Thread: Defending Yourself

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

I think anyone who enjoys boxing is a primitive SOB.
[/b]

"........"

*resists the urge and walks out, quietly*

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Don't quit your day job.

The "food" in your painting is somewhat repulsive; more like excrement of some sort. Otherwise not too bad! And a good subject: altho of course I'm against factory-farmed hamburger and I think anyone who enjoys boxing is a primitive SOB, I am strangely fond of George Foreman.[/b]

A bow an arrow is a rather primitive weapon, no?

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

"........"

*resists the urge and walks out, quietly*
[/b]

No...go ahead...I can take it..

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

[color=#003333]A bow an arrow is a rather primitive weapon, no?
[/b]

Yes you are correct sir. My weapon of choice is a nine.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

No...go ahead...I can take it..
[/b]

Well, if you're going to throw the first punch, like you just did, you might as well put something behind it, worth defending against.

So....

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

I think anyone who enjoys boxing is a primitive SOB[/b]

How do you figure?

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

How do you figure?
[/b]

I don't think that watching two people beat each other up is something that civilized people should do. It's just part of the progress of the human race. We don't watch gladiators fight to the death, do we? Why not? Would you enjoy that? A lot of people probably would, but I think people should try to rise above watching other people get hurt as entertainment. Especially when the "entertainers" may not have a lot of other options in their life and so altho they are not forced to do it, they may feel compelled. It is their right to trade their health for money if they want, like a prostitute--I just don't think people should encourage them to do it. It's not just a sport; there is a difference between competing to be the fastest or whatever and seeing who can hurt the other person the most. I am amazed that educated and/or intelligent people watch this stuff. When I see a couple guys fighting like animals and people cheering them on, it is so weird, I feel like a anthropologist in some primitive culture watching a sacrifice or something.

P.S. You don't see many rich guys doing it getting brain damage, mostly poor guys with the rich people betting on them.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

I don't think that watching two people beat each other up is something that civilized people should do. It's just part of the progress of the human race. We don't watch gladiators fight to the death, do we? Why not? Would you enjoy that? A lot of people probably would, but I think people should try to rise above watching other people get hurt as entertainment. Especially when the "entertainers" may not have a lot of other options in their life and so altho they are not forced to do it, they may feel compelled. It is their right to trade their health for money if they want, like a prostitute--I just don't think people should encourage them to do it. It's not just a sport; there is a difference between competing to be the fastest or whatever and seeing who can hurt the other person the most. I am amazed that educated and/or intelligent people watch this stuff. When I see a couple guys fighting like animals and people cheering them on, it is so weird, I feel like a anthropologist in some primitive culture watching a sacrifice or something.

P.S. You don't see many rich guys doing it getting brain damage, mostly poor guys with the rich people betting on them.
[/b]

Ok. That's where I figured you were going with this. I just wanted to be sure, before I made any assumptions.

First off, keep this in mind: Pain is relative.
Many atheletes put themselves through intense pain, to stake their claim. Doesn't matter if you're an olympic runner, a mixed martial artist, stuntman or body builder. If you get passed thinking about "getting hurt" as the objectively terrible thing that most of us feel it is, the truth is that some of us are able to take it a lot better than others.
That said, putting two professional boxers in the ring together is a lot different than, both, gladiators fighting to the death, and two animals going at it, in a pit. Looking passed the "OMG someone's getting hurt" factor (which the boxers are obviously much more comfortable with than many of the spectators) then boxing and professional martial arts are nothing but fast-paced, full-contact chess matches. There is a lot of skill and experience that goes into professional boxing matches. So much so that, once you've taken this into account, that's all you see, when two fighters are going at it, in the ring. The games are regulated so that the fighters are checked on as often as possible. If someone (that has been practically bred to take this level of what most of us would consider "punishment") feels that he is unable to continue, he can stop at any time. If an injury looks, from a third party, too bad to let the match continue, it is stopped. Professional boxing is not some backyard "extreme sport" where two guys that know jack shit about technique, conditioning, safety or respect just get let loose on each other for X amount of time. If you feel this way, then you're definitely misguided.

