|
you wanna fight? lets make it official bro
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 09:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
In Prussia, a dueling scar was considered an essential part of a fashionable male student's attire until the early 1900s. Since duels were fought with big military swords, they weren't just small nicks either:
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 09:39
|
|
|
OttoSkorzeny.jpg
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 09:42
|
|
|
I wonder what happens if you deny a challenge because you don't consider your opponent a gentleman and your social group backs you up. Sure, they're going to be gravely insulted, but what are they going to do? Challenge you to a duel? I can see the logic behind dueling, though. It enforces the social etiquette by making someone directly responsible for their claims. If you catch someone spreading lies about you, you're socially sanctioned to attack them for it. Presumably, if you publicly speak out against someone, you only do it if the matter is important enough to be worth potentially dying for. How it shakes out in reality is a different matter, of course...
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 11:11
|
|
|
Moldless Bread posted:I can see the logic behind dueling, though. It enforces the social etiquette by making someone directly responsible for their claims. If you catch someone spreading lies about you, you're socially sanctioned to attack them for it. In reality you just get a bunch of college kids stabbing each other in the face over the slightest insult because everyone must have a scar to be considered a Real Manly Man. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 11:26
|
|
|
barbecue at the folks posted:In reality you just get a bunch of college kids stabbing each other in the face over the slightest insult because everyone must have a scar to be considered a Real fixed that for you
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 11:37
|
|
|
It's probably more like frat boys. Prussia was nuts, they called it 'An army that happens to have a country'.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 11:52
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:It's probably more like frat boys. Yeah, this is it. The student dueling was not so much a matter of settling grievances (though that still did happen) but more of a fraternity activity. Fraternities held mandatory practice and exhibition duels among their members, which is probably where most people would be getting their scars from. It's also a fairly particular type of fencing, called "Mensur". Rather than the very mobile back-and-forth of something like Olympic fencing, it's a much more static affair that became ever more codified over time. The duelists would start out firmly within range of one another, swords held high, and then trade blows trying to hit the other's head, arms, or upper torso. You weren't really supposed to retreat or dodge since the whole thing was supposed to be exercise in bravery and machismo. For something that is actually fairly dangerous, it also tends to look really rather dorky: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUh5exBJXBU&t=198s Some modern fraternities in and around Germany actually still practice Mensur to this day. It's usually a giant red flag that the frat is full of Nazis, so, uh, beware.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 12:16
|
|
|
Moldless Bread posted:I wonder what happens if you deny a challenge because you don't consider your opponent a gentleman and your social group backs you up. Sure, they're going to be gravely insulted, but what are they going to do? Challenge you to a duel? Well this is a thing. If you have a system of duelling that only applies to the upper classes, then the upper classes can exclude anyone else from their social enforcement mechanism. You can't sue me, that's a duelling matter...oh and you're too scummy to duel me, sorry, piss off. This is why states (as opposed to militaries) frowned on the practice as mechanisms of civil law were set up. Duelling undermined the courts. People still enjoyed the practice because it showed how badass you were. There was a club in 1890s Paris that held mock duels with pistols firing wax bullets.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 12:17
|
|
|
Wasn't a good chunk of being a second going "Leave it bro he's not worth it bro he's not worth it?" Like I remember reading about how a lot of duels would consist of turning up and then being talked down, or missing the shot, so you had the ritual of the duel but without necessarily having the actual physical danger Can't remember WHERE I read it though, so could be bollocks
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 12:18
|
|
|
