Poll of the Day > Is Shadiversity right about women in war, and are nunchuks a stupid weapon?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Shadiversity gets into some interesting speculation about how men would win a war against women like 80% of the time, even though I don't see data to back it up. He says that people with the same skill level but with a size advantage will usually win out and because men are bigger on average they would win in a war more so than women.

Also bonus video from this channel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUWoUM4Wttc

Talks about how nunchuks are the worst weapon to use and demonstrates that with his big buff friend. Dang it all, why do grown up men have to win at everything!?

Response to Shad about nunchuks, there's some points I might agree some I might not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfYbyJxH1SQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsW6GkmHaY0

Video about learning how to use a long sword and not giving a dang about footwork:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDAEJdTUQIA

Pretty sure any relevance gender had to warfare vanished when we invented tanks, planes and ICBMs.

We just had a topic about how testosterone makes men do crazy shit. In addition, they also get increased muscle mass, increased bone density, increased blood production etc thanks to T.

Even in modern militaries, it's been shown that women on the battlefield directly lead to more friendly casualties. I can't say anything about women who drive tanks or operate machinery, I can't even be assed to look up the study. I don't mean to make anyone mad with that, but yeah. Men sort of evolved to kill each other senselessly.

Nunchucks are also stupid. They are probably the most useless "weapon" if you could even call them that. You know what else is stupid? Swords. They were designed as a last resort emergency weapon, but they were historically outclassed by polearms in every way. They would only use their sword if they lost their polearm. This actually makes some sense if you play any Dark Souls game with a spear... you just poke them and they can't get close.

Yet in all modern media, they are depicted as man's best friend weapon, a holy weapon that no knight would be caught dead without. They were a desperate backup weapon.

From what I remember of his stance on women in war, it makes sense. He basically argued that a large, strong woman would outperform a smaller, weaker man, but those were the exceptions rather than the rule. And, at the time, physical strength meant more. However, if one side had men and women fighting, it'd make sense for the other side to bolster their numbers in the same way.

As for nunchucks, a lot of people have claimed they aren't a good weapon and demonstrated the issues. However, the fact they weren't widely used in warfare comes down more to their short range than anything else. Spears and other polearms were traditionally the kings of the battlefield, and then there were a lot of other weapons with a shorter reach which were still longer than the range you'd get from nunchucks.

A lot of Shad's speculative fantasy stuff has sounded kinda bunko at times.

funkyfritter posted...

Pretty sure any relevance gender had to warfare vanished when we invented tanks, planes and ICBMs.

iirc, he was only talking about historical warfare. Guns started to change things and then gender doesn't mean as much now.

Never understood the nunchuck. Even when I was younger with a limited understanding of physics, it always seemed obvious that it would bounce off whoever got hit and back to you.

Treatises on nunchucks are simply due to the ninja life style, it's a farming implement and they had treatises for every single thing they used no matter how mundane... doesn't mean it's a good weapon, just means they knew how to use it if they had to.

...

Shad's argument is correct though, the nunchuck adds nothing that any similarly thicc stick can't do

I really like Shad and he seems to know what he's talking about, so I'll assume he's correct

I used to really like shad. But he has gone the mysoginest anti-woke route. I liked his knight watch videos until he started really digging deep into that shit. Unsubscribed front hat channel and blocked it. I keep shadversity around cause I like the weapon stuff and his takes on history. But I ain't watching his show reviews anymore.

Count_Drachma posted...

iirc, he was only talking about historical warfare. Guns started to change things and then gender doesn't mean as much now.

On a battlefield women are still at a considerable disadvantage with guns. I don't think people understand what it's like walking around all day with a fully kitted rifle, body armor, and 300-600 rounds of ammo strapped to you.

funkyfritter posted...

Pretty sure any relevance gender had to warfare vanished when we invented tanks, planes and ICBMs.

Ground troops are still a necessity, though. It's the main reason why we haven't fully gone all-in on a fully mechanized and automated military.

Armored vehicles and artillery strikes can soften up a target area, and things like aircraft and even unmanned drone attacks can take out specific targets, but to really control a given area you still need infantry. At which point the individual physiology and training of the soldiers becomes an issue again.

At least until we invent full mech support frames for troops (which we're working on!). But even then individual psychology still plays a role...



Yellow posted...

Even in modern militaries, it's been shown that women on the battlefield directly lead to more friendly casualties.

