Fixing the training model

Bro The Republic of Ireland is Eire ....that is the Gaelic for that name ...like the Gaelic for Scotland is Alba, the North of Ireland is the province of Ulster one of the four provinces of Ireland

Yes, but the official use of the name "Eire" (introduced in 1937) was dropped when the country declared itself a republic in 1949.

It's still the name of the place in the language, but it's no longer it's official title.
 
Yes, but the official use of the name "Eire" (introduced in 1937) was dropped when the country declared itself a republic in 1949.

It's still the name of the place in the language, but it's no longer it's official title.


I think you will find that most southern Irish use Eire
 
I can't not say it...

It's funny how the countries of England and Scotland are separate with respect to law until it comes to restricting freedoms.

It was Scottish influence that led to the original restriction on air rifle power.

It was a Scottish incident that led to the huge restrictions on handguns.

It was a Scottish incident that is trying to lead to an almost blanket ban on all air weapons (oh, and any firearm).

It's a group of Scottish politicians who are campaigning to introduce motor vehicle power and speed restrictions.


Admittedly, it does work both ways - in the eyes of the politicos we're separate unless they can see a way to impinge on our respective lives...


The air rifle thing are you taking about when that kid got shot in the head in the Glasgow area?

The handgun thing I am assuming you are referring to Dunblane ?

The Scots politicians that are leading that charge lol are the nationalists and they have their own agenda and alot of that is to disrupt Westminster.

As for speed restrictions lol they are not so applicable up here where I live as the roads are mostly single track


You forgot to add in that the first Monarch of the United Kingdom etc et al was a Scot (actually he had as much welsh blood in him as Scots lol and our present Monarch has half her ancestry as Scots , but hey as the saying goes who would be like us lol ....that the english translation as the scots I doubt any one would get)

Actually you are aware that when the ind ref was on there were parts of nothern England that actually wanted to join Scotland lol ....they were politely declined and not because of the English thing at all but because they would all have had to change their legal system lol
 
Truth is, then as now, I like you well enough to call you on your BS when it comes up


The thing is...you don't. You read into my words what you think I mean and then go off on one. You ascribe meanings to my sentences that aren't there and you post up how awful what I said was. For example I didn't say 'lynch mob', I didn't mention killing anyone previously, you assumed that by misreading and not reading the context. You totally screwed up my post and turned into something else, something that was verging on hysteria.

My view is quite simple, teaching a 'no touch' KO, is pointless, it doesn't work. A lot of techniques taught as self defence techniques don't work including some BJJ ones. We can't fool ourselves that a seven stone girl is going to be able to use BJJ to successfully fight off a 14 stone man intent on sexual assault. Consider it before giving all the ways it will work, it doesn't.
Police: UFC's Andrea Lee allegedly assaulted by husband, a convicted killer with Nazi ties

The education needed in this day and age is teaching boys and men not to assault and rape women. Children need to be taught that boys sexually assaulting girls is not a way of showing 'they like them'. That touching women without their consent is not right, that 'pussy grabbing' is wrong, that people who do this should not be in positions of trust and power. Compared to all that demonstrating a 'no touch' KO is a miniscule problem. I consider ganging up and going to someone dojo with the intent of beating them up to be a criminal act. It 'teaches' nothing, it's what thugs do. People who resort to violence to make the point that the martial arts they do are better than anyone else's are truly missing the point and are perpetuating the thug culture.


I don't want you to like me, I want you to leave me alone.
 
Scots, Welsh and Irish (both types) are all "Brits" by being residents of the British Isles, so there is no distinction to be made anyway.

The English are "Brit" as well.

The British Isles covers the whole thing - the UK is everything excluding the Republic of Ireland (the larger southern part, formerly Eire), then the individual countries of England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales.

Personally, I put "British" as nationality, unless it's not an available option - whereupon I revert to English.

Which leads to the fact that I've never once met one single person who would consider "European" a viable answer. Even in continental Europe.


