Never Trust Anyone That Hasn't Been Punched in the Face

[SahBumNimRush]

I have to say I agree with this article on some level.. .

http://takimag.com/article/never_trust_anyone_who_hasnt_been_punched_in_the_face/print#axzz1gXVe9Nm2

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I think it's crap.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

Having read many of your posts in the past Mr. Mattocks, do I detect a bit of sarcasm in that statement?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Having read many of your posts in the past Mr. Mattocks, do I detect a bit of sarcasm in that statement?

I don't think so. I really disliked it. I think it's wrong on so many levels, I have trouble even knowing where to start.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

While I don't think you should thrust yourself into "life or death" situations to make yourself a better person, I find it hard to trust anyone that is so afraid of physical confrontation, "that he's willing to hand his pants over in the street."

​

 

[WC_lun]

I couldn't make through the entire article. There was so much that was just garbage, that I didn't even get to any face punching comments.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

I don't think so. I really disliked it. I think it's wrong on so many levels, I have trouble even knowing where to start.

Fair enough.

While I would have used a different narrative if I had wrote it, there are things that seem to ring true. "Lack of contact with objective reality," for instance.

Could this, in fact, be a contributing factor to many of the senseless, and dare I say it, cowardly violence these days?



"Men who have been in fights know that, on some level, words are just words: At some point, words must be backed up by deeds."


While, I don't think that barbaric acts of violence are necessarily the only way to gain this experience, I believe that some sort of physical challenge does help. How do you know you can back up your words by deeds, if you've never had to on some level before?

​

 

[SahBumNimRush]

While I agree the authors choice of words is nothing short of inflammatory, I still think there merit in the underlying message.


"I think there is a certain worldview that comes from violent experience. It’s something like…manhood. You don’t have to be the world’s greatest badass to be a man, but you have to be willing to throw down when the time is right."

​

While there has to be a first time for everything, there is confidence to be had with experience.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

While I don't think you should thrust yourself into "life or death" situations to make yourself a better person, I find it hard to trust anyone that is so afraid of physical confrontation, "that he's willing to hand his pants over in the street."

I am not aware of the particular situation described. However, self-defense puts life ahead of pants. Macho ******** puts pants ahead of life.

I've been in a couple fights. The take-away? Try to avoid them. If you have to fight, fight, and fight to win. But 99% of all fights are avoidable if you don't wear your testicles like a badge of honor.

What that means applied to world economics, I have no idea. I don't think the author does either. Like I said, it's crap from start to finish, in my opinion. Complete, blithering idiocy, chest-beating nonsense. Anybody who has ever fought for their life knows something he doesn't. Life is what matters. Honor can suck my left whatever.

 

[Steve]

I don't like being punched. I grapple specifically so that I can avoid it!

 

[SahBumNimRush]

I am not aware of the particular situation described. However, self-defense puts life ahead of pants. Macho ******** puts pants ahead of life.

I've been in a couple fights. The take-away? Try to avoid them. If you have to fight, fight, and fight to win. But 99% of all fights are avoidable if you don't wear your testicles like a badge of honor.

What that means applied to world economics, I have no idea. I don't think the author does either. Like I said, it's crap from start to finish, in my opinion. Complete, blithering idiocy, chest-beating nonsense. Anybody who has ever fought for their life knows something he doesn't. Life is what matters. Honor can suck my left whatever.

I agree 100% with avoiding unnecessary fights, and I suppose it is difficult for me to agree with this and still defend my stance.

What I take away from this is that if you've never stood up for yourself, it's hard to be trustworthy. Whether that equates to being physically bullied because you're an easy target (if the bullies know you never stand up for yourself) or being intimidated and not having the self-confidence to stand your position.

I believe there are safer and more effective ways to achieve this experience and confidence than "baseball bat duels" or "knife fights" (which are asinine ideas), I think that there is something to be said by "testing your mettle."

 

[Steve]

In all seriousness, this article falls short in a couple of places, but I agree with what I believe is the central theme. That is essentially the distinction referred to by Ghandi in the quote I've had in my signature for several months.

The quote below goes on to say, "I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence....I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour."

He also said, "No matter how weak a person is in body, if it is a shame to flee, he will stand his ground and die at his post. This would be nonviolence and bravery. No matter how weak he is, he will use what strength he has in inflicting injury on his opponent, and die in the attempt. This is bravery, but not nonviolence. If, when his duty is to face danger, he flees, it is cowardice. In the first case, the man will have love or charity in him. In the second and third cases, there would be a dislike or distrust and fear."