You don't honestly think that everyone who boxes (or gets into mixed martial arts tournaments) does it soley for the money, do you? (if they just wanted to get paid, they could just go into "professional wrestling" where the fights are scripted and no one really risks getting hurt.) You think that a man's (or woman's, actually) reasons for getting into something like professional boxing or martial arts means that they have "no other options" in life? Often times it is a hobby. It is an interest, an artform to many (hense the relation to the term "martial art"). The people that decide to start boxing often have just as many other options in life as the people who decide to work desk jobs. It's simply that they find something they love and stick with it, which turns them into 'nothing but fighters' - same as a person who decides to become 'nothing but a guitarist,' or 'nothing but a graphic artist.'

Boxing is not about "go in there and do whatever you can to beat the other guy's brains in." It's about two men trained at the same game, conditioned to take (usually temporary) physical damage as part of the territory, how to defend oneself, how to play the offensive, and how to compete (in what many of us have trouble seeing as tolerable punishment) with both dignity and respect.

Physically extreme? Sure. Primitive? Only if you're seeing things superficially.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

No...go ahead...I can take it..
Yes you are correct sir. My weapon of choice is a nine.[/b]

You go girl!! Although a nine is a bit weak IMO. I prefer a 40 for a hand gun but preferably over both a shotgun.
I say we begin a new post here.

Oneironaut.
I think the over all view of boxing has went down hill unfortunately. There are not too many boxers who one would idle. They are all punch dumb., Tyson (speak for himself) - Holyfield - listen to the guy. Lewis, Lennox that is, arrogant.
Now the ultimate fighting gets a whole range of techniques but is too bloody for most females.

I think men generally view aggression very differently.

Moonbeam,
My wife felt uncomfortable having a gun ready for self defense. Understandably because she had not grown up around them.
If you familiarize yourself and are fluent with a firearm there is nothing to be scared off.

having children in the house requires a different outlook to me though.

Originally Posted by Howetzer

You go girl!! Although a nine is a bit weak IMO. I prefer a 40 for a hand gun but preferably over both a shotgun.
I say we begin a new post here.
[/b]

OK the easy one first: I like my nine because it holds 15 rounds, as opposed to what, 10? in a 40. I concur that the 12 guage is the best in some situations. But under my pillow I have a .357--it will never jam, it will work perfectly even if I don't shoot it for years, I don't have to think to use it when I'm sleeping, and it won't shoot me accidentally.

Originally Posted by Howetzer

Oneironaut.
having children in the house requires a different outlook to me though.
[/b]

Yes definitely true; altho a swimming pool is more dangerous than a gun.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

That said, putting two professional boxers in the ring together is a lot different than, both, gladiators fighting to the death, and two animals going at it, in a pit.

Physically extreme? Sure. Primitive? Only if you're seeing things superficially.
[/b]

I hear what your saying about the sporting side of it. I've had this discussion before and it makes me uncomfortable because I don't want to compare this to animals fighting and say they should be stopped. I just don't think most people look at it the way of an artform, maybe I've been around the wrong people and I admit I don't know much about boxing or really any sports, but to me it's just an extension of the gladiators and the pain of others as entertainment. It seems to me that the boxers are taken advantage of.

I know this is just a matter of opinion and I don't think boxing should be outlawed or anything. I don't think ALL people who watch boxing (just some of them) are brutes who woud just as soon see a dog or a knife fight. It is probably something so much a part of human nature that it will always happen and is better kept in a ring and controlled.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

OK the easy one first: I like my nine because it holds 15 rounds, as opposed to what, 10? in a 40. I concur that the 12 guage is the best in some situations. But under my pillow I have a .357--it will never jam, it will work perfectly even if I don't shoot it for years, I don't have to think to use it when I'm sleeping, and it won't shoot me accidentally.
Yes definitely true; altho a swimming pool is more dangerous than a gun.[/b]

Well you could buy high cap magazines. 13 opposed 15 and pricey.

I assume you have a revolver? - easy, foolproof, safe.

I purchased night sites for my 40 HK. Tritium. It is awesome. The sites will glow indefintely. You can see it in the darkness to locate the firearm, then you can easily align the front and rear site to align your target.

