Are Asian Martial arts an archetype of Perfect masculinity? (Whiplash movie)

[Pinjata]

So ... this thinking draws its impressions from many sources, so bare with me, please. (also my non-native English)

Recently I saw a movie Whiplash (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2582802/) and to me it came off as pretty close to Fight Club or Wolf of Wall Street. Toxic masculinity all over with a message "cripple yourself physically and emotionally and conquer the top as a cripple that you are". Then also maybe become a new "Toxic masculinity paragon" and cripple following generations of boys.

Now I, personally, have a bit of problem with pointing it out since, the disease is very easy to point out, but what is the good aspect? What is the Light side of masculinity universe?

So at this point I need to say I did traditional karate for more then half a decade. During that period I read a lot about how were pupils picked up by masters in 19th century Okinawa(or masters with same approaches elsewhere) and it was TREMENDOUSLY interesting.

To put it in the sphere of Whiplash: Our drummer would come to his teachers' lessons and be politely told to wait outside, that teacher does not have the time for him. After he'd persist(not with anger, of course) for perhaps a month, he could just watch other guys learn. Then he'd get his sticks and could play a very simple part of song over and over again. No pushing, his only enemy being his ego and impatence. Perhaps after a month, master would correct him once, about one thing. If he'd still be coming and WORKING HARD on THESE LITTLE PIECES he was given, he'd get more.

No pushing, no screaming, no chair-trowing, no slapping. I think that a final "product" is immensely more firm then the one from "Whiplash school of thought".

Would love to hear your thoughts on it.

[Murk]

First, I don't actually know what this has to do with masculinity. Toxic hierarchy, abuse, and self sacrifice to satisfy over-the-top ambitions are common in women too.

Second, I liked Whiplash, up until the end - at the end, it seemed like the movie actually said the abusive, idiotic teacher was right. I agree with you that situations such as those do not seem healthy or constructive at all.
However, the scenario you described, your alternative, seems almost just as bad. To me, the bad part isn't the shouting or the chair throwing - it's the mental abuse, the fear, the slavelike worship of a superior. The martial arts training from long ago you described still had all that.
Which, again, is not exclusive to Asian Martial arts, nor masculinity - every prestigious institution has been victim of those practices at least for some time.

[Frozen_Feet]

The answer to the title question is "yes", insofar as martial arts have been a mostly masculine pursuit meant to teach virtues of the art to the disciple.

This is almost completely detached from what you are really asking. What you're really asking is "are virtues and pedagogic methods of Okinawan karate better than those in [random movie about a drummer]?"

I have not seen the movie, so I can't meaningfully comment on it nor compare anything with.

I do, however, do Okinawan Karate and Kobudo, and as several of my senseis are acquianted with senseis of Okinawa and teach as their day jobs.

To paraphrase one of them on differences between Japanese and Okinawan karate: "Okinawans have no system." The techniques and principles of the art are taught in a very small circle, piece by piece, monkey-see-monkey-do, at the pace of the student, without codification. Japanese, by contrast, took karate and made it into a school sport. When teaching a big class, you need to get everyone on ball of what's happening, you have to give the techniques names and correct form. Japanese "have a system".

So how does it translate to other countries. In Germany and Finland, basic training is often done in big groups, more personalized training happens in higher belt degrees where the number of participants narrow. So there's a need to do what the Japanese did and codify the art, to create a system. Typically, what happens is that the highest-ranking non-Okinawan senseis go to Okinawan senseis, learn the art in the traditional manner, discuss the system with them, and then modify and spread the teachings in a form suited to their home environment.

The point I'm getting at that you haven't really even touched the core of the ideals or archetypes the training is supposed to instill. You've been talking about an idealized for of how to teach those things, which is a separate argument alltogether.

[A.A.King]

I find it very patronising and arrogant to call it 'crippling' and 'toxic' just because you don't agree with someone else his dreams. Just because you've set your own bar so very low it's okay to say that someone has "over the top ambitions"?

If you think it is 'crippling' to devote yourself to a cause with everything you have and if you think that people with a different emotional attitude are 'toxic' or have been affected by toxicity than that is your problem. You're the one with the disease and don't infect others with it, thank you very much.

[Murk]

I find it very patronising and arrogant to call it 'crippling' and 'toxic' just because you don't agree with someone else his dreams. Just because you've set your own bar so very low it's okay to say that someone has "over the top ambitions"?

If you think it is 'crippling' to devote yourself to a cause with everything you have and if you think that people with a different emotional attitude are 'toxic' or have been affected by toxicity than that is your problem. You're the one with the disease and don't infect others with it, thank you very much.

Well, of course people can disagree on what level of ambition is fine.
The movie OP gave as an example, though, Whiplash, features several people who are:
- Willing to cause car crashes for their performance
- Willing to walk away from said car crash bloody and almost fainting without seeing a doctor for their performance.
- Bully students into tears, then depression, then suicidal urges
- Justify said depression and suicide by saying "you have to make sacrifices for your ambition"
- Give students with such ambitions false hopes (and consequently, the enormous let-down of it) just to teach other students a lesson

Just a few examples.