It's like how everyone in Canada, the US, Panama, Chile, Brazil (etc.) are all Americans.
While I take your point, the US using “American” throws off the analogy. It’d be like if nobody used “European” except Spain, who blithely used it to refer to all things Spanish. We’re like that.
 
While I take your point, the US using “American” throws off the analogy. It’d be like if nobody used “European” except Spain, who blithely used it to refer to all things Spanish. We’re like that.


In Europe and in fact throughout the rest of the world though we see the people in the United States as 'Americans', we don't see the divisions you do ie African American, Irish American.

How to Distinguish Between United Kingdom, Great Britain, and England
 
The thing is...you don't. You read into my words what you think I mean and then go off on one. You ascribe meanings to my sentences that aren't there and you post up how awful what I said was. For example I didn't say 'lynch mob', I didn't mention killing anyone previously, you assumed that by misreading and not reading the context.

Actually, you did, Tez:

we don't play lynch mobs here

I’m on my phone, so will read the rest more carefully on a bigger screen.
 
The thing is...you don't. You read into my words what you think I mean and then go off on one. You ascribe meanings to my sentences that aren't there and you post up how awful what I said was. For example I didn't say 'lynch mob', I didn't mention killing anyone previously, you assumed that by misreading and not reading the context. You totally screwed up my post and turned into something else, something that was verging on hysteria.

Uh, what exactly do you think "Lynch Mob" means? Do you even know what lynching means?

My view is quite simple, teaching a 'no touch' KO, is pointless, it doesn't work. A lot of techniques taught as self defence techniques don't work including some BJJ ones. We can't fool ourselves that a seven stone girl is going to be able to use BJJ to successfully fight off a 14 stone man intent on sexual assault. Consider it before giving all the ways it will work, it doesn't.
Police: UFC's Andrea Lee allegedly assaulted by husband, a convicted killer with Nazi ties

Except a much smaller person CAN use Bjj to successfully fight off a larger person. This has been proven over and over again in the past. Your example is flawed because in the case of Andrea Lee you have a woman who is being serially abused by her husband to the point where she doesn't believe that she is being abused, thus she feels no need to defend herself.
 
Uh, what exactly do you think "Lynch Mob" means? Do you even know what lynching means?


So you think invading someone else's property with the intent to beat someone up is fine? Well, yes of course you do because you said so.


Your example is flawed because in the case of Andrea Lee you have a woman who is being serially abused by her husband to the point where she doesn't believe that she is being abused, thus she feels no need to defend herself.


So her case is disqualified because you feel that as an abuse victim she isn't a good example, just who do you think needs self defence then? >shakes head< just as bad as those comments that I've seen saying she deserved it. the first time he laid hands on her I would say she tried to defend herself, didn't work so he went on and on.

Honestly, you twist and turn more than a politician trying to win votes and please his master. Nothing you say actually proves anything. Post after post of you telling us your opinion, not one ounce of open mindedness, just the relentless churning of 'I'm right, you are all wrong'. Sad.
 
So you think invading someone else's property with the intent to beat someone up is fine? Well, yes of course you do because you said so.

So you clearly DON'T know what lynch mob or lynching means. Thank you for the clarification of your ignorance.

So her case is disqualified because you feel that as an abuse victim she isn't a good example, just who do you think needs self defence then? >shakes head< just as bad as those comments that I've seen saying she deserved it. the first time he laid hands on her I would say she tried to defend herself, didn't work so he went on and on.

I said it was a flawed example because it's not her technical skill to defend herself that is the problem (which is your argument). The problem is that she's in a depressed mental state that prevents her from believing that she's being abused. She could be on Rickson Gracie's level of technical skill, but if she doesn't feel that she's in danger, she's not going to use those skills to defend herself.

Honestly, you twist and turn more than a politician trying to win votes and please his master. Nothing you say actually proves anything. Post after post of you telling us your opinion, not one ounce of open mindedness, just the relentless churning of 'I'm right, you are all wrong'. Sad.

