unquestioning respect.
When students are taught to obey rather than question, they become vulnerable to manipulation. This mythologizing of the black belt creates a power imbalance that can be exploited by people who are capable of abusing others. This is not a hypothetical situation or a theoretical concern, it is a very real and lived reality for many people not just within jiu jitsu but within our overall society.
This elevated position of moral authority can distort public discourse. When athletes speak on complex issues without expertise, they can spread misinformation and reinforce harmful stereotypes. Which we have seen in real-time over and over again. The result is a community that values charisma over competence, and obedience over critical thinking.
What Are We To Do?
Look, the black belt is a significant symbol. It represents years of hard work, discipline, and mastery. But it is not a license to speak on every topic, nor is it a mark of moral or intellectual superiority. This idolizing of a black belt should be dismantled, and replaced with a more nuanced understanding of expertise and authority.
As the saying goes, true education is about the liberty to think critically and discuss openly—not domination of thought. In martial arts, this means creating spaces where students can feel free to speak freely and challenge authority figures’ views without repercussions. It means recognizing that a black belt is a beginning, not an end.
The jiu jitsu community really should be embracing a culture of critical thinking. Something that the likes of Joe Rogan and company all profess but in practice stifle. This can be done by supporting the separating of technical skill from moral authority. A black belt should be respected for their grappling ability, not their opinions on unrelated topics. You, know, sort of common sense stuff?
At the end of the day, this is a larger issue that exists in our society but is still avoidable with enough thought and care put in. And ultimately, that’s what I personally would like to see more of. I want to see more people criticizing the harmful rhetoric that figureheads in jiu jitsu and beyond are putting out there. We are starting to see that, which is a good sign the community is starting to get better as self policing. So let’s keep that going.