I was reading a thread this morning on Bullshido (of course) in our PT forum, about the difference between the Stronglifts 5×5 program, and the old-school “Super Squats” mass building program.

While I’d heard of the “Squats and Milk” maxim, I’d never known there was an actual program associated with it.  So I looked it up and it’s pretty simple; it even includes a diet plan, of sorts.  I’m already doing the Stronglifts program (5×5) and working up towards a 405lb squat (4, 45lb plates on each side of the bar).  30lbs shy of it now, but my form is ugly and I need to get deeper.

Anyway, the bad thing about the Stronglifts program is that while you’ll gain strength, you won’t gain any significant mass.  And considering that I’m built like some kind of goatweasel to begin with and have lost about 20lbs in the last year, the missus is already complaining about how skinny I am.  So it’d be nice to pack on a bit of muscle.

My solution is to blend the two workouts, which makes it that much more brutal, and see how things shake out.  I think I should be safe from overtraining, as long as I get enough sleep and nutrition.  Fortunately, this diet is all about craming food down your throat, mostly cow juice.

So today’s “experimental” workout went like this:

Warm-up

Squats 225×10; Dumbbell BP: 50×12; 5 Dips; 10 reverse crunches.

(Skipping the pullups because of shoulder pain)

Set 1, 2, 3

Squats: 315×5, DB BP: 65×8, 5 Dips, RCx10

Set 4

Squats: 325×5, 10 RC.

Super Squat Set:

20 lying barbell extensions (supposed to do it with 25lbs, use a 30), 20 deep squats -135lbs.

I underestimated the fatigue factor a bit on that, but it was a good workout nonetheless.  Instead of adding another 5lbs on the squat for each workout as suggested, I’m going to step back out of the rack and take my ass to my ankles for each rep which will suck, but is necessary.  I’ll then start adding on the 5lb increments.

Jiujitsu

Headed in to catch some rolling/sparring, and did a total of about 20 minutes.  Banged the hell out of my knee trying to fake a double on a new guy who’s a wrestler so he’d pop up and I’d get around to the side.  Was bad enough that while I was taking one person’s back and it came in contact with their heel  as they defended against the second hook, I yelped.  I also managed to catch an elbow in the face from one of our heavyweights who shucked off my legs into side control and brought it down directly onto my upper lip.  Strangely it’s not swollen, and I credit the “Talibeard” for saving me from both gimping around, and talking like Mush Mouth for the rest of today.

For extra cardio I’m going to speed-mow my back yard.  My last record was just under 2 hours (it’s fooking huge, unnecessary, and all down hill).  It’s tempting to do it at a slower pace because I’m usually listening to an audiobook while I’m doing it to keep me from mowing fractal patterns into my yard out of boredom.  And now with the knee giving me the finger I’ll probably manage to weasel myself into doing just that.

I actually started writing this several weeks ago, and am only now wrapping it up; partially in order to ensure it doesn’t just sit here unfinished, partially because I haven’t posted anything in a while.

When making an argument for something that seems either novel or extreme, it always helps to use the words of people better than yourself. So I’m going to quote Robert Heinlein:

Those who cling to the untrue doctrine that violence never settles anything would be advised to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Nations and peoples who forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms.

That’s a great quote, and I’m using it because it’s on the top of my head, not that it’s specifically relevant to this post.

What I’d like to attack (yes, the word choice is intentional) here is the notion that the concept of violence is so completely abhorrent that it should be discussed in the same tones and with the same palpable unease as accompanies discussions of minority issues by well-meaning but guilt-ridden members of the majority ethnic group in this country.

The reason this notion is idiotic is simple: life itself is violent. Violence is not only a necessary part of life, but a fundamental part of it. The act of eating, including not only the sourcing of the foodstuffs that reach your plate, but the act itself, is predicated on violence. Just chewing your food is a violent act by the dictionary definition. The house you live in was created by violence. Trees were murdered and habitats destroyed so you could park your doughy ass in front of a TV without getting rained on. Virtually the only thing you can do to avoid participating in this chain of violence is to somehow will yourself into nonexistence. And even that act, were it possible, could be considered violent.