Ichabod Sexbeast posted:Wasn't a good chunk of being a second going "Leave it bro he's not worth it bro he's not worth it?" Also true. It was quite common for both gentlemen to say "all right, you've made your point", fire into the air or deliberately aim to miss, and consider the matter settled. You'd proved you were prepared to die over the point, but that it wasn't worth killing over. Both parties were only supposed to fire once, and pistols in the 18th century were horribly inaccurate and prone to misfires, so even if you wanted to fire a killing shot you could well end up missing each other "honestly". The most famous example of this is of course Alexander Hamilton deloping (firing into the air or ground) in his duel with Aaron Burr. Assuming that's what he was actually doing - the story started after the duel as a way of his supporters vilifying Burr by saying his opponent hadn't wanted to kill him and Burr had essentially shot an unarmed man. The last nasty twist in all this is that seconds were also supposed to enforce the agreed-upon rules of the duel with lethal force. If your man cheated by firing early, or shot the other fellow in the back, then you as his second were supposed to kill him where he stood.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 12:25
|
|
|
Well, presumably most people don't actually want to die over some perceived slight, so I would think in most cases it was about the ritual. Basically so both parties could say that the offense was challenged, so that both could walk away without losing face or social standing. E: F;B
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 12:27
|
|
|
It's important to note that while it was probably most "ritualised" in Germany, duels were the standard all over Europe and its colonies during the early modern era and the 19th/early 20th century. This is due to an understanding of honour that is wholly removed from ours and is honestly hard to fuly grasp even when you've spent a lot of time researching it. Basically honour was a limited resource, and dishonour wasn't just the absence of honour but an attribute all of its own that was to be avoided at all costs. Dishonour was also contagious; you could catch it just by standing next to a dishonourabe person if you were not careful. Honour was strongly tied to behaviour proper to your social class: A nobleman not living up to the social expectations of nobility risked losing honour and catching dishonour instead, while e.g. a commoner dressing like a nobleman did the same. People back then were keenly aware that (dis)honour was entirely a social construct and all the more careful in maintaining/avoiding it. This is also why it wasn't only insults or the spreading of lies that might lead to being challenged to a duel: Basically anything that might be constituted as a challenge to your honour might lead to it, because not answering that challenge might be seen by your peers as an implicit admission that the challenger was in fact right. Duels also weren't limited to the upper classes, but could be found pretty much everywhere because peasants too had a strong sense of honour and social class. And of course you can still see echoes of this when e.g. you're in a club and some guy is like "Have you been ogling my girl? Let go outside Or heck, think of chuds threatening their daughters' boyfriends with brutal violence if they would ever "treat her wrong" - this is 100% not about the daughter but because said chud needs to navigate a difficult social situation here - his conception of honour entails laying claim to his family and defending the purity of his daughter. A boyfriend means that this purity in in danger and - even more importantly - that his daughter starts to get out of his control. But on the other hand the daughter starting to date is socially expected and necessary if she is ever to marry (which again is a must in the chud's conception of honour). So he solves that conundrum by letting his daughter date, but asserting his dominance by threatening violence as well as trying to keep their relationship non-sexual. Formalised duels might have gone the way of the dodo, but I'd say that the mechanics and the social concepts behind it haven't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 12:46
|
|
|
Loxbourne posted:Well this is a thing. If you have a system of duelling that only applies to the upper classes, then the upper classes can exclude anyone else from their social enforcement mechanism. You can't sue me, that's a duelling matter...oh and you're too scummy to duel me, sorry, piss off. This is why states (as opposed to militaries) frowned on the practice as mechanisms of civil law were set up. Duelling undermined the courts. They even exhibited this during the Olympics around that time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 13:31
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:Apparently the Muslims named one of their own siege engines 'Bad Kinsman' in response. its always weird when you look at the youtube comments under star trek clips of ferengi being ferengi watching rightwing trekkies tie themselves into knots trying to say the ferengi are somehow good actually
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 15:39
|
|
|
