Bart the Lover

How about 'Chips'? It should really be 'French fries' but that doesn't sound as good.

bustr wrote: What? That's appalling! Is that even legal?

Great cartoon!

karatemom#1 wrote: Don't wait that long to change schools! Your son's instructor is not strict, nor is he serious. He's an idiot. It doesn't matter what his reasons are for teaching in this way--he is wrong. Discipline is important when children learn martial arts. They are learning potentially injurious techniques, and need to listen, pay attention and do what is asked of them. However, it is important that your son feels able to politely ask questions, and ask to see techniques again (and again, and again, if necessary). How else can he learn? It's simply not acceptable to expect a parent to pick up the slack. DokterVet points out you are paying for a service, which the instructor is not providing. I agree it's a waste of money, but even if the instructor taught for free his attitude would be intolerable. It's not a question of money; if you promise to provide a service, than that is what you should do. Even if you were a black belt in your son's art, and could teach him yourself, this would still hold true. Learning martial arts should be fun, as well as hard work. Your son deserves an instructor who will encourage him, praise him when he succeeds, gently correct him when he is wrong and takes a genuine interest in his development. It doesn't sound like he is getting that, at the moment. I hope my post has been helpful to you. Good luck. Regards, Bart the Lover

A quote from the site: No kidding! Did you read their IQ guidelines? What a lot of nonsense.

monkeygirl wrote: It might clarify things to point out I was actually nine at the time! I was joking when I said I was twenty. Somehow the joke got lost in translation. Nowadays, I am a model of calm and controlled behaviour. Ahem. If you don't mind me asking, monkeygirl, are you planning to re-start your training? Or is your ex-dojo the only one for miles around? Regards, Bart the Lover

Howdy, all. When do you test for belts? Is it something your instructor decides? Do you wait until you feel ready? Most importantly, have you ever delayed testing, even though your instructor thought you were ready, because you didn't feel confident? Or do you think that would be considered rude (because you ignored your instructor's advice)? I would like your thoughts on whether it matters if you hang around the middle ranks for a while. If you plan to study the arts for life (barring accidents), isn't it better to try to perfect what you know, rather than continually adding new techniques? Or is there a danger you would never be satisfied, things would never be perfect? Does it depend on what you hope to get out of the arts? Thank you for your time. Regards, Bart the Lover

I've only been in one fight, and I provoked it. I stole one of my friend's shoes (don't ask) and wouldn't give it back. She rugby tackled me (quite impressive) and fisticuffs ensued. Eventually I threw the shoe at her, shouting 'Take your [insert profanity here] shoe, then!' and stomped off. I was twenty at the time. Happy days... battousai16 wrote: Coccyx? Is that a euphemism? Are there many coccyx fanciers in Wisconsin? What a peculiar bunch you must be. Cor! Check out the coccyx on that! Regards, Bart the Lover

Sorry to be stupid, but what does ROTFL mean? I know LOL...it's laughing out loud, right? I'm not really up to speed on internet lingo. Very funny joke, by the way. Bart the Lover

I completely agree with Gino. Some of the advice you have been given is startling, to say the least. Yes, consult a lawyer. He/she is the best person to advise you on legal matters. But do try to find some kind of rapprochement with your sister. It sounds as though you two have a history of conflict. It's easy to get locked into patterns of behaviour with family members, and hard to break out of them. But family is well worth the effort. We don't choose our family, but they are with us for life. Has your sister always been difficult? If not, when did it start? What set her off? Is it something you can help her with? Does she do drugs, which would explain the stealing/erratic behaviour? I hope you are not offended by my last question. I'm just trying to think of possible explanations. I'm not making excuses, or saying you should tolerate bad behaviour. But ultimately this will be resolved by talking and trying to understand one another, not by hitting or getting one another arrested. Gino wrote: Amen to that! If what I have written sounds pious, I don't mean it that way. Like Gino, I know that family members can be the most infuriating people in the world. They know all the right buttons to push! I hope you and your sister sort this out. Best of luck to you. Regards, Bart the Lover

