Kung -Fu Interview

Sensei Canna offers insight into the real world of self defense!

Moderator: Van Canna

People are sensitive. . .

Postby gmattson » Mon Jun 16, 2008 12:20 pm

As most of us realize. It is easy to be offensive - even when it is not intended.

We can all learn a lot about forum chatter from Rick. He has mastered the art of focusing on a topic - presenting his point of view, even when quite opposite from others - without offending anyone.
GEM
"Do or do not. there is no try!"
User avatar
gmattson
Site Admin
 
Posts: 6033
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 1998 6:01 am
Location: Mount Dora, Florida

Postby Van Canna » Mon Jun 16, 2008 2:50 pm

You are correct George, about people being sensitive…we all are …bar none.

Rick is an exception in communication skills, as he is able to control emotions better than most…and more to the point…he is extremely confident in his beliefs of what he does and why…so he lets forum hubris mostly roll off his shoulders.

But the truth of the matter is that we see much callowness in the behavior of readers, both the posters and non posters, especially in some you'd think would be much above that _ due to their status in life.


While it is not for me to say that no one should be enormously offended by the words _ because "being offended" involves an opinion-based, individual perspective_

It is impossible for me or anyone else to invalidate someone's feeling of being offended.


However, I think it is reasonable enough for me to argue that, the offended person should have first discussed the offending issue with the posters in the open forum…

because everyone's reaction _including the offended person's reaction was equally important to be looked at and analyzed by the group.

The smart readers and posters here, are quick to realize that an ‘offended person’ does not deserve special treatment because of his unwillingness to step forward and be clear why ‘the situation’ was extreme enough to allow for special treatment of his sensitivities.


But stepping forward openly_ not surreptitiously , would be greatly educational in moderating a more befitting discourse constantly affected by emotions.

At one time or another…if a person is very deeply involved in conversations, in person or on the forums…there will be the occasional flippant, tongue-in-cheek humor employed throughout_ something that seemed to make sense at the time.


We have all done that George…nobody is excepted here.

In my psychology classes I learned that in certain cases, people should be able to recognize that something offends them and just try to (gulp) deal with it without going to extremes in changing the situation, unless the ‘insult’ is to the extreme.

What we also learned is _ that in many cases…despite his/her profound conviction, there is often a quality of secretiveness or suspicion when a person is questioned about it.

The individual tends to be humorless and oversensitive, especially about the belief.

An attempt to contradict the belief is likely to arouse an inappropriately strong emotional reaction, often with irritability and hostility.


I think we can all recognize ourselves in some of the above. :wink:
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 55850
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Postby Laird2 » Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:10 pm

Good post Van!

I think we can all recognize ourselves in some of the above.
And some of us may see ourselves in the post below:


Watch your step folks !

Image

Just like the good old days, you are still playing the same old tired game.

Hmmm did I just mock the lad?
Laird2
 

Postby Laird2 » Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:17 pm

Valkenar wrote:Given that he's also being mocked, I can see why he would not want to post anymore.


Brown bag justice!

So who is mocking him, no need for all of us to step on the bag son. :wink: Please expand on this accussation.
Laird2
 

Postby Laird2 » Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:29 pm

Mock may not be the correct word.

Possible heckle

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8017HK1GIX0

Imbarazzare Van?
Laird2
 

Postby J.Iovinelli » Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:32 pm

So who is mocking him, no need for all of us to step on the bag son. Wink Please expand on this accusation.


Yes. I think everyone stated quite a few times how much respect they have for him. Much of what he said was agreeable and everyone took it for his option.

As a matter of fact almost every post in this thread have been a "dissertation" of either why it is OK to disagree or why it is OK to agree with or how to not hurt someones feeling when posting or how someone posted without hurting anyones feelings or etc...

Not much on Martial discussion. You should just kill it and we can start another thread on posting etiquette the do's and dont's of disagreeing.

I did like the turd bag on fire. I would love to step in it if I have not already.
- joe
J.Iovinelli
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:47 pm

Postby Valkenar » Mon Jun 16, 2008 3:49 pm

Laird2 wrote: So who is mocking him, no need for all of us to step on the bag son. :wink:


You are.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mock

"1. to attack or treat with ridicule, contempt, or derision."

Let me get this straight, because you are confusing me Mr. Yee. You’ve got all the answers, because you’re an insider who possesses the secret knowledge. The forums are a great place for learning and sharing but you will not share because other people have opinions and have expressed them. I would have thought that a Uechi chairman would want to share the truth with the Uechi world.

Yes there is some doggie doo do we all should avoid.
...
You chair two different groups and have chaired the Chinese group that has the real truth, for two terms no less. Where do I sign up! Someone take my money please!
...
I feel like I've gone back to elementary school...I've got a secret and I'm not telling. :insert smilie with tounge sticking out here:



That's not contempt and derision?

The fact is, communication on forums is subject to misunderstanding. Darin seems to feel he is being misunderstood as a result of the difficulties of the medium.
- Justin Powell
Valkenar
 
Posts: 1316
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2000 6:01 am
Location: Somerville, ma.

Postby Stryke » Mon Jun 16, 2008 5:59 pm

Exceptional claims require exceptional proof

I thought youd understand that Justin , but regardless i`m done on this thread , as per Georges definition this is just trolling behaviour . Nothing to do with MA , because people cannot feel comfortable discussing facts .
Stryke
 

Postby Van Canna » Mon Jun 16, 2008 7:09 pm

OK…the ‘phantom insults’ …the mocking etal…


Darin
First issue is the inaccurate statement of my jumping over the table to spar a sandan.


