The Field of Honor

@Dead Mans Life: But he thinks that's the cowardly way to do it. I say that it'd be effective to use his contacts and pull the rug out from under him, since Bob's closet isn't exactly devoid of skeletons either, but he won't do it because it's "not honorable". -rolls eyes-

edited 23rd May '11 10:49:15 PM by DrunkGirlfriend

@Dead Man: I'd do, if it was about taunting and the enemy actually presented themselves on some sort of field. But that's not how it works today. Anyone who's ever had an enemy knows this. And, it's not "good vs. evil"....it's "point vs. point" in the most elemental sense possible.

@Tongpu: Then we disagree, sir. I believe that was part of a gentleman's survival kit as well during the era I'm talking about. People didn't roll up their sleeves and fight over trivialities. Getting socked hurt just as much back then, I'd wager...and a fight means both parties are going to get bloody.

@DG: That's somewhat irrelevant to the topic at hand, and anyway not something I'm prepared to do.

EDIT: For one, no handy kilos of Colombian marching powder. For two, no one would believe it. For three, I want to kick his ass, not watch it rot in prison.

edited 23rd May '11 10:51:30 PM by drunkscriblerian

Personally I say plant a kilo or three of coke on this "Bob" and then phone in an anonymous tip to the cops, and get Bob sent away for trafficking.

Call me a bastard, but if someone spreads lies about someone I care for, I got no qualms about fighting dirty.

Wouldn't have to plant anything. He's dug his own grave, it's just not got out yet.

@Drunkscriblerian: See, this is how the field of honor operates nowadays. You're just not wanting to adapt because of romanticism.

edited 23rd May '11 10:51:56 PM by DrunkGirlfriend

If you're small and weak there's nothing you can do about anything, if solving problems with violence is the norm. I think the way it is now presents many more options and opportunities for vengeance. You say that nerds need to learn to be stronger? Why don't you learn some new skills and come up with another way to humiliate this "Bob"?

True, as a lot can be done with some porno pics and Photoshop.

@Thread: I didn't figure this would go over well with the tropers.

@Mellon: Ah. So I should learn to fight dirty like everyone else?

It's not fighting dirty; it's fighting efficient.

I'm confused... I thought we were advocating that physically weak people should cheat just upthread... Anyway "dirty" doesn't really have meaning to me, you just do what you need to survive.

Well, you could learn to fight "dirty". Or you could stick with the obsolete value system that'll either leave you stewing in frustration or get you arrested.

Let me tell you about honor. It is fake. There is only principles. Honor is whiat people who are afraid hide behind.

I think people are overlooking the principles that conflict with dueling, even aside from capability, or there's just somethings people just won't do.

Planting evidence? Attacking them in an alley?

No thank you. Emotionally tempting, but not necessarily moral or rational.

ETA: Obviously, this depends on the person, but it still applies.

edited 23rd May '11 11:16:30 PM by blueharp

Nah, honor's a very real and beautiful thing, it's just meant to be more of a bond forming... thing, that helps people work together.

Anyway, as nice as it would be to duke it out every time I have a problem with someone (and you know, I've had a lot of problems in the past with someone who's face I could've planted in the concrete within a few moments), it's not really the answer, like at all. Losers inevitably take it badly and it just creates more friction and a society where the strong, not the smart, have control. Most problems can more easily be worked out through talking it out or, you know, in the case of being insulted, just get over it.

edited 23rd May '11 11:07:10 PM by Usht

Morality is very much subjective.

Yes, I should have specified it was an individual matter of ethics and morality.

> People didn't roll up their sleeves and fight over trivialities.

This isn't true in current high school. so does story from time where duelling is allowed is full of young man killing each other over trivialities

> From what I've seen here though, people who are bullied tend to be... people who aren't good at physical fights.

Fully agreed with this, allowing duel will make its worse

> Part and parcel of the "Field of Honor" system was that picking on people was very much looked down upon. A man picked a fight with a man his size, or he was a coward

This is the ideal, it dont work in practice. there was even profesionnal duellist when duelling was allowed.

> The smaller man generally had family who would avenge him.

don't work that well in Middle East. it just allowing people from bigger / stronger tribe bully others.

> you know, in the case of being insulted, just get over it

This was good idea. You should just ignore insult, if your friend/family believe it, the fault is in the one believing it.

Very uncivilized.

Fisticuffs? Really? Why don't we just start spraying urine around to mark our territories?

Real women and men fight words with words, if necessary, and feel no need to "avenge" stupid insults.

Honor still exists, and it is very important; but the ability to deliver "a sound trashing" to people who put it into doubt has nothing to do with it.

If you want to be honorable, behave honorably. That's it.

edited 23rd May '11 11:43:35 PM by Carciofus

Personally I think if people want to be dicks to other people, they need to be willing to take a punch or twenty.

And if they are willing, then it's all right for them to be dicks?

An eye for an eye leaves the world blind... or at least severely bruised with a few missing teeth.

Well if they are dicks, chances are someone will kick the shit outta them.

Usht: Nah, it only leaves the world with poor depth perception.

Still I'm a fan of an eye for an eye.

edited 23rd May '11 11:54:00 PM by MarkVonLewis

I should have known this concept wouldn't fly here. Ah well, I'll just keep my aging romantic ideals intact and accept the occasional jail time that may result.

A man takes his lumps without complaint, after all.

Enjoy this topic if you wish, but the OP has left the building because he can take a hint.

edited 24th May '11 12:05:46 AM by drunkscriblerian

Eh, sure, until a second person stabs out the other eye and then it'll be another eye for an eye. And yeah, I agree that if they're continually dickish, someone will eventually hurt them and probably quite bad. Me? I prefer not to be that person if only because that'd make me a hypocrite. I dislike someone hurting/offending me so... I hurt/offend them back? Granted, sometimes violence is the answer but that's once during a blue moon. I will continue walking even if someone trips me.

This forum attracts liberal, chaotic neutral, cynical teenagers. Some things are just doomed to be unpopular here.

edited 24th May '11 12:01:23 AM by Usht

Violence is one of the most solution-oriented things ever. Granted it's rarely the BEST solution, but it is technically a solution.

And way I see it, what goes around comes around. And sometimes, I like to BE what comes around.

To quote Christopher Titus' dad: "I could get offended, OR... I could become the offender."

edited 24th May '11 12:08:02 AM by MarkVonLewis

I can't do the "eye for an eye" mindset. It's too frustrating. With the number of people I'd have to hurt or kill, the only way I could get a fraction of them would be to become a full-time terrorist.