When does a gentleman fight back?

[Diamondback]

And another observation: like the rest of life, the decisions that must be made in this field are all about balance; IIRC that one word is at the core of many warrior traditions' teachings, the samurai being the first example that jumps to mind. Let the reaction fit the action, no more and no less...

@Lizzie: Not even if I fired up the lathe and spun you one out of solid tool-steel? lol

 

[Justdog]

Fighting

It's makes me quite sad as well. I've never understood the "macho" fighting thing. Certainly I would absolutely believe in defending someone who is being attacked unjustly. But I'll be truthful, men who just caught up in the heat of the moment are honestly an enormous turn-off for me. Not that that was the question. But I regard a man who is able to see clearly, think thru how his actions would impact his future (as you listed) and avoid/talk thru the matter rather than getting caught up as much more compatible, much more level headed, mature and desireable sort. Fighting is the choice of a boy, walking away is the choice of a man.

Fighting is the choice of a boy, walking away is the choice of a man.

Very nice:eusa_clap

 

[Justdog]

Heroism

I think there is a sense of 'moral obligation' to a certain extent ... this is not an easy question to answer, to what lengths would one go ... at the end of the day you must simply do what you think is right.


Now, when it comes to getting into fights, well ... sometimes a man has to do what a man has to do and in my opinion , gentlemen do fight when necessary. I don't see anything wrong with that!

Heroism feels and never reasons and is therefore always right.
Emerson

 

[Harp]

The question is would that responding force be moral and legal?

I wouldn't hit someone for knocking off my hat. It's just property, hitting someone would be unjustified assault under the law...

Morally correct of course; however, said actus firmly established
sufficient ground for assault and battery beyond inchoate objection;
and, if the hat in question were an Optimo fedora or homburg,
and, if a moose came along and stepped on it, or a passing polar bear
saw an opportunity to grab a freebie Optimo with a moose bash,
well, recover is a definite option. Though I suspect the polar bear
can make valid claim as to provenance; while under the endangered
species act? the moose is loose, the punk is wide open for something
more than a right cross. Or a left cross if you are a southpaw.
The real question here is, does the punk have deep pockets?

 

[Harp]

Nope, it's a lovely 34-ounce Carl Yastrzemski model. After all, I'm a lifelong citizen of Sox Nation, and I'd never think of inflicting grevious bodily on a burglar with some foreign bat.

A Strzemskivarious?
I completely understand.

 

[carebear]

Nope, it's a lovely 34-ounce Carl Yastrzemski model. After all, I'm a lifelong citizen of Sox Nation, and I'd never think of inflicting grevious bodily on a burglar with some foreign bat.

I see an "American Justice" commemorative bat holder in the making.

A noble eagle in flight against a background of Old Glory, carrying the bat in its talons, a single perfect tear on its cheek reflecting the image of the fallen Twin Towers.

When the bat is removed, the strains of Lee Greenwood's "Proud to be an American" start to swell to cover the sounds of righteous thwacking.

 

[Harp]

I'm afraid to say that serving members of the British Armed Forces can be the worst offenders for causing trouble. Too much adreneline? Testosterone? Who knows?

I do know that one Living History event in the UK that had a group of serving Paras with a climbing wall had to send them home early after they *started* a fight in the beer tent a few years ago. Now, I can't understand why they went in the first place if they don't like re-enactors, as many don't. It's a very sad and strange attitude that completely baffles me. Why go looking for trouble?
[huh]

...a fight in a beer tent?
Paras are ok and generally well mannered. It's those leg MPs who start all the trouble. lol

 

[Harp]

Harp,
I see you finally got down from the trees on this one. Knuckle draggin' paratrooper! fftopic:

Semper Fidelis

Todd:

Slid down the static line.

?What does that Latin phrase mean?

 

[Story]

Time for a vintage spin to this thread...

TACOMA, Wash. -- Ted Mazetier may be a grandfather, but at 84 years old, he's still got his chops. And two men learned that the hard way.

