# Self Defense from rape



## ShortBridge (Mar 11, 2017)

This is a few miles from where I live. I know that we are skeptical of 2 hour self defense courses, but simply teaching people not to be victims can make all the difference. It sounds like it did for this awesome lady.

–------
Seattle Woman Uses Tactics She Learned from Self-Defense Class to Escape Brutal Sexual Assault

Seattle Woman Uses Tactics She Learned from Self-Defense Class to Escape Brutal Sexual Assault


----------



## Headhunter (Mar 11, 2017)

Obviously what she did worked out but one thing I'd suggest to do differently was instead if running into a stall run out of the bathroom into the public area. She locks herself in a stall but then she has no where to go to escape and if he's Intent on his attack he won't go anyway and will break the door down. But by going in public she can both just keep running away and get help. But don't know the full story maybe she couldn't make it to the door but that's just my 2 cents but of course it's a great thing it worked


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 11, 2017)

Yeah, tough to say what exactly went down and I won't second guess anything. What she did perfectly was turn into a rabid badger and fight for her life. Techniques and styles be damned, people who refuse to be victims and can tap into that have the best chance of survival. Tremendous respect for this lady.


----------



## JR 137 (Mar 11, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Yeah, tough to say what exactly went down and I won't second guess anything. What she did perfectly was turn into a rabid badger and fight for her life. Techniques and styles be damned, people who refuse to be victims and can tap into that have the best chance of survival. Tremendous respect for this lady.



I too think people get too worked up about techniques, styles, etc.  It's all about flipping that switch and not being a victim.  It's all about that mentality.  Granted, even if you're a ball of rage or a "rabid badger" (I'd prefer honey badger ), some things really have little chance.  But most things will work.  Get the mentality right, and you're 90% there IMO.


----------



## marques (Mar 12, 2017)

Most people have been avoiding much trouble avoiding situations of vulnerability (as she didn't being alone in a park).

If no course (just some caution and awareness) works (actually, it is the best defence), 2h training up to this should be an advantage (a little one). In this case this 'little advantage' did a great difference to this woman, happily.

Two hours don't do miracles. But may worth every second spent.


----------



## Steve (Mar 12, 2017)

You guys better watch out.   Some guys around here make their living selling the idea that these things don't work.


----------



## Headhunter (Mar 12, 2017)

These things do and don't work. You can't learn to fight in 2 hours and any techniques you lewrn you won't have them perfected but on the other hand they do teach you things like safety tips and little things you can use so they do have their uses but ladies shouldn't think they're ronda rousey by the end of it


----------



## Buka (Mar 12, 2017)

And he looks like such a nice man. Glad I get to chip in for his food and medical going forward.


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 12, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> These things do and don't work. You can't learn to fight in 2 hours and any techniques you lewrn you won't have them perfected but on the other hand they do teach you things like safety tips and little things you can use so they do have their uses but ladies shouldn't think they're ronda rousey by the end of it



Let's not look for ways to blame the victim here. Clearly it worked, she fought for her life and went home relatively unharmed.


----------



## Headhunter (Mar 12, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Let's not look for ways to blame the victim here. Clearly it worked, she fought for her life and went home relatively unharmed.


Umm...where in my post did I blame anyone I didn't even mention the victim


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 12, 2017)

I do a self-defense drill where we corner the women and they have to fight us off while avoiding being cornered.  Always make movement toward the escape, no matter how small the movement is.  When an opportunity opens up go for it.

I won't second guess the woman, could things have been done better.  I think that's always the case. Did she do the right thing?  Well she made it out, so she did the right thing.

If I remember correctly I think the most important lesson that actually saved her, was the understanding that it didn't have to be a fair fight.  Many of the female students are afraid that they care going to hurt the guys.  It's not until they actually give the guys a good kick or punch for them to understand that it takes more than what thought to actually hurt someone.  Once the lady in the article understood that it didn't have to be a fair fight then she probably felt fine and justified for attacking the guy in the face.

As for scratching the face, there is no technique to that.  It's something that most people can do with no problem.  You don't need to go to a self-defense class to learn that.  The self-defense class probably put things into perspective.  It made it clear to her that when it happens, it's a fight for your life, so don't feel bad about the guy or woman that's attacking you.  If a self-defense class can get women to understand this then, women are more likely to survive.  It's better than the other perception of:  Maybe if I don't fight back he'll feel bad about what he's doing and let me go or won't hurt me as much.

If a self-defense class can get women over this mountain of being afraid to hurt someone





And make women attack with this type of effort, then the self-defense class is well worth it.  While this lady did a good job.  Look at the reaction to the women in the background, you can see their body language and it's clear that they don't have the stomach for violence yet.  They aren't even being attacked you can see the "turtle" appear.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Mar 13, 2017)

Buka said:


> And he looks like such a nice man. Glad I get to chip in for his food and medical going forward.



Oh, well, if you're going to, can I opt out?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 13, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Let's not look for ways to blame the victim here. Clearly it worked, she fought for her life and went home relatively unharmed.


What part of that post sounded like he was blaming the victim?


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 13, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> I do a self-defense drill where we corner the women and they have to fight us off while avoiding being cornered.  Always make movement toward the escape, no matter how small the movement is.  When an opportunity opens up go for it.
> 
> I won't second guess the woman, could things have been done better.  I think that's always the case. Did she do the right thing?  Well she made it out, so she did the right thing.
> 
> ...


If I could add one bit of equipment for working with SD seminars and new students, it would be that Redman suit.


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 13, 2017)

The nature of the internet is that I can post something, but have nothing to say about where the conversation goes from there. Fair enough. I will let this run down whatever path it does from here and won't try to redirect it again, but I am a little disappointed with how it's gone and I want to explain why before I do. And then you're all free to turn on me if that's what happens next. I really don't care. Where to start...?

First of all, let me say that I don't know this woman, but I know this park and have been there a million times, sometimes I even had the audacity to be there unaccompanied. It's not a bad neighborhood, though it is public and Seattle is a city. If my comments don't pertain to you, don't take offense, they are not directed at anyone in particular and I'm not personally calling anyone out.

The number one thing that people like to argue about on Martial Arts fora in this decade is "where's the proof that would work in the real world". To the consternation of many of us "the real world" is often regarded as either MMA or YouTube .

Here we have a verifiable story of a woman being violently assaulted by a recidivist predator in the actual real world and she successfully fought him off and went home with what most of us would consider minor injuries commonly associated with hard training. When I read this article, I was happy, I was proud and I was inspired to share it not only here, but with my students and other people in my extended training circles. Because, this is what real violence looks like...not sparring, not training, certainly not points tournaments. All of those things have their place and their value, but they are not "real fighting", this is.

I posted in the "general self defense" forum, because it's not about my style or your style or MMA or Ronda Rousey, it's about a normal person surviving an assault that occurred through no fault of her own in the actual real world.

Though I teach a traditional style, I also teach what I think is THE vital thing for survival in these situations, which she executed perfectly with little to no training. If you teach or talk about "self defense" I highly recommend a few books that may help you reconcile it to whatever training you do. My top 3 are "Strong on Defense" "Meditations on Violence" and "The Gift of Fear", but there are others. A quote from one of them that I thought of when I read this article is "Raping me is going to be the hardest thing you've ever done!" She went with "Not today MF'er!" over and over again and I might actually like that better.

When someone is raped and you say "What was she wearing?" "Had she been drinking?" or "She shouldn't have been there alone." you are victim blaming, which I will go on the record as a self defense teacher and a human being, as opposed to. She had a right to be in that park and she's not required to bring an escort for safety. She did nothing wrong. He's a criminal. She fought him off with tenacity that I hope my students have or learn, because honestly, if they are assaulted, it might be the one thing that matters.

Shame on me for thinking that a group of self proclaimed self defense experts couldn't just give this brave woman a cyber pat on the back for using what little training she had "in the real world" and living to tell about it. Shame on anyone who sees this story and smugly makes it somehow about their own superiority.


----------



## oftheherd1 (Mar 13, 2017)

Headhunter said:


> Umm...where in my post did I blame anyone I didn't even mention the victim





gpseymour said:


> What part of that post sounded like he was blaming the victim?



@ Headhunter, Just my opinion of course, but I think by your comment in a post about a woman who took a 2 hour defense course and survived an attempted rape, you appear to be talking about her.  She is what the thread is about.

But I do take your point that in a self defense course, students should be warned not to think they have just learned an entire MA systems methods, and learned how to instinctively apply them.  They should also be taught that they are responsible for the learning and application of what they have learned.  We can teach and attempt to facilitate learning, but the student must be responsible for what they learn or don't learn.

It would appear as if the lady mentioned did learn something somewhere.  She kept her cool and responded in a way that prevented her from being raped and/or killed.  From whatever source, she used something that worked for her in real life.

