Which art is best of 'da streets'

Discussion in 'General Martial Arts Discussion' started by Dead_pool, Jul 5, 2015.

  1. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Firstly, thanks Ben and Bassai, for discussing things like grown-ups :).

    I've answered your questions on this at some length before Simon. If it meant so little to you the first time that you forgot it ever happened, I'm not going to repeat myself.

    It's fine that you feel the need to challenge me on everything, but it would be nice if you also added something constructive to the discussion as well. You seem to be getting your knickers in a twist about me being critical of others' training, well you can relax: I'm not being critical, I'm just asking questions about it and asking its proponents if they think it may be improved. Standard operating procedures are a good thing, don't you think? Doesn't training improve performance?
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2015
  2. greg1075

    greg1075 Valued Member

    49 pages in and I still don't know what art is best for da street.

    Disappointing :(
     
  3. icefield

    icefield Valued Member

    Honestly do you care though? :)
    That's what im suprised about, 49 pages and i suspect about three posters on the entire thread have had a physical confrontation in the last year, and i suspect those people had it through work

    Does it really matter that much??
     
  4. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Becoming very wealthy and influential is the best art for da street.

    On the rare occassions you have to go on the street, you have highly trained armed guards to worry about it. Sometimes whole police departments, or even the secret service, if you're that good at it.

    All you have to worry about is looking fabulous :)
     
  5. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    It's interesting that there's a discussion at the moment about a Rodney King article. I read an article by him many years ago that really made me think.
    It suggested that one of the key reasons for studying martial arts was exploration of warrior identity.
    We live in a culture that raises us to believe in certain things as being manly and attributes positive judgements to many "warrior" behaviours, yet we have few outlets to develop or express these behaviours.
    Perhaps the importance to people of self defence training isn't the need to defend yourself, but the knowledge/belief that you are able to defend yourself in a world that is increasingly emotionally and fiscally unstable (if ironically physically safer).
     
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2015
  6. greg1075

    greg1075 Valued Member

    No. Especially since I was joking...
























    ...everyone knows ninjutsu is best for da street.






















    That was a joke too.























    Or was it? :vanish:
     
  7. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    You're right that it's been over a year that I've had a physical altercation, but I think it might just be within the year that I've had someone threaten to stab me. That comes under the umbrella of "soft skills", and is a potential catalyst for a physical altercation, right?

    More importantly, some of my students have had physical altercations, and potential ones, within the last year. That really does matter to me. Not all through work either, but you're right that working in certain sectors does increase your chances of having to use your training by a large factor.

    Now, if someone really didn't like MA or SD training, they found it boring, or just felt they needed it because it might fix their confidence problems. If they just didn't enjoy coming to classes - then I would say it is a waste of time. Most people with half-developed social skills can go through life without being in danger.

    But, if it is an activity people enjoy, and it saves their bacon once or twice, isn't that a win-win?
     
  8. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    I'll be honest; that comes across as a very immature concept of masculinity to me. But we do live in the age of the eternal child, so maybe it is an issue.

    If someone felt like that, I would suggest they need more than SD training to heal their discontent.
     
  9. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    I haven't really described a concept of masculinity :confused:
    Also reasoned ideas are different to biological drives and culturalised subconscious expectations.
     
  10. greg1075

    greg1075 Valued Member

    Aaaaand...cue the gender debate.
     
  11. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Apologies, I must have misinterpreted you.

    Regardless of gender roles then, even though everybody has the capacity for violence I do not think that many people at all have some kind of innate warrior trying to get out. I believe we are, generally, more sociable creatures than that.
     
  12. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    It's not about violence, it's about self reliance and "alpha-ness" for want of a better term.
     
  13. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    I'm confused by the use of the term "warrior" in relation to that. What does it have to do with war?

    I agree that self-reliance can help to develop a healthy psyche, but how much does fighting fit into that?

    Not convinced about "alpha-ness", whatever that means... scaring away others with displays of violence and mating with their partner? :confused:
     
  14. Hannibal

    Hannibal Cry HAVOC and let slip the Dogs of War!!! Supporter

    You mean Thursday?
     
  15. Ben Gash CLF

    Ben Gash CLF Valued Member

    That's because you're abstracting the terms away from the context of the discussion. We're talking about self defence and martial arts, and so therefore it's the feeling that you're self reliant for your own security. It's also about freedom from fear of conflict.
     
  16. David Harrison

    David Harrison MAPper without portfolio

    Freedom from fear of conflict is something I can get behind.

    But I've found people to be very different in their needs for a sense of security. Some very hard people don't fear violence, but are still hugely insecure. They need something very different to a person who continuously feels like they are a victim. Ultimately, a MA or SD class is not where those issues will be sorted out, even if some of those issues may be highlighted there, IMHO.

    I still find the use of the term "warrior" very strange and off-putting in that context though.
     
  17. Matt F

    Matt F Valued Member

    Im glad you or anyone gets something out of them. If its right for you, thats how it should be. My main point has been that its individual, no rules at all. People who dont do this stuff are not incapable or missunderstood about SD.
    People can train to fight and still totaly understand all the soft skills and aspects of SD.

    Your probably right about a skewed idea of SIM days.
    Though clips do actualy show a scenario of a spilt pint. Im sure I have seen it in there. Along with other similar scenarios.
    I could ask why not just have the shouting, facing agressive part seperate from the physical, if your not concerned with the physical?
    I said earlier...theres no indication on clips about what the actual point is.
    You simply can not blame me for saying, as a layman, that it looks like you pad up....you shout...then it kicks off. Im sorry if theres more to it...thats simply what it looks like.
    Concerning the feelings of confontation...it seems totaly lost that having a heavy spar, or going into a heavy drill.. or having a full contact competative fight could bring about similar feelings. It could be argued thats its different, of course....but why dismiss those feelings as less than what might be felt in a SIM day? (There is an argument for some feelings being worse for a fight than a SIM day)
    Maybe because a person doesnt want to be there and the fighter has choosen?
    Possibly.. but he could be choosing it to progress and get better and facing the things just as a person entering a SIM day does.
    There could be many reasons.
    I said about breaking rules in SIM days....there are rules for safety. Just like learning to fight or fighting.
    Why are they held against them when scenarios have rules too?
    It will be said its different..but is it realy?
    If I cant take off a piece of equipment to use as a weapon, like I could for real, in a SIM day does that mean I can argue its not as realistic?
    What if I cant take a person seriouse as I know its not real, is it not realistic?
    A guy trying to knock you out is pretty real.

    Like you say things, are by no means perfect in SIM days just as they are not when learning to fight for fundamanetal movement during an emergency, but some of us know that is the closest, safer way .

    Concerning safety.Its strange to say safe as there needs to be an element of unsafety to be realistic and learn. But thats built up untill a person does feel kind of safe going high contact with few pads in drills or spars...but if they make a mistake the threat is there. Buts thats learning and thats bulit up. So its not safe but it is safer. What I mean is two guys training 10 years can go at each other, relatively safely, but with enough risk to learn. If a novice went in with the 10 year guy at there level, he would not be safe. So he has to learn and will learn in relative safetly, and aim to be safe against those guys. I dont see a better approach to that on a physical level , than learning to fight.
     

Share This Page