Mazetier was driving down South Proctor Street Wednesday night when he spotted a car on the curb and two guys standing nearby. He thought they needed help, so he stopped.

But as soon as he pulled over, the two men pounced.

"The guy comes over to my car, and unfortunately my window was open, because he cold-cocked me. I mean, just sucker-punched me. Just bam!" Mazetier said.

The punch left quite a shiner on Mazetier.

"It hurts. It hurts right now," he said.

But he wasn't about to take a beating sitting down.

You see, Mazetier is a World War II veteran who also happened to spend his entire career watching over criminals imprisoned in the U.S. penal system. In short, he can handle trouble.

"When I opened the door, he started toward me and I kicked him in the [hey nanny nannies*]," he said.

http://www.komonews.com/news/local/43601852.html

* Edited before the Bartenders do.

 

[Diamondback]

Local vet done good!

I only hope I age 1/4 as well. Give that man a medal and a cigar!

----------------
Now playing: Bill Conti - St. Cyril's Monastery
via FoxyTunes

 

[Erik]

When to fight? When you must. "Must" varies from person to person, granted, but action in the form of righteous violence should not be equivocated with the behavior which prompts it.

"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

 

[Lone_Ranger]

When to fight? When you must. "Must" varies from person to person, granted, but action in the form of righteous violence should not be equivocated with the behavior which prompts it.

"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing." - Edmund Burke

That about sums it up doesn't it? You make a great point.

As does Diamondback, and Care Bear. I suspect at some point in your lives, you Gentlemen, have been Professional Sheep Dogs.

Though, some here would no doubt believe that, Burke is "snobbish," or "preachy." I would point out that the question was, "when does a gentleman fight back." Gentleman being the operative word. A gentleman holds himself to a higher standard, than the "Ordinary Joe." You may not like, or agree with that. And that's OK. If so, perhaps being a Gentleman, or Gentlewoman for that matter is not for you.

In the end, a Gentleman, is a Gentle, Man. He avoids violence, but not at all cost. He avoids violence, and fights only when he must. As for when that is, see the above post.

And, for those of you that felt the Boy Scout Code, was too snobbish. How about this one?


Dalton's Code

All you have to do is follow three simple rules. One, never underestimate your opponent. Expect the unexpected. Two, take it outside. Never start anything inside the bar unless it's absolutely necessary. And three, be nice.

If somebody gets in your face and calls you a _____er, I want you to be nice. Ask him to walk. Be nice. If he won't walk, walk him. But be nice. If you can't walk him, one of the others will help you, and you'll both be nice. I want you to remember that it's a job. It's nothing personal.

I want you to be nice until it's time to not be nice.

 

[Erik]

Bear in mind that gentlemen, in adhering to stricter societal norms than their more malleable brethren, often find themselves in situations where "must" is a reality. Standing for something has a price. The price is worth it, assuming what you are standing for is.

Good call on the sheep dog line. Woof.

 

[carebear]

Conversely, if you have confidence in yourself you have no need to rise to challenges from puerile, aggressive thugs. You just ignore them and go on about your life.

Personally I feel no need to respond to threat displays or insults from wanna-be tough guys trying to impress their friends or themselves. I know who I am and I know what I am capable of, what they say affects me as little as the barking of a dog.

Not that I'm citing a movie as a guide for life but one other good line from Roadhouse, in the same scene previously mentioned, is:

"But what if they call my momma a whore?"

The answer given reflects the mental response of a confident adult with nothing to prove.

"Is she?"

To respond to insults from someone "less" than you is to drop to their level and give them control of your emotions. A gentleman cannot be insulted by a thug because a thug's opinion of him means nothing.

 

[Viola]

To me there's a pretty big difference between an insult and a threat.

I once had to basically ignore what I considered a true threat and honestly I was almost sick afterward.

 

[carebear]

To me there's a pretty big difference between an insult and a threat.

I once had to basically ignore what I considered a true threat and honestly I was almost sick afterward.

Better to back down and/or avoid the situation properly (as you did since you are still with us) and then come to terms with how it made you feel and why.