All that said, I agree with both of you that you didn't blame the victim.  Headhunter, you showed yourself dubious of how much can be taught and learned in a two hour SD class, and I agree.  But obviously, for some, they increase survivability.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 13, 2017)

oftheherd1 said:


> @ Headhunter, Just my opinion of course, but I think by your comment in a post about a woman who took a 2 hour defense course and survived an attempted rape, you appear to be talking about her.  She is what the thread is about.
> 
> But I do take your point that in a self defense course, students should be warned not to think they have just learned an entire MA systems methods, and learned how to instinctively apply them.  They should also be taught that they are responsible for the learning and application of what they have learned.  We can teach and attempt to facilitate learning, but the student must be responsible for what they learn or don't learn.
> 
> ...


_(Disclosure: I teach SD seminars occasionally, and actually today discussed doing a 2-hour one for some women next month.)_

My view of SD seminars is that they have 3 purposes:

Give the attendees useful information they can incorporate. This includes things like avoidance, target hardening, etc.
Give the attendees some quick, simple techniques they could apply without extensive training. If they practice them enough, they'll become habit. If they don't they might still show up under duress. It's a percentage change of the odds.
Give the attendees a chance to see how much there is to learn, if they are interested.
I think most SD seminars do a reasonable job of these. Some focus too much on #3. Some get lost trying to teach the "best" techniques, rather than the simplest, so miss on #2. Some probably forget to do anything with #1. I've yet to hear of one that didn't hit at least 2 of the 3 without seeming horrible to the participants.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 13, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Shame on me for thinking that a group of self proclaimed self defense experts couldn't just give this brave woman a cyber pat on the back for using what little training she had "in the real world" and living to tell about it. Shame on anyone who sees this story and smugly makes it somehow about their own superiority.


 I didn't see anything like this in the discussions.


----------



## Headhunter (Mar 13, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> The nature of the internet is that I can post something, but have nothing to say about where the conversation goes from there. Fair enough. I will let this run down whatever path it does from here and won't try to redirect it again, but I am a little disappointed with how it's gone and I want to explain why before I do. And then you're all free to turn on me if that's what happens next. I really don't care. Where to start...?
> 
> First of all, let me say that I don't know this woman, but I know this park and have been there a million times, sometimes I even had the audacity to be there unaccompanied. It's not a bad neighborhood, though it is public and Seattle is a city. If my comments don't pertain to you, don't take offense, they are not directed at anyone in particular and I'm not personally calling anyone out.
> 
> ...


No one is blaming anyone I read this thread 3 times to check and nothing bad has been said, I made 2 comments saying it would've been more ideal to get out the restroom and into public but also said I didn't know enough to say any circumstances and also spoke about how the courses obviously helped her survive which is obviously good and she took good lessons from that. Then I said women shouldn't get a false sense of security from them either and are not elite trained fighters either. I never said anything bad anyone I actually did congratulate the women and said it was good that she used what she learned to help her. And i haven't seen anyone else say anything bad. You post something on a forum people are going to discuss it for what it is. Of course it's great that she escaped and well done to her but does that really need saying this is a martial arts forum so we're obviously to discuss the martial art side of it.


----------



## Steve (Mar 13, 2017)

It's really hard to draw many firm conclusions from one event.  I saw story on the news and my reaction is simply just glad she's okay.  Good for her.

I've seen many of these stories, and while some identify a technique or martial arts training, other women point to their fitness or other things.  The one thing they all have in common is a woman who is determined not to be a victim.  I think there are several great ways to instill and promote that mentality, and if you're doing that, good for you.


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 13, 2017)

Thank you, Steve.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 13, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> If I could add one bit of equipment for working with SD seminars and new students, it would be that Redman suit.



Never liked it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 13, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Never liked it.


I like it for the ability to just let someone new (or in a seminar) have a bit of a go without worrying so much about hurting the "attacker". I can't think it would get much use beyond that - maybe in their first test (I test some simple defensive work even at that point).


----------



## mograph (Mar 13, 2017)

While doing some Chin Na, one of my teachers told me this. It might be useful to those of us who have to ramp up to crazed-badger status: *

"Grab his forearm! Press your thumb into it! He invaded your space, so you have full license to invade his!" *

It should also apply to kicks, punches, and general in-his-face insanity


----------



## crazydiamond (Mar 14, 2017)

I have only been in MA for a few years, but for self defense I think attitude and fighting spirit matter. I also think its one of the harder things to muster - for a women, a youth, or even a man.   I attended 1-2 of my schools women's self defense classes and part of it included getting angry and swearing as the teacher shoved you. As a mild mannered guy I found it difficult to muster this up. Then again I am a big guy and usually dont have to do much.

In my adult class and my child's classes they are also about "show me some attitude". I think its important - and hard for anyone to switch this on when attacked. I actually worry about this for my young daughter - she is big and strong for her age, and does well on technique  but she is such a sweet and non combative girl. Perhaps teen years will bring some attitude, but I also dont want her being an mean girl regularly. To be able to just switch it when needed - thats a trick.

Those words of that Seattle Woman really stick with me - "Not today Mother F'er...."   Good for her.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 14, 2017)

crazydiamond said:


> I think attitude and fighting spirit matter. I also think its one of the harder things to muster - for a women, a youth, or even a man. I attended 1-2 of my schools women's self defense classes and part of it included getting angry and swearing as the teacher shoved you. As a mild mannered guy I found it difficult to muster this up.


Attitude and fighting spirit is everything.  It will help define the quality of your training  I think many traditional martial arts systems have the solution. Learn to fight without getting angry and without emotions dictating how you perform.  When I teach people how to fight / defending themselves, I take the emotion out of what they have to do.  I rather that they have focus than anger.  Focus is easier pull out of someone than anger.  Even people who have short attention spans can focus when needed.  Test example:  If throw tennis balls at students with medium and hard force then it is their focus that will help them to evade the tennis ball not their anger.  After getting hit a couple of times, they will start tracking tell-tale signs that I'm about to throw the ball.  Still no anger, but excellent use with the same skill sets and focus needed to fight with.
-Agility
-Timing and awarness.
- Recognizing Tell-tale signs
- Endurance
- An understanding that they will get hit
- Hand and eye coordination
- Strategy
- Intent.
They even have a little Horse stance action going on.  Maybe I'll need to create a Jow Ga dodgeball team


----------



## Buka (Mar 15, 2017)

crazydiamond said:


> I have only been in MA for a few years, but for self defense I think attitude and fighting spirit matter. I also think its one of the harder things to muster - for a women, a youth, or even a man.   I attended 1-2 of my schools women's self defense classes and part of it included getting angry and swearing as the teacher shoved you. As a mild mannered guy I found it difficult to muster this up. Then again I am a big guy and usually dont have to do much.
> 
> In my adult class and my child's classes they are also about "show me some attitude". I think its important - and hard for anyone to switch this on when attacked. I actually worry about this for my young daughter - she is big and strong for her age, and does well on technique  but she is such a sweet and non combative girl. Perhaps teen years will bring some attitude, but I also dont want her being an mean girl regularly. To be able to just switch it when needed - thats a trick.
> 
> Those words of that Seattle Woman really stick with me - "Not today Mother F'er...."   Good for her.



 "Anger" may not be the right word. Emotional content maybe. And I've found it different amongst students, sometimes based on their personalities, sometimes based on how they handle an adrenaline dump, and obviously, sometimes both.

I've noticed over the years that pushing physical limitations in training sometimes seems to help bring out the emotional content when it's called for in other things. As an example - when doing resistance exercises, be it weight training, push ups, chin ups, whatever, an individual has to make use of the "pushing of oneself" - that teeth gritted, core tightened, mental scream of "one more, one more, one more". Over time, it seems to harden the attitude, shape the will and readies the body for physical stress - probably because it's getting used to it.

I think it then becomes easier to apply that "one more, one more" attitude to an individual's techniques, strategies and eventually to their overall make up as a Martial Artist.

That being said - high emotional content can tire you as well as drive you. It's up to the individual to learn the differences and harness the best way. As an example - if we are competing against each other, or sparring each other, and I'm all amped up and your calm as can be....if you play me right - there's a good chance I'll tire long before you will. What that can teach you, at the very least, is how emotional content can work for or against.


----------



## crazydiamond (Mar 15, 2017)

Buka said:


> "Anger" may not be the right word. Emotional content maybe.



Ya I get you.  Hard to define it - but the woman who was defending herself was mustering something between anger and strong defiance. Her stating with strong hard emotion "not today M'fer !" and fighting back -  is very similar to what was in that self defense class I attended. The instructor aggressively shoves and says he is going to hurt and looks mean (he is formal military guy so he does it convincingly) - and you either turtle, go weak...or show some teeth and swear back.

From my standpoint in my regular classes is something more subtle - its  a scowl and a certain expression/energy while sparing - but also separating "the hard *** spirit" from hitting hard on your good class mates.

As a man, besides being mild mannered, I am also a big guy. Over the course of my life when I have acted a bit bit angry/aggressive (normal persons pissed off - not violent) I have seen people around me -  get worried - or frankly scared. So I work on not doing that - I dont like the look in their faces - I feel bad - but also frustrated I can't act a little pissed off.

But back to the point for a female being attacked -, I think its important to be able to muster some level of aggression/anger/animal nature if attacked. My youngest one is almost 9 and I think at some point she needs to know how to muster some aggressive spirit if facing attack form a boy. I can say she was punched by a boy recently in the chest at school, and generally did not break down or crumble in tears. She did not seem upset because she experiences punching in class. I just wonder what would have happened if the boy kept at it and started to hurt or scare her - would muscle memory kick in, could she muster a "Not today M'Fer" growl back and start in ?  How to develop that in a sweet person ? I think the womens self defense classes focus on that - swearing, yelling back, getting your warrior on - and only very basic techniques - where as my daughter's normal class is 95% all techniques. Then again she is big like her daddy - so any boy her age is going to get a shock if the aggression comes out.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2017)

crazydiamond said:


> How to develop that in a sweet person ?



I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding female nature. It isn't a case of being sweet ( sorry but do you have to class her as sweet? it's somewhat of an anodyne description for a girl, I'd want to be described as well rounded, a decent person, pleasant natured not sweet which sounds twee) OR being aggressive. Females are more than capable of being all sorts of things, being aggressive is not being 'not sweet'.
What girls need is people to treat them as people not nice little girls, they need to be taught self confidence, to speak up, to be what they want to be. It's perfectly fine for females to be aggressive, why shouldn't it be yet it's spoken of here as being the opposite of 'sweet', it's not.
For female self defence there's a lot that comes into play, more than techniques, more than being told to dress 'nicely', not to drink etc.



crazydiamond said:


> The instructor aggressively shoves and says he is going to hurt and looks mean (he is formal military guy so he does it convincingly) - and you either turtle, go weak...or show some teeth and swear back.




If he did that to me in training I'd laugh in his face. I have been threatened by  a lot of people, men and women, military and non military in the course of my job. I neither fold nor shout back, there are proper techniques for dealing with this sort of aggression, showing teeth may not be the best way to deal with the situation. Knowing what is the best way to deal with situations is one of the best defences you can have. Confidence in your own abilities after an honest assessment of what you know and what you can do is something we should all have.
I am a 'cold' fighter, I don't blow up, don't get angry, don't get a red mist, I attack coldly and with purpose. Screaming at someone about to attack may be useful for some but it doesn't work for me. I prefer to save my energy, it could be that your daughter is the same. We aren't all the same. Also if you think females have to be taught aggression then you are very much mistaken lol.

There is a lot written by very experienced instructors such as Geoff Thompson about defending yourself etc. I'm sure other posters can also recommend good sources also.


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 15, 2017)

Thank you for joining this discussion, Tez.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Thank you for joining this discussion, Tez.



No worries, I just thought you needed a female view


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 15, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> No worries, I just thought you needed a female view



I was thinking the same thing.


----------



## crazydiamond (Mar 15, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding female nature. It isn't a case of being sweet ( sorry but do you have to class her as sweet? it's somewhat of an anodyne description for a girl, I'd want to be described as well rounded, a decent person, pleasant natured not sweet which sounds twee) OR being aggressive. Females are more than capable of being all sorts of things, being aggressive is not being 'not sweet'.
> What girls need is people to treat them as people not nice little girls, they need to be taught self confidence, to speak up, to be what they want to be. It's perfectly fine for females to be aggressive, why shouldn't it be yet it's spoken of here as being the opposite of 'sweet', it's not.
> For female self defence there's a lot that comes into play, more than techniques, more than being told to dress 'nicely', not to drink etc.
> 
> ...




I understand her nature very well - not primarily because she is a girl but because she is my child. I dont mean that in a "I know her because she lives with me" but on a much deeper level that ties me and my family lines together.  I was raised by a single mom, have sisters, all my kids have been female - numerous relationships not that it makes me an expert in women. But I was a "sweet" boy when younger  - maybe you and I don't share understanding of what that word means.

You will notice in my posts I mention my own challenges - as a man -  in what I would call a certain fighting spirit - or standing up to aggression and pushing back. I have read many books on violence and self defense from recommended experts in the field - the nature of violence and how to deal with it. It was a difficult process for me to think about this nature.

If you assumed I was speaking about all females - I was not. You are correct what works for some would not work for others.  I know what my daughter needs to develop - she will never be able to "attack coldly and with purpose" or "Laugh at some one shouting in anger at her".   She needs to be able to whip up a "not to day M'fer !" spirit when under threat or hurt. Just like the female in this news event.


----------



## Steve (Mar 15, 2017)

For discussion, I wonder what you guys think of instilling the will to fight back when considering that sexual assault is often perpetrated by someone known to the victim.  In this case, it was a stranger, but this is the exception to the rule.   It's one thing to say, "not today mother f'er." To a stranger, but to say it to your uncle or cousin or boss or boyfriend is something else.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 15, 2017)

Steve said:


> For discussion, I wonder what you guys think of instilling the will to fight back when considering that sexual assault is often perpetrated by someone known to the victim.  In this case, it was a stranger, but this is the exception to the rule.   It's one thing to say, "not today mother f'er." To a stranger, but to say it to your uncle or cousin or boss or boyfriend is something else.


That's an area I'm not qualified to help with.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 15, 2017)

Steve said:


> For discussion, I wonder what you guys think of instilling the will to fight back when considering that sexual assault is often perpetrated by someone known to the victim.  In this case, it was a stranger, but this is the exception to the rule.   It's one thing to say, "not today mother f'er." To a stranger, but to say it to your uncle or cousin or boss or boyfriend is something else.


 This is why I try to strip the emotion  from the task of applying self defense.


----------



## Steve (Mar 15, 2017)

Easier said than done.  And to be clear, I'm not qualified either.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 16, 2017)

crazydiamond said:


> If you assumed I was speaking about all females



Actually I wasn't thinking that. I'm just not sure if you realise that calling a girl sweet isn't helping her in the world. I am also a Guide and Brownie leader, I know girls and they wince when called sweet even the youngest Rainbows do, it holds them back from being themselves in a way that perhaps most people don't understand. I'm sure she is a credit to you and has a lovely nature but by calling her sweet you are pushing her into a category that invites dismissal by the outside world. You also don't know what will push her buttons to make her fight. I've seen people who you would not normally say boo to a goose turn into a raging monster because their child was attacked or their best mate etc.

I think also you aren't understanding that* training, training and more training* gives people the optimum chances for survival in situations, not turning into a fight monster or aggressive pitbull. You don't need an aggressive nature, you need to be confident that your techniques work, I wouldn't worry about whether you have the 'right nature' but rather concentrate on your training and your self confidence so that you know you can handle situations. *It's not my nature that makes me a cold fighter, it's training over many years with really good people*.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 16, 2017)

Steve said:


> For discussion, I wonder what you guys think of instilling the will to fight back when considering that sexual assault is often perpetrated by someone known to the victim.  In this case, it was a stranger, but this is the exception to the rule.   It's one thing to say, "not today mother f'er." To a stranger, but to say it to your uncle or cousin or boss or boyfriend is something else.



sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.

I have bashed people on the job I have know and even liked. It kind of sucks.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 16, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Actually I wasn't thinking that. I'm just not sure if you realise that calling a girl sweet isn't helping her in the world. I am also a Guide and Brownie leader, I know girls and they wince when called sweet even the youngest Rainbows do, it holds them back from being themselves in a way that perhaps most people don't understand. I'm sure she is a credit to you and has a lovely nature but by calling her sweet you are pushing her into a category that invites dismissal by the outside world. You also don't know what will push her buttons to make her fight. I've seen people who you would not normally say boo to a goose turn into a raging monster because their child was attacked or their best mate etc.
> 
> I think also you aren't understanding that* training, training and more training* gives people the optimum chances for survival in situations, not turning into a fight monster or aggressive pitbull. You don't need an aggressive nature, you need to be confident that your techniques work, I wouldn't worry about whether you have the 'right nature' but rather concentrate on your training and your self confidence so that you know you can handle situations. *It's not my nature that makes me a cold fighter, it's training over many years with really good people*.


Calling someone "sweet" is no more confining than calling them "bold". It's a personality descriptor, and any descriptor can be confining, as we tend to live up to them, at least a little. And while "sweet" may carry some gender-specific baggage, I suspect you'd find little boys rankle at it, as well.