Hello again, Valithor. Thank you for your response. You wrote: I should have made my meaning clearer. I wasn't comparing patriarchy with slavery (I agree that would be over the top), I was pointing out that asserting a system works tells us nothing about right and wrong. I could prevent a thief stealing my possessions by cutting off his/her hands, but it would not be a reasonable act. There must be justification other than 'it works'. Now there's an old fashioned word! My grandmother used to say 'courting' and it always made me think of people prancing around in Elizabethean clothes to a plinky-plink soundtrack. In this example, I think it is perfectly acceptable to offer to carry the suitcases. But this doesn't compare to giving up a seat. Men have greater absolute strength, allowing them to carry and lift heavier weights. A woman on a bus is only required to support her own weight, which she can do perfectly well. The greater absolute strength of men is not really relevant here. It's been fun, hasn't it? Like a workout for the brain (God knows my brain could do with it). Regards, Bart the Lover

Glad I'm not the only one! I have a habit of holding my breath doing push-ups, too. I haven't really fixed it yet, but it helps to breathe in time with the push-up or sit-up. Breathe in when lowering yourself, and out when straightening your arms. Try to concentrate on the breathing rather than the counting. Maybe you could do push-ups for a period of time, instead of a set number, so you can forget about counting. Hope this helps. Regards, Bart the Lover

Valithor: My questions are posed in a genuine spirit of inquiry, and are not intended to sound hostile or accusing. It can be difficult to convey that sense in writing. I apologise in advance if they come across like that. You wrote: Why must social structures be based on different roles for the sexes? What is so special about sex differences (whatever you believe them to be, or not to be) that they require strict demarcation into separate acceptable behaviours? People differ in many ways. We don't find it necessary to assign roles according to religion or creed. And who decides? You? Me? Should penalties be imposed if the roles are subverted? It has indeed worked well. For men. This is like saying slavery works because it benefits the enslaving nation or people. I'm not emotional. Nor are the other posters, with the exception of fireka. And what should roles be associated with? On average, I agree. But why does that impose upon men the obligation to give up their seat on the bus? I'm sorry to return to this example yet again, but no-one has given me a compelling reason for this. Women can climb Everest. They can run marathons. They can hunt, shoot, and dive deeper than anyone else. But they can't stand for ten minutes on a bus. Why? Speak for yourself! I try to spend as much time as possible in a world of fantasy. It's so much nicer there... I agree. I've encountered a number of smart-and-ignorant people. But I agree that the ones with knowledge should share it with others. On a final note, incidental to the matter in hand: please do not draw attention to mistakes in my writing. It's very rude. I try as much as is humanly possible to eliminate typos, spelling errors and correct missing words. It makes posts easier to read, for one thing. I don't correct other people, and I ask that you extend the same courtesy to me. Thank you. Regards, Bart the Lover

IAMA_chick wrote: Ummm...does 'wanked' mean something innocuous in the US?

Do you attend the same club as your friend, tenguartist? If you do, you could try voicing your concerns with your instructor. Perhaps he/she could have a word with him. If he respects the instructor, he might listen to him/her. It's worth a try. I imagine instructors will see this kind of thing frequently, and may know the best way to approach the problem. I urge you to keep persuading your friend to see sense. Don't wait until he finds out for real how dangerous untrained people can be. He may end up dead. Regards, Bart the Lover

Could you give us a description? Are they the ones with glucose in? We have drinks which claim to give you energy, but to be honest with you I think they are a waste of money. I know marathon runners sometimes drink that type of thing, because it allows them to take sustenance without stopping. Cyclists, too. But most people don't train anywhere near long enough to need them. Also, in martial arts, you tend to stop and start. Even if you were working constantly for a long time, you'd be better off eating a banana or a cereal bar--something light. They will also provide nutrients, rather than just energy. I imagine manufacturers observed the desire for fitness and wanted to make money out of it. If you like them, great, but I believe you should be able to get all your energy needs from your meals, with the odd piece of fruit, etc. used as a top-up. from the ground up wrote: I think Redbull has alot of caffeine in it, so you probably were a bit wired! Regards, Bart the Lover

