RE: Punching your sub/slave? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Master



Message

Grlwithboy -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/8/2007 6:37:24 PM)

The assumptions about punching/kicking sure are amazing.  Let's see

1. it's done in anger
2. its uncontrolled/uncontrollable
3. it's "brute" or unsophisticated, compared to hitting one another with strips of deer or something like that




KnightofMists -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/8/2007 6:40:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grlwithboy

The assumptions about punching/kicking sure are amazing.  Let's see

1. it's done in anger
2. its uncontrolled/uncontrollable
3. it's "brute" or unsophisticated, compared to hitting one another with strips of deer or something like that




Well.. I guess some people are not very creative with their thinking... dang right boring and narrow-minded I suppose



Aswad -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/8/2007 6:50:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: GhitaAmati

if he punched me, I mean "really" punched me...I doubt Id be up walking anytime soon.


Most likely a fair assessment. Unlike basic training (from how I've heard that described, it seems more geared towards hand-to-hand combatives that can be practiced in a competitive manner, like BJJ), I suspect USMC training covers more strictly combat oriented hand-to-hand work.

quote:

I, on the other hand, have tried punching him before and he just looks at me like Im silly.


Are you familiar with the right way to punch?
That makes a fairly big difference.

Women in particular do not instinctively lock their wrist, which men do (this has been tried with kids, and is the reason for the expression "throwing like a girl", which should be seen as a general observation, not an implication about the skills of any one female member of the species). This is one of the differences in untrained punching, and leads to lower impact and greater risk of injury to the person throwing the punch.

Women also generally need to work twice as hard for the same amount of muscle, due to differences in testosterone level (which makes it all that much more impressive when I saw a 70 year old woman lifting a dumbell that weighs about twice what I can do with a barbell). This leads to less mass, less peak velocity and less force after impact (for deep impact blows), plus less elastic mass to absorb the impact of a punch.

But there is nothing to prevent any average woman from becoming a skilled fighter, nor anything that says any one (specific) woman can't be different in this regard from square one. I know more than one woman I would be very reluctant to even spar with.

quote:

We used to do the whole sholder punch game thing....I never thought it was very fair though...


I hope he taught you the how you are supposed to aim slightly shy of an inch past the back of his shoulder?

This game is, after all, one where velocity counts, and your brain will start to signal for the hand to slow down before the target, because it is wired for precision, rather than force. Aiming past the target by the correct amount bypasses this mechanism, and allows you to hit at the time when the maximum velocity has been acheived, before the slowing down begins.



Aswad -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/8/2007 6:57:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

I guess I thought I was being pretty clear that I was discussing the latter...sorry if it wasn't.


It was clear that your practices were of the latter kind. It also seemed clear to me that the thread was primarily concerned with the former kind. Hence, I (erroneously, I now presume) assumed that your question was with regard to the former kind.

quote:


No, but I was discussing THIS thread and by far it has been leaning toward the male dom/fem sub dynamic.


Ah. Well, yes. It has.

Somewhat of a pity, really; as someone said, the femdom/malesub dynamic would elicit far less vitriolic comments.

I certainly do not mean to imply that women have less need of control or restraint in throwing punches when engaging in impact play, with or without toys. Admittedly, an average untrained woman will deliver less impact than an average untrained man, but this difference is negligible with a lot of the hit areas one should be concerned about. And any woman, like any man, can learn to deliver a lot more impact than an untrained counterpart.



Faramir -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/8/2007 7:01:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad
Most likely a fair assessment. Unlike basic training (from how I've heard that described, it seems more geared towards hand-to-hand combatives that can be practiced in a competitive manner, like BJJ), I suspect USMC training covers more strictly combat oriented hand-to-hand work.