Have you looked in the mirror lately?
 
So you clearly DON'T know what lynch mob or lynching means. Thank you for the clarification of your ignorance.


What it means to you, you mean. I speak the Queen's English I know what it means in my language. Stop trying to demean and patronise, it's not working.

I said it was a flawed example, because it's not her technical skill to defend herself that is the problem (which is your argument), she's in a depressed mental state that prevents her from believing that she's being abused. She could be on Rickson Gracie's level of technical skill, but if she doesn't feel that she's in danger, she's not going to use those skills to defend herself.


Didn't read what I said did you. the first time mate, the first time.


Yes I do look in the mirror and I like what I see, I am not a would be dominant male dictating to others how things should be, I don't advocate violence to people I don't agree with and if you don't like what I say put me on ignore, no skin off my nose.
 
The thing is...you don't. You read into my words what you think I mean and then go off on one. You ascribe meanings to my sentences that aren't there and you post up how awful what I said was. For example I didn't say 'lynch mob', I didn't mention killing anyone previously, you assumed that by misreading and not reading the context. You totally screwed up my post and turned into something else, something that was verging on hysteria.

My view is quite simple, teaching a 'no touch' KO, is pointless, it doesn't work. A lot of techniques taught as self defence techniques don't work including some BJJ ones. We can't fool ourselves that a seven stone girl is going to be able to use BJJ to successfully fight off a 14 stone man intent on sexual assault. Consider it before giving all the ways it will work, it doesn't.
Police: UFC's Andrea Lee allegedly assaulted by husband, a convicted killer with Nazi ties

The education needed in this day and age is teaching boys and men not to assault and rape women. Children need to be taught that boys sexually assaulting girls is not a way of showing 'they like them'. That touching women without their consent is not right, that 'pussy grabbing' is wrong, that people who do this should not be in positions of trust and power. Compared to all that demonstrating a 'no touch' KO is a miniscule problem. I consider ganging up and going to someone dojo with the intent of beating them up to be a criminal act. It 'teaches' nothing, it's what thugs do. People who resort to violence to make the point that the martial arts they do are better than anyone else's are truly missing the point and are perpetuating the thug culture.


I don't want you to like me, I want you to leave me alone.
I really don't even know what to do with this.

You made a reference to guns and then to lynch mobs. As I said earlier, the term lynch mob carries a lot of emotional weight in America. I'd like to think you would not use it if you knew that, but now I'm not so sure. you refuse to acknowledge the correction and instead attack the messenger. Here's the message, lynch mobs in America refer to a situation where white men hang a black man from a tree... Until he's dead. While Not everyone who has ever been lynched was black, the term connotes rqcism. And it always means hanging until dead, by a mob of angry vigilantes.
 
What it means to you, you mean. I speak the Queen's English I know what it means in my language. Stop trying to demean and patronise, it's not working.

What's wrong? Don't like a taste of your own medicine?

Didn't read what I said did you. the first time mate, the first time.

Except you're making an assumption that she was trained when the abuse began. She could be the victim of lifelong abuse and is simply drawn to abusive men, and think it's perfectly normal to be abused. Again, the POINT is that you tried to use her as an example of Bjj not being capable of helping smaller people defend themselves against larger people, and she was a BAD example. Instead of simply admitting that you used a bad example, you tried to paint me as someone who blames the victim for their abuse.

Yes I do look in the mirror and I like what I see, I am not a would be dominant male dictating to others how things should be, I don't advocate violence to people I don't agree with and if you don't like what I say put me on ignore, no skin off my nose.

And here we have some more thinly veiled insults hurled my way. How typical of you.
 
I really don't even know what to do with this.

