this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
983 points (98.1% liked)
Microblog Memes
5778 readers
2412 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
This subject got me curious so I read up on dueling. Apparently in the sword era most duels were to "first blood" not to the death, and even after pistols became the preferred weapon the object wasn't to kill an opponent or even to win. It was more important to demonstrate courage by showing up. Both parties upheld their honor simply by going through with it. Most deaths that occurred were from infections, not from the wound itself being fatal. It was also common and acceptable to try to avoid a duel through negotiation or an apology.
What OP meant by petty disagreements is unclear, but duel challenges were often made over matters of honor. Some of the issues might seem petty to us today, but in the dueling community reputation and image were vital social currency. For a rough comparison consider modern celebrities losing fans and jobs because of bad tweets (or even for liking the wrong tweet).
Are you really defending the concept of dueling for honor?
Oh FFS no. I'm just bringing some historical material to the forum. Why do people read everything like it asserts some position or other? Try just absorbing the information.