Now, we can discuss where to draw the line between "healthy ambition" and "over the top ambition", and that would be a worthwhile discussion, but I hope we can agree that above examples surely are not healthy, probably crippling, and if students who go through this later become teachers who put students through this it can be called toxic?
Please?

[Dodom]

First, I don't actually know what this has to do with masculinity. Toxic hierarchy, abuse, and self sacrifice to satisfy over-the-top ambitions are common in women too.

Toxic masculinity doesn't mean a certain element is essentially masculine or obligatorily toxic in itself, but that culture forces an association with masculinity, to the point where men not embracing it are perceived as lesser.

By example, the stereotype goes that men have high sex drive. Is having a high sex drive toxic? Not at all. Do all men have one? Nope. Is it exclusively masculine? Not either. But in some environments, men who don't boast of sexual activity are bullied and have their gender, sexual orientation and capability questioned over it. Toxic masculinity is basically denying men the right not to conform to their gender stereotypes.

[Frozen_Feet]

All very nice but I'll point out that what terminology you use for describing crappy pedagogy in [random movie about drummer] has next to nill do with the question the title poses.

[Murk]

Toxic masculinity doesn't mean a certain element is essentially masculine or obligatorily toxic in itself, but that culture forces an association with masculinity, to the point where men not embracing it are perceived as lesser.

By example, the stereotype goes that men have high sex drive. Is having a high sex drive toxic? Not at all. Do all men have one? Nope. Is it exclusively masculine? Not either. But in some environments, men who don't boast of sexual activity are bullied and have their gender, sexual orientation and capability questioned over it. Toxic masculinity is basically denying men the right not to conform to their gender stereotypes.

Aah, thanks, that makes sense, in a way. I can see what OP meant, now.
I still don't fully agree with it (I think that most of these cases are not a forced association with masculinity but with humanity, of two sexes, in general), but at least I can see where it's coming from.


All very nice but I'll point out that what terminology you use for describing crappy pedagogy in [random movie about drummer] has next to nill do with the question the title poses.

I assume OP is comparing "negative" archetypes of (toxic) masculinity, such as ridiculous amounts of wealth-wasting parties (wolf of wall street), self sacrifice for ambition (whiplash) and, ehm, I guess agressive individualism (fight club), to "positive" achetypes of masculinity such as Asian martial arts?

[A.A.King]

Well, of course people can disagree on what level of ambition is fine.
The movie OP gave as an example, though, Whiplash, features several people who are:
- Willing to cause car crashes for their performance
- Willing to walk away from said car crash bloody and almost fainting without seeing a doctor for their performance.
- Bully students into tears, then depression, then suicidal urges
- Justify said depression and suicide by saying "you have to make sacrifices for your ambition"
- Give students with such ambitions false hopes (and consequently, the enormous let-down of it) just to teach other students a lesson

Just a few examples.

Now, we can discuss where to draw the line between "healthy ambition" and "over the top ambition", and that would be a worthwhile discussion, but I hope we can agree that above examples surely are not healthy, probably crippling, and if students who go through this later become teachers who put students through this it can be called toxic?
Please?

In general the line between "healthy ambition" and "over the top ambition" is somewhere between President of the United States and King of the world, between achieving something amazing and having to establish a new world order.

For as far as your examples go:
Causing a car crash is either gross neglance or an active crime both of which are problems in and of themselves independant of ambition. The willingness however to walk away from a crash (assuming a situation in which you are the victim and not the cause) is in many ways something that should be applauded. It may be foolish and it it is certainly risky but can you really fault someone for wanting to go ahead with what may be a once in a lifetime achievement? Are you not familiar with the show must go on? With the concept of an Adrenaline High? Have you really never wanted something so much that you believed nothing would stop you from getting it if it came within your grasp? There are many stories of famous performering artist who sustained injuriers during or prior to being on stage who went on regardless of the consequences (which in some cases were fatal). The mantra of "The Show Must Go On" may have claimed lifes but it has given birth to legends, are we really ready to fault great names like Houdini? Are you really prepared to stop people from taking their chance and making them forever life with two words boomimg round their head: "What If?!"

