joesteph

But the class is a psychology class, and a religious belief was not the discussion. It was whether this is my face, with its skin, nose, eyes, teeth, and beard, or that the beard can be dispensed with as not integral like the skin, nose, etc., that my face is covered by a beard, is beneath a beard, even hidden by a beard. I maintained that what is there is my face, and that includes the beard as my face. This can be seen as Buddhist religious belief, and even a philosophical construct going back to Plato and the Forms, but it isn't the psychological discussion of whether I am mentally correct when I say "This is my face." It matters to me, and do you look at your face in the mirror in the morning and tell yourself that it doesn't exist? If so, perhaps it's based on a religious belief, but that's not the discussion. My face exists; I venture to say that the overwhelming number of members of Karate Forums believe their faces exist; Buddhist religious beliefs are, at best, tangental to "I say this is my face. I'm told it's not."

It is true that we could have this discussion about the hair on our heads, but it was about my face, and that to most of the class, the beard was seen as something one may change matter-of-factly, just as the girls (it's an all-girls academy) change their hair color so often; but to me, it is an integral part of me, not something that can be changed matter-of-factly without me "losing" my actual face. It's not something I hinged on regarding being judged by others, but in self-recognition--my face.

Actually, no. It's the perception I have of myself, that this is my face. No fear at all regarding adults and students. (The only concern would be my children, but they should be off-limits in this discussion; besides, I'd already had the beard for eleven years straight before they were born.) I did say in the OP that I'd had it on-and-off for years, then kept it. That would be from when I was nineteen to when I kept it permanently at age thirty-eight. People during that time saw me with and without it. It was old hat to have/not have it during that time. I have to have a legitimate reason to alter my face from what it truly is to me. Shaving for the sake of repeating an experience I did for nearly two decades wouldn't be legitimate to me. I said that this is my face, while nearly every student said my face was beneath the beard.

And how would the world recognize me if I don't recognize me? Do I even unconsciously, likely subtly, act a certain way because of the appearance of my face, so that if it were altered, I would no longer have "my" face, no longer feel I am "me," and begin to act differently?

My boys are 8 yrs. old. If I shave my beard, will they still see Daddy, or will I not be "me" to them, just as I feel that I won't be "me" to myself?

This was what I'd learned in a course called Street Survival (which I took when the buffalo were still on the plains). The wrist lock isn't a guarantee, but if it gives you a split second, use that time to grab a finger and snap! This is what my sensei demonstrated in self-defense JJ, which I took a number of lessons in last year. Using both hands, he first seized the hand and a couple of fingers of the arm reaching out to grab him, then he yanked the demonstrator (not me; someone with experience in Vee Arnis JJ) right down onto his belly, even maneuvering him around as though threatening his attacker's friends that he'd snap the fingers if they didn't back off. We practiced the finger lock after that, to get the assailant face down.

My point when I discuss this with my students is that it matters to me. It would throw me off, because my face would be "gone." If I get used to it, I'm getting used to a "different" face, not my "real" one. The beard, to me, doesn't mask my face; it isn't a mask at all. Without it, my face would be incomplete.

It's like a "different" or "new" face . . . Where did the "old" one go? And our faces are, to me, the most identifiable physical aspect we have.

I feel that the beard is an integral part of my face; its absence would make it so that it is not my face any longer, but an "altered" one.

I noticed Tai Ji in your background, Heidi. I wonder if learning and performing its forms had an influence on how you feel about kata. Perhaps what's subjective to me is my feeling about its applications--whether or not I actually know the meaning of what I'm doing; to you, the competition itself is judged subjectively. Am I right on the latter?

The question "Who competes in tournaments?" definitely has the feel of sparring to me. I didn't want to mix the thread, so I'm asking "Who competes in kata?" Many martial artists don't compete in the sparring division of tournaments for various reasons, but many of those tournaments have kata competition. In discussion with others, I said I did not want to compete in kata if I didn't know the applications of what I was doing. I feel there's a difference between declining sparring competition and declining kata competition, in my case, declining the latter not because I won't come home with a trophy, but because I don't feel it's "genuine" to me. How do others feel?

