Are KFSS folks sadistic?

[usnken]

I was engaged in a conversation the other day that involved me, another KFSS guy and someone who has never trained. We were explaining how violent KFSS techniques are and quite honestly it was beginning to sound as though we were sadistic to the outsider. However, to the contrary, we are both easy-going guys. I began thinking: some people are drawn to this art while others are turned off by is violent aggression.  What is it that attracts us (the rest of us who stay with the art)?

That is, I am posing this question to the group ….are KFSS people sadistic?

Is that why some people love this art while others run away from it?! I have concluded with relative certainty that we don’t WANT to hurt others but we aren’t afraid to do so. That is what separates us from other arts. I knew a guy who trained in another style for a few years but when we played around his techniques were very delicate; not only did he not want to hurt others----he was AFRAID to hurt others. 

Based on that logic, KFSS doesn’t train fighters—it’s FINDS them.

Remember that stellar quote by Kevin Spacey’s character in the Usual Suspects: ….”They (Hungarian gangs) realized that to be in power, you didn't need guns or money or even numbers. You just needed the will to do what the other guy wouldn't.”
I interpret that as this: To win a fight, a person needs the will to do what the others guy isn’t….. to up the ante to the point where the other guy isn’t willing to. The more comfortable able we are with violent action and hurting people, the more confidence we have.  Most others aren’t willing to do the damage we KFSS folks are willing to.

We up the ante. But, I don’t think we are sadistic.

Just trying to get something on this board. :-)

[Jeffrey P.]

The Techniques used in San Soo sound Sadistic but than again so is fighting if you get right down to it.  Bar room brawls for example; broken bottles, cowboy boots, belt buckles, knives of all sorts, some times the pistol appears, bitting, gouging, grabbing all sorts of sadistic things taking place.  San Soo is just happens to fight the same way but we are refined and tuned in to what is going on or you should be.  That is what I find so special about this art for it works in the above environment weather well.  We do what it takes to end the fight as fast as possible without all the flash.  Sadistic maybe, effective very much so.

[Dave Lorenson]

 :)Hi Ken,

It's good to hear some discussion.  Among every grouping of people there are those whose motives are "good" and those whose motives are not.  Most San Soo people that I know do not enjoy causing pain.

Let me ask the question, is it more merciful to quickly end an encounter, albeit with brutality, or to take ones time and render pain and injury slowly and carefully over an extended period of time, just to watch the person suffer physically, emotionally and mentally?  The answer seems obvious, yet some do not see it this way.

I used to have a wolf hybrid.  She never toyed with her prey.  If she felt it needed killing she took care of business quickly, brutally and, in my opinion, mercifully...unlike a couple of cats I used to have.

Who can say it any better than Grandmaster Woo?  "San Soo is about your life or mine."  It's not about enjoying another persons suffering, it's about survival and avoidance, if possible.  "Best way not to get hit...don't be there."  Grandmaster Jimmy H. Woo.  This statement speaks not only to someone in the middle of an encounter, but to complete avoidance of the entire situation in the first place.

With Respect,

David Lorenson

[ccory]

I listened to part of an interesting story on public radio the other day. It seems this Doctor, I forgot his name, was talking about the sociopath/ psychopath gene as well as a warrior gene. He claims that scans of the brain of "normal human brain and these people show they use a different portion of their brain. He was told by his mother or grandmother to check his fathers’ side of the family. He looked back in their history and found some abnormalities. However to get to the point he had been a witness in several trials testifying to abnormities he found in other peoples brain. He checked himself and was surprised to discover that his brain had the same inactive and extra active parts as did psychopaths and people with there warrior brains. He stated the only real difference between him and most of the other abnormal brains he had tested was that the  others had all been abused as a child. I would like to find out more about this guy. Has anyone else heard about this guy?

Chuck

[usnken]

Using the basic info you provided, I googled some key words and found this discussion.

Maybe this is a transcript of what you heard: http://integral-options.blogspot.com/2010/07/npr-can-genes-and-brain-abnormalities.html

[kfss4life]

I've been thinking about this topic for awhile,to decide what i would like to say.I am just an ole country boy & not as well spoken as most people on this board,so i tend to read alot and not post much,but here goes.When learning this art,usually we start for the sole purpose of learning to defend ourselves.As we grow a beautiful transformation takes place in character,knowledge and in everyday life.You start to see the beauty of this art.We develop new friendships with people that we would normally never know in life,but only thru the art.Jimmy not only gave the first generation GOLD (meaning this art),but just as important a love for our fellow man.Every body has some one or some thing that they really love in life & thank's to Jimmy and Chuck and all who teach the way Jimmy taught it,we ar assured that we have the ability to handle any situation the best we know how and see our love ones again.We are not sadistic,but have the ability to handle sadistic people.That's the best way this ole counrty boy can say it today.

