Why do you like fighting?

[Gerry Seymour]

What I really don't care for are people who enjoy the hell out of street fighting. They look for fights, and always find them. I pretty much understand their physiological background and quirks, but I do not have much apathy, nor tolerance, for them. In any protective services field, or in police work, you run into these people on a pretty regular basis. When you tangle with them you are trying to control, they are trying to hurt. It's always a pain in the butt.

It sucks when you cross paths with them in private life. And if you're well trained it still sucks, because you're supposed to be above all that.
But it must suck really bad to actually be them.

I've run into a few people I think must be this type. They seem to be looking really hard for a fight. So far, I've managed not to give them one, but I've had a couple where the fight started to seem like the safest course (dangerous road rage situations, trying to force me to stop and fight). And I've always had the same thought as you, Buka: it must suck to be that way. In some cases, they just seem angry at their core. In some cases, it's like they feel the need to prove something (to whom, I don't know). Either way, don't wanna be them.

 

[Midnight-shadow]

I've run into a few people I think must be this type. They seem to be looking really hard for a fight. So far, I've managed not to give them one, but I've had a couple where the fight started to seem like the safest course (dangerous road rage situations, trying to force me to stop and fight). And I've always had the same thought as you, Buka: it must suck to be that way. In some cases, they just seem angry at their core. In some cases, it's like they feel the need to prove something (to whom, I don't know). Either way, don't wanna be them.

In the UK whenever there is a big soccer match on, these types always pop out of the woodwork looking for trouble. Most of the time they aren't even fans of the teams playing, they just use the event and confusion to start fights. It gets to the point where they will even take on the police if they get the chance, and the only thing stopping them at that point are trained police dogs. In the words of Mr T "I pity the fool"

 

[Jenna]

Thereis some satisfaction out of coming out on top of a fight that comes out of necessity.

Thank you.. Would you be able to elaborate at all on that?

 

[Jenna]

I love to fight in training, hate to fight in real life. Absolutely loathe it. Never enjoyed hurting or beating someone. Never enjoyed the emotion involved - or the aftermath.

You can say what is it that define the difference between these two situation that mean one of which you love and other you loathe?? The difference is intent?? Thank you

 

[Jenna]

TO ME, all of these reasons really point to one reason and one reason alone......that human beings are still a violent, primitive, savage and unevolved race of beings that still have such a long way to go. THAT'S WHY WE LIKE FIGHTING!!

That is a broad brush sentiment though one that might be exactly true.. Could it be *fear* or reticence in recognising this mentality within us that cause us to apparently loathe fighting (yet be prepared to engage in it)? what do you think?? Thank you for taking time to write out your reply

 

[CB Jones]

Thank you.. Would you be able to elaborate at all on that?

It's crazy to go out looking for a fight....sparring and fighting competitively in a controlled environment is one thing, street fighting is another.

But when you are in a situation where you don't have a choice but to defend yourself.....there is a sense of pride and satisfaction in your skills and in that you were able to apply your training and it work to defend yourself.

And I'm not going to feel sorry for any injuries occurred to my attacker. They chose to attack me and I'm going to do what I must to defend.

And in the end I'm going to take pride in knowing that I was successful in protecting myself.

 

[Jenna]

I don't like any sort of real world violence where there is actual harm intended on either side. I do enjoy sparring and sometimes actual competition where the adrenaline is ramped up a bit. I enjoy the chess match and the experience of having someone else push me to discover my strengths and weaknesses.

I like the distinction made by these folks: Love Fighting Hate Violence

So the difference is a moral one, they talk of consent and mutual respect.. So then where there are not these criteria, fighting is immoral?

I understand the essence of what they mean.. still it not combat, fighting and violence different faces on the same die??

 

[Gerry Seymour]

So the difference is a moral one, they talk of consent and mutual respect.. So then where there are not these criteria, fighting is immoral?

I understand the essence of what they mean.. still it not combat, fighting and violence different faces on the same die??

The morality is one-sided. In one case, people have agreed to face each other and test skills within some ruleset. In the other case, one person has decided to visit violence upon the other without their consent.

 

[Jenna]

I don't like street fighting it is just a mean spirited exercise. But i do get a chemical rush from winning a fight.

I am intrigued how you have said mean-spirited?? You could explain that term? Thank you

 

[Jenna]

The morality is one-sided. In one case, people have agreed to face each other and test skills within some ruleset. In the other case, one person has decided to visit violence upon the other without their consent.

there is not in some way an implied consent to violence assented to by a person if that person try to harm you??

 

[Martial_Kumite]

Fighting can be to defend. While violence is an unnecessary act associated with hatred. People will disagree about this, but that is (what I see as) the main difference between the two.

there is not in some way an implied consent to violence assented to by a person if that person tries to harm you??

