The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The forgotten secret of the ancient Greeks > Comments

The forgotten secret of the ancient Greeks : Comments

By Dave Smith, published 8/11/2005

Dave Smith argues the pugilistic arts teaches boys to be better partners, fathers, citizens and men.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. All
Pedant..and Scout
You 2 need to chill a bit, lay down and relax. You are ascribing farrrr to much 'intent' to my rather naked words (i.e. unclothed with body language or intonation) and you seem to have missed the odd 'smiley'...

Pedant..
I'm detecting a considerable knowledge of scripture coming from you, and this is encouraging. Lets just hope that you are not of the 'Pharisaical' mould :)

Just on the issue of 'male aggression' I don't know why this is even a bone of contention, it is 'nature' for goodness sake. Males BIG, Females 'small' etc... Testosterone is a male hormone..and it has medically describable characteristics.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s394779.htm

<<The Y chromosome governs serotonin levels. The researchers conclude that when the Y chromosome is stimulated, serotonin levels decrease and testosterone increases. The result is aggressive behaviour.>>

So, all I am doing is merely echoing good science. The biblical position is this: "a Man must look after his own household above all else."

In terms of his relationship to his wife, it is one of sacrificial self giving in the context of leadership. Such a structure has nothing at all to do with inequality or lack of respect and I'm getting a bit weary of the constant attacks on this matter.

But re this topic, sure.. females are welcome to engage in energetic persuits of self defence, why should they not ?

So, my position on the nature of the 'male' is born out by natural observation, scientific fact and Biblical revelation. Why are we arguing ? or it just 'get Boaz day' :) ?
blessings.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Sunday, 20 November 2005 3:35:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Part 1

Get Boaz day! Yeah! Yeah! I smell blood! No, just kidding ;-) if it was really get Boaz day, and I was in one of my particularly pedantic and (shock, horror) aggressive moods I'd point out that the correct word is "borne", not "born" ;-)

Sorry we're going to have to agree to disagree here as I don't agree with your views on a fixed nature of the male, observational, Biblical or scientific and :-P for good measure if we're going smileys ;-) BUT I will agree that on a scale most men are more aggressive than most women.

Observationally, I detect that some women can be very aggressive and some men can be very passive. Conversely some men can be very agressive and some women can be very passive. Regarding, "Males big, females small", I have to point out that I've seen some big females and some small males. My position is that it's all about being on a scale.... much easier to prove than your assertion, "Males big, females small".... AND I'm even happy to agree that on a scale most males are bigger than most females.

Yes testosterone is the principal sex male hormone but it is secreted in the testes of men and the ovaries of women check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone and in both males and females, testosterone plays key roles in health and well-being. So, testosterone makes the average male "fingies" generally bigger and hairier than the average female "fingies". It doesn't mean that females can't box (which you seem to acknowledge so full marks there). Scientific studies of testosterone are complex, check out http://abc.net.au/science/slab/testost/story.htm
Posted by Pedant, Monday, 21 November 2005 6:12:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Part 2

The most important teaching of Jesus is to: love the Lord your God with all your heart and mind and love your neighbour as yourself. This is much, much more important Biblically that a man looking after his household.... of course you're weary of constant attacks, if you constantly make these vague statements or give weighted examples about men being the only 'protector' or 'agressor' with women always assigned the 'victim' or 'nurturer' role I will constantly question them. As I say above, I will never be sorry for wanting women to be treated as people.

From my understanding the Pharisees were teachers of the Law (all men, incidentally) who followed the letter of the Law but not the spirit. Pedantry must be tempered with compassion (see Micah re justice and mercy) and I wouldn't classify myself as a Pharisee in that sense, because I'm pedantic about the spirit as well as the letter.... but perhaps you should be doing a check there yourself?

I'm off to chill out, lay down and relax, wishing you a great day too :-)
Posted by Pedant, Monday, 21 November 2005 6:14:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am a bit surprised the comment about Macquarie fields by Hamlet on 14 Nov has generated no further comment.

I feel it is simplistic to condemn Standing for "rioting against authority ", and thus class his boxing as a moral failure.

I live in Queensland and coverage of the MF affray was rather sparse, but I saw film of people rioting. The police were well armoured against damage by rocks thrown at them. That does not make it okay to riot. I do not know how Standing himself was motivated to take part. Perhaps he felt his obligation to his friends outweighed his obligation to an authority many might see as oppressive. It could be said that Standing had enough maturity to realize he had been wrong. The SMH report says he turned himself in to police. That didn't do him much good.

I do remember one newspaper report stated "the rioting ceased AFTER POLICE DEPARTED (my capitals)". I interpret this to mean, the police did not quell the riot, it stopped when there were not police there to fight. I was left wondering why they went there in riot mode in the first place.

It would be asking a lot to expect boxing to result in universal respect and obedience to police.

cheers
Posted by Whistle, Tuesday, 22 November 2005 10:40:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Whistle,

I did make a comment on Hamlet's comment.... check out above "Posted by Pedant, Tuesday, 15 November 2005 8:14:05 PM". No-one else has commented though. Of course boxing isn't going to fix everything, and neither is football. But it's a start.

Cheerio :-)
Posted by Pedant, Tuesday, 22 November 2005 6:40:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As a mother (who apparently shouldn't have an opinion on this)I will not be encouraging my son to take up boxing. Apart from the fact I couldn't bear to watch I don't believe it is in his best interests to turn up at his first job interview with a broken nose and cauliflower ears. However I take the point that fighting has its benefits in directing aggression, relieving stress and basically allowing boys to be boys for a change. I might just think about judo or Tae Kwon Do.
Posted by sajo, Tuesday, 22 November 2005 8:15:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. Page 9
  10. 10
  11. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy