# women's techniques



## marlon (Feb 18, 2008)

It has come up before that some people teach different kempo techniques to women.  Perhaps i misunderstood things, however, in my opinion if the techniques being taught to women are for reasons of effectiveness against bigger stronger male attackers, then i would say throw out all the rest as these would seem to be the most effective for anyone.  i mean if you are going to teach a woman differently because they are supposedly weaker then what are you teaching them/  Probably a more technique based response that necessitates lees physical strength and relies more on timing and positioning.  Sounds like a great technique for anyone.  And, what of the slightly built male who shows up.  are they taught the female techniques? Are there other reasons for teaching women differently than men? Any thoughts on this issue would be much appreciated.

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Kacey (Feb 18, 2008)

Well, I teach TKD, not Kenpo/Kempo - but I teach the same techniques to everyone.  I may emphasize certain techniques to certain students, and other techniques to other students - but it's based on size, build and flexibility, not gender; otherwise, I'd have to have different curricula for kids under a certain age (or size), for teens of each gender, for young adults of each gender, for middle aged adults, for people with physical problems (flexibility, back problems, knee problems)... you get the idea.  I teach everything, and people put into practice what they like the best, which is usually the techniques that work the best for them.


----------



## MJS (Feb 18, 2008)

marlon said:


> It has come up before that some people teach different kempo techniques to women. Perhaps i misunderstood things, however, in my opinion if the techniques being taught to women are for reasons of effectiveness against bigger stronger male attackers, then i would say throw out all the rest as these would seem to be the most effective for anyone. i mean if you are going to teach a woman differently because they are supposedly weaker then what are you teaching them/ Probably a more technique based response that necessitates lees physical strength and relies more on timing and positioning. Sounds like a great technique for anyone. And, what of the slightly built male who shows up. are they taught the female techniques? Are there other reasons for teaching women differently than men? Any thoughts on this issue would be much appreciated.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


 
IMHO, I think that both men and women should be taught the same techniques.  Teach them the same and have both males and females work together.  Now, take a wrist grab technique such as Crossing Talon.  A male may be able to just go right into the move and make it work, while a female may not.  So, in that case, teaching a 'distraction' such as a kick to the leg, strike to the face, etc. and then go into the technique would be fine.  Personally, I see nothing wrong with doing that for a male as well.


----------



## ktaylor75 (Feb 19, 2008)

Speaking from my limited 5 months of experience, in the Kenpo school I attend, so far, I have been taught everything the same as my training partner (a male).  We are the only two orange belts, so we always get paired up together (only one time was I paired with the other female in the class).


----------



## LawDog (Feb 19, 2008)

Selfdefense / fighting skills are not gender based, only extremes in age and weight should be considered.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 19, 2008)

marlon said:


> It has come up before that some people teach different kempo techniques to women. Perhaps i misunderstood things, however, in my opinion if the techniques being taught to women are for reasons of effectiveness against bigger stronger male attackers, then i would say throw out all the rest as these would seem to be the most effective for anyone. i mean if you are going to teach a woman differently because they are supposedly weaker then what are you teaching them/ Probably a more technique based response that necessitates lees physical strength and relies more on timing and positioning. Sounds like a great technique for anyone. And, what of the slightly built male who shows up. are they taught the female techniques? Are there other reasons for teaching women differently than men? Any thoughts on this issue would be much appreciated.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon


Kenpo is not one size fits all. Children and small females should have mobility ahead of stability... period, end of story!


----------



## Sukerkin (Feb 19, 2008)

It's an interesting area of discourse but I think, as has been touched upon above, it's should more be discussed in terms of disparities in size and strength than gender.

On the core subject of whether women/smaller-people should do techniques differently than men/bigger people, then the ubiquitous "It depends" comes to the fore .  

For example, in the partner forms of MJER, one of the kata calls for one iaidoka to take hold of the wrist and manipulate the sword angle of his/her opponent whilst similutaneously breaking their posture.  My partner was a slender and petite woman and physically could not get her fingers around my wrist sufficiently to execute the technique.  As we are encouraged not to 'give the result away' as noone learns anything if you do, I refused to go with the ineffective technique.  We talked about what was happening and why she couldn't do it.  The solution?  Well, she's a third dan karate as well so she came in with a plunging knife-hand to my wrist with her body-weight behind it, knocking me off posture and allowing her partial wrist-grip to turn my blade over whilst she ran me through .

