• LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Everything this side of a real life or death fight has rules, so I don’t think people could ever test stuff without limits.

    Or rather, the number of people who agree on a no rules fight is self-regulating…

    • Sergio@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah, exactly. Violence is contextual. Sometimes you just want to get the drunk out of the bar. Sometimes you want to hurt someone enough to leave you alone. Sometimes you want to defeat your opponent in a fair fight. Sometimes you want to get as many people as possible and catch your enemy by surprise – but even then you may not want to kill them bc you want to “win the peace as well as the war.” Obviously no single “style” is gonna cover all of these. (and one of MMA’s contributions was to emphasize how you could mix them together.)

      • LH0ezVT@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Good point.

        It took me a while to understand why a lot of self-defence-focussed jiu-jitsu reminded me of Aikido so much, instead of more “efficient” styles.

        But it makes sense for the intended purpose: you don’t want to immediately punch someone into the next time zone for being loud and pushy at the bar, or for touching you in a way they see as bold and you see as creepy. But a twisted joint communicates “do this again and it hurts more” pretty well, yet doesn’t do long-term harm or cross the line into excessive violence