Real Men

[Shell B]

There's no room for heroism in combat arms.  This gets drilled in hard, but doesn't seem to effect public perception.

Yeah, I find the whole, "He's in fatigues! Let's call him a hero." thing boring at this point. I've been around military worship for years. It doesn't reflect whatsoever the caliber of the huge variety of people in the military.

[The Grand Nudger]

You put all your heroes at the front of the element. They'll be cured in no time.

[tackattack]

@Shell B That's precisely the point. Intention does matter. Would you deny that the "Saving private Ryan" narrative isn't heroic? Even though it's a ridiculously unrealistic example, ostensibly they were doing that because they were ordered to, but none of them wanted to. There may have been movie trope heroic moments, the core reason they were there was not heroic. Was there a point, in that movie, for example where anyone appeared heroic to you? Why? Was it because of their actions or because it's a movie and we were hyper-focused on understanding the narrative on why they are doing what they're doing? The same applies to the firefighter scenario. It's not the fact they charge into burning buildings to save people by itself. It because they knew the probability was low and did it anyway.

All of this is part of the core of why I consider a "real man" someone that sacrifices and makes the right decision, even when it's hard.

[EgoDeath]

Yeah, I find the whole, "He's in fatigues! Let's call him a hero." thing boring at this point. I've been around military worship for years. It doesn't reflect whatsoever the caliber of the huge variety of people in the military.

Mhm. It's mostly nonsense. I know some complete lunatics who were in the military in one branch or another. One guy, Army, is a piece of shit drunk and pill popper who got in trouble for beating the living fuck out of his wife... And I don't mean just like smacking her around or something, I mean that's horrible enough. No, not just some smacking around. This was like a half hour of him keeping her trapped in their house, beating the shit out of her, resting for a few minutes, then going at it again, wash rinse and repeat for about 30 minutes. Apparently he threw her down the stairs at one point because she was pregnant. All kinds of fucked up shit. She didn't even look like herself when I saw the photos of her. Of course, her dumb ass chose to stay with him for like another year before they split, if I'm not mistaken.

But yeah, try to imagine how horrifying that'd be.... being stuck in a house for almost 30 minutes while some lunatic refuses to let you leave and just wails on you, punches you, kicks you, throws you down stairs, etc. Fucking terrible.

Another guy, Marine, was a crack head piece of shit. Granted, addiciton ain't no joke, and I'm not judging the guy based on the fact that he liked drugs. Same as the last guy, it wasn't the drugs, it was that outside of the drugs he was a total POS. He was also a wife-beater. Landed himself in prison because he came home to some guy banging his wife one day. Apparently he wasn't dickin her down good enough. Loser, lol. But seriously, so he beats the fuck out of her, and the guy, goes to prison and then gets involved with fucking skinheads or Aryan brotherhood or whatever the fuck. Total racist, wife-beating POS...

The list goes on.

So, when I hear "Support the troops"... well... support them with what? and how? And why? I might have some extra change in my cupholder... beyond that, Good luck and godspeed, dude, cause I don't fucking know you.

You don't automatically get any more respect from me just because you're in the military. Pieces of human garbage exist in every profession.

Now if you joined the military because you really did have this romanticized, fairy-tale vision of protection your country... well I think that's really fucking naive and stupidly dangerous.. but in a weird way, I have some admiration for a decision like that. But let's be honest, a lot of military guys are just like cops. They didn't know what the fuck else they were going to do with their lives so they upped and joined the military, or the police force, or whatever.

Don't even get me started on police lol

[Shell B]

@Shell B That's precisely the point. Intention does matter. Would you deny that the "Saving private Ryan" narrative isn't heroic? Even though it's a ridiculously unrealistic example, ostensibly they were doing that because they were ordered to, but none of them wanted to. There may have been movie trope heroic moments, the core reason they were there was not heroic. Was there a point, in that movie, for example where anyone appeared heroic to you? Why? Was it because of their actions or because it's a movie and we were hyper-focused on understanding the narrative on why they are doing what they're doing? The same applies to the firefighter scenario. It's not the fact they charge into burning buildings to save people by itself. It because they knew the probability was low and did it anyway.

All of this is part of the core of why I consider a "real man" someone that sacrifices and makes the right decision, even when it's hard.

I don't think it does matter. Even if you're ordered to, you have a choice. There is no moment before a heroic act where you don't have a choice to do something else. They didn't want to, but they didn't back down. Having that tenacity and moving forward is the heroic act. No one who's a hero wants to do what they're doing. You think guys want to jump on grenades to save their buddies or run out into the open to be killed by the enemy just so that they can get a signal to call for help, to save the rest of their unit? These men don't have to do any of that because of their jobs. They are trained to do it because of their jobs, but they still need the character and they are still heroes.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

There's no room for heroism in combat arms.  This gets drilled in hard, but doesn't seem to effect public perception.

Hero get other men killed.