If it is an accurate descriptor, however, I don't think there's anything wrong with using it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 16, 2017)

drop bear said:


> sometimes you gotta do what you gotta do.
> 
> I have bashed people on the job I have know and even liked. It kind of sucks.


I think it's more an issue of context. I'm not an expert on this, but I think violent, forcible rape is not the norm. It's more a perversion of the position power of a trusted adult. Physical self-defense skills aren't much help with that, unless the person recognizes the situation for what it is and goes into fight mode.

Of course, if we're talking about forcible rape of an adult (or near-adult), the physical skills do apply. There's still that violation of position power that seems to put some into shock.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 16, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Actually I wasn't thinking that. I'm just not sure if you realise that calling a girl sweet isn't helping her in the world. I am also a Guide and Brownie leader, I know girls and they wince when called sweet even the youngest Rainbows do, it holds them back from being themselves in a way that perhaps most people don't understand. I'm sure she is a credit to you and has a lovely nature but by calling her sweet you are pushing her into a category that invites dismissal by the outside world. You also don't know what will push her buttons to make her fight. I've seen people who you would not normally say boo to a goose turn into a raging monster because their child was attacked or their best mate etc.
> 
> I think also you aren't understanding that* training, training and more training* gives people the optimum chances for survival in situations, not turning into a fight monster or aggressive pitbull. You don't need an aggressive nature, you need to be confident that your techniques work, I wouldn't worry about whether you have the 'right nature' but rather concentrate on your training and your self confidence so that you know you can handle situations. *It's not my nature that makes me a cold fighter, it's training over many years with really good people*.


I have a section on my schools webite that highlights historical female warriors in an effort to show female students and visitors,male and female, that it's natural for women to be tough. The images of soft and helpless is a box that men and socity place women.  I try to get women to accept their "rough side" of who they are.  I think the reason why women enjoy punching bags and pads.  It allows them to be more of who they are and they don't feel judged because their excuse is that it's a fitness kickboxing class.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 16, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Calling someone "sweet" is no more confining than calling them "bold". It's a personality descriptor, and any descriptor can be confining, as we tend to live up to them, at least a little. And while "sweet" may carry some gender-specific baggage, I suspect you'd find little boys rankle at it, as well.
> 
> If it is an accurate descriptor, however, I don't think there's anything wrong with using it.


We tend to behave the way people perceive us. It's almost like setting expectations.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 16, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Calling someone "sweet" is no more confining than calling them "bold". It's a personality descriptor, and any descriptor can be confining, as we tend to live up to them, at least a little. And while "sweet" may carry some gender-specific baggage, I suspect you'd find little boys rankle at it, as well.
> 
> If it is an accurate descriptor, however, I don't think there's anything wrong with using it.



It's not so much wrong but as I said anodyne, it doesn't say anything about a person ( other than they are female lol), it's like saying someone is 'nice', a word my English teacher forbade us to use unless in the context of being skilful/precise because it actually doesn't mean anything. Think about it... what sort of day have you had? it was nice. what does that tell you? nothing, not even if the person enjoyed their day, it just sounds polite.  However when it's used to describe girls it's actually quite confining because little girls etc are expected to be both 'sweet and nice'. Translated to martial arts it makes teaching females who have been brought up to be 'sweet and nice' difficult, not because they are scared of being punched or hurt but because they've been brought up not to rough around, not to wrestle or play fight and so can't grasp the concept of sparring to hit someone as easily as males.  Hitting bags and pads fine, but not people. Nice girls, sweet girls don't hit people, boys aren't supposed to either but it is tolerated because 'boys are boys'. an excuse as we've seen recently which seems acceptable to a lot of people.

What we want for our daughters is for them to be self confident, to feel they can take on the world and to be themselves, nothing of that has to do with being aggressive or 'not nice'. It's about being independent and happy in your skin, it's about having a can do attitude not an 'up yours mate' one. Girls and boys should feel they have their parents approval not for being gender stereotypes but for being themselves.

Being able to defend yourself when attacked isn't about being aggressive and screaming, it's about being confident through training that you can take a punch or two, not freeze, can respond appropriately ( and knowing what that appropriate action is) and can survive. Training yourself to be aggressive isn't the answer. Training yourself to be confident and trust yourself is. That and the proper martial arts training for you.


----------



## mograph (Mar 16, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> We tend to behave the way people perceive us. It's almost like setting expectations.



It happens.
_"For example, a study on chess players revealed that female players performed more poorly than expected when they were told they would be playing against a male opponent. In contrast, women who were told that their opponent was female performed as would be predicted by past ratings of performance.[15] Female participants who were made aware of the stereotype of females performing worse at chess than males performed worse in their chess games."_
Stereotype threat - Wikipedia


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 16, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> We tend to behave the way people perceive us. It's almost like setting expectations.


That's true. It's also true that descriptors are necessary for, well, describing. And it's not only the ones that have a confining bias that are problematic. It turns out telling a child they are smart can cause them to give up more quickly on difficult tasks. There's nothing unusually confining about "sweet", IMO.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 16, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> It's not so much wrong but as I said anodyne, it doesn't say anything about a person ( other than they are female lol), it's like saying someone is 'nice', a word my English teacher forbade us to use unless in the context of being skilful/precise because it actually doesn't mean anything. Think about it... what sort of day have you had? it was nice. what does that tell you? nothing, not even if the person enjoyed their day, it just sounds polite.  However when it's used to describe girls it's actually quite confining because little girls etc are expected to be both 'sweet and nice'. Translated to martial arts it makes teaching females who have been brought up to be 'sweet and nice' difficult, not because they are scared of being punched or hurt but because they've been brought up not to rough around, not to wrestle or play fight and so can't grasp the concept of sparring to hit someone as easily as males.  Hitting bags and pads fine, but not people. Nice girls, sweet girls don't hit people, boys aren't supposed to either but it is tolerated because 'boys are boys'. an excuse as we've seen recently which seems acceptable to a lot of people.
> 
> What we want for our daughters is for them to be self confident, to feel they can take on the world and to be themselves, nothing of that has to do with being aggressive or 'not nice'. It's about being independent and happy in your skin, it's about having a can do attitude not an 'up yours mate' one. Girls and boys should feel they have their parents approval not for being gender stereotypes but for being themselves.
> 
> Being able to defend yourself when attacked isn't about being aggressive and screaming, it's about being confident through training that you can take a punch or two, not freeze, can respond appropriately ( and knowing what that appropriate action is) and can survive. Training yourself to be aggressive isn't the answer. Training yourself to be confident and trust yourself is. That and the proper martial arts training for you.


Why is "sweet" an indicator that someone is female? That's where the problem lies, IMO. Just because it is a gender stereotype, that doesn't make it untrue for some people of that gender, nor does it make it an un-useful descriptor. I've known girls, boys, men, and women who were sweet people.

And, as you pointed out, I don't think sweetness precludes a fighting will. It's less instinctual, perhaps, but still accessible.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 16, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Why is "sweet" an indicator that someone is female? That's where the problem lies, IMO. Just because it is a gender stereotype, that doesn't make it untrue for some people of that gender, nor does it make it an un-useful descriptor. I've known girls, boys, men, and women who were sweet people.
> 
> And, as you pointed out, I don't think sweetness precludes a fighting will. It's less instinctual, perhaps, but still accessible.



It indicates a girl by context, if someone is 'sweet' and it's a compliment it's a girl they are talking about, when someone says 'sweet' about a boy, then it's usually not a compliment. It shouldn't be this way, of course, but it mostly is and as far as I can see given the current political climate  this putting down of females will only get worse. When you have people in power denigrating females and a rape/grope culture being promoted then things don't look good, they seem to be trying to put the clock back to when women 'knew their place' in kitchen and bedroom.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 16, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> It indicates a girl by context, if someone is 'sweet' and it's a compliment it's a girl they are talking about, when someone says 'sweet' about a boy, then it's usually not a compliment. It shouldn't be this way, of course, but it mostly is and as far as I can see given the current political climate  this putting down of females will only get worse. When you have people in power denigrating females and a rape/grope culture being promoted then things don't look good, they seem to be trying to put the clock back to when women 'knew their place' in kitchen and bedroom.


Perhaps there's a different vernacular there. It's not an insult for someone to say to a parent, "What a sweet little boy you have!"


----------



## Steve (Mar 16, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> It indicates a girl by context, if someone is 'sweet' and it's a compliment it's a girl they are talking about, when someone says 'sweet' about a boy, then it's usually not a compliment. It shouldn't be this way, of course, but it mostly is and as far as I can see given the current political climate  this putting down of females will only get worse. When you have people in power denigrating females and a rape/grope culture being promoted then things don't look good, they seem to be trying to put the clock back to when women 'knew their place' in kitchen and bedroom.