If I remember correctly, it was either proven or at least hypothesized that that particular phenomenon is at least partly based on the fact that men tend to act differently in combat when women are present. Male soldiers are more inclined to prioritize the safety of the woman over the mission or their own safety, which in turn makes them more prone to making stupid mistakes.

So it's not so much that women are less effective in combat, it's that women make men less effective in combat.



Yellow posted...

Nunchucks are also stupid. They are probably the most useless "weapon" if you could even call them that.

To be fair, they sort of fall into that weird category where they were originally invented to be something you could use as a weapon but also pass off as a non-weapon. Like how the tonfa were originally threshing tools, but were basically turned into batons you can use to beat the shit out of someone.

When nobles make it illegal for peasants to have weapons, peasants tend to make weapons out of their farming tools or other stuff. So you get less effective weapons, but they're easier to hide or justify when you get caught.

Ozmose posted...

On a battlefield women are still at a considerable disadvantage with guns. I don't think people understand what it's like walking around all day with a fully kitted rifle, body armor, and 300-600 rounds of ammo strapped to you.

Poor delicate women can't carry ammo without the help of men right?

Why we still discuss gender differences like each is a monolith is beyond me. As if having testosterone as the primary sex hormone makes you automatically bigger and better at handling guns.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

So it's not so much that women are less effective in combat, it's that women make men less effective in combat.

Ah, Highschool bra strap policy.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

If I remember correctly, it was either proven or at least hypothesized that that particular phenomenon is at least partly based on the fact that men tend to act differently in combat when women are present. Male soldiers are more inclined to prioritize the safety of the woman over the mission or their own safety, which in turn makes them more prone to making stupid mistakes.

So it's not so much that women are less effective in combat, it's that women make men less effective in combat.

Wow, that's really unfair if true. At least that means it can be accounted for, by telling your men to not be total simps.

Hmm, I was going to say because of personality traits men would win simply because more of them would be willing to fight.

But then I thought about the crazy hive-mind cult thing we had going on in the last few years so I'm not so sure about that specifically.

IronBornCorps posted...

Poor delicate women can't carry ammo without the help of men right?

Why we still discuss gender differences like each is a monolith is beyond me. As if having testosterone as the primary sex hormone makes you automatically bigger and better at handling guns.

Been a while since I've had Biology, but yes, this is exactly how testosterone works. If you pick a random woman and a random man, chances are very good that the man will be stronger. That doesn't mean there aren't exceptions.

IronBornCorps posted...

Poor delicate women can't carry ammo without the help of men right?

Why we still discuss gender differences like each is a monolith is beyond me. As if having testosterone as the primary sex hormone makes you automatically bigger and better at handling guns.

Pretty sure the "feel good" discussion is over that way ---->

Sorry if reality bothers you.

Shadiversity's video on nunchaku (not nunchucks) annoys me, because he is going about it as someone who clearly has no idea how the weapon is actually used. I don't claim to be a zealous follower of his videos, but he strikes me as a theorycrafter who relies more on his own personal interpretations than an in-depth understanding of history; I've seen about as many inaccurate claims out of him as accurate ones (and not just on this subject).

For my own background, I've trained in martial arts for just over 30 years now, about 20 of them with Okinawan weapons like the nunchaku. I run my own dojo and I'm president of a North American martial arts federation.

First of all, he compares the nunchaku to a flail, which is all kinds of bizarre. Yeah, they look similar, but they are very different weapons. Flails were improvised weapons of war, largely used by peasantry that were levied when manpower was short. Contrary to what fantasy stories may have taught you, there's basically no credible evidence that they were ever used by knights or professional soldiers. They were a grain threshing tool that could be used to bludgeon someone, so farmers brought them if they didn't have anything better, but a good polearm or sword would serve you much better if you could afford it.

Nunchaku, by contrast, were never used for warfare - that was not their intended nor actual application. The original nunchaku was a horse's bridle (as seen here: https://www.kobudo.ch/Kobudo/Waffen/Nunchaku_files/page32_3.jpg) and it was, similar to the flail, an improvised weapon, but one intended mostly for civilian self-defence or possibly law enforcement. Your attacker was assumed to be a mugger and, therefore, if he was armed at all it would probably be with a knife.