It's not strict MJER but it worked .


----------



## still learning (Feb 19, 2008)

Hello, There are times when certain techniques need to be change to fit the person.

Size, weight, height, lenght and ?  ....Kempo is NOT one siZe that fits all...good point from above!

In rape seminars...there is more emphasis are certain "techniques" than others. Things women can do and should use first!  You don't expect women to go one on one with kicks and punches? ..in these situtions?

For those who are more flexible...Man or Women? ...you would teach these people a few more things..than those who cannot bend at all!

The Ideal teacher teaches  the art to fit the person!    Can be same stuffs with varietions...on them!

Aloha ( Some say Women wants to be treated equal with MEN? ...yet women say they are different...so they want to be treated as a Women? ...not as MEN!)


----------



## marlon (Feb 19, 2008)

Touch Of Death said:


> Kenpo is not one size fits all. Children and small females should have mobility ahead of stability... period, end of story!


i do not disagree that everyone should personalize their art.  However, my point is about what makes a self defense technique effective.  the things i have heard discussed about how a person with a more slight built and less wieght  (many women fall into this category) should execute a technique always sounds to me like a more effective technique,  this assuming that proper stances and positioning are taught.  The wrist example above is a perfect example of what i am taking about.  why not make the technique with the things that made it effective for the woman.  What happens when the big strong man meets a bigger stronger man?  Should we not teach the techniques in the mosst effective way to everybody?

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Kacey (Feb 19, 2008)

marlon said:


> i do not disagree that everyone should personalize their art.  However, my point is about what makes a self defense technique effective.  the things i have heard discussed about how a person with a more slight built and less wieght  (many women fall into this category) should execute a technique always sounds to me like a more effective technique,  this assuming that proper stances and positioning are taught.  The wrist example above is a perfect example of what i am taking about.  why not make the technique with the things that made it effective for the woman.  What happens when the big strong man meets a bigger stronger man?  Should we not teach the techniques in the mosst effective way to everybody?
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon



The problem lies in assuming that _all_ lighter/weaker people will be women, and all heavier/stronger people will be men.  One of my TKD students is 22, 6'3", lifts weights... and is female, a direct contract to another student, who is 26, 5'6", stocky, horribly out of shape... and male.  Is his potential strength greater than hers?  Probably, especially in the upper body - but I teach them each from where they are *now* - not based on a stereotypical expectation based on their gender.  _All_ students are individuals, and all instruction should therefore be individualized as much as possible, within the precepts of the style in question.


----------



## Sukerkin (Feb 19, 2008)

That's such a good last point, *Kacey*.  

I've, embarassingly, been pinned to the ground and tickled mercilessly by a female friend of mine who happens to match your description of your student (except she's "6' 2", eyes of blue" to steal some old song lyrics) and outmasses me proportionally (I'm a puny 5' 11" since my bike accident squished my spine).

Okay, it's true that this only happened because she's not martial arts trained and I didn't want to hurt her (and, to 'win', I would have to, given the physical disparity) but it does not invalidate the point that women are not necessarily weaker (which is why I made the point I did in my previous post).


----------



## marlon (Feb 19, 2008)

Kacey said:


> The problem lies in assuming that _all_ lighter/weaker people will be women, and all heavier/stronger people will be men. One of my TKD students is 22, 6'3", lifts weights... and is female, a direct contract to another student, who is 26, 5'6", stocky, horribly out of shape... and male. Is his potential strength greater than hers? Probably, especially in the upper body - but I teach them each from where they are *now* - not based on a stereotypical expectation based on their gender. _All_ students are individuals, and all instruction should therefore be individualized as much as possible, within the precepts of the style in question.


 
i am actually not assuming a gender to physical mass and size at all...in fact this distinction is an essential part of then point.  Let me ask the question differently (please remember that i do not in an\y way shape or form suggest a "one size fits all" method and i really do not understand how such a comment came into this thread)  Do we teach our techniques to work in the situations where we have the advantage of size and strength or where we are at a disadvantage?  If the latter is what we intend to do then why would the techniques not incorporate most of the 'differences' that we would teach to the smaller weaker students, into all the techniques?  ...well as for the rest i'll wait to see where this leads first.

Respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Kacey (Feb 19, 2008)

marlon said:


> i am actually not assuming a gender to physical mass and size at all...in fact this distinction is an essential part of then point.  Let me ask the question differently (please remember that i do not in an\y way shape or form suggest a "one size fits all" method and i really do not understand how such a comment came into this thread)  Do we teach our techniques to work in the situations where we have the advantage of size and strength or where we are at a disadvantage?  If the latter is what we intend to do then why would the techniques not incorporate most of the 'differences' that we would teach to the smaller weaker students, into all the techniques?  ...well as for the rest i'll wait to see where this leads first.
> 
> Respectfully,
> Marlon



Not all techniques will work for "smaller weaker students"; likewise, not all techniques will work for larger, stronger students - and even with two students who are matched for size, strength, flexibility, reach, etc., there will be some techniques that work for both, and some that work better for one than the other.  As an instructor, I teach _everything_ to _everyone_, and included in my instruction is teaching students how to modify techniques to fit their own strengths and weaknesses.  By not teaching something to a student, I limit the student's toolbox - and why would I want to do that?


----------



## MJS (Feb 19, 2008)

Touch Of Death said:


> Kenpo is not one size fits all. Children and small females should have mobility ahead of stability... period, end of story!


 
I don't necessarily disagree, although it seemed to me that the OP was talking more about teaching something not part of the Kenpo material, rather than teaching the same material, but making an adjustment if needed, due to size, reach, etc., disadvantages.

Mike


----------



## morph4me (Feb 20, 2008)

I teach aikido, not kempo, but I think the distinction might not be that different techniques are being taught, but the same techniques are being taught differently. 

I don't really like to generalize, but in my own experience I've found that when I teach women they learn quicker and easier because they don't try to use strength and pick up the subtleties of the techniques quicker.  Men can usually muscle through a technique and make it work women rely on the technique and are better at getting the principles. 

 You can watch various practioners doing the same style and see the same technique performed a little differently by each one, and see different instructors of the same style teaching the same technique a little differently.  Taking a technique and adapting it for one's individual stregnths and weaknesses is what makes a martial _*art*_.


----------



## Christina05 (Feb 20, 2008)

morph4me said:


> I teach aikido, not kempo, but I think the distinction might not be that different techniques are being taught, but the same techniques are being taught differently.
> 
> I don't really like to generalize, but in my own experience I've found that when I teach women they learn quicker and easier because they don't try to use strength and pick up the subtleties of the techniques quicker.  Men can usually muscle through a technique and make it work women rely on the technique and are better at getting the principles.
> 
> You can watch various practioners doing the same style and see the same technique performed a little differently by each one, and see different instructors of the same style teaching the same technique a little differently.  Taking a technique and adapting it for one's individual stregnths and weaknesses is what makes a martial _*art*_.



Very very true Women are  technique oriented. Guess we figure learn it correctly  manipulate it later to make it effective in my opinion  anyway.


----------



## DavidCC (Feb 20, 2008)

We don't teach the women differnet techniques or drills, but that doesn't mean their learning style is the same.

There are certain assualts that are basically gender-specific, that is, it is unlikely that a man will attack another man that way... but we train the men those techniques anyway


----------



## Danjo (Feb 20, 2008)

Women have a narrower range of effective techniques than men do due to their relative size and strength. For women to be effective against a larger male aggressor, they need to utilize techniques that have a far higher chance of causing permanent damage or death. Eye gouges, throat strikes, perforating the ear drum, destroying the knee, etc. are vicious moves that should only be utilized in situations that warrant them. When a woman is being attacked by a man, I would say that these type of techniques are warranted. She must not only be taught these moves and targets, but also the most effective delivery methods.

However, if you are law enforcement, a bouncer, security guard, dealing with a lout at a bar, women fighting other women, or a drunk at a party, these are probably too extreme to employ with any justification. Thus the need for other techniques. If one were to only train in those techniques that cause permanent injury or worse, we would have no way to effectively respond to those situations that were not life or death.