Many people get themselves hurt because they have internalized that they need to "stand their ground" or "assert their rights" in situations that really don't rise to the level of justifying an effective (that's key) forceful response or are so stacked against them that standing their ground is suicidal.

Gaining knowledge of the realities of violent people and violent interaction can replace the internalized false societal cues of what "being a man / strong woman" or being "respected" really means; which can help with the after-action self-criticism.

One thing to keep in mind is that oftentimes threat displays are not real threats even though they may appear to be.

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/threatdisplay.htm

Read that and see if it meshes with your experience and then go read about "respect" and "insecure alpha" behavior to see where both threats and threat displays by thugs usually come from.

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/alpharespect.htm


I've been where you are and know that intellectually accepting that you did the right thing in avoiding trouble sometimes doesn't help when you think of what you coulda/shoulda/woulda done. Just remember, you and your well-being are worth far more than anything involving the kind of person who forces you make that choice.

 

[Viola]

I don't know if my reaction was proper or not.

It's my one scary subway-riding story, starring two guys I uncharitably hope have since been hit by a bus, who upon realizing we were on a no-stop express and it was just them and two girls in the car started talking/laughing about their tee-hee violent felonies and one's hobby of beating the hell out of his girlfriend.

There was one other person in the car, another woman as scared as I was, sitting across from me, and we traded looks of "oh the alarm is over there and just gonna stop the car..."

I knew I didn't have a chance in hell of fighting two guys (I think we were all unarmed but yeah I'm small and was not dreaming of being beat down in a nearly vacant subway car) so even when they'd moved right up next to me I ignored them and stared at my shoe like it had the cure for cancer written on it.

I still don't feel good about my reaction.

 

[carebear]

Vi,

That appears to be wanna-be tough guys trying to impress themselves; which is genuinely scary and has the potential for real trouble depending on your response.

That type gets off on making people squirm, they only behave when they recognize there are real tough guys present or the odds are against them in some other way.

Looks like you read the situation right, given the circumstances there was little you could immediately do to change it. Heck, fighting two guys is a losing situation for anyone, man or woman, trained or not, armed or not.

Ignoring them without showing obvious fear (but having a back up plan) and then getting out of there was probably the best bet. When a situation seems dangerous and the odds are bad, you leave, you don't insist on your right to be there or any other nonsense.

Challenging them would probably have provoked them, that type is all about proving how macho they are to themselves and each other, a "mere girl" challenging them puts them in a place to put up or shut up and that's when their threat display turns into violence. If you then can't back up your own threat display with effective force, you will lose.

Read this "Bullies" section of the NNSD website and pay particular attention to where those feelings of "I shoulda done something" come from. It isn't your rational mind talking, it's a whole bunch of animal instinct and societally-induced crap about what it means to be "strong".

http://www.nononsenseselfdefense.com/bullies.htm

But I admit just knowing this stuff intellectually doesn't make it any easier to internalize.

Thing is, the part of you that is telling you what you 'should have' done isn't the part that was doing the math. It's telling you what a coward you are for not throwing yourself onto the train tracks to stop that runaway train. It isn't until you step back from that perspective that you realize how stupid the idea is. It's a train, it's bigger than you are.

From the sound of it, you aren't listening to the part that did the math and said, "Train big, train move fast, step in front, bad." Instead the part that you are listening to to that little s---heel inner-voice of yours that is saying, "You should have jumped in front of that train and stopped it."

 

[Erik]

On what a gentleman is or is not, or which parts are admirable or not: It appears that there may be some disagreement as to the term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gentleman

http://wapedia.mobi/en/Gentleman

If all it means is a well dressed man with adequate manners then the term has perhaps been diminished.

 

[Erik]

"Conversely..."

CB,
I'd argue that there isn't a conversely assuming a properly calibrated sense of "must." I don't see cause for violence in the scenarios that you presented. Certainly I have more grave things in mind in mentally mulling over when righteous violence should occur; defense of self , another or in rare instances a thing.
Best,
E