Are you referring to current events in the UK, in the USA, both?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 16, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> That's true. It's also true that descriptors are necessary for, well, describing. And it's not only the ones that have a confining bias that are problematic. It turns out telling a child they are smart can cause them to give up more quickly on difficult tasks. There's nothing unusually confining about "sweet", IMO.


Instead of telling a child that they are sweet, how about telling the child that they are "kind" or  "respectful" ?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 16, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Perhaps there's a different vernacular there. It's not an insult for someone to say to a parent, "What a sweet little boy you have!"


 this would be find to me because it's about the child but not directed at the child.  After a certain age some boys will set an adult straight and tell the adult that they aren't a little boy.  When things like this are said it's more for the parent's benefit and not the child's benefit.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 16, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Perhaps there's a different vernacular there. It's not an insult for someone to say to a parent, "What a sweet little boy you have!"



The operative word there though is 'little', try saying that about boys over the age of four. What boy of 10/11 etc wants to be called sweet? I'm not sure parents would be happy about having a 'sweet' boy of 12, many would be somewhat insulted that it was the best you could say about a lad.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 16, 2017)

To raise brave girls, encourage adventure

This is what we want...brave girls!


----------



## Steve (Mar 16, 2017)

I agree with tez.   These are diminutive state,nets that we often don't even think about.   People use words like this, sometimes intentionally, to diminish others.   Calling people sweet or describing their efforts as little or small is similar to saying son, boy or kid.


----------



## Steve (Mar 16, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Perhaps there's a different vernacular there. It's not an insult for someone to say to a parent, "What a sweet little boy you have!"


Only if that boy is a baby or toddler, or if you're an 80'year old woman talking to another 80+ year old woman.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 16, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> The operative word there though is 'little', try saying that about boys over the age of four. What boy of 10/11 etc wants to be called sweet? I'm not sure parents would be happy about having a 'sweet' boy of 12, many would be somewhat insulted that it was the best you could say about a lad.


In Black American Culture to sweet has multiple meaning.  For example, "Your boy is a little sweet" = Your boy is a little girlish.   "That boy is sweet" could mean that he's nice or that he's gay. "He has some sweetness in him"  = he's definitely gay / question about if he's ga.   Keep in mind that in Black American Culture the term "sweet" isn't negative for gay.  It's almost like polite code word for gay, because if you say someone is gay people tend to freak out, but if you say that a guy has some sweetness in him, then for some reason it's not as bad as being gay even though that's what is being implied.  In addition some guys can be more feminine without actually being gay, and sweetness would fit that description as well.  It would be like saying "Soft like a girl" but not gay.   It could be even used as "He's a little sweet but not gay."

I know it's not me because it's even shown here in this commercial.


----------



## mograph (Mar 16, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> The operative word there though is 'little', try saying that about boys over the age of four. What boy of 10/11 etc wants to be called sweet? I'm not sure parents would be happy about having a 'sweet' boy of 12, many would be somewhat insulted that it was the best you could say about a lad.


But after such a lad discovers girls, he might be quite pleased to hear a young lady describe him as "sweet."


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 16, 2017)

mograph said:


> But after such a lad discovers girls, he might be quite pleased to hear a young lady describe him as "sweet."




LOL maybe, but he will stay that much sweeter if he knows the girl can take care of herself and can KO him if necessary.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 16, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> Instead of telling a child that they are sweet, how about telling the child that they are "kind" or  "respectful" ?


Because those aren't exactly the same thing, and "sweet" isn't an insult. Heck, I still hear teenage girls talking about how sweet their boyfriends are when they do something nice.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 16, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> The operative word there though is 'little', try saying that about boys over the age of four. What boy of 10/11 etc wants to be called sweet? I'm not sure parents would be happy about having a 'sweet' boy of 12, many would be somewhat insulted that it was the best you could say about a lad.


That's more a masculine gender role issue, than a problem with the word.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 16, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> That's more a masculine gender role issue, than a problem with the word.



It is but I wouldn't have said the problem is the word but the use of it to cause that masculine gender problem is.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 16, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Because those aren't exactly the same thing, and "sweet" isn't an insult. Heck, I still hear teenage girls talking about how sweet their boyfriends are when they do something nice.


Again that's girls talking to other girls about a person that isn't being spoken directly to.  No different than an adult talking to another adult about a child who isn't being spoken directly to.  So in your case it's a girl not directly telling her boyfriend that he's sweet right?


----------



## Buka (Mar 16, 2017)

Taught a self defense class at my buddy's place last night. Introduced some young women to various chokes. They had such a gleam in their eyes. But they're sweet kids. "Sweet" does not mean to me what it means to others.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 16, 2017)

Buka said:


> Taught a self defense class at my buddy's place last night. Introduced some young women to various chokes. They had such a gleam in their eyes. But they're sweet kids. "Sweet" does not mean to me what it means to others.


Did you tell the young women that that they were sweet?


----------



## Buka (Mar 16, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> Did you tell the young women that that they were sweet?



I did not. I told them they were pretty damn awesome.


----------



## Hanzou (Mar 16, 2017)

Buka said:


> Taught a self defense class at my buddy's place last night. Introduced some young women to various chokes. They had such a gleam in their eyes. But they're sweet kids. "Sweet" does not mean to me what it means to others.



Good. The amount of martial arts that lack choking within their curriculum is staggering. An effective choke can be applied by a small against a larger person, and end a confrontation in a matter of seconds. Every woman that is serious about self defense should know how to do them.


----------



## Buka (Mar 16, 2017)

Hanzou said:


> Good. The amount of martial arts that lack choking within their curriculum is staggering. An effective choke can be applied by a small against a larger person, and end a confrontation in a matter of seconds. Every woman that is serious about self defense should know how to do them.



Long time, no hear, bro. Good to read you again.

I agree. I find basic choking skills to be very empowering. Perhaps even more so for women.
I suppose that could be said of any technique, but I find it much more so with chokes. And done properly, they're very safe. Besides, they're a whole lot of fun.


----------



## FriedRice (Mar 25, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> This is a few miles from where I live. I know that we are skeptical of 2 hour self defense courses, but simply teaching people not to be victims can make all the difference. It sounds like it did for this awesome lady.
> 
> –------
> Seattle Woman Uses Tactics She Learned from Self-Defense Class to Escape Brutal Sexual Assault
> ...




It's better than nothing. I don't see anything wrong with it.


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 25, 2017)

It was certainly worth something to this woman, which was my point.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 25, 2017)

We are sceptical of 2 hour SD courses for women for a very good reason.


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 25, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> We are sceptical of 2 hour SD courses for women for a very good reason.



Just to be clear. I was asked to teach a 2 hour SD course for women once and after collaborating with someone on a curriculum for a few weeks, we declined, because I didn't feel good about what I thought we could offer in that context. 

But, technique aside, some people (men and woman) need to embrace the idea that they can and should and will fight if someone tries to victimize them. If that's all they get out of it, it's worth it to some people and it sounded like it made a difference in this woman's life. 

Conversely, if you study martial arts for a decade and don't develop that commitment not to go down without a bloody fight, it will most likely let you down when tested in a public restroom.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 26, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> Just to be clear. I was asked to teach a 2 hour SD course for women once and after collaborating with someone on a curriculum for a few weeks, we declined, because I didn't feel good about what I thought we could offer in that context.
> 
> But, technique aside, some people (men and woman) need to embrace the idea that they can and should and will fight if someone tries to victimize them. If that's all they get out of it, it's worth it to some people and it sounded like it made a difference in this woman's life.
> 
> Conversely, if you study martial arts for a decade and don't develop that commitment not to go down without a bloody fight, it will most likely let you down when tested in a public restroom.




I said we are sceptical for a reason and I mean it despite someone thinking that is funny but then he's on a campaign to pick arguments with me. *There is nothing, ever, funny about rape.*

I will state the obvious here and it's what most of us think, that doing a 2 hour course can and often does make people think they have the techniques to fend off an attacker so they take risks they wouldn't take if they hadn't done the course. They think it's fine to ignore the 'rules' of self defence like not walking in dark places etc because they are confident they can handle themselves if attacked. Then of course there's the issue of whether one should fight immediately, thinking one can defend themselves and attacking your 'attacker' can backfire on you, sometimes other actions can be more productive. I've dealt with a couple of rape cases, one had a knife to her throat, she didn't resist because to do so would have left her dead she believed so she remained totally passive, she was sure that was the right thing for her, I can't argue it wasn't. I can't argue that one should always fight, I can't argue that you shouldn't.
We need to be very careful about what we teach, the first thing I always say is that you must go with your gut feeling and instincts. Going down fighting isn't always the right thing to do. It sounds great when writing it, it may help convict the attacker in court by convincing a jury that you didn't want the sexual contact but being beaten to an inch of your life is not something you want to happen if there's anything else you can do to avoid it. Be very careful about telling people, especially women they must fight to the death as it were.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 26, 2017)

An interesting article. What should you do if a man is about to rape you?