Bill F.

[Sansoofu]

I was reading an interesting book today that gave about a 5 page explanation of sadism.  I thought that it was worth throwing into this conversation as some added food for thought.  The perspective of this book was pretty broad, but the angle that the author addressed this topic with came from a psychological point of view.

Let me know what y'all think.  I'll try to cover the main points and still keep it as brief as possible.  In a nut-shell the explanation goes like this...

Most humans have three basic motivations: pleasure (i.e. Freud's 'will to pleasure'), power (i.e. Adler's 'will to power'), and meaning for existence (Frankl's 'will to meaning').  The 'will to meaning' takes more of a primary precedence (higher level of thought) in life with the 'will to power' and the 'will to pleasure' carrying more base, primal connotations.

Most people think of sadism in the traditional sense of 'physical' sadism.  These three basic psychological human motivators have turned the argument towards the mental aspects of sadism.

There are actually two types (or degrees) of sadism broken down under the concept of Sadism Proper.  Sadism Proper is defined as 'the pleasure felt from the observed modifications on the external world produced by the will of the observer.'

On the surface this sounds like Adler's 'will to power,' that we need to feel we have some kind of control, or at least influence, over our lives.  This is linked in with Maslow's 'survival and safety needs.'  Possessing a strong power base and support network makes us feel safe- insulated and happy.  When our basic physical needs are met, then we can pursue higher order needs like self-actualization (i.e. the 'will to meaning').

At this point Sadism Proper dovetails into Freud's 'will to pleasure.'  Central to sadism is the pleasure one receives by knowing that one's words or actions affect others strongly.  And it's no secret that deliberately raising our stress levels- in a controlled situation, or at least in a time and place of our own choosing- brings us pleasure.

Here is where Sadism Proper is defined more specifically into its two distinctions (or degrees):

1)  Schadenfreude - This is the more passive form of sadism that deals with the sense of joy and/or excitement we get when we watch others suffering, pain and unhappiness.  But while we enjoy this other person's pain and discomfort, we are not the ones directly (actively) responsible for their misfortune and suffering.  We allow someone to suffer through our inaction and/or lies of omission.  This pops up in two ways: benign and belligerent.

2)  Algolagnia - This is the aggressive form of sadism defined by the pleasure (even sexual pleasure) you get from deliberately and actively inflicting pain on others.

Thus, to digress from the book's definitions, it seems that we may fit into the broader term of Sadism Proper in some ways, but it will certainly depend on the inner make-up of each individual rather than stereotyping us all into one heterogeneous group.

Couple some of this with the article posted above about the genetic brain structure of warriors and this makes for some pretty interesting stuff...

By the way, the author of the series of books is Dr. Haha Lung (great name, no?).  It is a fascinating series of books.  There are about 6 of them.  I would recommend anybody to check them out.  They are all pretty dense with cool information.

Mason

[ThomPayson]

For me the answer is somewhat simple. I was attracted by the effectivness of our techniques. With this knowledge comes a certain kind of confidence that we all possess. The art itself is dangerous and when used can be very brutal. But no sadistic intentions. Most if not all of the San Soo brothers and sisters I know will walk away from a confrontation when possible, they are usually very kind and giving people. Really the kind of folks you just want to be around. I am still friends with some of the guys I got my black belt with back in 1982. Now if push came to shove I would shove back as hard and fast as needed. Chuck always taught us to assume the other guy could have the same skill level in fighting that you do or even more, show no quarter when forced to fight. That is not sadistic in my mind. But maybe that doctor Chuck was mentioning has something, perhaps there is a way our brain works. Real quick, I was once working with Bill Cory at a place called the Country Club in Reseda CA. I was by far the smallest of all the bouncers there. During one show a guy was about to hit one of the other bouncers with a bottle while his back was turned. I grabed him by the wrist, brought it into my body and applied the leverage as I was taught. When I felt the wrist go snap in my hand my initial reaction was to be kind of sickened. But still he was going to hit a guy with that bottle. Again no joy or sadistic thoughts came over me, but the art did what it had done for centuries.

[martial_imaging]

OK, I've been watching this thread for a while now.  I think that most of the San Soo people I know are not sadistic.  Most do this art in order to learn to do serious damage to others in an attempt to best defend themselves and their loved ones.  Sure, it's fun to practice, and yeah, there's joy in imagining the damage caused when you take things almost to that point.  Thom Payson pointed out the sickness feeling he had when hearing that other guys wrist snap.  How many of you have accidently hurt your workout partner?  was that fun, or did you feel bad? 