Originally Posted by Howetzer

I assume you have a revolver? - easy, foolproof, safe.[/b]

Well yea the .357 is a revolver. I was always paranoid of automatics because I thought it would probably jam at the crucial moment. But then I got the Beretta and actually it works really well, but I still wouldn't want to give up the reliability of a revolver in some situations. I also have a .38 special S&W Airlite (revolver) that weighs 7 oz, holds 5 rounds, and can fit in my pocket (if I'm wearing loose pants). It shoots +P rounds and is not fun to shoot--it kills your hand (especially when it's cold out. It's kind of funny to watch people shoot it; they're like "Ow! Ow!" every time because its so tiny yet powerful.) I'd have to shoot an automatic like weekly to feel as comfortable with it as the revolvers; I wish I had the time. Probably a 40 caliber is better than a nine mm but I'm sort of attached to mine (it's a military Beretta Desert Storm edition); it's just for fun anyway (til the bad times or the zombies come! Then we break out the big guns.)

Originally Posted by Howetzer

I purchased night sites for my 40 HK. Tritium. It is awesome. The sites will glow indefintely. You can see it in the darkness to locate the firearm, then you can easily align the front and rear site to align your target.
[/b]

That's cool. I painted the front sight on my .357 with glow-in-the-dark paint. It helps a little. If I ever had to use that at night I would be counting on not having to aim, I think. My BF has laser sights on a little .22 automatic he's got just for fun but I don't have anything with a laser yet.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Don't quit your day job.

The "food" in your painting is somewhat repulsive; more like excrement of some sort. Otherwise not too bad! And a good subject: altho of course I'm against factory-farmed hamburger and I think anyone who enjoys boxing is a primitive SOB, I am strangely fond of George Foreman.
[/b]

George foreman ROCKS.

Also, that reply was the reply to my eye-bleeding-beautiful piece of art, the already famous 'Portrait of the Messiah of grilling', George foreman. But really, I don't get the context of the initial post. :0

Originally Posted by Neruo

George foreman ROCKS.

Also, that reply was the reply to my eye-bleeding-beautiful piece of art, the already famous 'Portrait of the Messiah of grilling', George foreman. But really, I don't get the context of the initial post. :0
[/b]

Yes he does. I heard something about him once that was so sad about his childhood, about him being really hungry, and how he wanted to help people eat, so he invented the Grill. I haven't used mine as much lately as I used to, but I wore out like three of them before I got more into slow-cooking with the crock pot.

I think Howetzer moved this because we got off the topic of your inspired artwork and into weapons and boxing, which I'm sure is what you really had in mind. It makes it look like I started a weird random thread.

I like boxing, not to hurt, but to get me in shape. I use my punching bag a lot, and box with friends sometimes. I probably would box competitavely though.

If it's a matter of defending myself, I will go to any length. If I were to get jumped on the street, I'm obviously not going to just box, I'll do any form of fighting to survive.

Self Defense? When it comes to fighting, I do both Karate and Jeet Kune Do, but I focus on the Jeet Kune Do. Weapons aren't my idea of self defense, though I will use them if needed.

I think in many cases, weapons tend to make people overconfident. I have fought on more occasions then one, against someone who was armed, while I was unarmed and the person was often of little challenge.

Anyway, when it comes down to it, I really enjoy just sparring with others. Jeet Kune Do has to be my favourite art.

Boxing has had its problems, to say the least. With the large amounts of money involved and matters of pride, I doubt it will ever be completely free from corruption. However, on the face of things, it's still a regulated professional sport with highly trained athletes.

Ideally, boxers must have discipline, physical courage, heart, exceptional conditioning, talent, good sportsmanship, and a deep desire to win. In my culture, these are all good and admirable qualities. It's great to see things come together. There's the excitement of seeing how the boxers with different reaches and fighting styles perform against each other, and how they adjust their strategies, etc. There's the excitement of seeing how the match progresses and come-backs that the fighters make. Obviously unequally matched fighters and unfair advantages make for a boring fight.