I have a full beard, something I grew on-and-off from my college years until 1990, when I kept it. There are photos of me with my boys in the KF Photo Album, mostly under Dojo photos. I teach psychology on the high school level in an all-girls academy. As the periods are so long (80 minutes; "block" scheduling), I allow a tangental discussion, just to give a break. In both my psychology classes this past school year, one of the discussions was my face--and beard. I was told by the most active participants that my face was the one beneath the beard; my face, to them, had a beard, not that my face is one with a beard as an integral part. I countered that this is my face; without the beard, it wouldn't be my face. It hinged on whether my beard is a genuine part of my face or an appearance factor only, indispensible or not to be my "true" face. Only one student out of two classes spoke to say that if this is what I believe my face to be, then this is my face. What do you think?

I struck me as more towards defusing or avoiding falling into the violent situation. It doesn't glamorize the fistfight but encourages steering clear. It's a lot like saying that you're the decent one with the job, etc., and the other has nothing so he has nothing to lose. Is the title deceptive, Jay? Should the title have been altered in some way? It sounds like a how-to book on busting heads, and it's far from that.

The problem isn't that the way you protected yourself is necessarily criminal, but that you have a greater chance than the untrained fighter of being sued for the level of damage inflicted, even though the other guy's the aggressor. That was the kickoff in the OP, citing the source and asking for thoughts about it. I don't believe the lower level gup/kyu belts would be held to the same standard as a red/brown or midnight blue/black belt. There's nothing to stop an attorney from bringing this into a court case, and then the judge and jury make a decision as to its weight. BTW, the punk or punks who attacked you will be barely recognizable to you in civil court, wearing jackets and ties--and should I say they bathed as well?

I've read it, Jay, and started a topic a while ago, "Legal Problems Due to Belt Rank?" at: http://www.karateforums.com/legal-problems-due-to-belt-rank-vt38208.html?sid=648515b9c84d54ed3b0a983cefa04883 That topic is based on what I'd read on p. 72.

I think that all-too-often we think of hitting a target that's stationary, like a heavy bag or a WaveMaster, when in reality a human target is far from that accommodating.

I was thinking of the heel question only in terms of punching, not kicking. I thought the kick warning about noticeably raising the heel, say by the supporting leg to have the kicking leg strike higher, is that you can knock yourself over.

Reminds me of XMA. There's a girl I had history for last year who told me of her karate background, that she had earned a black belt in Tae Kwon Do. She then went into XMA, and eventually ended martial arts to concentrate on Dance Troupe. For the girl in the video, who might be well-able to defend herself when concentrating on that facet of martial arts, karate is to be enjoyed in dance and presentation. Others enjoy it as exercise.

I found this also in Soo Bahk Do, but only in forms and striking against air. When I was studying Jeet Kune Do, that rear heel was up--but there was no kata; it was target work, instead. In Martial Mechanics by Phillip Starr, on pp. 33-37, keeping the rear foot, as the driving one, on the floor is presented as delivering more shock, even being more stable if striking a larger opponent. This contradicts Western-style boxing, as well as target work I've done in both SBD and JKD. I don't see the hip rotating enough for maximum power with the heel down.

You're right, Danielle, it's only three offered, not that only three women are being sponsored in the US. The men have three three-minute rounds; the women have four two-minute rounds. Women's boxing is not new, but it is new for the Olympics, so they're being conservative--maybe more than they really have to be.

The NY Times had an article on women's boxing on 7.13.10, "Trying to Punch Her Way Into the Olympics." It focused on a particular woman who wants to make the US Women's Boxing Olympic Team. There are just three places to represent the US when women's boxing becomes a medal sport in the 2012 Summer Olympics, to be held in London. According to the article, there'll be only three weight classes: flyweight (106-112lbs); lightweight (123-132lbs); middleweight (152-165lbs). I don't know why there aren't classes in-between those weights, unless it's that we're competing in three of the ones offered. In the last Olympics that opened up the saber for women's fencing, the US athlete won the gold. I wonder how we'll do in women's boxing?

After WWII, Hwang Kee first founded the Moo Duk Kwan (Institute of Martial Virtue), then he presented Soo Bahk Do (The Way of the Striking Hand). Together, they form Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan. What I learned from by SBD teacher was that Soo Bahk Do is considered the art, which would fall under methodology, and Moo Duk Kwan is considered the style, which would fall under ideology. In everyday speech, though, when someone finds that another person studied a martial art, the usual question seems to be "What style?"