----------



## DavidCC (Feb 20, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Women have a narrower range of effective techniques than men do due to their relative size and strength. For women to be effective against a larger male aggressor, they need to utilize techniques that have a far higher chance of causing permanent damage or death. Eye gouges, throat strikes, perforating the ear drum, destroying the knee, etc. are vicious moves that should only be utilized in situations that warrant them. When a woman is being attacked by a man, I would say that these type of techniques are warranted. She must not only be taught these moves and targets, but also the most effective delivery methods.
> 
> However, if you are law enforcement, a bouncer, security guard, dealing with a lout at a bar, women fighting other women, or a drunk at a party, these are probably too extreme to employ with any justification. Thus the need for other techniques. If one were to only train in those techniques that cause permanent injury or worse, we would have no way to effectively respond to those situations that were not life or death.


 
hey Danjo, I just noticed you got the 1st degree!  Congrats!

-David


----------



## Danjo (Feb 20, 2008)

DavidCC said:


> hey Danjo, I just noticed you got the 1st degree! Congrats!
> 
> -David


 
Thanks David, but you forgot to say how great my post was.


----------



## marlon (Feb 20, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Women have a narrower range of effective techniques than men do due to their relative size and strength. For women to be effective against a larger male aggressor, they need to utilize techniques that have a far higher chance of causing permanent damage or death. Eye gouges, throat strikes, perforating the ear drum, destroying the knee, etc. are vicious moves that should only be utilized in situations that warrant them. When a woman is being attacked by a man, I would say that these type of techniques are warranted. She must not only be taught these moves and targets, but also the most effective delivery methods.
> 
> However, if you are law enforcement, a bouncer, security guard, dealing with a lout at a bar, women fighting other women, or a drunk at a party, these are probably too extreme to employ with any justification. Thus the need for other techniques. If one were to only train in those techniques that cause permanent injury or worse, we would have no way to effectively respond to those situations that were not life or death.


 

are female officers trained differently than male officers?

marlon


----------



## marlon (Feb 20, 2008)

Danjo said:


> Women have a narrower range of effective techniques than men do due to their relative size and strength. For women to be effective against a larger male aggressor, they need to utilize techniques that have a far higher chance of causing permanent damage or death. Eye gouges, throat strikes, perforating the ear drum, destroying the knee, etc. are vicious moves that should only be utilized in situations that warrant them. When a woman is being attacked by a man, I would say that these type of techniques are warranted. She must not only be taught these moves and targets, but also the most effective delivery methods.
> 
> However, if you are law enforcement, a bouncer, security guard, dealing with a lout at a bar, women fighting other women, or a drunk at a party, these are probably too extreme to employ with any justification. Thus the need for other techniques. If one were to only train in those techniques that cause permanent injury or worse, we would have no way to effectively respond to those situations that were not life or death.


 
When a fight can be avoided then i do so, if my life is in danger or the lives of people i care about or other innocents around and a fight cannot be avoided i am entering the conflict with the idea that the person does not care and is capable of anything so then i would use techniques and delivery methods that are most effective.  I am not a very big person nor am i small i will not be attacked by a 5" 80lb anybody without a weapon unless they are stupid and if they are very little technique would be needed.  The change are more in favour of someone bigger and fast jumping me.  For each individual i teach i consider that anyone attacking them will be a 'bad' person, usually bigger and wanting to do nasty things to them.  The curricullum and teaching incorporates different styles of fighting depending on the size and speed of your opponent.  I am not going to try and arm lock a 6"6' 300lbs fighter who has intentions on separating me from my family permanently
interesting to see how others think.  The differences help me become a better teacher and martial artist
thanks for the post Danjo and congratulations on your dan!

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## LawDog (Feb 20, 2008)

For the most part female officers under go the same training as their male couterparts. In Massachusetts as of late the powers to be are softening up the physical training standards for the female cadets. Why, of course, lawsuits. 
Many of the old school female police officers are very upset by these new easier standards.


----------



## MeatWad2 (Feb 20, 2008)

marlon said:


> are female officers trained differently than male officers?
> 
> marlon


 
No.  They aren't.  They are taught the same things as male officers.  IMHO, some of the female police officers out here are more scary than the males.


