I wish I had some of them growth plates in my stomach, so it would of quit growing at 18
I have waited and finally decided to chime in. I have two sons, one is a wrestler and the other is into Kung Fu. Both love to watch the MMA and UCF matches on TV. I somewhat enjoy watching the shows with them. BUT, I do not in any way condone the children in this sport as acceptible. First of all, my oldest son has been wrestling since he was 46 lbs. He was in set weight divisions and against kids his weight and age. This part I do condone. But, we are expecting the parents of these kids to be responsible and to do the right things by their kids. I am here to tell you that it doesn't happen. In fact, my oldest is now on the high school wrestling team (9th grade) and went to state. I have heard throughout the years overzealous parents prodding their child to "suck it up", "stop being such a sissy", and of course my favorite one "the next time you get his arm in that hold, fucking break it off". Now, I am sure that most of the readers will say that this is just an overblown example of poor parenting, to which I would mostly agree. But, this is not an isolated thing. I have watched in horror at the parents of kids especially in wrestling. Kids come off the mats crying and are met by the father that is trying to relive their childhood through the kid. They will say the most horrifying comments. I get sick to my stomache at the behavior some parents display. My other son in Kung Fu has been in this sport since he was about 8. He is now 12 and has progressed to the level of Sr. Gold Sash. He is now able to spar for the first time. It is monitored very closely and they wear protective head gear, foot and hand covers, and the black sash instructors are the only ones that can monitor the sessions. But, they are too young to engage in full-contact matches at this time. I do agree with that. In mixed martial arts, though parents should do the right things - they often don't. I watch as the parents get more excited than the kids and they will tell their kid to strike an oponent in the groin or to knock the smile off his face. This is common for the contact sports. Anyone that has seen contact sports at this young age will be able to spot these adults easily and often. To say that it doesn't exist is naive. To say that it should be the parents responsibility is a cop-out. It is a nice idea, but not reality. It will take a child being hurt badly before this is stopped, but it will happen. In MME for this group, I see that they can't strike another kid in the face when they are on the ground, but they do and with force. I also see them strike each other pretty good in the face while standing. What do you tell a 6 yr. old that has been hit in the nose and bleeding? Tell him to act like a man?
In mixed martial arts, though parents should do the right things - they often don't. I've seen the same thing in football and baseball with overzealous parents. Main difference is neither of the sports are banned and probably will not be regardless of the injury (although rare). Now, if your condemning a sport based on parents, suggest all sports be banned. Bad behavior by parents is in the minority (based on my observations), and I raised 3 children to adulthood and all participated in sports, including bodily contact and non contact activities.
Don't give yourself so much credit; I wasn't leaving the site and certainly not because of you. I am done... talking to you. And you're giving yourself way too much credit on thinking that I honestly could give a damn if you talk to me or not? Better yet, thank you. Why is it so difficult for people to just stay on the subject instead of percieving themselves to be holier than thou like their spoken word is the end all be all of all conversations? If one doesn't agree with a statement made by someone, is that so wrong? Better yet, why is it even harder for people to see when someone actually agrees with their statement?
Where does it say in the article that the instructor is a qualified licecensed instructor. And where does one get that title? One doesn't. Any yahoo can hang out a shingle claiming to be an official 57th degree grandmaster of Bullshi-do, an international MMA champion, or any other crap they want. There is no regulation of these claims, and there is no licensing required to to teach whatever you decide to call a "martial art". Mine is a minority view, both within and without the martial arts community, but I don't think that young children have any place in martial arts or sport fighting, not even in limited ways (and I include boxing and wrestling in that). The skills that one learns when training in a martial art or a sport fighting form are skills to injure an opponent, and rules and protective gear can only partially protect from the consequences of using these skills. Ultimately, the greater protection comes from judgment of a sort that young children simply do not have.
For one thing, baseball, football, golf, tennis, hockey, and even wrestling have a couple of rules that MMA does not. Those being, the intention to knock your opponent unconcious. You're not allowed to deliberately strike your opponent in the head. Almost every injury being mentioned here are the result of accidents. An accident can happen while you're cooking soup. I like MMA and boxing, but I wouldn't let a kid under 10 or 12 participate in them because your opponent deliberately tries to strike you in the head. In my opinion, a 6 year old is ill-equipped to defend himself against someone trying to strike him in the head. Heck, a lot of 35 year olds are in the same boat. Apologies for being repetitive. Maybe too many blows to the head from my youth boxing 35 years ago.