For what it's worth, The Marine Corps Martial Arts Program is a close quarters combat system, that does include unarmed fighting techniques, but I would say the emphasis was on grappling and weapons techniques (especially bayonet training).  You get MCMAP training during three weeks of recruit Training, with testing in the third week, but I would think of it more as agressiveness training.  That and Pugil Sticks (man that hasn't changed in a long time) is about getting a civilian to be able to overcome their instinctive reluctance to hit other people.  It's not going to make you some Semper Fu dude.  Boxing and punching techniques aren't a big part of it.

It's actually kinda ghey I think--the belt system just sounds like a reach to me.

But anyway, it's nothing like boxing or karate where you practice punching/kicking and spar a lot.



Aswad -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/8/2007 7:01:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mistoferin

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHolly
But some people just aren't that creative.  [;)]


Well, that was rather offensive.


~nod~



Aswad -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/8/2007 7:32:22 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Faramir

The Marine Corps Martial Arts Program is a close quarters combat system, that does include unarmed fighting techniques, but I would say the emphasis was on grappling and weapons techniques (especially bayonet training).


Ah, thank you for the reference and information.
Seems it is similar to what I assumed to be the case for basics, then.
(That is, well suited to inter-company competitions; I've been told the brass likes that.)

quote:

I would think of it more as agressiveness training. That and Pugil Sticks (man that hasn't changed in a long time) is about getting a civilian to be able to overcome their instinctive reluctance to hit other people.


~nod~

I've noticed that few people are able to attack without aggression, and even those who are, usually require some sort of psychological preparation for the act, or some sort of context within which to put it. Obviously, for an army to be effective in preemptive strikes and active aggression, the soldiers need to breach this barrier.

quote:

It's not going to make you some Semper Fu dude. Boxing and punching techniques aren't a big part of it.


Makes sense, I guess. The USMC may, for all I know, only rarely be deployed in scenarios where hand-to-hand is important. CQC encompasses more than HTH, though, so I would guess the other parts are covered better. (You mentioned bayonets, for instance.)

quote:

It's actually kinda ghey I think--the belt system just sounds like a reach to me.


Did you mean to say that there are belts in USMC combative training?
That just sounds ... well ... ~cringes~

I kind of like to keep it simple. The Japanese system is complicated enough. White belt, you're a novice. Black belt, you're a student. Godan and above, you've graduated, but will (hopefully) keep improving. Menkyo Kaiden, you can teach a system. Hiden, you can legitimately branch a system.

quote:


But anyway, it's nothing like boxing or karate where you practice punching/kicking and spar a lot.


Well, it would make little sense for it to be like karate (time-to-use issues).
And boxing would yield pugilistic dementia et al, so...



LadyHolly -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/8/2007 9:12:57 PM)

My words were not to offend but it is hard to share opinions and thoughts on a board and not offend anyone.  Actually, its not hard - it is impossible. 
 
As I said, technique is personal preference . . . this is a tactic I would not use.  I never said it is a tactic you or anyone else should not use.
 
Like I mentioned to another writer on this thread, if I were experienced in manners relating to martial arts or military training, maybe I would be fond of this technique.  But alas, I don't and this is why I feel the way I feel.
 
No offense meant.
 
LH



Aswad -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/8/2007 9:47:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHolly

I never said it is a tactic you or anyone else should not use.


You did, however, seem to be saying that doing so was a matter of lacking creativity.

quote:


No offense meant.


I never took any, just nodded to the idea that it was bound to came across that way. Either way, elaborating on what was meant by "some people just aren't that creative" (or whatever was actually said) would lead to a quick resolution or an interesting introspection, depending on what was actually meant vs what was said, and why.



mstrspuppet -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 12:54:35 AM)

That is understandable.  I've been on groups for quite some time and there is always _________ whatever this is.  I know it is part of the territory and have come to expect it. 
 
However, when posting I simply say what comes to mind and heart without sensoring myself.  I've tried to be politically correct in the past and that doesn't work for me either as there are those out there that get offended regardless. 
 
At this stage in my life, I have learned to say and to feel what I think without worrying over fall out.  They are my feelings / opinions and I own them.  I don't mean to offend anyone, as I told the girl who felt insulted by what I what I said.  Offense happens more than I'd like but that is simply how it is.  Im sure you understand this.
 
