From: aaron@cse.ucsc.edu (Aaron Emigh)
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts
Subject: Re: Model Mugging (long)
Summary: idealists are understandable, but mistaken
Date: 15 Sep 92 02:29:35 GMT
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz (CE/CIS Boards)
NNTP-Posting-Host: oak.ucsc.edu

In article <1992Sep14.200233.4362@cbfsb.cb.att.com> osan@cbnewsb.cb.att.com (Mr. X) writes:
>	...I find it interesting to note people's attitudes
>	about violence and combat and the sort.  Many folks that I have
>	met and spoken with on such topics feel that they should not *have*
>	to train to be safe in this world of ours.  This clearly ignores the
>	reality in which we find ourselves.  The question of rightness and
>	wrongness of violence is IRRELEVANT.  The fact is that we live in a 
>	violent little universe where great myriad collisions occur at all
>	times, and sometimes those collisions occur between persons.  And
>	in order for one to fare as best as one might under such circumstances
>	as may occur at times, it is necessary for a person to engage in the 
>	proper study and training in such matters.

Yes.  I often speak to people who say, when I suggest martial arts
training to increase confidence, "But I shouldn't have to do something
like that to deal with {muggers, rapists, etc.}."  The issue, as Andy
has pointed out, is that it's not important what you _should_ have to do
in an ideal world -- the world's far from ideal, and the issue is making
a good life in a world that contains muggers, rapists and marketing
reps.  

>	But it seems that many have the attitude that violence is beneath them
>	and they fallaciously infer from this false premise that the study of
>	combat is therefore also beneath them and that they should therefore
>	not have to do it.  They appear to feel that the world should be 
>	intrinsically safe for them at all times and that they should not be
>	obliged in any way to take measures to ensure their own safety and 
>	well being.  Amusing.  
>	
>	It is also interesting to note that it is also often precisely these 
>	same folks that complain so bitterly when they get their heads handed 
>	to them by criminals in the street.  They usually look for somebody
>	else to issue the assurances they want, typically the government.
>
>	Comments? Flames?

Here, I think I disagree a little.  I don't have any scorn for the
people you're talking about.  They are fundamentally right -- they
really _shouldn't_ have to think about these things happening to them as
they're minding their own business.  I can understand their attitude --
it's just a misplaced idealism.  It's something like refusing to take
medication for a serious ailment on the grounds that you shouldn't be
sick.  [The problem with this reasoning may not be apparent to Christian
Scientists.]  When a problem comes, they tend to blame others.  That,
too, is understandable.  Hopefully with these experiences comes some
understanding that, though it's the mugger's _fault_ that something
happened, the odds can be improved by looking within yourself and
developing some skills.

Also, I know people who are morally opposed to using violence in any
situation; they tend to question any involvement in the martial arts as
a commitment to violence.  I tend to look at it in a different light:
it's easy to choose nonviolence if it's all you know.  It's something
like the story of the expulsion from the garden of Eden -- without
knowing both good and bad, it's impossible to make a moral choice
between them.  In the same way, having the physical skills to harm gives
meaning to the choice not to harm anybody.

>	-Andy V.

Aaron Emigh
aaron@iit.com
aaron@cse.ucsc.edu
Newsgroups: rec.martial-arts