You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Tactical Breathing in A High Pressure Situation
I really don't understand those people who follow you screaming FUCK OFF when you're trying to fuck off -_- I used to teach "I'm leaving" or variations thereof rather than "Back off" as it can easily be twisted to be "aggressive" and "telling someone what to do" (okay I guess it is technically telling someone what to do) whereas it's slightly harder to twist "I'm leaving" especially if you don't embellish it further than that. Most of the problems I had were the kids usually had the firm belief that they needed to "win" situations by screaming or beating the other person down and if they walked away then they "lost". Kinda sad that mentality continues to adulthood.
Love the term "monkey dance" XD
People aren't rational. What can I say...
I really should use "I'm leaving" more often, but only in a situation where I do have the option to leave. If I don't, "Back off" is more appropriate. While it can be twisted as aggressive, if your job is to guard a place, you can't just walk away. Would "Leave now!" be less confrontational though?
I stole "monkey dance" from Rory Miller. His thoughts on self-defence shaped my own.
The people I was teaching were kids or adults who were able to vacate an area if they encountered trouble in it, so I didn't even think about that. Guess you would have to be a bit more aggressive/assertive/generally not backing down if you have to guard something.
"Leave now" has longer sounds than "Back off" so it sounds a bit less abrupt, but as you say people aren't rational and they're going to interpret whatever they want to from whatever you say, you could politely say "Excuse me sir, please kindly vacate the premises" in a very calm and completely non-aggressive tone and someone hyped up could still decide to hear you being confrontational.
I'll check out Rory Miller, thanks :)
You're welcome, and thanks for dropping by.
It's not that they aren't rational per se. Rather all mammals have social dominance preprogrammed into them.
These guys will, as you've noticed, loudly demand you to go away . . . while they approach you and then aggressively follow you around as you try to keep away from them . . . worse if they are presently in a group. The behavior of whether they follow you or not and continue to attempt to threaten you or not depends on where they see you in their dominance hierarchy.
I suggest it's not so much that human brains cannot distinguish threats to body from threat to egos — which is somewhat true.
The less intelligent they are they less their brain can tell the difference between an intellectual argument and a physical argument — and this in the context of position in a hierarchy of social dominance. Because when humans evolved there was no such distinction. (I refer you to this book: Satoshi KANAZAWA, The intelligence paradox, Hoboken: Wiley, 2011)
We live in an age where, despite everything, persons survive far more independently than ever before. In the past, when there was no significant production of anything, social group and therefore social dominance hierarchy, was survival.
Generally you might be interested in these two classic papers on the subject: (1) Eugene BRODY, Enger ROSVOLD, Influence of prefrontal lobotomy on social interaction in a monkey group, Psychosomatic Medicine, 14(5):406-415, 1952(9)., (2) E. ROSVOLD, A. MIRSKY, K. PRIBRAM, Influence of amygdalectomy on social behavior in monkeys, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology, 47(3):173–178..
(I might write a post on this subject.)
Thanks for the info!