I do stand by what I said, in my mind I prefer what I consider to be more creative ways to torment.  lol  Growing up with an abusive marine as a father, belting and punching were his only outlets.  I've tired of those long ago.  It is what it is - we are all different. 
 
Lady H



mstrspuppet -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 12:58:20 AM)

Simply not my cup of tea, but I've just gone into that for the 2nd time and wont do it again.  Not my cup of tea - nope.  But I dont believe I mentioned anger in my original post.



ripples -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 1:51:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: ripples

I wonder how many in a Thug scenario have taken advantage of training as Archer offers and if there have been any occassions where a D has not controlled their aggression sufficiently?


Aggression is not necessarily implicit in punching or whatever.


The act of punching someone is physically aggressive. One doesn't have to be emotionally angry to be aggressive.

Having said that, I can't really understand the pay off of physically hurting someone if no adrenaline is involved. If adrenaline is involved, I would imagine it would be harder to control one's physical actions without adequate training.

quote:

quote:

Conversely, if one were to punch, kick, slap, one's body will react accordingly - a rush of adrenaline etc.


It is quite possible, and indeed desireable, to function both with and without adrenaline, as the levels will depend on the situation. When training, one will also not use aggression, at least not in self-defense oriented martial arts. Quite simply, you need to be able to defend yourself straight away, and normal humans do not, without drugs, go from 0 to 60 in a fraction of a second.


Right. And I would imagine that this is something that is best learnt in a controlled environment - in other words - through training.

I'm still very much of the mind that if one wishes to participate in SM it is safer to first receive adequate training and thus a more complete understanding not only of how to punch, kick, use a whip etc., but of the ramifications of each physical act. An informed choice can then be made and unwanted consequences avoided. No?



Domspaintoy -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 7:03:26 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RaynaSub

Very interesting topic, Domspaintoy.
My Master and I would never participate in this type of play,
but I do admire those that seem to love it.


Thanks RaynaSub, ive found this to be a far more evocative and emotive thread than i expected.

personally ive learnt quite a lot about a) the subject and b) about the people who have answered, most especially 2 or 3 have been incredibly helpful and informed.

dpt. [:D]



chellekitty -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 7:06:02 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ripples


The act of punching someone is physically aggressive.




is there an SM activity that is not physically aggressive?



Sinergy -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 12:38:30 PM)

I have to agree with Alumbrado, Silat (or Penchak-Silat) is Indonesian.

My former Arnis instructor described one of the fundamental differences between Arnis and Escrima was in how one grips the weapon.  A practioner of Arnis held tight-fisted onto the stick, whereas the Escrima practitioner held loosely with the ring and little finger.  Another was that Escrima dealt with stick and knife, whereas Arnis dealt with stick and machete.

Not sure how much to believe, but he did grow up in the Phillipines.

Seemed to make sense the way he said it, but in my various travels though martial arts I have learned that, as Alumbrado pointed out, there is so much that is made up about the histories.

Sinergy

p.s.  Was telling my son last night that a lot of the various breaking and locking techniques used by any number of martial arts simply do not work against an adrenalized opponent.  Found that out researching this to teach students and getting feedback from the students.  This basically revolves around the idea that an expert on a certain technique would try to do the technique to an armored and padded assailant and would discover it did not work.



Aswad -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 1:23:44 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mstrspuppet

I do stand by what I said, in my mind I prefer what I consider to be more creative ways to torment.  lol  Growing up with an abusive marine as a father, belting and punching were his only outlets.  I've tired of those long ago.  It is what it is - we are all different. 


Might have clarified that there was trauma involved; that would probably eliminate any offense in making a judgment that others lack creativity.



Aswad -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 1:41:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ripples

The act of punching someone is physically aggressive. One doesn't have to be emotionally angry to be aggressive.


