falseness in training

[JR 137]

Just because I love how awful this is. Does this constitute as immoral or just people having pointless fun.

At about :26 in does the teacher say “Come on, you’re being kind” or “...you’re being timed.” I laughed quite a bit when I first heard it. Then I went back looking for it to quote it and I’m thinking maybe she said timed instead of kind now.

Being kind? I guess no one paid attention and went harder. Or maybe they did Great theatrical performance though. And they’re getting some exercise and good old bonding in, so they’ve got that going for them, which is nice.

 

[dvcochran]

Just because I love how awful this is. Does this constitute as immoral or just people having pointless fun.

I like the premise but that is just sad, unrealistic, and in great danger of false pretense. The smiling and laughing might be ok in moderation but, wow.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

It depends what you are saying you do. Or what you are implying you do.

Using terms like self defense are on there own meaningless. There is no standard and there is no way of discerning what constitutes effective self defense methods.

So self defense can mean training for no purpose other than the fun of getting out there and meeting people.

So people using those terms should be clear about whether they are an evidence based training program or not.

That's reasonable. I'd expect someone teaching with a self-defense purpose to be focused on effective fighting technique. There will be areas outside of ring application they'll often get into that can't be evidence-based (no controlled arena to test them in), but there should be a foundation of technique and approach that's based on what we can test.

But to back up a bit to my previous post (replying to your previous post), the whole diet shake thing got me thinking. The training for fun in MA is like drinking a shake. Doesn't matter if it's diet or not, if you're enjoying it and that enjoyment is your purpose. But if you're drinking a shake for weight loss reasons, that shake should somehow help with weight loss. Same would go if you're drinking that shake to help with muscle gain, etc. If there's a stated purpose, something involved should aid with that stated purpose.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Just because I love how awful this is. Does this constitute as immoral or just people having pointless fun.

Looks like sloppy testing to me (probably of sloppy training, but I haven't seen their training). I don't know about immoral, but there's nothing there I like from a SD perspective. If they took the SD out of the title, and said it was for fun and fitness, I'd still think it's sloppy, but would just shrug at it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

At about :26 in does the teacher say “Come on, you’re being kind” or “...you’re being timed.” I laughed quite a bit when I first heard it. Then I went back looking for it to quote it and I’m thinking maybe she said timed instead of kind now.

Being kind? I guess no one paid attention and went harder. Or maybe they did Great theatrical performance though. And they’re getting some exercise and good old bonding in, so they’ve got that going for them, which is nice.

I thought it was "kind", too. I expected someone to throw a significant punch or tackle or something after that.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I like the premise but that is just sad, unrealistic, and in great danger of false pretense. The smiling and laughing might be ok in moderation but, wow.

Yeah, this is the kind of thing that leads people to think they're becoming invincible. Nobody (the defenders) was losing, regardless of the situation.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Just because I love how awful this is. Does this constitute as immoral or just people having pointless fun.

Depends. If they're doing a parody or F-ing around, then fun. If they think even slightly that they're learning to defend themself, I would consider that immoral.

 

[drop bear]

That's reasonable. I'd expect someone teaching with a self-defense purpose to be focused on effective fighting technique. There will be areas outside of ring application they'll often get into that can't be evidence-based (no controlled arena to test them in), but there should be a foundation of technique and approach that's based on what we can test.

But to back up a bit to my previous post (replying to your previous post), the whole diet shake thing got me thinking. The training for fun in MA is like drinking a shake. Doesn't matter if it's diet or not, if you're enjoying it and that enjoyment is your purpose. But if you're drinking a shake for weight loss reasons, that shake should somehow help with weight loss. Same would go if you're drinking that shake to help with muscle gain, etc. If there's a stated purpose, something involved should aid with that stated purpose.

Yeah. So the act of drinking a diet shake comes with the implication of some sort of weight loss.

Unlike martial arts?

 

[drop bear]

I like the premise but that is just sad, unrealistic, and in great danger of false pretense. The smiling and laughing might be ok in moderation but, wow.

Smiling and laughing is fine. I smile and laugh. But I will also sit on you until you get me off.

 

[JR 137]

Smiling and laughing is fine. I smile and laugh. But I will also sit on you until you get me off.

I like to smile when I get hit pretty hard. Usually laugh too.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Yeah. So the act of drinking a diet shake comes with the implication of some sort of weight loss.

Unlike martial arts?

Again, it comes down to purpose. If someone is teaching MA for fun, and people are learning it for fun, there's no reason that is a diet shake. Sounds like a milk shake, to me. And as long as nobody is being told it's diet, there's no reason it should be.

 

[dvcochran]

Again, it comes down to purpose. If someone is teaching MA for fun, and people are learning it for fun, there's no reason that is a diet shake. Sounds like a milk shake, to me. And as long as nobody is being told it's diet, there's no reason it should be.

Somewhere in the argument I hear unintended consequences. In this case, good ones such as losing weight or learning a skill.

 

[drop bear]

Again, it comes down to purpose. If someone is teaching MA for fun, and people are learning it for fun, there's no reason that is a diet shake. Sounds like a milk shake, to me. And as long as nobody is being told it's diet, there's no reason it should be.

A milk shake is a diet shake. Just more fun.

I mean it think it depends on the individual when it comes to weight loss not the shake.

 

[dvcochran]

A milk shake is a diet shake. Just more fun.

Like the song says, "make your milk shake".

 

[drop bear]

Like the song says, "make your milk shake".

It does bring all the boys to the yard.

The thing is there needs to be diet shakes that cater to those people who still want to consume high levels of sugar and fat.

We really can't judge these people as they are providing a service that the fitness industry tends to overlook.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Somewhere in the argument I hear unintended consequences. In this case, good ones such as losing weight or learning a skill.

Interesting. What do you see as unintended within the discussion?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

A milk shake is a diet shake. Just more fun.

I mean it think it depends on the individual when it comes to weight loss not the shake.

I think we're wandering farther and farther afield.

Anyway, I think you're making a good point. It just doesn't apply where the purpose is different.

 

[Steve]

That's reasonable. I'd expect someone teaching with a self-defense purpose to be focused on effective fighting technique. There will be areas outside of ring application they'll often get into that can't be evidence-based (no controlled arena to test them in), but there should be a foundation of technique and approach that's based on what we can test.

But to back up a bit to my previous post (replying to your previous post), the whole diet shake thing got me thinking. The training for fun in MA is like drinking a shake. Doesn't matter if it's diet or not, if you're enjoying it and that enjoyment is your purpose. But if you're drinking a shake for weight loss reasons, that shake should somehow help with weight loss. Same would go if you're drinking that shake to help with muscle gain, etc. If there's a stated purpose, something involved should aid with that stated purpose.

you use the term "should" and "shouldn't " a lot for a guy who has problems with using should as a blanket statement.

For something claiming to promote weight loss, I agree. The issue I have is with the blanket statement of "should". If someone wants to train for the fun of the movement, who in the world has the right to say they shouldn't? And if someone wants to teach those folks in a way that suits their needs, why does that become immoral?

 

[dvcochran]

Interesting. What do you see as unintended within the discussion?

Like I said in the same post, ones such as losing weight or learning a skill.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

you use the term "should" and "shouldn't " a lot for a guy who has problems with using should as a blanket statement.

Do I? I'll have to watch for that and see if I'm not communicating what I mean. Thanks.