In that particular role, nunchaku work fine - they have a range advantage over the knife, and their large arcs make approaching for a stab or slash difficult. Moreover - and this is the part of the nunchaku most people don't understand, because they're used to Bruce Lee or Michelangelo from the Ninja Turtles swinging them like flails - the nunchaku actually has a lot of uses as a grappling tool. They were basically a primitive form of handcuffs.

Honestly, we don't have great information on a lot of the historical applications of nunchaku, as the Ryukyu Kingdom (present day Okinawa prefecture) didn't have great written records for much of its history and relied on oral records. Furthermore, a lot of that knowledge and history was lost when the prefecture was invaded and decimated in the Battle of Okinawa at the end of WW2 (the Americans dropped five artillery rounds on the island for every Okinawan living there at the time, and over a quarter of the population died, if you want an idea of the scale of the destruction). However, what we do know does not line up at all with what Shadiversity thinks he knows about the weapon.

ParanoidObsessive posted...

To be fair, they sort of fall into that weird category where they were originally invented to be something you could use as a weapon but also pass off as a non-weapon. Like how the tonfa were originally threshing tools, but were basically turned into batons you can use to beat the shit out of someone.

When nobles make it illegal for peasants to have weapons, peasants tend to make weapons out of their farming tools or other stuff. So you get less effective weapons, but they're easier to hide or justify when you get caught.

@ParanoidObsessive
Nunchaku were not "invented" as a weapon at all. Again, they're a horse's bridle - we have historical examples and pictures of this. People started using them as weapons at some point - we're not exactly sure when, but it predates the Satsuma clan's takeover of the territory and the imposition of Japanese weapons laws. Most likely it came from farmers having them on hand when they were out drinking and using them to defend themselves if a mugger or other bar patron came at them in a fight.

Tonfa also weren't threshing tools; they were generally made from handles originally, either for a gristmill or a well. They would be terrible for threshing, because they're too short for the job (compare to flails, which actually *were* threshing tools). Also, traditional Japanese rice harvesting techniques actually didn't use "striking" as a threshing method; that wouldn't show up until the 19th century. They used a device called a kokibashi to separate out grains from the straw.

Finally, there was never any law in Okinawa that barred peasants from owning weapons but permitted nobles to bear them. That is based off of laws from the Japanese mainland (which were never rigorously enforced anyways) controlling the ownership of "longswords" and a Ryukyu law that briefly banned peasants from owning firearms in the 1600s, but that never actually affected the melee weapons most people talk about when they're referring to a weapons ban. Japan did have laws in all its territories (including Okinawa, following its establishment as a Japanese protectorate after the Satsuma Clan's invasion at the end of the Sengoku Jidai) controlling weapons ownership, but again they're not nearly as strict as the urban legends say. The idea that the Satsuma Clan banned the Okinawans from bearing traditional weapons like swords and spears and therefore they came up with stealthy workarounds is largely fiction with zero historical evidence behind it. Most of the weapon arts of Okinawa were developed by Pechin (who were nobles), rather than commoners, either for law enforcement, dueling, or training.

Also worth noting - Japan (and the Ryukyu Kingdom, for that matter) had guns at this point. The idea of banning melee weapons and the Okinawans deciding they needed a workaround was kind of silly when the weapon du jour was the tanegashima matchlock rifle. The Japanese, along with the Ryukyu nobility, had little to fear from peasantry with swords (those who could afford them, that is - steel wasn't exactly cheap in Japan, and nor were the services of a weaponsmith) when they could just shoot them.

Lokarin posted...

Treatises on nunchucks are simply due to the ninja life style, it's a farming implement and they had treatises for every single thing they used no matter how mundane... doesn't mean it's a good weapon, just means they knew how to use it if they had to.

The nunchaku were not a ninja weapon. They came from Okinawa, which had nothing to do with the ninja, and there is no evidence the ninja ever used them (though modern ninjitsu schools - the overwhelming majority of which are more Hollywood than history - have adopted it).

Rotpar posted...

Never understood the nunchuck. Even when I was younger with a limited understanding of physics, it always seemed obvious that it would bounce off whoever got hit and back to you.

It will if you use it badly. If you pull it through target, it works fine.

There are contact targets (makiwara) you can use for practice in order to make sure you're actually doing things correctly and one of the signs of a novice nunchaku user is exactly what you've observed - they strike *at* target, rather than *through* target and you will 100% get the nunchaku bouncing back at you if you do that.

