Columbia Martial Arts Academy
Lifetime Supporting Member
- May 27, 2004
- Reaction score
- Not BC, Not DC
I must digress ... we read a lot of this kind of thing over and over and over again.As an observer, with no dog in this fight, I'd like to say that it really appears to me that Richard has gone out of his way to be careful and polite in this discussion.
The same cannot be said of many of the counter posters. Really, the nastiness coming from MY SIDE (the Bujinkan side) is really embarassing. Upping the ante, begging the question, strawman tactics. It's sickening to read.
And I'm just calling it as I see it. I have had plenty of rows online with Richard over the years, and I am perfectly willing to call a spade a spade if I see it. But this aint it, folks.
Rick's main point isn't even controversial: if you want to know what you're capable of doing under pressure, you have to actually put yourself under some kinds of pressure to find out. Your instructor's assessments, your faith, your lineage, your assumptions... NONE of those things can replace actual experience in spontaneous application of what you know in various controlled environments. None of them are perfect, but to throw out 'sparring' or 'alive' training because it isn't perfect is to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
And seriously folks, I don't even do a whole lot of 'alive' type training but I'm not going to deny it's appeal or its strengths. That's just silly.
I realize that I've opened myself up to all manner of nasty insinuations and criticisms which are pretty much the standard for these 'debates', so I shan't be responding. I just hope that my (relatively) objective viewpoint gets through to some of the heads here.
Carry on, then!
Alive training - testing your limits, rolling with people outside your training hall ... of course it's important! It just appears that it's not accepted that it's actually done unless there is videotape of it, or a challenge through a mud-slinging board, or notarized statements to that effect or eye-witnessed. And it gets old, really, to go into an art-specific forum for discussion on the art itself to find the same argument time and again and the accusation that people who don't conform to the above standards are "afraid."
It seems to me that this is not the subforum for this discussion/debate, but as an involved party, I cannot moderate nor administrate this discussion.
Personally I tire of the idea that there are no individual identities if you are part of a group. It's a sweeping statement that is short-sighted, assuming and generally false. It's like I can't be "me" if I say I'm a woman. I don't belong to a group, I'm not a "wo-MAN" I'm ME. I think for myself! Well ... heh heh heh ... guess what? I'm a woman AND I'm me. And fortunately, my thinking parts are higher on my body than the organs which determine my gender. If I'm part of a family, does that mean I lose my identity? No. Do I think I *am* the entity that I am a part of? No. Anyone who does has a serious identity problem. There may be sheeple who follow people blindly ... but to think we all do that and that we're afraid just because someone thinks we do because of the nature of our discussion is just short-sighted and assuming falsehoods.
I refuse to be intimidated by someone else's idea that I fit their cookie-cutter idea of what a TMAist is supposed to be just because I train in a TMA and don't compete. I will not be pushed into doing something I don't care to do because it's someone else's measure of reality. I am more mature than that ... I think for myself, thank you very much.