Recently, I read that the only 2 species that play with, or torment their prey prior to killing them are cats and humans. At this blog, we give a pass to the felines, but we expect more from the humans.
In bull fighting, the bull is usually killed after having been stabbed several times with sword like blades by the matador. When you see a bull-fight either in person or on television (from either Spain or Latin America), you will see the bull still chasing the matador’s cape even when several metal swords or spears are sticking out of its back between its shoulder blades and/or neck. Even after the final death thrust by the matador to sever the spinal cord, the animal may take a while to die. This method of killing is less painful to the animal than (the primitive, barbaric and superstitious) forms of kosher or halal slaughter, but it still is quite inhumane.
Why is bull fighting (and also cock (rooster) fighting, and dog fighting) so popular among the Latinos? Is this inflicting pain truly masculine? Why not just run with the bulls as they do in Spain once or twice a year and not kill? If you feel the need to prove your masculinity to yourself and to others, if you are that unsure of yourself, why not take up wrestling in high school or college? It is competitive and a contact sport. How about boxing? Martial arts require self-discipline and much sacrifice to master and that helps to develop character strength. Taking life, even animal life, really is not a cause for celebration. (We get the hunting thing as we, many years ago, did hunt. But, responsible hunting does not involve tormenting animals or having animals fight each other.)
It seems to me that there are times when people over do things or push things to overkill. One’s sense of masculinity and confidence (for a male that is) is internal and individual, and is only dependent on outward shows of force and the approval of others if you choose to let it be so dependent. Beware of those who put much effort into projecting a perception of something about themselves (either intelligence, humility, courage, machismo, etc.). When persons are overly concerned with managing the public perception of themselves, it may be that there is little substance backing up the perception.
Here are a few things to do that are constructive and show a mature understanding of masculinity. Get married and stay married instead of hooking up year after year with a string of “conquests”. Truly deep and fulfilling intimacy is not found in these type of casual encounters. Spend some time with your children after dinner each night (even if you’re stressed and tired out from your demanding job). If you are fortunate to have the kind of woman who knows how to love and honor a man in your life, be sure to show your appreciation to her frequently. Being thoughtful and considerate and kind to those you love and care for are not unmanly things. (Sadly, we must say here that we are not talking about being a “nice guy” as in the nice guy syndrome. That we have previously addressed in a much earlier post.)
The dark dungeons of men’s souls are hinted at in this modern work of art seen in the local art museum.
other not so related thoughts
In the world of today, we often rush to judgment or jump to conclusions based on the background pressure of those around us. Whether they be virtual friends on social media, people we do not even know or know about in the news or cited in text books or online articles, or our real life friends, relatives, and business associates, there is a certain pressure felt, even if not consciously, from these persons to conform to the generally accepted conclusions currently in vogue. Thus, we have people who have never looked into the science of say manmade global warming who simply believe in it because so many others around them believe in it. The same is true for so much of history, or what is considered as and accepted as history by the majority of people. Beware of group think. It is no myth.
The same general principle can be applied to both science and historiography. See where all the evidence (data) leads; do not start with a preconceived or desired outcome/result and then cherry pick your data to support your desired outcome. If you do this in scientific investigation, research and experimentation, you are practicing pseudo-science. If you do this sort of thing in historical research and the writing of history (such as ignoring forensic evidence, and documentary evidence), you are writing propagandized or “fake” history.
copyright 2018 – larrysmusings.com