Emily wrote, "Trial by jury involves a selection process. It's not exactly a self nomination thing."
Okay. I should have said, "The prosecution can rest, imnsho."
Emily again: "Challenging questions are OK. If a concept cannot be challenged, and must be protected like a glass bubble, it's not much good in the real world. Something that can be kicked around, evolved and improved, is. It's called critical thinking, and while it's not exactly in vogue in the US any more, 49% of us still practice it."
Thanks for the giggle there at the end.
What made me finally snarl publically (after following this thread for several days) was neither critical thinking nor raising the bar. I saw a single argument - that supporting women instructors was not traditional - combined with a lot of insinuation that the women being responded to are being crybabies, have aikido that won't stand up in a tough dojo, and/or take floppy, weak ukemi with poor attacks. A woman said that she liked having senior women around to when she got grabbed on the mat, and she was accused of playing the vitctim card. Even worse, it was implied that women should learn to put up with being molested because it's natural. Yes, we are primates, but we are also human; I'd like to think that we have more potential than 'eat, grow, and reproduce.' Why are we practicing aikido, if we're nothing but monkeys?
Okay. Per an earlier plea by Emily, a change of topic:
Kayla Feder Sensei came up to the dojo I train at last year for a seminar, and it was wonderful. The ab warmups were *awful* (in a good way), and we're still working on some of the ukemi techniques she showed us. I also loved having the opportunity to listen in on her discussions with our dojo-cho at the post-seminar potluck.
I'm also indebted to my female sempai for giving me the example of women who are feminine but not weak, good martial artists but not masculine, and also for showing me how to put a nikkyo on someone with wrists twice as big as mine.