Closed Threads

tom hyle · 8th May 2005, 03:20 PM

Beheading is not a routine, or for the most part even realistic, combat move, because the human guards its head and neck more naturally, automaically, and instinctively than any other region (it will often expose its vulnerable legs, abdomen, and even armpits, to do so, and must be trained if it is to learn to avoid this. The elephant guards its trunk, and ruses and tricks are described to get it to expose same.). It's relevant mainly to judicial/official/ceremonial killing, which I for one find much more boring and less interesting (and perhaps more unfair, for whatever that means, and horrific) than combat, be it among humans or otherwise. I, and some others, discuss combat and cutting mechanics openly and commonly on this forum. I for one, tend to attempt to restrain the language used in such discussions so as to not offend the various humans with their various beliefs and desires, but have sometimes failed in this. I generally think(?) that moderator actions on this forum are in response to member complaints, either current, past, or fore-see-able (I can't remeber how people like that spelt.); I certainly don't always agree with such actions, but I think this is the motivation for them. The rules ask us not to discuss the rules, which seems bizarre and uninterprettable to me; not sure if we're suposed to have this conversation in public or not.......sure curious about Radu's awful link(s) that seem to be gone (Radu, please feel free to PM me about this; I'm not a gore lover, but I am usually curious....). The exact detailed use of edged weapons in attacking large animals seems central to the nature of this 'site IMHO. Historical/social/anthropological/linguistic discussion also gets objected to, perhaps more understandably, but also seems neccessary and relevant to me..............
The quoted passage was both short enough and tightly focused enough to our legitimate scholarly discussions to obviate copyright concerns, BTW; I wouldn't worry about that; publisher or author would likely see it as a free advert. more than anything else, anyway.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

8th May 2005, 03:20 PM	#5
tom hyle Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Houston, TX, USA Posts: 1,254	Beheading is not a routine, or for the most part even realistic, combat move, because the human guards its head and neck more naturally, automaically, and instinctively than any other region (it will often expose its vulnerable legs, abdomen, and even armpits, to do so, and must be trained if it is to learn to avoid this. The elephant guards its trunk, and ruses and tricks are described to get it to expose same.). It's relevant mainly to judicial/official/ceremonial killing, which I for one find much more boring and less interesting (and perhaps more unfair, for whatever that means, and horrific) than combat, be it among humans or otherwise. I, and some others, discuss combat and cutting mechanics openly and commonly on this forum. I for one, tend to attempt to restrain the language used in such discussions so as to not offend the various humans with their various beliefs and desires, but have sometimes failed in this. I generally think(?) that moderator actions on this forum are in response to member complaints, either current, past, or fore-see-able (I can't remeber how people like that spelt.); I certainly don't always agree with such actions, but I think this is the motivation for them. The rules ask us not to discuss the rules, which seems bizarre and uninterprettable to me; not sure if we're suposed to have this conversation in public or not.......sure curious about Radu's awful link(s) that seem to be gone (Radu, please feel free to PM me about this; I'm not a gore lover, but I am usually curious....). The exact detailed use of edged weapons in attacking large animals seems central to the nature of this 'site IMHO. Historical/social/anthropological/linguistic discussion also gets objected to, perhaps more understandably, but also seems neccessary and relevant to me.............. The quoted passage was both short enough and tightly focused enough to our legitimate scholarly discussions to obviate copyright concerns, BTW; I wouldn't worry about that; publisher or author would likely see it as a free advert. more than anything else, anyway.