That's why I enjoy watching it...plus seeing those cut physiques in short pants So, yes, there is something basic about it. Sports are an outlet for that, more so for men in US culture than for women, but many women (self included) enjoy watching men compete against otheres and test themselves. Why? For social status? For breeding privileges? Who knows lol

The difference in my mind between human and animal fighting is that profession human athletes, including boxers, aren't forced into competition. They have a choice whether to compete or not. Most of them understand that suffering is going to be involved in their activities...the pain of training, the pain of self-denial and discipline, the pain of performance and recovering from any injuries. My guess is that most athletes would say that it's worth the reward they get from competing and winning: pride, bragging rights, admiration, and, of course, a paycheck. The animals used in c0ck and dog fighting have no choice at all. The only ones benefiting from their pain and suffering are the humans who put them into that cruel situation.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

I know this is just a matter of opinion and I don't think boxing should be outlawed or anything. I don't think ALL people who watch boxing (just some of them) are brutes who woud just as soon see a dog or a knife fight. It is probably something so much a part of human nature that it will always happen and is better kept in a ring and controlled.
[/b]

Well I don't disagree with too much of this. Just as long as you realize that there is a civil, tactical and even respectable side to boxing. Sure, not everyone sees it this way, even many of those that love the sport, but please don't try to group all of us together.

And many fighters go into fighting for themselves - not as entertainers. It just happens that, as a byproduct, people are entertained by what they do, and they pay good money for it.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

Oneironaut.
I think the over all view of boxing has went down hill unfortunately. There are not too many boxers who one would idle. They are all punch dumb., Tyson (speak for himself) - Holyfield - listen to the guy. Lewis, Lennox that is, arrogant.
Now the ultimate fighting gets a whole range of techniques but is too bloody for most females.

I think men generally view aggression very differently.

[/b]

Such is the way of those who choose to fight for a living. The question is, is sacrificing being punch-dumb for the love of your sport, objectively, bad? If you're going to choose to do nothing but fight, it's obvious that you aren't going to end up as the sharpest crayon in the box, but who's to tell you you're wrong for doing so? Hell, many of the people who are the sharpest crayons in the box use their knowledge for nothing but helping themselves, so who is a less likely candidate for idolization? I see what you're saying, though, so I'm not necessarily arguing your point - I do understand that it's factors like this that make many people look down on fighters. I mean, who's going to idolize a fighter, other than someone that already carries a level of respect for what it takes to be a good fighter? It's definitely not for everyone.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Well I don't disagree with too much of this. Just as long as you realize that there is a civil, tactical and even respectable side to boxing. Sure, not everyone sees it this way, even many of those that love the sport, but please don't try to group all of us together.
[/b]

WEll...I guess so..if you say so. I feel somewhat convinced right at the moment, but I don't know if it will last. I never really looked at it like other martial arts, which I can't say I ever felt were just a display to satisfy a repulsive urge in people to see brutality. Mostly the permanant brain injuries are what bothered me I guess.

WEll remind me of this if I ever start going off on boxing again. I may have some brain cell loss myself causing memory problems.

Every one has the right to protect themselves from danger through self defense. How ever fighting through sport like boxing, well thats just plain stupid to me. All it shows is some one is more stronger then some one else, and while it shows this you have 2 guys practically killing each other.

I once saw an interview with one of the boxers after the fight and he couldn't put a sentence together, he was smacked that badly. Its not healthy either, think of the physical damage that is caused to the brain and other body parts.

Originally Posted by Moonbeam

WEll remind me of this if I ever start going off on boxing again. I may have some brain cell loss myself causing memory problems.
[/b]

Haha. Don't worry. I got yo back!

Does no one else practice an (Martial)art?

Originally Posted by ExoByte

Does no one else practice an (Martial)art?
[/b]

All I have is a little (2 1/2 - 3 years) Karate training, as a kid. As soon as I get the time (and extra money) to go further, I'd like to get some more martial arts under my belt. I'm thinking of starting with kickboxing, then moving on to Kung-Fu and perhaps Judo. The goal, of course, to be able to incorporate them all in a personal, comprehensive style, a la Jeet Kun Do.

Originally Posted by ExoByte

Does no one else practice an (Martial)art?
[/b]

Krav Maga