----------



## JR 137 (Mar 26, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> In Black American Culture to sweet has multiple meaning.  For example, "Your boy is a little sweet" = Your boy is a little girlish.   "That boy is sweet" could mean that he's nice or that he's gay. "He has some sweetness in him"  = he's definitely gay / question about if he's ga.   Keep in mind that in Black American Culture the term "sweet" isn't negative for gay.  It's almost like polite code word for gay, because if you say someone is gay people tend to freak out, but if you say that a guy has some sweetness in him, then for some reason it's not as bad as being gay even though that's what is being implied.  In addition some guys can be more feminine without actually being gay, and sweetness would fit that description as well.  It would be like saying "Soft like a girl" but not gay.   It could be even used as "He's a little sweet but not gay."
> 
> I know it's not me because it's even shown here in this commercial.



So when Walter Payton was nicknamed "Sweetness," did the black community interpret that as "Gayness?"


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 26, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> So when Walter Payton was nicknamed "Sweetness," did the black community interpret that as "Gayness?"


Probably.  So I looked it up to see what I could find.

Source Why Walter Payton was called Sweetness - Trivia Happy

"
_Ever wonder why legendary running back Walter Payton had the nickname Sweetness? His brother gave the answer in his book Walter & Me, and there are a few reasons the tough player had the sweet nickname.


Payton cycled through a few nicknames before finding one that stuck. Payton was called Bubba as a child, and Jackson State fans called him Little Monk and Spider-Man. Eventually, they thought of Sugarman, and a twist on that nickname became permanent.


After Sugarman, Walter Payton became Sweetness. Payton’s brother speculates that the nickname was meant to pick on his soft, high-pitched voice, but it quickly became a badge of honor. The media was happy to promote Payton’s nickname because, as one reporter said, “he runs so sweet that it gives me cavities just watching him_.”"

You can see his video here

From this statement it sounds as if the Reporter knew why people were calling him the name and he thought to redefine the meaning of name. I'm not sure about other cultures but this is also a normal thing in Black American culture where black people embrace a negative image or name and then turn it around to mean something else.  Sometimes it works and sometimes it causes more problems.  Examples of this is, Thug, Pimp, Player, N---a,(n-word), Hustler, and some other words that are negative but are also used in a way that even other ethnicites are happy to be called some of these words.

There have been rumors about him being gay as well.  No one knows the answer to that, but I'm pretty sure that if he was, then you would be able to tell from childhood photos.  Kids make less of an effort to hide that they are gay.    But like I said before, some guys can be more feminine and not actually be gay, but still be called sweetness.  But like I said being gay isn't a big deal in the black community. It didn't have the stigma that I see outside of the black community.   Some of the most famous black musicians had a lot of "sugar in them"  slang for being very feminine.  Little Richard, Prince, Luther Vandross. Tevin Cambell.  If you look at the news reports shockers from the past about who was gay.  Do you ever remember it being a shocking news story that a Black American Celebrity was gay?  It just wasn't a big issue within the Black American Communities.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 26, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> but this is also a normal thing in Black American culture where black people embrace a negative image or name and then turn it around to mean something else.



It's a British thing as well, look up 'Desert Rats' and 'Old Contemptibles'.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 26, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> There is nothing, ever, funny about rape



I am repeating this because you have to be very sick to think there is. This is a statement of fact, not an insult or an attack.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 26, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> This is a few miles from where I live. I know that we are skeptical of 2 hour self defense courses, but simply teaching people not to be victims can make all the difference. It sounds like it did for this awesome lady.
> 
> –------
> Seattle Woman Uses Tactics She Learned from Self-Defense Class to Escape Brutal Sexual Assault
> ...


The one thing I don't like in terms of what happens before Rape is the mindset that "it won't happen to me."  If we could get people to understand the danger of this mindset then I think we could do a lot more to help women protect themselves against rape and to better analyze the environment.  I'm not saying that women need to dwell on the environment, but the better they can analyze an environment, the sooner red flags will pop up.    I think this would be even more valuable for children, who are the most likely to have the "it will won't happen to me." mindset.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 26, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> The one thing I don't like in terms of what happens before Rape is the mindset that "it won't happen to me."  If we could get people to understand the danger of this mindset then I think we could do a lot more to help women protect themselves against rape and to better analyze the environment.  I'm not saying that women need to dwell on the environment, but the better they can analyze an environment, the sooner red flags will pop up.    I think this would be even more valuable for children, who are the most likely to have the "it will won't happen to me." mindset.



Alongside that is the fact that most rapes aren't 'stranger' rapes' but perpetrated by someone known to the victim.
I think too that we need a lot of education not just to prevent victims becoming victims but to stop rapists from becoming rapists, the onus is put on women to 'be careful', 'not to dress provocatively' , don't 'walk the streets alone' but we also need it to be known and recognised that rape is a crime and to have it treated as such with better sentencing, less judging of victims etc.
You have only included women in this post but men get raped too.

List of Rape Myths


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 26, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Alongside that is the fact that most rapes aren't 'stranger' rapes' but perpetrated by someone known to the victim.
> I think too that we need a lot of education not just to prevent victims becoming victims but to stop rapists from becoming rapists, the onus is put on women to 'be careful', 'not to dress provocatively' , don't 'walk the streets alone' but we also need it to be known and recognised that rape is a crime and to have it treated as such with better sentencing, less judging of victims etc.
> You have only included women in this post but men get raped too.
> 
> List of Rape Myths


When I made the comment I was actually thinking about the other side of the coin. Males get raped too.  At a younger age and as adults.  More so in prison, but it happens out of prison and sometimes by women.  I've personally have seen cases of this in my neighborhood as a teen.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Mar 30, 2017)

kick him in his dick. It hurts. Alot.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 30, 2017)

senseiblackbelt said:


> kick him in his dick. It hurts. Alot.



One of the worst pieces of advice ever given..... men who are about to attack ( or defend in different situations) will adjust their stance, protect their groin and do everything to protect themselves from strikes there. I have actually seen in different situations from MMA fights to arrest situations where someone is resisting, men who have been kicked/struck n the groin and they have carried on regardless. I'm sure the pain was quite obvious to them but adrenaline/drugs/alcohol/rage etc can carry someone over quite an enormous amount of pain. It can have the effect of making the attacker angry and therefore inflict more pain or attack harder. I wouldn't go for it as a first or only strike. There may be a point where you can strike to the groin but really you need to be able to be sure that it will be effective.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 30, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> One of the worst pieces of advice ever given..... men who are about to attack ( or defend in different situations) will adjust their stance, protect their groin and do everything to protect themselves from strikes there. I have actually seen in different situations from MMA fights to arrest situations where someone is resisting, men who have been kicked/struck n the groin and they have carried on regardless. I'm sure the pain was quite obvious to them but adrenaline/drugs/alcohol/rage etc can carry someone over quite an enormous amount of pain. It can have the effect of making the attacker angry and therefore inflict more pain or attack harder. I wouldn't go for it as a first or only strike. There may be a point where you can strike to the groin but really you need to be able to be sure that it will be effective.


If a good groin shot is available, I'd take it. Then, just like a left hook to the liver, I'd keep following up until they were done. If that one shot did the trick (possble in either case, but not reliable), then I get to stop sooner.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 30, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> If a good groin shot is available, I'd take it



As I said so would I but it's not a one shot wonder which stops the attacker on the spot as was implied in senseiblackbelt's post. Too many SD 'experts' tell students to do this and they really, really shouldn't.


----------



## ShortBridge (Mar 30, 2017)

In my experience, by the age of 14, male humans develop an uncanny ability to avoid getting kicked in the junk.

If it's there, take it, just like anything else and keep going.

So, the actual woman in this article was on local news this week talking about the incident. She took quite a beating too, which didn't quite come across in the article. It was a fight and she has my admiration.


----------



## Steve (Mar 30, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> In my experience, by the age of 14, male humans develop an uncanny ability to avoid getting kicked in the junk.
> 
> If it's there, take it, just like anything else and keep going.
> 
> So, the actual woman in this article was on local news this week talking about the incident. She took quite a beating too, which didn't quite come across in the article. It was a fight and she has my admiration.


I saw that story, too.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 30, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> One of the worst pieces of advice ever given..... men who are about to attack ( or defend in different situations) will adjust their stance, protect their groin and do everything to protect themselves from strikes there. I have actually seen in different situations from MMA fights to arrest situations where someone is resisting, men who have been kicked/struck n the groin and they have carried on regardless. I'm sure the pain was quite obvious to them but adrenaline/drugs/alcohol/rage etc can carry someone over quite an enormous amount of pain. It can have the effect of making the attacker angry and therefore inflict more pain or attack harder. I wouldn't go for it as a first or only strike. There may be a point where you can strike to the groin but really you need to be able to be sure that it will be effective.


