QUOTE (bahad_zu'bu @ Sep 7 2006, 10:02PM)
......to some then, FMA would be politically incorrect...
QUOTE (malapitan @ Sep 9 2006, 02:32 AM)
QUOTE (Kilat Serrada @ Sep 8 2006, 11:22 PM)
I mean is Combat Aikido also FMA too?
Oh...My...God. Please tell me people don't think that.
I really think it depends on one's perspective. Now, to make the discussion easier to manage, how about defining FMA first.
Possible definitions and implications:
1. FMA's are those martial arts that have been developed ever since the dawn of time
only by cultures found within the geographical area that is now known as the Philippines. This would include all the homegrown arnis, kuntaw-silat of Sulu & Mindanao, local tribal martial arts like bultong, yaw-yan and combat aikido. This would exclude the arnis styles developed in foreign countries (like Inosanto-Lacoste), arnis styles developed by foreigners and martial arts developed in Sabah (although Sabah was the property of the Sultan of Sulu and therefore its martial arts can be considered as falling under Sulu martial arts, it is not part of the geographical area now known as the Philippines).
2. FMA's are those martial arts that have been developed only since the colonization of this archipelago by the Spaniards
(since there was no such thing as Filipinos before the Spaniards colonized us) up to the present time by cultures found within the geographical area that is now known as the Philippines. This would include all the homegrown martial arts developed within the colonial era and later like LAMECO, Ywa-Yan and Combat Aikido. But, this would exclude all those martial arts that were developed here but pre-date the arrival of the Spanish (maybe kuntaw-silat of Sulu & Mindanao and local tribal martial arts like bultong?). And this would again exclude the arnis styles developed in foreign countries, arnis styles developed by foreigners and martial arts developed in Sabah.
3. FMA's are those martial arts that fall under the categories of arnis/escrima/kali and kuntaw/silat that have been developed ever since the dawn of time by cultures found within the geographical area that is now known as the Philippines
as well as all styles of arnis/escrima/kali/kuntaw/silat that are derived from the above martial arts to any extent. This would include all homegrown and foreign developed (as long as they are derived from homegrown ones) arnis, kuntaw and silat. This would exclude combat aikido, yaw-yan (yaw-yan may be based on arnis but as far as I know it is not a style of arnis/kuntaw/silat) and martial arts developed in Sabah.
4. FMA's are those martial arts that fall under the categories of arnis/escrima/kali and kuntaw/silat that have been developed ever since the dawn of time by cultures found within the geographical area that is now known as the Philippines as well as all styles of arnis/escrima/kali/kuntaw/silat that are derived from the above martial arts to any extent
but do not have any elements of foreign martial arts integrated into it. Now you can just imagine what this definition would imply. I would think a number of systems would not be considered FMA if this were the definition.
5. FMA's are those martial arts that have been developed within the geographical area that is now known as the Philippines
by self-professed Filipinos. This implies that if one (the founder of a martial art) doesn't consider himself a Filipino, even if the Philippines claims him (and his martial art) as being Filipino, he and his martial art cannot be considered Filipino
from his perspective. Now, what should be done with a guy (and his martial art) that has this perspective? Do we still claim his martial art as Filipino regardless of his opinion?