The skills that one learns when training in a martial art or a sport fighting form are skills to injure an opponent, and rules and protective gear can only partially protect from the consequences of using these skills. Are not similar skills taught to defensive football players? Those being, the intention to knock your opponent unconcious Not true. The goal in MMA is not to injure an opponent, or render them unconscious but to win the fight - and the difference is not subtle. I'm sure most people like to imagine a bunch of broken arms, legs, noses and whatnot - but the truth is the sport is infinitely safer than that - and much less lethal than skiing, football, golf and a host of other sports. That and I'm absolutely sure that kids can gain great life skills through the study of a martial art. Much like most sports - discipline and respect are large components. Look at all them cute little Shoalin Monks; they're taught how to kill a man 43 different ways with their second knuckle on their ring finger from the age of 4. I find it somewhat interesting that two kids punching each other is a travesty, but teaching a 10-year old how to use a gun is educational. And kids are put into go karts and motorbiking at this and much younger age - so it's not about protecting children from dangerous activities.
Are not similar skills taught to defensive football players? No. The skills they are taught are to stop a player from making forward progress with the football. They hit the opposing player hard because the opposing player is also attempting to make forward progress with the football. Cornerbacks and safeties don't want to hit a reciever who has caught a ball; they'd rather deflect the pass before it gets into the reciever's hands. When a running back is bursting through the hole in the line, the linebacker would rather strip the ball from his hands than slam head-on. The contact is incidental. It's why you can play flag-football without any major change of the rules. Now imagine playing "flag-MMA" or "flag-martial-arts".
That and I'm absolutely sure that kids can gain great life skills through the study of a martial art. Much like most sports - discipline and respect are large components. Look at all them cute little Shoalin Monks; they're taught how to kill a man 43 different ways with their second knuckle on their ring finger from the age of 4. I'm absolutely sure that martial arts do not teach "discipline" or "respect", or "self-confidence" or any of that other blather that parents buy into when they sign their children up for karate lessons. These things are character traits, not skills, and martial arts are teaching a different skill set. They do not teach character any more than they teach you how to bake petits fours. In fact, while it is at least theoretically possible to teach character, I'd venture to say that insofar as people develop positive character traits, they do so through their life experiences rather than through any teaching medium. Some would call this a niggling philosophical distinction, but if I may appropriate a quote, "the difference is not subtle". Children come into the world as impulsive, selfish little bundles of need. They don't instinctively gravitate to the rules of civilized conduct; at first, "doing the right thing" is a matter of rote for a child. Don't hit people. Share. Don't cut the line. Children follow the rules, at first, because they are the rules, rather than out of an understanding of the larger consequences of good and bad behavior. A child refrains from hitting another child because he knows that he will be faced with immediate negative consequences, not because he understands the consequences to his victim and chooses not to visit that harm on another person -- prudent self-interest, not compassion, rules the day. A martial arts instructor doesn't have some special qualification or ability to teach compassion. What he or she is teaching are fighting skills -- skills that are designed to hurt people. There's no getting around that: if what you're teaching isn't designed to hurt people, then you're not teaching a martial art. The apparent paradox between developing fighting skills and not using them to hurt people is something that many adults are challenged to resolve. Young children simply do not belong in that mix.
claiming to be an official 57th degree grandmaster of Bullshi-do Who is Dana White. Alex: Correct I'll take S-words for a thousand
Cornerbacks and safeties don't want to hit a reciever who has caught a ball; they'd rather deflect the pass before it gets into the reciever's hands. When a running back is bursting through the hole in the line, the linebacker would rather strip the ball from his hands than slam head-on. Of course they would, but it's because those results are a better outcome for the defensive team, not just because of the contact. A flag football cornerback would rather defend the pass than deflag a wide receiver with the ball just the same. Hitting and tackling are an intrinsic and popular part of the game, not just incidental. There may be some avoidance of contact from time to time with the interest of career longevity in mind, but I challenge you to come up with one NFL linebacker who doesn't love hitting a running back head on as he hits the hole and driving him into the backfield.
The goal in MMA is not to injure an opponent, or render them unconscious but to win the fight I see where you are coming from, Weedy, but I have to stand by my statement that in none of those other sports is your opponent trying to deliberately strike you in the head. I'm not as familiar with all the nuances of the rules of MMA, but I was under the impression that a win was accomplished by submission, knockout, or sufficient landing of punches or dominance in the grapple. No ground and pound in the kiddie version (a good thing). Better ways for a 6 year old to spend their time in my opinion. And for what it's worth, I don't have my kids involved in go karts, motorbiking, or guns at that young age. 15 and up for those activities in my household.