That's not actually that unique, though. Beginners at empty hand arts do the same thing. If you watch someone kick a bag for the first time, they often bounce off of it because they don't realize that you don't just aim at the surface of the bag, you have to aim through it like you're kicking the person holding it or else you'll suffer the effects of Sensei Isaac Newton's Third Law of Motion.

darkknight109 posted...

The nunchaku were not a ninja weapon. They came from Okinawa, which had nothing to do with the ninja, and there is no evidence the ninja ever used them (though modern ninjitsu schools - the overwhelming majority of which are more Hollywood than history - have adopted it).

ok, i didn't know the origin - I was just saying that it makes sense there would be treatises for any common tool for weapon use no matter where you go

IronBornCorps posted...

Poor delicate women can't carry ammo without the help of men right?Why we still discuss gender differences like each is a monolith is beyond me. As if having testosterone as the primary sex hormone makes you automatically bigger and better at handling guns.

Werent you in the navy? Do a lot of ruck marches carrying 50+lbs? Even with the physiological difference at the time?

Get the absolute fuck out of here. I was in a co-ed MOS for 5 fucking years and there absolutely is a general physical capability difference and any argument to the otherwise is batshit insanity. Grow up.

Anyone saying that nunchucks are useless has obviously never watched Ninja Turtles.

i thought shad got arrested.

rexcrk posted...

Anyone saying that nunchucks are useless has obviously never watched Ninja Turtles.

To be fair, Ninja Turtles shows the exact wrong way to use pretty much all of their weapons (at least they did in the 80s; haven't watched any of the newer ones, so cannot comment). Why they didn't go for a more realistic depiction in a kids show about anthropomorphic reptiles is beyond my comprehension.

IronBornCorps posted...

Why we still discuss gender differences like each is a monolith is beyond me. As if having testosterone as the primary sex hormone makes you automatically bigger and better at handling guns.

Well, it isn't like estrogen is showing up on too many PED lists, but T on the other hand....

darkknight109 posted...

In that particular role, nunchaku work fine - they have a range advantage over the knife, and their large arcs make approaching for a stab or slash difficult. Moreover - and this is the part of the nunchaku most people don't understand, because they're used to Bruce Lee or Michelangelo from the Ninja Turtles swinging them like flails - the nunchaku actually has a lot of uses as a grappling tool. They were basically a primitive form of handcuffs. You were probably just as likely to use these things like a garrote or in submission holds as you were to actually hit someone with them.

I've seen plenty of knife fights on CCTV footage. It is usually some crazy methed up guy running full tilt at some dude and stabbing the dude several times like a maniac until he is incapacitated. There is no technique, just raw ferociousity. Unless you can land a death blow on the knife fighter as he approaches you are a goner and I just don't think chucks have the force necessary to do this. Even if we are limited to just improvised weapons, I would rather have a bat, since the one blow I have would be devastating, probably cracking the knife wielding maniacs skull and instantly killing him, unlike chucks that are kind of wimpy

Haven't read the thread and just giving a uninformed opinion. If it was old school war I might be inclined to agree. Especially if we are talking old school men. But the advantages of typically being stronger contribute way less to war combat these days. My grandma could out shoot most men. My mom could also score expert/master back before her eyesight started going down hill. The rest is tactics/strategy

And yeah for the average person nunchuks would be a terrible weapon. I believed it when I heard they where justba training tool.

DragonClaw01 posted...

It is usually some crazy methed up guy running full tilt at some dude and stabbing the dude several times like a maniac until he is incapacitated.

I don't think there were too many "crazy methed up guys" in medieval Ryukyu.

Dealing with someone with a knife back then didn't mean they were on a different planet trying to cut out your heart and eat it; they could just as easily be after your money and threatening you, similar to how a gun would get used in a mugging today.

DragonClaw01 posted...

Unless you can land a death blow on the knife fighter as he approaches you are a goner and I just don't think chucks have the force necessary to do this.

Take a solid crack across the face or hands with one of those swung at full force and try saying that.

I'm not saying you're going to get the impact with one of those that you would with a club, but you can 100% generate enough force with them to break bones and shatter teeth. If you've only ever seen them used the way Bruce Lee or Michelangelo uses them, yeah, you're not seeing them used with anywhere near their full potential for power, since both of them like to use speedy, flashy moves that are pretty far removed from how the weapon is actually used.

DragonClaw01 posted...