If someone is TRYING to harm you, the only rule is to survive. If two people consent to a no holds bar fight then that's different. Ther is not the level of " I need to win or I will die" kind of thinking. It's like when two drunk friends end up putting on gloves and giving a go of each other. They aren't trying to kill each other, and it's just a good-natured fight.

 

[Jenna]

When I spar, I assume my opponents are trying to out do me. But for me, sparring for me is less about my opponent and more about me. It's less about me hitting them and more about me being able to say "I finally understand how to use this kung fu technique and how to be successful with the technique."

Thank you for your reply.. You let me pick your brains yes??

What is your criteria for indexing that kung fu technique as successful? Is not that you inflict sufficient pain to cause your opponent to stop?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

there is not in some way an implied consent to violence assented to by a person if that person try to harm you??

I'm talking about the other direction. They bring violence in their attempt to harm you, but you didn't consent to it. That's why I said the morality is one-sided. If you compete in a contest by agreement, you are doing nothing immoral, nor is your opponent. If you are attacked on the street and defend yourself, you are doing nothing immoral, but your opponent is.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Fighting can be to defend. While violence is an unnecessary act associated with hatred. People will disagree about this, but that is (what I see as) the main difference between the two.

If someone is TRYING to harm you, the only rule is to survive. If two people consent to a no holds bar fight then that's different. Ther is not the level of " I need to win or I will die" kind of thinking. It's like when two drunk friends end up putting on gloves and giving a go of each other. They aren't trying to kill each other, and it's just a good-natured fight.

I do disagree, but I suspect it's only a difference of definitions. I will visit violence upon an attacker, to whatever extent is necessary to survive. I will fight him so long as I must. By your definition, apparently, violence isn't what I'm doing. By others' definitions, I'm not actually fighting. I'm okay with both, though they are not my definitions.

 

[Jenna]

I'm talking about the other direction. They bring violence in their attempt to harm you, but you didn't consent to it. That's why I said the morality is one-sided. If you compete in a contest by agreement, you are doing nothing immoral, nor is your opponent. If you are attacked on the street and defend yourself, you are doing nothing immoral, but your opponent is.

Ah ok thank you, I understand.. sorry I am too single minded! xo.. And so I am morally exonerated in harming someone -in proportion to what harm I have received- because I am not the instigator.. yes?? this is akin to legal definition, that is correct?? Thank you for your patience

 

[Headhunter]

I've run into a few people I think must be this type. They seem to be looking really hard for a fight. So far, I've managed not to give them one, but I've had a couple where the fight started to seem like the safest course (dangerous road rage situations, trying to force me to stop and fight). And I've always had the same thought as you, Buka: it must suck to be that way. In some cases, they just seem angry at their core. In some cases, it's like they feel the need to prove something (to whom, I don't know). Either way, don't wanna be them.

There was a tv show on a few weeks ago about football hooligans and these guys train for months to get strong so they can go and start fights at football games, to them it's a sport. There was one case in Russia where they'd go into the woods and beat the hell out of each other to get toughened up for the World Cup. In my opinion people like that are just unbalanced

 

[Martial_Kumite]

By your definition, apparently, violence isn't what I'm doing.

I agree with this. You are defending yourself when you are attacked, it is not violence. If you are defending yourself, you should not be the aggressor. Like it was said on this thread so many times, there are people who go looking for a fight. That is (my definition of) violence. It is an action done with intent to harm an individual. This can even be non-physical, but that is not what this thread is about (I assume).

 

[Jenna]

I don't know this can be called as fight or not. A guy tried to pull a girl into his car. The girl was screaming and asked for help. I walked over, got that guy in a neck choke from behind. The guy let go the girl. The girl ran toward east. I let go the guy. The guy ran toward west. Nobody got hurt. I still feel good about what I did that day after so many years.

You can say what is it about this instance of using physical force that you feel good about, but yet some other instances you might not feel good about?? Thank you

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Ah ok thank you, I understand.. sorry I am too single minded! xo.. And so I am morally exonerated in harming someone -in proportion to what harm I have received- because I am not the instigator.. yes?? this is akin to legal definition, that is correct?? Thank you for your patience

Yes, the concept (IMO) is similar to the legal question. If you have reason to fear injury, you are exonerated from any moral issue if you harm them. If you fear they will kill you, you are morally exonerated if they die in the attempt to protect yourself.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I agree with this. You are defending yourself when you are attacked, it is not violence. If you are defending yourself, you should not be the aggressor. Like it was said on this thread so many times, there are people who go looking for a fight. That is (my definition of) violence. It is an action done with intent to harm an individual. This can even be non-physical, but that is not what this thread is about (I assume).

Just to clarify what I mean when I say "violence", it is the more technical definition. Like if someone were to say (archaically), "He visited violence upon him." That's the "violence" I speak of. It's connecting with someone with the intent to do harm, which I do intend to do when defending myself. If I get a lock and break/tear/dislocate something on them, that was my intent, as it will (hopefully) end their violence.

Just a different way of defining it. All good.