It’s not that violence should be considered good for its own sake. Frankly there is nothing that could be considered good for its own sake. Ideas, concepts, and philosophies, are good or bad because of the effects they produce, not on their own merits. In fact, without the effects caused by putting these ideas/concepts/philosophies into action, there is no merit in the first place; just the suggestion of merit, something equally ephemeral. (Tangentially, this is why Communism is not a “good thing”.) This kind of defective thinking forms the root for many problems I’ve noticed, but applies specifically to the concept of violence.

For example, when someone is shot with a firearm, there is always at least a flicker of the suggestion that firearms should be banned. Why? Because the firearm called seductively to the assailant to caress its trigger while the barrel was pointed at a potential victim? Obviously, no. People take actions that have effects. The causes of these actions are ideas (often half-baked, ill-reasoned, or downright maniacal), but ideas do not take the physical form of action without a person to carry them out. Neither should the actions, and the tools used to accomplish them, be put on the same chopping block of judgment. Tools, like ideas, exist without merit or judgment until human intention is applied to them.

It could and will be argued that simply by being available, certain tools designed to inflict violence (for good or ill) increase the likelihood of misuse. But this still doesn’t address the true problem which is the intent behind their misuse, and reflects a sense of moral laziness or lack of fortitude required to address the illness instead of its symptoms.

Violence is not always necessary. Ghandi’s march to the ocean for salt is an example of this. However, the weak-minded (or hearted) pacifist will take examples like this and use them to justify wholesale abdication of violence. And this is just as asinine as a mechanic who in a pinch, had to use a wrench in lieu of a hammer, deciding to forgo the use of hammers entirely.

Protip: If you forgot to bring your cup to jiujitsu, don’t play half guard.

Your future children will appreciate it.

My daughter does Ballet one day a week and Jiujitsu (MMA) two. She’s eight. She’s a she. These are all good things.

The ballet helps her flexibility and balance. Besides, she’s a GIRL and even though girls can be feminine and kick ass at the same time, I’m taking great pains to ensure her interests in ass kicking are balanced with her greater interest in growing up to be a well-adjusted female member of society.

While pondering this as I often ponder things (mostly while in traffic), it occurred to me that gender roles and what society expects out of individuals based on where their reproductive organs are, are fairly well entrenched.

If we’re being completely honest with ourselves, most people, yes even guys, like to dance. The amount of alcohol or level one needs to go to impress a female required to facilitate this happening will vary from individual to individual. But failing the sauce or the chance for musical foreplay, dancing is not the most masculine pursuit. Hell, John Wayne didn’t dance. He did, however, kick copious amounts of ass.

And with most urges that get repressed by society, people tend to find an outlet to pursue them in a socially acceptable manner or a manner that balances the urges with the image they want to put forth.

You probably see where I’m going with this already.

So let’s cut to the chase and compare forms-based or non-sparring Martial Arts/Schools with Dance Schools.

• Flashy costumes often bordering on “fabulous” (if you know what I mean)? CHECK!
• Group and partner performances/demonstrations? CHECK!
• Mirrors so you can preen and always look your best? CHECK!
• Excessive amounts of stretching? CHECK!
• Instructor-lead choreography? CHECK!
• Partner-assisted coordinated movements? CHECK CHECKITY CHECK YOURSELF!

All of these are feminine qualities/pursuits. However, when you put on Asian pajamas, they are all magically masked by the oh-so-manly implication that you’re learning to kick someone’s ass.

But without doing any actual ass-kicking (at least via sparring), it’s just Mandancing. This is not to say that violence is a masculine trait, or even a positive one. What’s happening though is much like a male ballet dancer stuffing a sock in his pants and/or walking around glaring at people with a chip on his shoulder; projecting what’s only an image to overcompensate for his love of a feminine pursuit.

So if you spend several hours a week practicing something that resembles fighting, that’s suggestive of fighting, that you want to believe helps you get better at fighting, but you’re not actually fighting, then go ahead and admit it: you like dancing.

Sifu Bob’s House of Krotty is basically LaFleur Academy of Dance. And your silk pajamas? Yeah, not much more than a lacy tutu. Enjoy your costumes and your choreography, mandancer.