Even if we are limited to just improvised weapons, I would rather have a bat, since the one blow I have would be devastating, probably cracking the knife wielding maniacs skull and instantly killing him, unlike chucks that are kind of wimpy

I mean, if we get to pick our weapons, I'll take a sword or a spear - better reach advantage and superior killing ability.

Is a bat going to beat nunchaku? Sure. But how often are you going to be carrying a bat around with you as you go about your day?

Nunchaku fold up and fit nicely into the sleeves or vest of a kimono, so you could have them readily available if someone decided to make trouble for you. A tetsubo - probably the closest thing you'd have in the Middle Ages far east to a modern baseball bat - isn't particularly inconspicuous, nor is it practical to lug around with you as you run your daily errands.

Saying a bat or a sword is a better weapon than the nunchaku is a bit like saying a Reaper drone is a superior weapon to a pistol - technically true, but you're also talking about weapons designed for completely different applications.

Sufferedphoneix posted...

And yeah for the average person nunchuks would be a terrible weapon. I believed it when I heard they where justba training tool.

A training tool for what? What would you possibly be using nunchaku to train for?

Again, we have surviving historical nunchaku and we know *exactly* what they were used for. They were a horse's bridle. There shouldn't be any mystery behind this.

He says that people with the same skill level but with a size advantage

I don't think this is true in modern warfare, not when so much combat is reliant on being able to hide from enemy fire, the every increasing use of robots/vehicles/etc. If anything being a bit shorter on average might be the actual advantage since you're a smaller target.

Like... I dunno what to say. I'm not saying that size doesn't give any advantages, but I think that acting as though it is an unambiguous advantage with no drawbacks makes me think he's working backwards from his conclusion.

Whether or not you're of sound physical and mental health matters a hell of a lot more than your genitals and hormones in modern warfare. Having a twitchy/unsteady hand will fuck you far harder than your size.

I dont think anybody would argue that say, Woody Allen would beat Brienne of Tarth in any sort of fight, but how many women are statuesque and built like a truck vs. the average Joe Sixpack? How many women grow up roughhousing compared to men in terms of having a basic sense of throwing/taking hits?

Boys give each other bruises, Girls give each other eating disorders.

There will certainly always be exceptions to the rule like Tomboys and gals like Rhonda Rousey, and twinkish soy dudes, but in the aggregate comparing the combat readiness of the average male vs the average female is apples to oranges.

darkknight109 posted...

I don't think there were too many "crazy methed up guys" in medieval Ryukyu.

Dealing with someone with a knife back then didn't mean they were on a different planet trying to cut out your heart and eat it; they could just as easily be after your money and threatening you, similar to how a gun would get used in a mugging today.

Dealing with a knife wielder in Medieval times is even more scary because due to the low level of medical science it was very easy to sustain a mortal wound. A stab wound to the stomach was almost certain to kill you then. Plus there was a death penalty for robbery in many places, so criminals had very little incentive to spare your life.

darkknight109 posted...

A training tool for what? What would you possibly be using nunchaku to train for?

Again, we have surviving historical nunchaku and we know *exactly* what they were used for. They were a horse's bridle. There shouldn't be any mystery behind this.

It's not exactly well publicized history. I assumed it was good for hand coordination.

DragonClaw01 posted...

Dealing with a knife wielder in Medieval times is even more scary because due to the low level of medical science it was very easy to sustain a mortal wound. A stab wound to the stomach was almost certain to kill you then. Plus there was a death penalty for robbery in many places, so criminals had very little incentive to spare your life.

OK. And?

You're still going to have to deal with this guy and a set of nunchaku is as suited to that as any other tool you're likely to have on hand.

Sufferedphoneix posted...

I assumed it was good for hand coordination.

Not particularly. Honestly, nunchaku don't really require any more coordination to use than any other weapon I've worked with.

darkknight109 posted...

OK. And?

You're still going to have to deal with this guy and a set of nunchaku is as suited to that as any other tool you're likely to have on hand.

A set of nunchaku is not equipped to take on a person wielding a knife. All the knife user as to do is rush you and stab you a couple times to win the fight. The nunchaku is not a powerful enough weapon to stop this tactic. I mean, you got at best one swing at the guy, then the dude is going to be stabbing you in your spleen and the sad thing is that the nunchaku is a specialized tool that is cumbersome to carry around all day, whereas nearly every male in America carries at least a pocket knife

DragonClaw01 posted...

A set of nunchaku is not equipped to take on a person wielding a knife.