Kanine posted:its always weird when you look at the youtube comments under star trek clips of ferengi being ferengi watching rightwing trekkies tie themselves into knots trying to say the ferengi are somehow good actually I can only imagine that being a hell of a thing to untangle, especially since the arc of literally every Ferengi protagonist is that their mainstream society holds them in contempt and ruthlessly exploits them, on top of teaching them cultural norms they have to unlearn to succeed- their misogyny, selfishness and narcissism are all clearly shown as not only negative qualities but as holding them back, and the successful Ferengi discard them to take on elements of a culture that works.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 15:42
|
|
|
Dang it, I had something in this very thread earlier about duelling iirc. Edit: Found it: Samovar posted:Ooh! We're talking about duelling? Than allow me to share one of my favorite incidents, the duel between William Adam and Charles James Fox; I added the wiki link to the latter for he is the more interesting of the two, and also it is needed to get an idea of his appearance - specifically, how goddamn fat he was. Samovar has a new favorite as of 15:57 on Nov 28, 2020 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 15:53
|
|
|
Speaking of student fencing, there is still the interesting tradition in Finnish academia (and maybe in some other Nordic countries as well?) of graduating doctors receiving the right to wear a special 'civil sword' as a part of their academic regalia. They're allowed to carry it in academic festivities as a symbol of their willingness to defend Truth and Bildung with the weapons of spirit, all strictly symbolic, of course. I'm due to get my own silly hat and sword next summer and I'm unreasonably excited about it, hah 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 16:14
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:This is probably something a lot of you already know but it's still a really weird fact for me, when I think about how people actually unironically behaved like this. didnt a republican politician recently make unironic comments about wanting to duel his opponents recently
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 16:23
|
|
|
barbecue at the folks posted:Speaking of student fencing, there is still the interesting tradition in Finnish academia (and maybe in some other Nordic countries as well?) of graduating doctors receiving the right to wear a special 'civil sword' as a part of their academic regalia. They're allowed to carry it in academic festivities as a symbol of their willingness to defend Truth and Bildung with the weapons of spirit, all strictly symbolic, of course. hell yeah
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 16:32
|
|
|
barbecue at the folks posted:Speaking of student fencing, there is still the interesting tradition in Finnish academia (and maybe in some other Nordic countries as well?) of graduating doctors receiving the right to wear a special 'civil sword' as a part of their academic regalia. They're allowed to carry it in academic festivities as a symbol of their willingness to defend Truth and Bildung with the weapons of spirit, all strictly symbolic, of course. No you are completely reasonably excited about getting a sword and silly hat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 16:32
|
|
|
What's the point of academia if you can't even carry a silly hat and sword? In Sweden, you only get the silly hat, but it is pretty up there as far as hats go. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
Ghost Leviathan posted:I can only imagine that being a hell of a thing to untangle, especially since the arc of literally every Ferengi protagonist is that their mainstream society holds them in contempt and ruthlessly exploits them, on top of teaching them cultural norms they have to unlearn to succeed- their misogyny, selfishness and narcissism are all clearly shown as not only negative qualities but as holding them back, and the successful Ferengi discard them to take on elements of a culture that works. turns out rightwingers lack basic media literacy crazy i know right
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 16:44
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/CSMFHT/status/1332400344974802944
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 16:47
|
|
|
barbecue at the folks posted:Speaking of student fencing, there is still the interesting tradition in Finnish academia (and maybe in some other Nordic countries as well?) of graduating doctors receiving the right to wear a special 'civil sword' as a part of their academic regalia. They're allowed to carry it in academic festivities as a symbol of their willingness to defend Truth and Bildung with the weapons of spirit, all strictly symbolic, of course. gently caress yes
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 18:03
|
|
|
I loving hate graduation garb, even with swords. Where did that goofy poo poo come from?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I loving hate graduation garb, even with swords. Where did that goofy poo poo come from? What, you're saying in your university system you don't have to defend your dissertation?