I only know a few guys who actually get or got into fights regularly, and who actually enjoyed hurting others.  Most of the guys I've known who did fight a bit frequently took pleasure not in hurting the other guy, but in knowing they could protect themselves effectively.

Thus, In my experience, San Soo practitioners, IN GENERAL, are not sadistic individuals.

[ccory]

That is the program Ken. What did you think of it?

Chuck

[ccory]

I agree with everyone 100 percent. I obtain no joy in hurting someone, but better them than me If I canot defuse the problem. In Viet nam i have known a few people that I would classify psycopaths and they did enjoy hurting people. I can proudly say that 99% of my students joined to learn to protect themselves or to gain self confidence in themselves. Oddly enough, the two I knew to exist in San Soo, we abused by their father in childhood as the Doctor stated in his radio interview.

Chuck

[Dave]

not even close.  Nobody Ive been around in this art, or martial arts in general for that matter are sadistic. People that are sadistic are criminals and they take pleasure in hurting people. I think some may confuse this sometimes because we all go, "Whoah thats awesome" when we learn and practice a cool technique.  Most of the time we do that because we are glad we now know that technique and could do it if we want to. But I guarantee you that if you did that to someone on the street you would be singing a different tune, That is, if you could do it at all...

Ive been in some pretty nasty fights growing up. You know how many of them were after I started San Soo?  Zero!  And I am very proud of that number. I guess I learned a little bit more than just fighting from Kung fu.  There is nothing sadistic about that in my opinion.


Dave

[usnken]

  Wow, those are some interesting comments. Glad the topic sparked some interest.

Mason, thanks for the remarks. I enjoyed the food for thought. It’s funny you mention Schadenfreude. I had read about that previously after hearing the term on an old episode of Boston Legal (Alan Shore: Shadenfreude. From the German words, Schaden and Freude, damage and joy. It means to take spiteful, malicious delight in the misfortune of others. We used to dismiss this as simply an ugly side of human nature, but it is much much more than that. Recently a Stanford professor actually captured Schadenfreude on a brain scan. It’s a physiological medical phenomenon. When we see others fall it sometimes causes a chemical to be released in the dorsal striatum of the brain which actually causes us to feel pleasure. If you watch the news or read the papers, which of course you don’t because the Judge said not to, but if you did, you would see the undeniable delicious joy of the media and the public over Kelly Nolan’s plight. I have no doubt that you want Kelly Nolan to be punished. She married for money, she had an affair, she carried on naked in the pool with her boyfriend. She’s cold, materialistic, unlikable, and it might bring you all pleasure to see her go to jail. But as for evidence to establish that she committed a murder beyond all reasonable doubt? It just isn’t there. The only possible route to a guilty verdict here is Schadenfreude.)

Master Cory, I listened to that story just now. Interesting to hear that people are now using the ‘warrior gene’ as a reason, or excuse, in court. Interesting topic altogether and I would question the premise that a person with the warrior gene could grow into a mentally healthy adult as long as their upbrining is 'normal' (ie they arent absued). Look at the serial killers like Jeffery Dahmer and Ted Bundy who grew up in middle class families with a somewhat 'normal' upbringing. Strong parenting is powerful, but choice/freewill still comes into play.

I guess at the heart of the original question was: what separates those who love KFSS, from those who are turned off by its violent nature? Why do some stay and some go? I am not a mean person at all, nor do I like violence. When people close to me find out that I train in such an art, they tend to comment that they are surprised I would be into something like that.

I don’t think there really is a clear-cut answer on why some people stay and others go. I could write a book about all the reasons why this art appeals to me personally…and I am just a green belt (who is WAY out of practice, btw). I suspect most anyone who loves the art would also have a number of reasons why they love it. 

Thanks, all.

[ccory]

Good reply Ken,
I have found over the years I have taught San Soo that either you like San Soo are you are afraid of it and any associated with it. I have found that most of my students came to me to learn to defend themselves and their family. However, the more they studied, the more they mellowed out and let a lot more slide off them before they reacted to any threat. In short they became more controlled and disciplined as to when and where and how to attack or defend themselves. In my opinion, it is far safer to be around a trained fighter than to not be. They have better control of their temper. They are taught that the luxury of being upset, angry, or mad is not an option. I have taught bikers and gang members who all left the gangs because they developed more confidence in themselves and did not need the protection of a group environment. I also had an attorney who after gaining confidence in himself, broke away from the firm he was a part of, leaving the safety of the group income to be a practicing attorney by himself and later became a setting judge because his San Soo training helped him feel that he was helping support the others and he did not need to share his income any longer.

San Soo gives you confidence in yourself for being able to defend yourself but it spills into your professional and personal life as well. As the saying goes "Kung Fu is not an Art, it is a way of life".


Chuck