I'm absolutely sure that martial arts do not teach "discipline" or "respect", or "self-confidence" or any of that other blather that parents buy into when they sign their children up for karate lessons. Then all I can say is that you have not seen my son's Tae Kwon Do class. The teacher stresses discipline and self defense. In every class, the teacher lectures the kids on the appropriate use of Tae Kwon Do. And that means never hitting another kid (or parent or pet). If one of the kids does that, they have to sit out the class. Most of the class is exercise and practice of the various moves. The kids NEVER hit another kid in (or out of ) class. It is not part of the curriculum. The discipline comes from having to obey a strict teacher who doesn't put up with any fooling around, roughhousing or playing with each other during class. It was also something highly recommended by teachers and other people involved with children's therapy as a way of building gross motor skills. And, specifically with my son, it has actually cut down on his aggressive behavior which is why we were advised to take him there.
The goal in MMA is not to injure an opponent, or render them unconscious but to win the fight I don't know what MMA fights you are watching but it is absoutely the goal. The number one goal of every fighter that steps into the ring is to knock out the opponent. Let me spell this out. That means to hit him in the head hard enough to cause the temporary loss of consciousness. If this cannot be done then there is the option of choking him into it, causing a laceration which bleeds enough to get a doctor to stop the fight, or bending a joint to the point of breaking forcing him to tap out. I also disagree with the post about football players prefering to deflect a pass rather than hit the opponent. Most safetys in the NFL get paid to make big contact and separate receivers from the ball, or make them pay for coming into their zone etc. But in the case of football causing an injury is not the objective it's just the accidental result of hard football. In MMA the intent is to cause the lights to go out. All you have to do is listen to fighters talk about their intentions before a fight and you will see that the object is absoutely to render the opponent helpless in one of the above fashions. Surely the fighters are not trying to cause permanent injury but when they step in the ring it is literally hurt or be hurt. Please don't sugar coat it. I like watching as much as the next guy. As long as the fighters are well skilled well trained professional adults with the ability for legal age consent. Watching seven year olds do it is just disgusting and frankly I would want my son getting hurt or would want him to hurt anyone else's child.
Then all I can say is that you have not seen my son's Tae Kwon Do class. The teacher stresses discipline and self defense. In every class, the teacher lectures the kids on the appropriate use of Tae Kwon Do. And that means never hitting another kid (or parent or pet). If one of the kids does that, they have to sit out the class. I am quite sure I've seen many Tae Kwon Do classes just like your son's -- probably quite a few more than you have. I remain skeptical that your son's teacher's "lessons" on "discipline" and "self defense" are taken in by any young children in the class as anything but rote-learned do's and don'ts, just as they learned "don't cut the line" in school. You say it yourself, in fact: if they do something they shouldn't, they have to sit out. The child's reason to refrain from unwanted behavior is, "It hurts me," not "It hurts someone else." When you're teaching fighting skills, your student needs to be capable of considering more than just the consequences to him/herself. Let me also say pre-emptively, because I know someone's gonna go there...no, I am not saying that your kid's school (or any other school) is churning out little thugs. I am not saying that they teach violent behavior. But they don't teach young kids good behavior in the way that so many people would like to believe, because young kids just don't do moral reasoning on that level -- what they learn is do's and don'ts, and they don't need a dojo to learn that, they just need adults who are on the job enforcing consequences. No, martial arts do not teach good behavior in that way, and they do give their students the tools to commit violence, and that can be problematic. Young children do not need to learn fighting skills. Get them involved in other physical activities, and introduce them to martial arts when they're of an age to appreciate the seriousness of what they're learning.
The first rule of Bitch-Slap club is don't break my nails, bitch. The second rule of Bitch-Slap club is don't EVEN talk about Bitch-Slap club. The third rule of Bitch-Slap club is Oh no you di'nt. Further proof that I should not write everything that comes to mind.
No, martial arts do not teach good behavior in that way, and they do give their students the tools to commit violence, and that can be problematic. Well, we'll have to agree to disagree because two, three, four year olds already have the tools to commit violence. Pre-schoolers kick, bite, strangle punch and push without any teaching from anyone else. You may blame the parents but I've seen the most mild parents have offspring that are extremely violent. And as a parent of a four year old there is only so much you can do once the child goes to pre-school for three and then six hours every weekday. You can certainly lecture them on it after school, but you can't be there with them at school day in and day out. Add to that the fact that kids will sometimes tune out their parents, another authority figure can be very helpful in teaching them these lessons. And whether or not it is moral reasoning (which is being developed right now) or rote learning, it is still important. And I suspect you have not seen a class like my son's in which 75% of the time is spent on exercise (jumping jacks running, jumping) and the other 25% on purely defensive moves. It's hard for me to imagine how learning how to block a punch thrown at you is going to be used to hurt another child.