They might have originally been diagnosed--or misdiagnosed--with Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder. The problem about dealing with very active children is that there may be a demand that they be as "controlled" as possible. If there's one diagnosis, such as ADD, then the scrutiny they're placed under may cause normal activity for a child (children can be little fireballs of energy) to be deemed as ADHD. I have a nephew who, by age eight, just couldn't stay in his seat in school, and the concern of a combo with ADD was also a factor. I don't know that he wasn't diagnosed as borderline ADHD, but in his case, his parents decided to try a medication, and their doctor was more conservative about the dose. My nephew was never made into a zombie because he wasn't overmedicated, and at some point in his younger teenage years he was weaned off the medication.

Thanks so much for posting this, Rick. It really clarifies the stance/shuffle forward, and I like the way it's broken down, that combo of block-strike in one. Even if the jam against the face causes the attacker to pause for a half-second, he's not using that other fist (the old one-two) during that pause, which gives the defender time to strike again. I did see that you referred to a hook kick, but it looked like a roundhouse to me. I do know that in Jeet Kune Do, the roundhouse is called the hook kick, as Lee believed that since it followed the same path as the hook punch, it should bear the same name. Is this what you referred to in your video?

I'm going to assume that your nephew hasn't been examined by a developmental pediatrician, or some other professional, such as a behavioral therapist. You haven't mentioned hyperactivity, and fidgeting can be taken more seriously than it should be because you see a lack of focus, so that leaves open the question of Attention Deficit Disorder. One of the children at the dojang where my children study is a girl who was exhibiting such behavior at age eight, both in school and in the dojang, and the parents took it from there. My own children, David and Patrick, twins who are age eight, are in the autistic spectrum, although David is more so than Patrick. David demonstrates the zoning out behavior in school and in the dojang, but in school both boys are in a special needs class, and in karate it's the same. Since you mentioned that you could give a tug on your nephew's sleeve, you're doing, in a sense, what I did; you are on the floor with him during class. (In my case, I assisted their teacher for two years on the floor, in their special needs karate class. They now no longer need me, although the boys are still in that class.) It's best to focus on behavior that your nephew and my David have in common; it doesn't mean he's autistic or even has ADD, and since my sons are on the spectrum, they sometimes act just like any other eight year olds, and other times their autistic issues are manifest. Here's the wrong way to direct David to a task: "Everybody is supposed to be at attention. David!" Here's the right way: "David! Attention!" Obviously, in the first example, he never focused on what was first said, and his attention was grabbed by his name being called--too late. He'll have to have the directive repeated, and that can get tedious. In the second, his name being called immediately got his attention, and then he focused on the directive. I realize that, in class that may be school or in the dojo, the directives that are given usually have no one's name called out; it's to the class as a whole. But with patience, some creative ways of popping his name in, and more patience, it can be done. I understand the tug on the sleeve and I don't disagree with it. It has to be used sparingly, though, or else he'll be taught to be "prompted"; that is, he won't be focused unless signaled physically. If you're on good terms with the teacher so that s/he doesn't mind, you can repeat in a low voice, such as I've done (David! Attention!), if your nephew doesn't do as directed. You might, if permitted by your teacher, break ranks to get him to perform as directed. I've done block and punch exercises with my boys, but sometimes have had to put my hands right on either David or Patrick to move the blocking arm, then the punching arm, etc. It starts the child off, and can only be done if you're beside or behind him. You must also use the word "focus" where applicable. None of this is easy, but I genuinely believe that karate has been of great aid to my children, and they have an actual autistic spectrum diagnosis of Pervasive Developmental Disorder--Not Otherwise Specified. Even if your nephew does not have ADD or an autistic spectrum diagnosis, and my children do not take medication, it doesn't hurt, and I believe it can help, to borrow from the way ADD and autistic spectrum children are handled. Incidentally, that class is too long for such a young child. My boys have a diagnosis and have a half-hour class. The daughter of a parent that I referred to, above, has a forty-five minute class. I don't know what to say about the length of the class other than to discuss this with your teacher. It may be that in your teacher's experience, other students, likely young like your nephew, had breaks built in. You are a good man to take such an interest in his nephew.