I had a long and detailed response to this with medical sources and videos but my browser crashed.  Here's the short version
There are 2 types of pains a man will feel.  
1. Creeping pain that gradually gets worst - this is the pain that guys may be able to stay on their feet and struggle, but it makes us weak.
2. Instant pain - This is a sharp instant pain.  There's nothing a guy can do to fight against this type of pain.  He would literally have to be on some kind of drug to ignore this pain.  There's no way that a person can fight through it anymore than a person getting a tooth pick stuck in their open eye during a fight.  

The reason why people think groin strikes are ineffective is because they are looking at unsuccessful strikes to the testicles.  If you strike the testicles with a solid hit then he'll mostly likely feel #2  Depending on how the strike is, it may cause a testicular rupture.  As a guy speaking about the pain, if you got a clear shot then go for it.  If you are successful at striking the testicle then you will instantly end the fight.

The only thing I would warn is to think of groin shots as the only thing that needs to be done.  At a very minimum a groin strike or attempted groin strike will disrupt an attack.  This disruption needs to be taken advantage of.  If a guy is busy trying to avoid having his testicles then for that instant he's not attacking. Most attackers pick people who they believe are weaker than them, which increases the chance of success.  If the person can deliver a good kick or knee (meaning they train these strikes) then even a miss can be effective in either stopping or slowing the person down.

While being kicked on the penis is not as bad as being kicked on the testicles, it's not fun either.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 30, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> As I said so would I but it's not a one shot wonder which stops the attacker on the spot as was implied in senseiblackbelt's post. Too many SD 'experts' tell students to do this and they really, really shouldn't.


 I teach student 5 different ways to strike the testicle., Foot, open hand, fist, knee, and grab.   I don't speak of it as a "magic strike".  I let them know right away that it only works if the strike gets a solid hit on the testicle.  I don't use a red man suit when I do self-defense training. So when they do groin strikes on me,  the knee and the foot, then they can see me naturally react to avoid it.  I think this is important in understanding the challenges with groin strikes.

For me the idea strike would be to use the hand to strike and grab, crush then pull.

Fun fact: Animal  Predators (wolf, wild dog, and big cat families) will often target the genitals of their prey if it's an option.  This is why.  





Human males are no different.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 30, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> He would literally have to be on some kind of drug to ignore this pain.



As were some of the people resisting arrest I was telling you about. Adrenaline also acts as a drug, along with alcohol and rage. If tasering doesn't put them down first time, a groin shot is unlikely to.



JowGaWolf said:


> The only thing I would warn is to think of groin shots as the only thing that needs to be done



That was what I was saying, so often the instruction is 'a strike to the groin' will do it, well no, because even if it's bang on target the guy goes down if you are standing there thinking he's finished and you're safe...you're not.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Mar 30, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> As were some of the people resisting arrest I was telling you about. Adrenaline also acts as a drug, along with alcohol and rage. If tasering doesn't put them down first time, a groin shot is unlikely to.
> 
> 
> 
> That was what I was saying, so often the instruction is 'a strike to the groin' will do it, well no, because even if it's bang on target the guy goes down if you are standing there thinking he's finished and you're safe...you're not.


  Do women worry about the same thing?  I know we are always saying to kick men in the groin but does it work as equally well to kick women in the groin?  Say woman fighting against another woman.


----------



## drop bear (Mar 31, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> As I said so would I but it's not a one shot wonder which stops the attacker on the spot as was implied in senseiblackbelt's post. Too many SD 'experts' tell students to do this and they really, really shouldn't.



Do it anyway. knock him unconsious first if you have to. Then kick him in the dick.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 31, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> Do women worry about the same thing?  I know we are always saying to kick men in the groin but does it work as equally well to kick women in the groin?  Say woman fighting against another woman.



Not so much, hitting the pubic bone hurts though, hitting the breasts hurts too but neither as much as many think.

Rather than 'hitting' the penis, I was taught how to 'break' it under rape conditions, yes really. It's a very nasty injury ( I've had some nasty instructors lol) Probably best not to think about it too much.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Mar 31, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> One of the worst pieces of advice ever given..... men who are about to attack ( or defend in different situations) will adjust their stance, protect their groin and do everything to protect themselves from strikes there. I have actually seen in different situations from MMA fights to arrest situations where someone is resisting, men who have been kicked/struck n the groin and they have carried on regardless. I'm sure the pain was quite obvious to them but adrenaline/drugs/alcohol/rage etc can carry someone over quite an enormous amount of pain. It can have the effect of making the attacker angry and therefore inflict more pain or attack harder. I wouldn't go for it as a first or only strike. There may be a point where you can strike to the groin but really you need to be able to be sure that it will be effective.



ok but lets say hypotheically someone was rapin - god forbid- someone, rapist was defenceless wasnt in a stance, why not go for his dick? problem solved. 

Im struglling to understand how someone can continue to try and rape someone when there balls are killing.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Mar 31, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> One of the worst pieces of advice ever given..... men who are about to attack ( or defend in different situations) will adjust their stance, protect their groin and do everything to protect themselves from strikes there. I have actually seen in different situations from MMA fights to arrest situations where someone is resisting, men who have been kicked/struck n the groin and they have carried on regardless. I'm sure the pain was quite obvious to them but adrenaline/drugs/alcohol/rage etc can carry someone over quite an enormous amount of pain. It can have the effect of making the attacker angry and therefore inflict more pain or attack harder. I wouldn't go for it as a first or only strike. There may be a point where you can strike to the groin but really you need to be able to be sure that it will be effective.



by the way, i like your profile pic.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Mar 31, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> Do women worry about the same thing?  I know we are always saying to kick men in the groin but does it work as equally well to kick women in the groin?  Say woman fighting against another woman.



reckon it could since a female vagina is sensitive..


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 31, 2017)

senseiblackbelt said:


> reckon it could since a female vagina is sensitive..



It is impossible to kick or strike a vagina it's located _inside_ the body. Many rapists do use objects to penetrate their victims as this is often more damaging and humiliating.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Mar 31, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> It is impossible to kick or strike a vagina it's located _inside_ the body. Many rapists do use objects to penetrate their victims as this is often more damaging and humiliating.



Rape is a really bad thing. Being told what some bad people do there poor victims is.. traumatizing. But really there needs to be more awareness of proper useful sd techniques


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 31, 2017)

senseiblackbelt said:


> ok but lets say hypotheically someone was rapin - god forbid- someone, rapist was defenceless wasnt in a stance, why not go for his dick? problem solved.
> 
> Im struglling to understand how someone can continue to try and rape someone when there balls are killing.


No one has said never to use it. We just don't like that some see it as a magic response. If it's there, use it. But don't depend upon it being there. And don't depend upon it to incapacitate them. If you get the shot, and hit the testicles, it will probably work. Just don't assume either of those conditions will always be true.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 31, 2017)

senseiblackbelt said:


> Rape is a really bad thing. Being told what some bad people do there poor victims is.. traumatizing. But really there needs to be more awareness of proper useful sd techniques



Rape isn't about sex, it's about having power over your victim and hurting them in ways that also humiliate them.
Self defence is never bad but we also need to take into account that sometimes the best self defence is not to resist or fight back. It must be accepted that the victim should be respected for whatever action they take because they and only they can decide on the way they deal with it based on their situation, their instincts and their strength. We must never tell people that if they don't fight it wasn't rape, we must never tell people who aren't beaten up because they chose to take a passive way that they were wrong, they are never wrong.


----------



## Steve (Mar 31, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Rape isn't about sex, it's about having power over your victim and hurting them in ways that also humiliate them.
> Self defence is never bad but we also need to take into account that sometimes the best self defence is not to resist or fight back. It must be accepted that the victim should be respected for whatever action they take because they and only they can decide on the way they deal with it based on their situation, their instincts and their strength. We must never tell people that if they don't fight it wasn't rape, we must never tell people who aren't beaten up because they chose to take a passive way that they were wrong, they are never wrong.


Victim blaming is never okay.


----------



## aedrasteia (Mar 31, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Rape isn't about sex, it's about having power over your victim and hurting them in ways that also humiliate them.
> Self defence is never bad but we also need to take into account that sometimes the best self defence is not to resist or fight back. It must be accepted that the victim should be respected for whatever action they take because they and only they can decide on the way they deal with it based on their situation, their instincts and their strength. We must never tell people that if they don't fight it wasn't rape, we must never tell people who aren't beaten up because they chose to take a passive way that they were wrong, they are never wrong.