----------



## kidswarrior (Feb 21, 2008)

MeatWad2 said:


> No.  They aren't.  They are taught the same things as male officers.  IMHO, some of the female police officers out here are more scary than the males.


I remember a class early on in my training when a much smaller man couldn't break my wrist grab using the tech being taught. I could have easily shown him how to make it work, but didn't want to overstep my bounds. Finally the female instructor came over and showed him ways to soften me up (low kicks, etc.) to make it work. To me, that was an injustice to him because he never got to see that the original tech worked on everyone if done right. A different female instructor at that school would have handled it differently, had she been there, but oh well.

The point is, as several have said, if a tech doesn't work on a larger, more powerful person, it shouldn't be in our 'small' tool box--the 6-12 techs that we'd count on to save our lives. Our 'big' toolbox maybe--the one that includes al the techs learned, so we can pass them on and let others choose from that their own small set of 'all purpose' half dozen lifesavers. But male or female, if it doesn't work on someone much larger, what good is it?


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 21, 2008)

marlon said:


> i do not disagree that everyone should personalize their art. However, my point is about what makes a self defense technique effective. the things i have heard discussed about how a person with a more slight built and less wieght (many women fall into this category) should execute a technique always sounds to me like a more effective technique, this assuming that proper stances and positioning are taught. The wrist example above is a perfect example of what i am taking about. why not make the technique with the things that made it effective for the woman. What happens when the big strong man meets a bigger stronger man? Should we not teach the techniques in the mosst effective way to everybody?
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon


Yes, however, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater when you do have the advantage of size in your favor. To dominate or evade is situation specific. Even whisps of a female should learn to dominate body types smaller than theirs.
Sean


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 21, 2008)

MeatWad2 said:


> No. They aren't. They are taught the same things as male officers. IMHO, some of the female police officers out here are more scary than the males.


They are trained the same. Its just that mistakes on the street can be much more costly.
Sean


----------



## MeatWad2 (Feb 22, 2008)

kidswarrior said:


> I remember a class early on in my training when a much smaller man couldn't break my wrist grab using the tech being taught. I could have easily shown him how to make it work, but didn't want to overstep my bounds. Finally the female instructor came over and showed him ways to soften me up (low kicks, etc.) to make it work. To me, that was an injustice to him because he never got to see that the original tech worked on everyone if done right. A different female instructor at that school would have handled it differently, had she been there, but oh well.
> 
> The point is, as several have said, if a tech doesn't work on a larger, more powerful person, it shouldn't be in our 'small' tool box--the 6-12 techs that we'd count on to save our lives. Our 'big' toolbox maybe--the one that includes al the techs learned, so we can pass them on and let others choose from that their own small set of 'all purpose' half dozen lifesavers. But male or female, if it doesn't work on someone much larger, what good is it?



I agree with you 100%.  The way that I see it though, if the instructor can't make the technique work in its original context, for males and females, then it really shouldn't be taught.  Techniques will always and forever have to be modified to work in the streets...but, one should have the 6-12 techniques that will always work, no matter what.


----------



## marlon (Feb 23, 2008)

Touch Of Death said:


> Yes, however, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater when you do have the advantage of size in your favor. To dominate or evade is situation specific. Even whisps of a female should learn to dominate body types smaller than theirs.
> Sean


 
i agree completely.  the five animal system of shaolin kempo is actually about different fighting styles for different situations and body types.  Ex.:  the tiger techniques are for dominating smaller oppponents.  Yet within the tiger techniques there are a myriad of detail that make it 'easier ' to pull off.  Therefore there is technique that makes it less "strength" dependant.  And before i get slammed i know that a martial artist need strength and muscle to be good at thier art

respectfully,
Marlon


----------



## Touch Of Death (Feb 23, 2008)

marlon said:


> i agree completely. the five animal system of shaolin kempo is actually about different fighting styles for different situations and body types. Ex.: the tiger techniques are for dominating smaller oppponents. Yet within the tiger techniques there are a myriad of detail that make it 'easier ' to pull off. Therefore there is technique that makes it less "strength" dependant. And before i get slammed i know that a martial artist need strength and muscle to be good at thier art
> 
> respectfully,
> Marlon


It stacks the odds in your favor.
Sean


----------

