-

[Diana]

I understand what you are saying, I'm sorry if you think a minor difference of opinion means I don't understand yours, but I read your posts and rarely have trouble understanding the point you are trying to convey.

No worries. It is difficult with words on a page only.

But my point is why is being beaten bloody a seemingly inevitable outcome? That's why you see it as a martyr situation.

This is one place you misunderstood. I was quoting Aion in the story he related earlier in the thread. I did state that my intention is no harm to anyone. Of course being beaten bloody is not an inevitable outcome.

There are any infinite number of outcomes to the scenario. Your friend is trained, how long does it take before the tipsy fighters realize this? Maybe your friend is able to immediately disable them and you (as the projected protagonist in Aion's scenario) have no part in being the hero? Maybe you've picked up a few things from your friend and are able to bluff the antagonists that you are -both- trained, which forces them to move on to pick an easier target. Also, just because there is a physical altercation, does not mean there is always an obvious victim or aggressor. In the scenario, all three parties are ready and eager to go. What seems barbaric (or "uncivilized and savage") is good fun to some, and sport to others. It may not be the most productive outlet of creative energy, but as long as both parties have put up their dukes, it's certainly not the least creative outlet, either.

It may be an assumption that there are 3 parties eager to go. Sport or fun would flow from choice such as getting in an MMA ring or other place where all parties jump in gladly. The trained person in this scenario is presumably not choosing to fight (hopefully, because as I say training in martial arts is to learn to avoid fights), rather to defend. If "boys" want to fight, and they all choose to, that's fine by me. And I agree that there could be endless scenarios unfolding from such a situation.

I'm sorry if you feel I'm antagonizing or disagreeing, I'm just trying to explore the riddle without fear-based reactions. I also have to say that the situation is inherently different to see from a female perspective, as physical domination is often the more likely outcome for the female if it's a fight of men vs. women. But I'm trying to keep it in the context of two grown men walk down an alleyway and are approached by two other men who want to interact in a physical manner. 3 out of four are ready to go.

First, no need to apologize. Disagreeing is fine. It's good and fun to explore concepts, and if we all agreed, how much exploration would unfold?

Well, the scenario did not say all men. Even so, my boyfriend has also trained (Wing Chun) and he would not put his dukes up and fight like the "boys." His reaction would be the same as mine—to avoid harm and use his training to do it.

To me, in this situation, calling the cops is an infringement, because it is a fear-based, self-preservation action, and your friend already requested for you to leave it under their control. But that's just my opinion and my own interpretation of the events.

Why is it an infringement if you don't desire to engage in violence? To do so is not necessarily based on self-preservation; it can be based on the concept of "no harm" to anyone. If the attackers need this catalyst, we don't have to be involved. And it doesn't have to derive from fear; it can derive from love. Love of all life and respect for all beings including self.

If the friend said to run with the tone that he/she wanted this fight, then my best guess is that I would back away but not leave the friend alone. If the friend said this only to protect me, I would do something else.