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 19:42
|
|
|
Kanine posted:didnt a republican politician recently make unironic comments about wanting to duel his opponents recently Wasn't that recent https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSu5mgjurhA Ghost Leviathan posted:If only they had invented children's card games. Magic the Gathering is the ultimate expression of honor
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 19:57
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:Wasn't that recent https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSu5mgjurhA what im remembering is way more recent than this
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 19:59
|
|
|
Back in 2017 there was this:quote:During an interview with local Corpus Christi radio host Bob Jones, Texas Congressman Blake Farenthold surprised many with his comments on a group of fellow Republicans (all women) who didn’t support efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 20:00
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I loving hate graduation garb, even with swords. Where did that goofy poo poo come from? If crappy movies have taught me anything, probably druids.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 20:08
|
|
|
The Norse had a form of duel called hólmganga where they'd robe off a small square like an impromptu boxing ring (or in some cases find a small island or ,,hólmur" hence the name) where the combatants would fight until first blood (or death if there was a lot of drama) usually with a sword and shield. This was a popular way of settling disputes but was banned when professional duelitists would roam around staking claims to land or horses or whatever and asking for either monetary compensation to give the claim up or a duel.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 21:24
|
|
|
Moldless Bread posted:I can see the logic behind dueling, though. It enforces the social etiquette by making someone directly responsible for their claims. If you catch someone spreading lies about you, you're socially sanctioned to attack them for it. The counterswing to this is that if there's someone who's really good at dueling, then speaking out against them is effectively suicide—They'll accuse you of lying, you can't back down, and then you'll get shot dead for speaking the truth. There's a reason that dueling has been banned by various societies going back over a thousand years—"Talk poo poo get hit" sounds like a great policy, right up until it turns into socially acceptable theft and murder. Loxbourne posted:Also true. It was quite common for both gentlemen to say "all right, you've made your point", fire into the air or deliberately aim to miss, and consider the matter settled. You'd proved you were prepared to die over the point, but that it wasn't worth killing over. Another twist comes from Andrew Jackson's duel with Charles Dickinson. Jackson knew Dickinson was a better draw and a better shot, and so deliberately allowed Dickinson to fire first in the hope that "quickness would spoil his aim." The shot hit Jackson in the chest and nearly killed him, but still left him standing—and because by the rules of the duel Dickinson couldn't move until Jackson had fired or was incapacitated, he had to stand there as Jackson readied his pistol, took careful aim, and fired the shot that killed him. On the other side of the spectrum, you also have Abraham Lincoln's duel with James Shields. Unlike Jackson, Lincoln was not a bloodthirsty maniac, and was able to manipulate the rules of the duel to his advantage to get the whole thing called off: quote:Since Lincoln was challenged by Shields he had the privilege of choosing the weapon of the duel. He chose cavalry broadswords "of the largest size." "I didn't want the d—-d fellow to kill me, which I think he would have done if we had selected pistols," he later explained. For his own part, he did not want to kill Shields, but "felt sure [he] could disarm him" with a blade. At six feet, four inches tall, Lincoln planned to use his height to his advantage against Shields, who stood at a mere five feet, nine inches tall.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 21:25
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:I loving hate graduation garb, even with swords. Where did that goofy poo poo come from? Clergy, most likely. You have to remember that for the major part of their history, universities were religious institutions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 21:51
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:The counterswing to this is that if there's someone who's really good at dueling, then speaking out against them is effectively suicide—They'll accuse you of lying, you can't back down, and then you'll get shot dead for speaking the truth. There's a reason that dueling has been banned by various societies going back over a thousand years—"Talk poo poo get hit" sounds like a great policy, right up until it turns into socially acceptable theft and murder. I think someone did this back in the napoleonic era and I strongly suspect it was the inspiration for harvey keitel's character in the duelists, an insanely good movie that everyone should watch.
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2020 22:51
|
|
|
Milo and POTUS posted:I think someone did this back in the napoleonic era and I strongly suspect it was the inspiration for harvey keitel's character in the duelists, an insanely good movie that everyone should watch. The movie embellishes and exaggerates it (and I imagine the short story the movie is bases on does as well), but François Louis Fournier was an rear end in a top hat who went out of his way to duel everyone he met. He became obsessed with dueling Pierre Dupont de l’Étang after Pierre delivered an insulting message from another officer. They ended up dueling 30 times over the next 20 years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2020 00:13
|
|
|
That sounds like a scam, or someone would've died long before before the 30th time.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2020 00:25
|
|
|
The obvious solution to too many officers dying in duels would've been to promote normal people instead of the inbred people.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2020 03:25
|
|
|
Social change isn't just hard, often it's impossible to the people living in that time. That applies to our time too. It would be easy to prevent Bezos from owning the whole of US, if you just had normal people. It's like that with the past too.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2020 03:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 05:20 |
|
|
I meant normal as opposed to noble.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2020 03:45
|
|