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree because two, three, four year olds already have the tools to commit violence. And a martial art (if a martial art is what they're learning, and not gymnastics in a gi) teaches them to do it more effectively, because it teaches fighting skills. And no, I don't blame the parent. Please don't misunderstand that. It's just that many parents consider martial arts a panacea for all ills, from attention problems to bad grades to socialization issues. The reality is that there are no magic bullets and plenty of pitfalls.
And no, I don't blame the parent. Please don't misunderstand that. It's just that many parents consider martial arts a panacea for all ills, from attention problems to bad grades to socialization issues. The reality is that there are no magic bullets and plenty of pitfalls. Fair enough, I may have taken the criticism a bit personally. And I would agree that martial arts is far from a panacea for all ills. I would, however, consider it as one of many options a parent has in their parenting toolbox, if properly used.
I expect this will become a regulated sport with mandatory protective equipment, state licensed judges and fights conducted within weight and age classifications. I also expect "no holds barred" versions to show up on YouTube.
I'm absolutely sure that martial arts do not teach "discipline" or "respect", or "self-confidence" or any of that other blather that parents buy into when they sign their children up for karate lessons. These things are character traits, not skills, and martial arts are teaching a different skill set. Well, there's a few thousand years of Chinese culture summed up in one word: blather. And discipline is not a born-with character trait. It absolutely is learned behaviour. Self confidence is not static either. I understand that you don't share the sentiment, but that's ridiculously dismissive. It appears that the thing that seems to bother most is that the sport allows blows to the head. Okay. I don't have a huge problem with it. Few boys manage to get through life without being punched in the face at one time or another. Honestly, it's not nearly as bad as you're imagining it to be. No. The skills they are taught are to stop a player from making forward progress with the football. They hit the opposing player hard because the opposing player is also attempting to make forward progress with the football. Cornerbacks and safeties don't want to hit a reciever who has caught a ball; they'd rather deflect the pass before it gets into the reciever's hands. When a running back is bursting through the hole in the line, the linebacker would rather strip the ball from his hands than slam head-on. The contact is incidental. Grum, you have got to be kidding me. Perhaps from a bird's eye 'rules of the game' narrow context, you could suggest that contact in football is incidental, but clearly the game is all about contact. It's analagous to war. And is absolutely one of the most vicious sports going for teenagers. Ever been in a high school lockerroom? Kill, kill, kill! And football suffers more parapalegics, brain injuries and broken bones than any one-on-one organized fight would ever have. The impacts are simply more devestating. Some of you feel that there is no positive outcome for the participants of fighting in an organized setting. I couldn't disagree more. It just comes down to that.
Well, there's a few thousand years of Chinese culture summed up in one word: blather. If you think that martial arts as taught and practiced today -- and particularly the flavor commonly taught to children in the West -- is based on "a few thousand years of Chinese culture", then we've got a fundamental disagreement right there. Insofar as any martial art being practiced today has meaningful cultural antecedents, they are removed from that cultural matrix and thus can't honestly claim to be sprinkling that culture's virtues like pixie dust all over their practitioners.
I would say that the virtues of the art are inherent in the practice and the physical work involved. The virtue is in the activity itself. However, this is not to suggest that there aren't a pile of bad dojos with mediocre instructors out there. This example may qualify. It's just that the vast majority of my experience in martial arts suggests that most of the people who do it to the highest levels and become instructors take it very seriously and there is a legitimate legacy of teaching that has been passed along for a long time. Anyway - MMA is a sport more than a discipline, so while I see there being some genuine value in undergoing martial arts instruction, this may not necessarily meet my qualifications.
I would say that the virtues of the art are inherent in the practice and the physical work involved. The virtue is in the activity itself. Bingo. But that comes from the individual and his/her application of effort and picking up of clues, not from outside. And it could come in any number of different types of practice -- I've had parents speak to me about the transformative experiences their kid has had on the track team, for instance. It's the magic that happens when someone makes the "it's that simple, and that hard" connection between effort and results. It's just that the vast majority of my experience in martial arts suggests that most of the people who do it to the highest levels and become instructors take it very seriously and there is a legitimate legacy of teaching that has been passed along for a long time. Anyway - MMA is a sport more than a discipline, so while I see there being some genuine value in undergoing martial arts instruction, this may not necessarily meet my qualifications. I'm somewhat judging a book by its cover here, but I think that anything calling itself (or called by wannabee parents) "Garage Boys Fight Crew" has a different set of goals in mind.
Wait - are you suggesting that the "Garage Boys Fight Crew" aren't versed in Sun Tzu's Art of War? Well, then. I'll just take my concrete smashing blocks somewhere else. Good day.
I've got some small-handled crotch bats you can take with you.