A very interesting post, Cheeky. You're very lucky to have a father that is willing to share his experiences and knowledge with you. I agree with Kirves. Take advantage of the opportunity. The people we are nervous of sparring with should be the ones we seek out. Challenge yourself. You don't say how you spar at your club. Do you use light, semi, or full contact? A mixture? How big is your club? I ask this because if your club is fairly small you won't be exposed to a variety of approaches, and it becomes even more important that you spar with your dad. Some people are much more aggressive than others. In a real situation, I think someone small (I'm small, too) should avoid getting into a punch-up type situation. In sparring, there's a back and forth to the action. But if you were confronted for real, you woudn't stop to let your opponent respond. Ideally, as soon as you saw the first punch come in, you would respond with a barrage of punches, kicks, knees, elbows, or whatever you know. Remember that if you're small, you can still kick your opponent (in the knees, say) at a distance they will be thinking of using their hands only. I wasn't completely clear what you meant by this. Do you mean that when you made contact with the pad, your arm wasn't fully extended? You were swinging past the target? Sorry to sound like a broken record, but if you want to make your kicks (or punches, or whatever) more powerful you should use the heavy bag. Bags can also be used for accuracy. Pick a spot on the bag to hit, and try to hit it. You don't have to pound away every single kick to benefit from them. Try working on diferent things on different days. Bags give good feedback--the sound you make hitting it, the way it moves. You can measure your progress this way. I hope you don't get discouraged by this. Pacificshore's point is a good one. What you would be willing to use in a real encounter is not the same as what you would be willing to use against your dad. Don't overestimate yourself, but don't underestimate yourself either. Keep training! Regards, Bart the Lover

Jiminy Cricket! This thread has stirred up a hornets' nest! Very exciting. fireka wrote: Sometimes the obvious turns out be wrong. Not long ago it was obvious women were too weak to run marathons. The people who believed this weren't bad or deliberately trying to keep women from their goals, they were just plain wrong. What we think of as common sense sometimes crumbles to nothing when examined closely. For example: it is common sense (and a reasonable explanation) that the sun orbits the earth, giving us days and nights. It is also, unfortunately, wrong. The reason I queried Valithor's post wasn't because I necessarily believe men and women to be exactly the same. To be be honest, I don't think it matters all that much, at least in terms of public policy. Everyone should have the same rights. Everyone should have the same responsibilities. Everyone should have equal access to education, health, and justice; everyone should be able to seek to represent their community. I don't care if one or two studies appear to show women have superior verbal skills, or one or two studies appear to show men are better at navigating. It has nothing to do with equal access. I queried Valithor's post because usually (not always) when people say what he/she said it serves either to excuse bad behaviour, or to justify prejudice. If you substitute 'women' for 'people' then I whole-heartedly agree with you. Many skills are derided. Certain jobs are looked down upon, and the people who do them unappreciated. Many talents go to waste because the people are the 'wrong' colour, sex, creed or sexuality. Almost everyone has something to offer and should be valued as an individual, and not seen as part of a homogeneous group. Why do we need roles? As far as I can see, a role is someone telling you what to do. Why doesn't everyone decide for themselves what to do in life? I don't believe anyone should be assigned a role. It is up to the individual to consider their own strengths and abilities, and act on them. While it is true you have no control over the decision, it is silly to say you do not have the right to an opinion. You will meet many people who try to persuade you to do, say and believe all kinds of things--including the lie that your views are worthless or irrelevent. They may be annoying, but you don't have to pay attention to them. It's simply a debating trick, designed to unsettle you. Maybe cloning will settle that one? (I'm joking.) battousai16 wrote: You beat me to it! The threat of threads being locked is like a sword of Damocles! Love your fellow man. Love your fellow woman. 'Nuff said. Regards, Bart the Lover

fireka wrote: No, I don't know. I have no idea what Valithor believes to be essentially female, or essentially male. I don't know him/her. I assume Valithor was not refering to physical differences, as it would be irrelevent to the thread. What am I ignoring? And how does it relate to the subject of this thread?

tenguartist wrote: I don't think this is as a result of training with men. I agree with Kamidake--some women need a little time to adjust to contact sports. You have to bear in mind that girls are still actively discouraged from doing anything perceived as aggressive. They are expected to be passive and obedient. There was an enormous fuss in Britain not long ago when Jane Couch (boxer) took the British Boxing Board of Control to court over their refusal to grant her a license to box. Some of the crap written about women's boxing by the press was amazing, and some of the arguments the Board used were ridiculous. So it's not surprising women have to learn how to tap into their aggression (I think some men do, too). Maybe you should concetrate on becoming a sifu/sensei first?! Ultimately, it will be for you to decide on the merits of a female-only class. We could discuss and discuss, but the decision will be yours. This is true for any aspect of training, of course. Perhaps by that stage your experience will lead you to the correct answer? I don't think I have enough experience myself to offer a firm answer. Regards, Bart the Lover

Valithor wrote: Whatever that means.

I'm in two minds as to the wisdom of female-only martial arts. On the one hand, they are better than nothing. Also, some women may have religious reasons for seeking a women and girls facility; it's important that their needs are catered for. And it might act as a stepping stone for women who are initially a little intimidated by the thought of training with men. You also have to remember that some women may have been violently assualted and do not want to put themselves in a situation where they feel they do not have full control. Also, the weak spots on a man's body are the same as on a woman's--with the exception of the groin. Knee, shin, eyes, throat etc. On the other hand, training selectively means you will inevitably miss a variety of experience. The more people you train with (which means more to spar with) the greater the range of styles and approaches you will encounter. Some people are tall, some short; some favour hands over legs, some the other way around; some like to get in close and grapple, some like to sweep (depending on your art, too). Even in something as apparently ordinary as a jab-cross-hook combination can vary from individual to individual. So I believe it pays to train with anyone who is willing to train with you! But then this is an issue for small clubs, too. A large female-only club will have greater variety than a small mixed club. I suppose the answer to this depends on whether you believe the mere fact a woman trains with men makes it more realistic. I don't think it does. The one exception to this I think is grappling. Men's greater upper body strength makes it important for women grapple with men, at least some of the time. What can be made to work on another woman may not work with the same ease on a man. Again, this depends on your art. I think men benefit from working with women, too. Certain locks are easier to apply on the average man. The average woman seems to have (in my experience) greater flexibility, and it can be harder to make them work. It's important to be able to respond to this. To sum up: I appreciate the need for these clubs, but on the whole I think mixed clubs have more to offer. Regards, Bart the Lover

Kirves: Firstly, sorry if my previous post sounded a little snippy. It's not meant to be. You wrote: Compliments are great. They make people feel good. Having manners, being respectful, and thinking of others are all desirable things. But why should women enjoy them exclusively? If giving up your seat on the bus (for example) is an act of niceness, why aren't women expected to do it? Shouldn't everyone be bound by civilised behaviour? Regards, Bart the Lover

Kirves wrote: Why is an able-bodied woman entitled to special treatment? Is an adult woman capable of carrying a bag? Is she so feeble she cannot stand? I'm interested: why does being XX rather than XY confer privileges? By the way, I'm all in favour of assisting the disabled, the elderly, and the very young. Of course, if a pensioner boards a bus, they can have my seat.

How about: "Is your butt supposed to stick out when you do that?" "Oooh. Check out your muscles! Can I have a feel?" (Said while fluttering eyelashes)