The article isn't about picking fights. It was, to me, simply trying to articulate that without the willingness to fight, there isn't actually a choice being made. Where there isn't a capacity for violence, we're simply being cowards. Gandhi believed that violent men can hope to become non-violent, but a coward will always act from fear.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

Men who have been tested"...

There is not much of a "test" anymore.There is no rite of passage to be a man, no ritual that leaves a mark and shows an effort was made to attain it. Self worth used to come from accomplishing something, yet, these days it seems that self-worth comes from merely existing.

When everybody gets a trophy.. . everyone loses.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

In all seriousness, this article falls short in a couple of places, but I agree with what I believe is the central theme. That is essentially the distinction referred to by Ghandi in the quote I've had in my signature for several months.

The quote below goes on to say, "I do believe that, where there is only a choice between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence....I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honour than that she should, in a cowardly manner, become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonour."

He also said, "No matter how weak a person is in body, if it is a shame to flee, he will stand his ground and die at his post. This would be nonviolence and bravery. No matter how weak he is, he will use what strength he has in inflicting injury on his opponent, and die in the attempt. This is bravery, but not nonviolence. If, when his duty is to face danger, he flees, it is cowardice. In the first case, the man will have love or charity in him. In the second and third cases, there would be a dislike or distrust and fear."

The article isn't about picking fights. It was, to me, simply trying to articulate that without the willingness to fight, there isn't actually a choice being made. Where there isn't a capacity for violence, we're simply being cowards. Gandhi believed that violent men can hope to become non-violent, but a coward will always act from fear.

Couldn't find the "Thank You" button, so here it is: Thank you, haha!

Whether this was the author's intent, this was the same theme I took away from the article.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

If, when his duty is to face danger, he flees, it is cowardice.

Yes. When it is his duty. Being called out on the street, or having one's momma insulted, does not imply a duty.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Men who have been tested"...

There is not much of a "test" anymore.There is no rite of passage to be a man, no ritual that leaves a mark and shows an effort was made to attain it. Self worth used to come from accomplishing something, yet, these days it seems that self-worth comes from merely existing.

When everybody gets a trophy.. . everyone loses.

I'm a US Marine. Don't have to prove a thing, to anyone, ever again. And what I had to prove, I only had to prove to myself. My self-worth does indeed come from my accomplishments, but that is internal. The world did not test me, I tested me. And the world can take a flying leap if they have a problem with me. I never had to prove anything to the tribe.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

Yes. When it is his duty. Being called out on the street, or having one's momma insulted, does not imply a duty.

Being called out or a "Yo Mamma" insult is unquestionably not worth it. But a broader topic, what about the rise in incident of child suicide as a result of bullying? I'm not suggesting that physical violence is the appropriate solution, but if the person was too scared to stand up for themselves it certainly devalues their own self worth.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

I'm a US Marine. Don't have to prove a thing, to anyone, ever again. And what I had to prove, I only had to prove to myself. My self-worth does indeed come from my accomplishments, but that is internal. The world did not test me, I tested me. And the world can take a flying leap if they have a problem with me. I never had to prove anything to the tribe.

That is very well put Bill, but the point is you were tested. I think everyone needs to be, and if you aren't going to test yourself, someone who cares about you should somehow encourage it.

 

[SahBumNimRush]

That's the great thing about martial arts. It forces you to test yourself, you aren't judged by the abilities of others. You are judged by your potential and how much you are realizing it. You gain self-confidence, self-discipline, self-control, and self-esteem. These four character attributes enable you to best choose when the appropriate time is to act on physical self-defense and have the mental fortitude to do so.

 

[Steve]

Yes. When it is his duty. Being called out on the street, or having one's momma insulted, does not imply a duty.

And often, the truth of the situation is known only to the person in question. If I'm called out on the street and avoid confrontation out of fear, I'm a coward.

The gist of what I'm getting at is that a person who has the capacity and will to do what must be done will avoid violence when possible and act with violence when necessary. Or, since I'm in the mood to use more quotes, "If somebody gets in your face and calls you a ***, I want you to be nice. Ask him to walk. Be nice. If he won't walk, walk him. But be nice. If you can't walk him, one of the others will help you, and you'll both be nice. I want you to remember that it's a job. It's nothing personal. I want you to be nice until it's time to not be nice." Dalton from Road House