This was something that Fedele wrote, which would of course raise some question as it did….but it was cleared up.
Respect is earned and goes both ways. Seniors being pompous and self-righteous only demonstrate poor Bushido or a lack of. We all know that’s happened a few times in the past.


Well, what do we qualify this as…in relation to what Fedele wrote? Fedele is a senior, and he could well have interpreted what Darin wrote as aimed at him…or whom was Darin aiming at…and why was it necessary for him to ‘lash out’ at seniors?

Do you guys see the incongruence here? An example of this is >>So there will be incongruity if you think you’re generous but find yourself being mean to someone.<<

Why did Darin have to be mean to seniors in general without specifying whom and what he meant…because of something really innocent as posted by Fedele?
Do you really think an outsider could muster as much or more authentic information than an insider like me with 2 full terms as “chairman”? The only information outsiders get are that which we allowed and they are sketchy at best. I will offer no more information as I can see there are opinionated people who feel the theories they’ve read somewhere outweighs written chronicles from the actual source.

What I’ve mentioned in my interview was the conception of kung fu. Please research the actual meaning of these words (kung fu). I can tell you, being fluent in 3 dialects of Chinese it does not say anything relating to fighting. Also be reminded that all things evolve including kung fu. Most of the systems were named after animals and insects for a reason. The kung fu not name after animals came much later and do not fall under my concept of “original kung fu”.


Now I can readily see why some people got ‘fired up’ by these statements as they clearly reflect condescension…which can also be spelled ‘patronizing and haughtiness’ and possibly so interpreted.

So as you can see….gunfights with words do happen…smile. :)
Van
User avatar
Van Canna
 
Posts: 55850
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 1999 6:01 am

Postby Valkenar » Mon Jun 16, 2008 8:46 pm

Stryke wrote:Exceptional claims require exceptional proof


Absolutely. But there's a difference between respectfully asking for exceptional proof, the way several posters have, and mocking the person making those exceptional claims.

If you're worried about trolling try looking up flamebait and then read this thread's posts objectively to see which are the most incendiary. To me there's a clear difference between those written in a respectful manner and those written to insult and demean. But maybe that's just my bias.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamebait
- Justin Powell
Valkenar
 
Posts: 1316
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2000 6:01 am
Location: Somerville, ma.

Postby hoshin » Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:25 am

if i am correct in my assumption Darin is a uechi senior and member of the board of directors? i dont personaly find anything wrong with any of his statements about kung fu, while i may not agree. the unfortunate part of all this is that actions speek louder then words. Darins unwillingness to even have a basic convertation about the history of kung fu leaves a bad flavor in ones mouth. and now with all of this extra babble even i would be reluctant to step back into the ring of fire.

steve
hoshin
 
Posts: 485
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2001 6:01 am
Location: worcester, ma

A mockery! Or is it?

Postby Laird2 » Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:34 am

deleted someon claimed it was insulting
Last edited by Laird2 on Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Laird2
 

Postby J.Iovinelli » Tue Jun 17, 2008 2:55 am

Laird2,

You forgot about "if you study Chinese Martial Arts you can not fight". It certainly got a good reception from the CMA forums.

You really should relax a bit, maybe some Tai Chi. It is good for health.
- joe
J.Iovinelli
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 1:47 pm

Postby hthom » Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:06 am

(P.S. Wow----- sorry that I intruded into the above discussions--- wrong timing but --- here's what I wrote at about the same time the above stuff was hitting the fan--- sorry again---)

[quote="Stryke"][quote] I guess the Chinese dont consider Sanshou to be a fighting sport , even though it`s extensively used in military training there .....[quote]

I am not too sure if I should get into another potential dispute but what the heck, just don't forget that I have already admitted that I am no historian so please be gentle :wink:

The use of the term "Sanshou" has been bothering me for a long time. I want to thank Stryke for the opportunity to say a few words here.

My opinion is that the term Sanshou has been misunderstood or misused by a lot of folks. Before I say one more word let me stress that I have nothing but respect for the Sanshou folks. One of the best MMA fighters, Cung Le from San Jose, California, is known to be a Sanshou expert, and for those who may not have seen him in action, check it out.

The term Sanshou is two Chinese words that literally mean "loose-hands" or "miscellaneous-hands". When put into use in a phrase or sentence, it means "fighting techniques"-- implying fighting techniques from Kungfu. There is no other meaning to the term. An example of the usage is: "Joe is a hell of a good bouncer because he knows a couples of Sanshou."

A lot of Kungfu schools teach fighting techniques or Sanshou (taken from katas or forms) as part of the Kungfu program. Some teachers would teach nothing but San-shau because, hey, if someone pays me for a few techniques, why not (Check out my web site. I call them self defense techniques). Of course, some teachers don't even teach fighting or techniques at all except for forms and ancient weapons.

I would be surprised if someone hasn't already created a style call "Sanshou Karate". Americans are creative bunch :wink: . (If there is really such a "style" already please don't take this as an insult or offense, I am just making an example here. If there isn't one already may be I should start one :P ). And, if golf can be considered a sport (sorry George), I can't see why San-shau can't be considered a sport also (again, don't eat a cow, folks, I am just making an example).

Jeeze, you guys got me all intimidated :roll:

Henry
Last edited by hthom on Tue Jun 17, 2008 4:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
hthom
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2000 6:01 am
Location: Bay Area, CA, USA

Postby Laird2 » Tue Jun 17, 2008 3:18 am

This afraid to express ones self because it may offend is becoming plain silly. I'm going to order your DVD Henry I'm a collector of things Uechi, from what I've seen it's the kind of thing we should see more of.

I like Marcus am done with this thread, actually these forums as well.

Be nice to Van in my absence.
Laird2
 

PreviousNext

Return to Van Canna's Self Defense Realities

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 3 guests

cron