It 100% is.

DragonClaw01 posted...

All the knife user as to do is rush you and stab you a couple times to win the fight.

And all the nunchaku wielder has to do is smash them once in the face or across the hands and that will stop the attack very quickly. And the nunchaku has a significant reach advantage, being more than twice as long at full extension than all but the largest of knives, so advantage nunchaku there.

I don't care what kind of drugs you're on, if you think you will still be standing after someone smashes your crosswise across the teeth with a fast-moving wooden stick, you're mistaken.

DragonClaw01 posted...

The nunchaku is not a powerful enough weapon to stop this tactic.

Again, it 100% is.

You swing that thing full force, it can easily break bones. If all you've seen is Bruce Lee twirling it around to look fancy, you have not seen it used in a way where it actually generates power. A nunchaku at full extension is no different than a stick of the same length, so unless you're arguing that you couldn't beat a guy with a knife if you were armed with a ~2 foot stick, you're wrong here.

That is the nunchaku's main strength - it has the power of a short stick, but the portability and concealability of a much shorter weapon.

DragonClaw01 posted...

the sad thing is that the nunchaku is a specialized tool that is cumbersome to carry around all day, whereas nearly every male in America carries at least a pocket knife

If your hypothesized setting is modern America, you can stop this argument right away because the ultimate weapon there is a handgun, not a knife.

But if you're looking at the environment where the nunchaku was actually used, which was the middle ages Ryukyu Kingdom, different story. Nunchaku are not particularly cumbersome to hang off your belt, tuck in your sleeves, or tuck in your vest if you're wearing traditional Okinawan garb (the latter generally being the preferred place to store inconspicuous self defence weapons like nunchaku or tekko, due to ease of access).

If you think Nunchucks are a bridge too far, Don't even look at the Three-part Staff or a Manriki-no-Garu...

What I gather from these walls of text is that nunchucks are improvised weapons for when you don't even have a large stick.

Yellow posted...

What I gather from these walls of text is that nunchucks are improvised weapons for when you don't even have a large stick.

Dunno how much I would call them "improvised" - you do train with them, so in that sense they are expected to be used as a weapon, but it is also true that they're based off of a farming implement and were not purpose-built to be a weapon, so it depends on how you're defining it.

And yes, I would say that large stick generally trumps nunchaku, because large stick trumps a lot of things. So yeah, if you have access to a large stick, I would generally prefer to use that over a nunchaku, a knife, or really over most things that aren't an actual weapon of war (i.e. sword, spear, etc.) or an even larger stick.

That said, how often do you come across large sticks in your day-to-day goings about? How often do you carry them around with you in case someone tries to mug you?

i carry a club in my pants every day <_<

darkknight109 posted...

To be fair, Ninja Turtles shows the exact wrong way to use pretty much all of their weapons (at least they did in the 80s; haven't watched any of the newer ones, so cannot comment). Why they didn't go for a more realistic depiction in a kids show about anthropomorphic reptiles is beyond my comprehension.

older ones uses sais right sometimes.
in the 2012 version, raph often puts his "fingers" between the spikes....

NeoKaiser posted...

Shadiversity gets into some interesting speculation about how men would win a war against women like 80% of the time, even though I don't see data to back it up. He says that people with the same skill level but with a size advantage will usually win out and because men are bigger on average they would win in a war more so than women.

Also bonus video from this channel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUWoUM4Wttc

Talks about how nunchuks are the worst weapon to use and demonstrates that with his big buff friend. Dang it all, why do grown up men have to win at everything!?

Response to Shad about nunchuks, there's some points I might agree some I might not.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfYbyJxH1SQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsW6GkmHaY0

Video about learning how to use a long sword and not giving a dang about footwork:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDAEJdTUQIA

That guy kind of gives white supremacist vibes.

BigOlePappy posted...

That guy kind of gives white supremacist vibes.

That's just cuz is a Mormon

Krazy_Kirby posted...

older ones uses sais right sometimes.
in the 2012 version, raph often puts his "fingers" between the spikes....

He did that in the 80s version as well. Moreover, the 80s version mostly treated the sai as stabbing weapons, when they're supposed to mostly be used like truncheons (you *can* stab with them, but it's not commonly done, to the point where most sai have blunt tips).

Although, to be fair, I'm going off of, like, 35 year old memories now. Haven't actually watched the show in ages.