What do you call an art that integrates striking and grappling?

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
19,229
Reaction score
4,742
Location
Covington, WA
Why in the world would you think I am angry? That is just weird.
Your inferences are what I reacted in your original post. Dropping hints of meaning that can leave an bad impression on people.
I'm glad to hear you aren't angry. Take care.
 

isshinryuronin

Master Black Belt
Joined
Feb 28, 2019
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
970
Location
Las Vegas
Should you think about whether the words you use are insulting to someone else? Maybe and maybe not.
If we stopped to think before considering everyone's twisting/re-imagining of generally accepted definitions, there would be little time left over for real communication. I understand your sensitivity for others feelings; that's a good thing. People have a right not to be slandered. But like all things, it can be overdone. I was taught no one can make you feel small but yourself. It's up to you to strengthen yourself and achieve, even against adversity. (I believe from experience TMA helps teach that.)

It's a two way street. If 90% of us have to consider how 10% have adopted a new meaning for a word and now expect the rest of us to rewrite the dictionary in the interest of their own sensitivity, why can't the 10% have enough sensitivity to accept the 90% who mean nothing more than the simple definition of the word. I think this is called "transferrance," their bias causing them to perceive other's innocent words or actions as hostile. If one is looking for affront, one will find it everywhere. People need to pull in their horns and chill.

That's why it's important to get out of the bubble (geographic, social, ideological) one may be trapped in and see the big picture. Hypersensitivity causes overreaction and the cycle begins.
But I never said or meant that everyone should be offended by the term. I said something like, "Hey, just know that in some areas, that means something else."
Yeah, but should that be my problem? Do I need to consult my new PC dictionary every time I turn the corner into a new neighborhood, or carry a suitcase so I can change my clothes so the colors don't resemble some gang's or political group? In the interest of survival, maybe I should. But I shouldn't have to. I notice most subgroups (stupid PC word) don't change their speech or dress when amongst the "outer world." How is that fair? Yet, they demand the majority of us do. IMO, such expectations are divisive.

Multi-cultureism is great and makes society richer. But it must peacefully co-exist with, and be a part of, the greater Society as a whole - that's what make us united. "A house divided cannot stand." Unfortunately, there are forces that have another maxim: "Divide and conquer."
 
Last edited:

Steve

Mostly Harmless
Joined
Jul 9, 2008
Messages
19,229
Reaction score
4,742
Location
Covington, WA
If we stopped to think before considering everyone's twisting/re-imagining of generally accepted definitions, there would be little time left over for real communication. I understand your sensitivity for others feelings; that's a good thing. People have a right not to be slandered. But like all things, it can be overdone. I was taught no one can make you feel small but yourself.

Once again, I think you have the wrong idea here. I'm not offended in the least. You do what you want. Say what you want to say.

I'm sharing some practical advice. And the fact is, if you call the wrong person "boy" or refer to them or others as a "thug", don't be surprised if they take it personally. That's it. That's the entirety of the point. Don't be shocked when you are held accountable for those words, even if you think the other person is taking them wrong.


It's a two way street. If 90% of us have to consider how 10% have adopted a new meaning for a word and now expect the rest of us to rewrite the dictionary in the interest of their own sensitivity, why can't the 10% have enough sensitivity to accept the 90% who mean nothing more than the simple definition of the word. I think this is called "transferrance," their bias causing them to perceive other's innocent words or actions as hostile. If one is looking for affront, one will find it everywhere. People need to pull in their horns and chill.

Totally agree. There's an old Covey quote, something along the lines of, 'We judge ourselves by our intent and others by their actions." I think that, combined with some folks' tendency to presume the worst in others, leads to some unfortunate misunderstandings.

But, and this is the main point, if you dig yourself a hole with someone (intentional or not), your ability to climb out of that situation will depend on your relationship with them. Someone who knows you may give you the benefit of the doubt. No big deal. But if you screw around with the wrong person, and they don't know you or don't like you, it will be much harder to climb out.

Once again, look at the situation here with @dvcochran. I've pointed out to him several times that I agree with him, for the most part. And yet every time I say that, he twists it around and focuses on the one thing that gets under his skin. At this point, there is literally nothing I could say to him that wouldn't just make it worse. So, nothing to do but say, "Okay" and wish him well.

That's why it's important to get out of the bubble (geographic, social, ideological) one may be trapped in and see the big picture. Hypersensitivity causes overreaction and the cycle begins.

Yeah, but should that be my problem? Do I need to consult my new PC dictionary every time I turn the corner into a new neighborhood, or carry a suitcase so I can change my clothes so the colors don't resemble some gang's? In the interest of survival, maybe I should. But I shouldn't have to. I notice most subgroups (stupid word) don't change their speech or dress when amongst the "outer world." How is that fair? Yet, they demand the majority of us do. IMO, such expectations are devisive.
Of course not! No need to consult your PC dictionary or walk on eggshells. But, ignorance doesn't absolve you of all responsibility for your words, either. We're all accountable. If you upset someone, you can handle it in many different ways. You could, I suppose, say to that person something like, "You shouldn't be upset. It's not my fault you're upset. You're too sensitive." Or you could say, 'I'm sorry. I didn't know that would upset you." I would generally go the latter route, and I think most other people would, too.

Edit: Just thinking about your last line... that strikes me as odd. I mean, if I tell you my name is Steve, would you call me Chris? I presume you wouldn't... and would call me Steve. So, why is that? I'm guessing it's as simple as, I asked you to call me Steve. What about if I said, 'Please don't call me Stephen." Would you go out of your way to call me Stephen? Once again, I'm presuming you would just call me Steve, probably for no reason other than that I asked you to not call me Stephen.

The rest of this is as simple as that. If someone says, "Hey, please call me X." Why wouldn't I? What do I care what that person wants to be called? If they want me to call them Chocolate Cake... what's the big deal? It's a little funny to me, but so what? I don't have to get it. I don't even have to agree with it. Chocolate Cake you want? Chocolate Cake you shall be.

And if they say, "Hey, don't call me Y." Why would I go out of my way to call them Y? Why not just say, "No problem." :)
 
Last edited:

InfiniteLoop

Black Belt
Joined
Aug 30, 2021
Messages
523
Reaction score
107
There is another discussion I want to have, but before I get to that discussion, I need some help with terminology. Or maybe opinions if there isn't an agreed-upon fact.

What do you call it when an art mixes striking and grappling techniques? Not like MMA, which typically will either strike in order to set up a take-down, or when stalemated in the grapple will throw some punches for points. But arts which use grappling to isolate your opponent's limbs and then attack from an advantaged position?

For example, using an arm lock to tie up one of your opponent's arms and keep the other arm pointed away from you, so that you can strike with your free arm unimpeded.

I've seen this kind of thing in the self defense portion of a more traditional Taekwondo class, and I've seen it in Kung Fu, Wing Chun and various Karate tutorials. I've seen the concept in Hapkido and Aikido (although usually a strike isn't thrown from there).

It kind of also applies to the Muay-Thai clinch, although that is a slightly different application than the others on my mind.

But back to my question - is there a name for this concept? We have "striking" and "grappling", but what about the concept of using one to break your opponent's structure, with which to allow you to use the other?

It's what I would call a martial art. Muay Thai is not a martial art since its sole goal to is to train for the Thai Boxing sport against other Muay Thai fighters (usually). And MT has little to no joint locks, at least not systematic ones.

And yes even modern TKD has all of this in the patterns, it just isn't explored by those schools since they do the patterns but never do any applied training with the moves.

If you apply most of the moves found in Karate and TKD, you will do some form of Hapkido/jujutsu.
 

Latest Discussions

Top