The description "Bullying" is an interpretation of the event which I cannot comment on without seeing the movie, nor can I, without seeing the movie, accept the premise that the harsh teaching gave birth to the suicide (post hoc ergo propter hoc anyone?). I am however willing to agree that the events as described are wrong, and that there is something wrong with a teaching apparatus that bullies its pupils into suicide

HOWEVER:

The faults of the movie are the faults of reality. The problem isn't so much the drill sergeant routine the teachers adopt for their students, it is the fact thr people who just can't believe that they can't do something. We live in a society of participation awards and genuine awful movies like Pitch Perfect which sell the lie that anyone can accomplish anything if they really really want it. The false hope doesn't come from the school, it lives in our society and comes from every single American Underdog movie where the million to one contestant ends up stealing the show. We see it on TV in Got Talent like shows were atleast half of the participant deserve to hear a resounding NO yet were still strongly encouraged by tone-deaf friends and relatives. Look, I too would much rather watch a movie in which very quickly the dad took his child aside and said to him: "Billy, dancing isn't for you. You move with the grace of rampaging elephant and you have a face which was made for you. Just stop all this pointless practise and try to focus on getting a proper job" but I just don't see that happening yet. Failing that I prefer to see a movie which shows that to get to the top you don't just need talent, you need hardwork. I want a movie which dared to tell its audiance that you have to suffer for your succes and no amount of pain is guarantee that you'll make it, but you are guaranteed that if it doesn't hurt it doesn't work.

I am strongly, strongly, in favour of telling people that not everypne can do it. The world was created unequal and some people have talent and some people don't. I am however just as strongly oppposed to telling anyone with abilities to not reach for the stars. No ambition you can make a reality is over the top, no amount of hard work and suffering which gets you to where you want to be is too much and for some people no personal risk is too great.

No-one should ever be told to settle for mediocre just because for other people mediocre is a bridge too far.

[Murk]

Snip

Fair enough.
Look, I'm not faulting people with ambition here, though I do not share these sorts of ambitions (so, no, I have never experienced such highs or drives). I'm not even faulting people who abuse those with ambition.
So, no way I want to tell people "you can't" or "you shouldn't", because it is their right to do unhealthy things if they think the result is worth it.
As you say, however, I do think there might be a societal problem here, where people with ambitions are told "Your life is only worth something if you achieve greatness" - as children, highly influentiable - and then, after they've been ingrained with a deep desire to achieve greatness, tell them "... Oh, and you can only achieve greatness by suffering".

As you say, this is everyone's personal choice, and if Houdini thinks it is worth it (even though I might disagree) he's free to suffer as much as he thinks is necessary.
Most of this greatness can only be achieved if people start at very young (vulnerable) ages though, and there we might have a problem. Social pressure can be very hard especially at young ages.
And when that happens, there is something toxic and crippling happening.

So, yeah, of course that's not always, and of course people can sacrifice stuff for their ambitions - but not every ambition is healthy, and though this threads premises were rather extreme, I do think it is possible to discuss if some ambitions are... healthier? Smarter? Nicer? to strife for. I guess.

[A.A.King]

Fair enough.
Look, I'm not faulting people with ambition here, though I do not share these sorts of ambitions (so, no, I have never experienced such highs or drives). I'm not even faulting people who abuse those with ambition.
So, no way I want to tell people "you can't" or "you shouldn't", because it is their right to do unhealthy things if they think the result is worth it.
As you say, however, I do think there might be a societal problem here, where people with ambitions are told "Your life is only worth something if you achieve greatness" - as children, highly influentiable - and then, after they've been ingrained with a deep desire to achieve greatness, tell them "... Oh, and you can only achieve greatness by suffering".

As you say, this is everyone's personal choice, and if Houdini thinks it is worth it (even though I might disagree) he's free to suffer as much as he thinks is necessary.
Most of this greatness can only be achieved if people start at very young (vulnerable) ages though, and there we might have a problem. Social pressure can be very hard especially at young ages.
And when that happens, there is something toxic and crippling happening.

So, yeah, of course that's not always, and of course people can sacrifice stuff for their ambitions - but not every ambition is healthy, and though this threads premises were rather extreme, I do think it is possible to discuss if some ambitions are... healthier? Smarter? Nicer? to strife for. I guess.

It is true that their is something toxic about telling children that they are only worth something if they achieve something but I would still consider the sentiment that anyone can achieve greatness to be the most toxic thing. Worse than creating the desperate desire to achieve something is the false hope of the illusion which states that it is pausible. That btw is the toxicity ignored by the OP who only wanted to change the method of the teacher which doesn't adress the kid who had false hope in the first place.

There is something wrong with many parents when it comes to setting ambition for their children. One of the examples is ofcourse the parents who put make-up on their 5 year old and enter it into a pageant, but like most other examples the problem isn't a societial push to be ambitious but parents pushing 'ambition' because they want to live through their children.

Now don't get me wrong, I also think that their are certain dreams and desires which I don't understand that people pursuit. My usual go to example is young girls gymnastic because the effect the intense training has on their body and puberty. Though I still find it hard/impossible to fault those who pursuit that dream.

To reiterate my position:
There is nothing wrong with ambition
There is nothing wrong for being willing to suffer for your ambition
In fact having to suffer for your dream is simple reality, no-one got to be the best by accident

There is however something toxic about society telling everyone that they can achieve their dream if they are willing to suffer, because that is simply not true.
There is also something seriously toxic about parents forcing certain ambitious on their child especially when they create the desire before informing on the pain.