You made a reference to guns and then to lynch mobs. As I said earlier, the term lynch mob carries a lot of emotional weight in America. I'd like to think you would not use it if you knew that, but now I'm not so sure. you refuse to acknowledge the correction and instead attack the messenger. Here's the message, lynch mobs in America refer to a situation where white men hang a black man from a tree... Until he's dead. While Not everyone who has ever been lynched was black, the term connotes rqcism. And it always means hanging until dead, by a mob of angry vigilantes.


You have problems in your country with extreme racism, don't bring it to my door. When we use the word 'lynch' which is a non racist, non political word here we mean to punish someone without the benefit of a trial, ie illegally, nothing more, nothing less.
I don't care what it means in your country, as you've all told me many times when I use a word used regularly in the UK and has no connotations but you don't like. You have read your own American meaning into this word which doesn't mean the same here, that it has racist connotations is down to the behaviour of Americans not British people so we use the word as we would others. don't get on my back because you have problems, they aren't my or the Brits problems.

You stirred this up by not understanding my posts, it's down to you that the use of a word 'upsets' you and you patronise me and the Brits by insisting I'm in the wrong. Fine. I really don't care. If you take offence at every word we Brits use in our normal way but continue to use words we as Brits don't use ie spaz ( there's others) and think it's funny when we complain then it's just tough.
 
You have problems in your country with extreme racism, don't bring it to my door. When we use the word 'lynch' which is a non racist, non political word here we mean to punish someone without the benefit of a trial, ie illegally, nothing more, nothing less.
I don't care what it means in your country, as you've all told me many times when I use a word used regularly in the UK and has no connotations but you don't like. You have read your own American meaning into this word which doesn't mean the same here, that it has racist connotations is down to the behaviour of Americans not British people so we use the word as we would others. don't get on my back because you have problems, they aren't my or the Brits problems.

You stirred this up by not understanding my posts, it's down to you that the use of a word 'upsets' you and you patronise me and the Brits by insisting I'm in the wrong. Fine. I really don't care. If you take offence at every word we Brits use in our normal way but continue to use words we as Brits don't use ie spaz ( there's others) and think it's funny when we complain then it's just tough.
Good Lord.

For what it is worth, I don't use the term spaz either. I used to, but someone let me know that it's offensive and so I apologized and try to do better. I also no longer use the terms retarded or short bus for the same reason.

I'm nit upset that you used the term lynch mob. I'm disappointed that you defend its use by you without apology or any indication that you give a rip about how you appear to Americans when you use it.

You have a lot in common with our current president. He also projects his own faults onto others and cannot apologize when he is clearly in the wrong.

Regarding african american or asian American, we use these terms because these groups use them and ask others to do so. I made jokes earlier about calling everyone in the UK a brit. Truly, if you prefer Welsh to brit, or want to be called a bananite, fine. If it's important to you, no skin off my nose . why not call you a bananite? In the same vein, if you want to be called an African-American, why wouldnt I respect your requesr?
 
What it means to you, you mean. I speak the Queen's English I know what it means in my language. Stop trying to demean and patronise, it's not working.
The sources I can find indicate "lynch" has pretty much the same meaning on both sides of the Pond: kill without a trial, usually by a group.
 
I consider ganging up and going to someone dojo with the intent of beating them up to be a criminal act. It 'teaches' nothing, it's what thugs do.
For the record, this isn't what I was talking about when I mentioned the BJJ community policing its own. Once upon a time in Brazil perhaps, but not today.

If someone is claiming rank in BJJ that seems questionable and cannot be independently verified, then someone (not necessarily even a black belt) might visit for a class and ask to roll with the instructor. If the instructor refuses or clearly does not have the skills to back up their claimed rank, then they may be verbally shamed and the word may be spread so potential students will know to avoid them.

If the instructor can be verified to have legit credentials but they are doing something which violates BJJ community standards (handing out ranks online or whatever), then their behavior will just be publicized and criticized and they have the choice of ignoring the criticism, defending their practices, or accepting the criticism and making changes.
 
Back
Top