[onlinebiker]

So a "real man" isn't an asshole... and that helps to a definition. I don't think a "real man" has to be a hero either. Back to the cowards in foxholes; cowards firefighters or military don't do their job and that makes them bad at their job. If part of your job is to do something most consider heroic (ie. risking your life for others) is doing something heroic as part of your job. All I'm saying (and I think we're not that far off from each other) is that doing those heroic things can make you heroic, if you do them heroically. Doing those heroic things to get attention or pick the victim's pocket(or any other list of non-heroic reasoning) doesn't make the individual a hero. That to me means that being a hero isn't about what you do, but how and why you do it. If the last sentence is true, then simply being a firefighter, or military, etc. doesn't make you a hero of itself.

Let me clarify.

"Real" means tangible, quantifiable - an actiual physical presence.

"Real" is not a synonym for heroic- or even laudible.


"Real" is not an antonym for sleazebag.

"Real" is an antonym for fictitious.

.....

You run into trouble when you try using it otherwise.

For real.

[tackattack]

@Shell B That's precisely the point. Intention does matter. Would you deny that the "Saving private Ryan" narrative isn't heroic? Even though it's a ridiculously unrealistic example, ostensibly they were doing that because they were ordered to, but none of them wanted to. There may have been movie trope heroic moments, the core reason they were there was not heroic. Was there a point, in that movie, for example where anyone appeared heroic to you? Why? Was it because of their actions or because it's a movie and we were hyper-focused on understanding the narrative on why they are doing what they're doing? The same applies to the firefighter scenario. It's not the fact they charge into burning buildings to save people by itself. It because they knew the probability was low and did it anyway.

All of this is part of the core of why I consider a "real man" someone that sacrifices and makes the right decision, even when it's hard.

I don't think it does matter. Even if you're ordered to, you have a choice. There is no moment before a heroic act where you don't have a choice to do something else. They didn't want to, but they didn't back down. Having that tenacity and moving forward is the heroic act. No one who's a hero wants to do what they're doing. You think guys want to jump on grenades to save their buddies or run out into the open to be killed by the enemy just so that they can get a signal to call for help, to save the rest of their unit? These men don't have to do any of that because of their jobs. They are trained to do it because of their jobs, but they still need the character and they are still heroes.

I won't argue the minutiae. I will agree with you regarding free choice. They'll always have a choice. I would disagree that they don't want to do what they're doing. In any sense you can't do anything without wanting to do it (whether instinctual or conscious). I posit that they do want to do these heroic things. This is exactly what pre-empts the need for a defining reason behind the actions. I think we completely agree that having a character that pushes ahead (tenacity) is a big part of what's heroic for each of us. Here again where we're disagreeing is that an action, by itself (without value or reason) can be heroic. I don't think being a cop(firefighter, soldier, etc.) is heroic, however many cops can do heroic things. This is mainly because it takes a certain character to be successful in some risky career lines. A cop afraid of guns won't be a cop too long. Thus there are less cops that are afraid of guns generally, because they would have been fired. I would posit that there are far more heroic firefighters (cops, soldiers, etc.) simply because of the qualities that make them successful in that line, hence and explanation of the societal basic increased respect for successful people in those positions.


@onlinebiker - ok I got it, you didn't really want a real conversation and your qualitative standards of real man are intrinsically low. A tree exists, thus it's a real man.

[Mr.wizard]

Why all the hero talk? Isnt having a penis and being a decent human being enough, do I really have to run into a burning building to prove my manhood.

[onlinebiker]

I don't think it does matter. Even if you're ordered to, you have a choice. There is no moment before a heroic act where you don't have a choice to do something else. They didn't want to, but they didn't back down. Having that tenacity and moving forward is the heroic act. No one who's a hero wants to do what they're doing. You think guys want to jump on grenades to save their buddies or run out into the open to be killed by the enemy just so that they can get a signal to call for help, to save the rest of their unit? These men don't have to do any of that because of their jobs. They are trained to do it because of their jobs, but they still need the character and they are still heroes.

I won't argue the minutiae. I will agree with you regarding free choice. They'll always have a choice. I would disagree that they don't want to do what they're doing. In any sense you can't do anything without wanting to do it (whether instinctual or conscious). I posit that they do want to do these heroic things. This is exactly what pre-empts the need for a defining reason behind the actions. I think we completely agree that having a character that pushes ahead (tenacity) is a big part of what's heroic for each of us. Here again where we're disagreeing is that an action, by itself (without value or reason) can be heroic. I don't think being a cop(firefighter, soldier, etc.) is heroic, however many cops can do heroic things. This is mainly because it takes a certain character to be successful in some risky career lines. A cop afraid of guns won't be a cop too long. Thus there are less cops that are afraid of guns generally, because they would have been fired. I would posit that there are far more heroic firefighters (cops, soldiers, etc.) simply because of the qualities that make them successful in that line, hence and explanation of the societal basic increased respect for successful people in those positions.


@onlinebiker - ok I got it, you didn't really want a real conversation and your qualitative standards of real man are intrinsically low. A tree exists, thus it's a real man.  

There isn't a gradiation of real.

It is inherently either/or.

Only by misuse can the concept have "a low bar".

---

Why all the hero talk? Isnt having a penis and being a decent human being enough, do I really have to run into a burning building to prove my manhood.

It's what happens when people try assigning qualitative values to a binary condition.