Access the Meat
Choosing the level of interaction in violent conflict.
One of the key features of the sociopath is that they see everyone as essentially the same—a piece of meat to be butchered. Sociopaths look at everyone this way, regardless of personality, skill, or ability: a big strong guy with a black belt looks the same as a sleeping child. The sociopath understands that both their skulls open the same way, their eyes yield to equal pressure, and they both die when their throats are cut.
The sociopath disregards the things that set them apart, and won’t waste time interfacing with their personalities, or the big strong guy’s black belt skill, or his massive muscles. They will only concentrate on the things that both victims are susceptible to. In order to use violence successfully, in order to have an equal chance of survival, so must you. Don’t get caught in the sucker’s game of interfacing at higher levels, of showing respect for the person, their skills, or physical power. Go straight for the meat.
The Four Levels of Interaction
As a person – social
This is trying to change behavior, mood, or motivation. This is where most people would like to keep the situation.
As a skill set – antisocial
This is trying to out-wrestle him, or out-technique him in a 90-mile-an-hour chess game. This is a duel in which the most skilled practitioner will typically win. It is “civilized violence” and seen as “fighting fair”.
As an animal (via strength, speed, stamina) – antisocial
This is pitting your strength against his, trying to out-maneuver or out-last him, going blow for blow—this typically looks pretty brutal and ugly. A lot of struggle where the best specimen prevails. This is seen as brutish, desperate, and decidedly “uncivilized”.
As a piece of meat – asocial
This is regarding him as a physical object beholden to the natural laws of the universe. Paying no heed to the person, the skill, or the ability. This is seen as almost universally “bad”—people who do this naturally are classified as “evil” in a social setting. This is interfacing with him as a thing that can be broken down and rendered nonfunctional.
It’s interesting to note that these four levels correspond to different ranges and comfort zones.
Interfacing with the person can be done from across the street, a distance from trouble where most people feel safe (they can always take off running if it gets out of hand).
Interfacing with his skill set is almost always done at a pace away, with the contestants circling to get a feel for their opponent’s skill level, feinting and parrying and otherwise dancing around. It’s all about giving yourself enough room to see what he’s doing and try to counter it.
Interfacing with his physical abilities is done skin-to-skin, but that’s as deep as it goes.
Interfacing with the frailties of the flesh is done beneath the skin—true injury is about disregarding the sanctity of the body and simply destroying it.
What-ifs, Buts and Maybes
The kinds of questions people ask during training can tell you a lot about where their head is at and at which level they’re stuck on. The important thing to note is that none of their worries have any impact on injury whatsoever.
The “Socialist”
The person who is uncomfortable with the whole idea of conflict will ask questions that dance around the issue from across the street, like, “How can I tell if he wants to hurt me?” and such.
The Duelist
People trained in martial arts usually get hung up on interfacing with his skill. They’ll ask the most what-ifs, like, “What if he throws a spinning back kick?”, “What if he counters my joint lock?” and “What if he’s holding the knife like this?” They are also overly concerned about defensive reactions like blocking and counters—both in doing it and worrying about having it done to them.
The Animal
Untrained people who can come to terms with the idea of conflict usually end up fixated on physical attributes. For smaller, less athletic people it manifests as worry about how they’ll fare against bigger, stronger, faster adversaries; big, strong folks have the opposite problem—they typically believe they cannot be defeated by “lesser” beings.
Sociopaths & Butchers
Almost no one shows up comfortable with injury as a starting point.
Another interesting thing to note is that progressing through the levels is not linear. Socialists don’t usually walk through the others to arrive at injury. They go one of two ways—either they dig in their heels and cram their heads into the sand and will never, ever cross the street, or they go straight from where they are to injury (though sometimes with a short stopover at the animal level).
Duelists are another thing entirely. It is often very difficult to wean them off of the idea that they need to respect and/or thwart his skill before they can be effective. If they do move on, it’s usually with a long stopover at the animal level. His skill bothered them before; now they’ve transferred that worry to his physical abilities. Those who have taken the long walk from skill to animal to injury are typically the most evangelical about the whole process. (As opposed to those who went straight from social to injury. They usually don’t see the whole experience as that big of a deal.)
Animals are easier to nudge into interfacing directly with the meat of the matter. They’re pretty close, conceptually, and they just need to be shown how to direct their efforts away from strong points and into the weak ones. (Instead of going strength-to-strength, go strength-to-eyeball.)
If you’re reading this, I’m going to assume that you don’t have a problem with violence in a general sense, that you’re not hung up on the social aspects from across the street. So where are your hang-ups? What are you stuck on? Are you worried about what he’ll do if he’s skilled? Or bigger-stronger-faster? Be honest with yourself. You’re letting yourself down if you lie—you’re not going to get any more effective that way.
If the idea of going after a trained Goliath makes you sweat (more than the usual, healthy amount, I mean) then you need to buckle down and study up on injury. Seek out photos of sports injuries (for broken joints and twisted, nonfunctioning limbs). Autopsy reports from non-firearm killings—especially where the victim was beaten to death—are illuminating. Troll the internet for videos of prison fights and violent muggings. Essentially, look for anything where the survivor is interacting with the other person as a piece of meat.
You’ll be repulsed and comforted simultaneously.
– Chris Ranck-Buhr (from 2006)
For sane, socialized people, intent is all about choice, and this is why we tell people to think about what they are truly willing to do ahead of time. You will not have the luxury of picking and choosing in the middle of this ugly business. The sociopath gets a big boost from faulty wiring; for him it’s not so much a choice as a foregone conclusion. The non-sociopathic criminal who has lived a hard life comes to the choice from modeling, experience, and desperation. (The same can be said for warriors; not in the romantic sense, but the true sense: “those who make war”.) Those of us who have led different lives (read: comfortably suburban) often don’t want to admit that it’s really as simple as disregarding the person, skill, or ability and getting at the meat. We don’t want a level playing field, we want an advantage.
So for the true sociopath it may be genetic, for the average criminal it’s environment; for the rest of us it’s choice. The choice is not to be “bad” or “mean”—the choice is simply whether or not to wade in and get it done. Note that if anyone fainted and fell sideways into anyone else’s knee, they would break it. The laws of the physical universe are always on, everywhere. Choosing to access this fact is counterintuitive and downright scary. Agreeing that that’s how the universe works says a couple of uncomfortable things:
1) That society and civilization are thin, artificial veneers that can be stripped away in seconds, and
2) There’s no such thing as a tough guy.
We don’t like the feel of either. Taking both at once can be heart-stoppingly terrifying. So I would say that the difficulty people have with intent comes primarily from fear—fear of taking away social interaction and replacing it with capital-n Nothing, and the fear of being killed. We usually mollify those fears by thinking that everything will turn out all right because of the love of the Human Family and that we’re tough enough to take it, should it come to taking it. Replacing those psychic cushions with “go get him & get to work” is not something most people will willingly do.
(As a side note, directly accessing the meat is what knives, batons, and guns do to the exclusion of all else. They don’t supply intent, of course, so their effects fall into the same category as falling on someone’s knee. Getting the same results as a bullet with your bare hands takes effort, but once the trigger’s pulled all that matters is aim. Your goal in training for violence must be to replicate the effects of a bullet, as best you can, with your body.)