Still not strictly speaking correct, or my understanding of English is missing something.
It constitutes physical aggression (i.e. battery), but need not be aggressive.

quote:


Having said that, I can't really understand the pay off of physically hurting someone if no adrenaline is involved.


I can't say that I've ever experienced adrenaline while flogging anyone.
There was certainly a payoff for both parties, though.

Nor do I generally get a significant adrenaline response until after a physical conflict.

quote:


If adrenaline is involved, I would imagine it would be harder to control one's physical actions without adequate training.


True, many people react oddly under adrenaline.
Hence it may be useful for them to train with adrenaline.

I've had the "benefit" of spending nearly a full day in complete fight/flight mode due to a medical issue.

Thus I can't comment on how others react; I can function normally in adrenally induced fight/flight.

quote:


Right. And I would imagine that this is something that is best learnt in a controlled environment - in other words - through training.


Certainly. Training is almost always preferrable, whether in BDSM or anything else.

quote:


I'm still very much of the mind that if one wishes to participate in SM it is safer to first receive adequate training and thus a more complete understanding not only of how to punch, kick, use a whip etc., but of the ramifications of each physical act.


Yes. Just as with floggers, canes and so forth.

quote:


An informed choice can then be made and unwanted consequences avoided. No?


Well, the risk can be lowered.
No physical act, with or without "toys", is without risk.
But, yeah, an informed choice would be my preference as well.



KnightofMists -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 2:31:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: chellekitty

quote:

ORIGINAL: ripples


The act of punching someone is physically aggressive.




is there an SM activity that is not physically aggressive?



yeah .. dressed up in a clown suit and using a nerf bat to beat some with... I dare someone to try doing that without laughing.



Aswad -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 3:11:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sinergy

Seemed to make sense the way he said it, but in my various travels though martial arts I have learned that, as Alumbrado pointed out, there is so much that is made up about the histories.


Quite a lot is made up, yes. Even more commonly, there is a lack of clear information, and people end up using different sources, and these sources are conflicted about how the facts really are. I read a tagline on a martial arts forum, attributed to Masaaki Hatsumi, which I think aptly summarizes my own attitude to such things: "Shut up and train!"

If it works, or does something for you, who cares where it's from or what it's called?

quote:


Was telling my son last night that a lot of the various breaking and locking techniques used by any number of martial arts simply do not work against an adrenalized opponent.


Many martial arts are unrealistic.

Take the Japanese arts, for instance. Originally, there were only a few "legitimate" schools of Japanese martial arts. The reason for this was that others would challenge them to duels to test their skills. Unlike sports like UFC, these were sometimes no holds barred fights, with no rules like "no eye gouging" and so forth. This served as a kind of quality assurance: any school you trained at either had been tested or would be tested. More recently, these duels were banned. Almost overnight, dozens of new schools appeared. Later, a lot of them were turned into sports. Focus shifted to opponents that are neither determined to kill you, nor wearing armor, nor using drugs, nor heavily influenced by adrenaline.

Also, look at stuff like pressure points. Some schools rely almost entirely on them, and most of these are bogus, while the rest are generally questionable. Do I learn pressure points? Well, kind of. Am I supposed to use them? No, I'm supposed to break the bones under it; hitting the point itself is just an added bonus- nice if it happens, don't care if it doesn't.

Locks are, comparatively speaking, one of the lesser "sins". Some work, some don't. The better arts tend to teach the difference, when to apply which locks. Bone, muscle, and nerves are very different in this regard. Against an opponent that is full of drugs or adrenalin, it is more viable to neutralize him/her.

quote:


This basically revolves around the idea that an expert on a certain technique would try to do the technique to an armored and padded assailant and would discover it did not work.


Any chance of getting a list of the techniques tested?

Would be nice as a reference.



Alumbrado -> RE: Punching your sub/slave? (7/9/2007 3:16:06 PM)

The are forums where lists of 'what works' under pressure/in reality are discussed at length.

Here's one:

http://www.selfdefenseforums.com/forums/cmps_index.php






Page: <<   < prev  16 17 [18] 19 20   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875