Thanks Tez.   Survivors/targets/victims are told this every day - usually in the form of 'questions'  from
family and 'friends'.  And many MA/SD  instructors and experts pay (very) brief lip-service to saying
 ' whatever you decide to do is OK' - and go straight to a technical speculation on what she 'could have done'
lots of opinions, assessments, critiques. Just like this and other threads. 
Right in front of her. While she is right there, in front of them. 

They want to 'help', you know.


----------



## aedrasteia (Mar 31, 2017)

Steve said:


> Victim blaming is never okay.



Thanks Steve.   Lots of lip-service, and then right back to it. (not directed at you). I'm just so tired of it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Mar 31, 2017)

aedrasteia said:


> Thanks Tez.   Survivors/targets/victims are told this every day - usually in the form of 'questions'  from
> family and 'friends'.  And many MA/SD  instructors and experts pay (very) brief lip-service to saying
> ' whatever you decide to do is OK' - and go straight to a technical speculation on what she 'could have done'
> lots of opinions, assessments, critiques. Just like this and other threads.
> ...


I think part of the problem is that some (many?) SD instructors confuse what a victim "could" have done with what she "should" have done. There are always different choices that were possibilities. That doesn't mean they were better choices, would have produced better outcomes, or ought to have been used. Only the person in the situation can make that decision, and they have to make the decision that is right for them in that moment, as best they can, with what options and personal abilities they have available.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 1, 2017)

aedrasteia said:


> Thanks Tez.   Survivors/targets/victims are told this every day - usually in the form of 'questions'  from
> family and 'friends'.  And many MA/SD  instructors and experts pay (very) brief lip-service to saying
> ' whatever you decide to do is OK' - and go straight to a technical speculation on what she 'could have done'
> lots of opinions, assessments, critiques. Just like this and other threads.
> ...



People do that after a sports fight loss as well.

Doesn't help there either.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 1, 2017)

aedrasteia said:


> Thanks Tez.   Survivors/targets/victims are told this every day - usually in the form of 'questions'  from
> family and 'friends'.  And many MA/SD  instructors and experts pay (very) brief lip-service to saying
> ' whatever you decide to do is OK' - and go straight to a technical speculation on what she 'could have done'
> lots of opinions, assessments, critiques. Just like this and other threads.
> ...



I had over 20 years of a few work colleagues doing this, the 'well, I would have...' when ever I dealt with a situation. They would tell me how they would have dealt with it. However I had dealt with it my way and nine and a half times of out of ten successfully, the real reason they were telling me is because I dealt with it as a woman and not a man, I'd talked, placated sometimes, tried for agreements and generally tried not to use unnecessary violence, they nearly always would be more 'butch', much more 'assertive' ( they thought actually it came over as more aggressive). When checking drunk squaddies for example I would go along with the mood, 'jolly' them along to check their IDs, check where they've been, if they knew anything about the incident etc etc, these few would stand on their authority and demand to be spoken to with 'respect', they turned the mood of the squaddies from jolly to aggressive, not what you want or need when you have a bunch of them. Perhaps I did look less authoritative, more approachable but then I never got threatened, the squaddies might have been more suggestive, more flirty even with me but by god I got the job done. After though I got the 'what I would have done', yeah whatever, at least I never had to call the dog section for backup or got thumped by a big Fijian soldier lol.

So many think self defence is all about 'fighting', being able to use martial arts techniques to get out of a situation, self defence is about coming out a survivor, not a victim. these days when you have politicians spouting off that you can't get pregnant during rape ( if you do it seems it wasn't rape ), that women are to blame for being raped ( it seems too that men don't get raped in these people's world), self defence is 'not wearing revealing clothes'. Obviously if you are beaten black and blue or murdered then perhaps there's a chance you didn't 'ask for it', but you have to be broken to have them think that.

The message should be ' do what you have to survive', then do that, survive and live your life to the fullest you can, you were and are right. What the rest of us should do is support that, to lobby politicians for proper sentencing for rapists, to help finance rape crisis centres, to have the whole idea of what is rape ( not just of women) turned around and seen for what it is and stop this macho nonsense of 'all you have to do is kick them in the nuts' and you 'have to go down fighting' attitude.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 1, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I had over 20 years of a few work colleagues doing this, the 'well, I would have...' when ever I dealt with a situation. They would tell me how they would have dealt with it. However I had dealt with it my way and nine and a half times of out of ten successfully, the real reason they were telling me is because I dealt with it as a woman and not a man, I'd talked, placated sometimes, tried for agreements and generally tried not to use unnecessary violence, they nearly always would be more 'butch', much more 'assertive' ( they thought actually it came over as more aggressive). When checking drunk squaddies for example I would go along with the mood, 'jolly' them along to check their IDs, check where they've been, if they knew anything about the incident etc etc, these few would stand on their authority and demand to be spoken to with 'respect', they turned the mood of the squaddies from jolly to aggressive, not what you want or need when you have a bunch of them. Perhaps I did look less authoritative, more approachable but then I never got threatened, the squaddies might have been more suggestive, more flirty even with me but by god I got the job done. After though I got the 'what I would have done', yeah whatever, at least I never had to call the dog section for backup or got thumped by a big Fijian soldier lol.
> 
> So many think self defence is all about 'fighting', being able to use martial arts techniques to get out of a situation, self defence is about coming out a survivor, not a victim. these days when you have politicians spouting off that you can't get pregnant during rape ( if you do it seems it wasn't rape ), that women are to blame for being raped ( it seems too that men don't get raped in these people's world), self defence is 'not wearing revealing clothes'. Obviously if you are beaten black and blue or murdered then perhaps there's a chance you didn't 'ask for it', but you have to be broken to have them think that.
> 
> The message should be ' do what you have to survive', then do that, survive and live your life to the fullest you can, you were and are right. What the rest of us should do is support that, to lobby politicians for proper sentencing for rapists, to help finance rape crisis centres, to have the whole idea of what is rape ( not just of women) turned around and seen for what it is and stop this macho nonsense of 'all you have to do is kick them in the nuts' and you 'have to go down fighting' attitude.



Ok. But how do you then approach women who basically want to walk in front of a bus?

I know I go to the wrong place and say the wrong thing I will get my self flogged. It would nice if I could have the freedom of a safe society but it is not the case and it is my head if I screw up.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 1, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Ok. But how do you then approach women who basically want to walk in front of a bus?
> 
> I know I go to the wrong place and say the wrong thing I will get my self flogged. It would nice if I could have the freedom of a safe society but it is not the case and it is my head if I screw up.



Sorry? I actually have no idea what you mean? I don't see how 'safe society' comes into this, I've said we need to sort sentencing out for rapists, sentencing as you should know comes after being found guilty and many people think that the sentence should reflect the crime. I don't see how you going somewhere and shooting your mouth off has anything to do with rape sentencing, rape crisis centres or indeed self defence.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 1, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Sorry? I actually have no idea what you mean? I don't see how 'safe society' comes into this, I've said we need to sort sentencing out for rapists, sentencing as you should know comes after being found guilty and many people think that the sentence should reflect the crime. I don't see how you going somewhere and shooting your mouth off has anything to do with rape sentencing, rape crisis centres or indeed self defence.



None of the extra sentencing will stop rape.  It will always be a risk that has to be managed by the victim.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 1, 2017)

drop bear said:


> None of the extra sentencing will stop rape.  It will always be a risk that has to be managed by the victim.



Excuse me? Where did I said anything about 'stopping rape'? I think you have got this all the wrong way around, sentencing is about justice for the victim, so that each one feels that taking their case to the police and the subsequent trial has been worth the effort it took ( and it is considerable). the sentencing should be appropriate to the crime because the perpetrator has to feel the punishment. Justice has to be seen to be done.
'Extra' sentencing? *No, we need appropriate sentencing,* not a sentence of a few months because the guilty is a really good swimmer, not a let off because the victim was an educated woman who therefore 'isn't vulnerable'.
You have fundamentally misunderstood what I have said and twisted into something it's not.


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Apr 1, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Rape isn't about sex, it's about having power over your victim and hurting them in ways that also humiliate them.



God that is so fucked up. 



Tez3 said:


> Self defence is never bad but we also need to take into account that sometimes the best self defence is not to resist or fight back. It must be accepted that the victim should be respected for whatever action they take because they and only they can decide on the way they deal with it based on their situation, their instincts and their strength. We must never tell people that if they don't fight it wasn't rape, we must never tell people who aren't beaten up because they chose to take a passive way that they were wrong, they are never wrong.



Fair enough


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 1, 2017)

Myths about rape

Sexual violence overview

"_Sexual violence is any unwanted sexual act or activity. There are many different kinds of sexual violence, including but not restricted to: rape, sexual assault, child sexual abuse, sexual harassment, rape within marriage / relationships, forced marriage, so-called honour-based violence, female genital mutilation, trafficking, sexual exploitation, and ritual abuse.
Sexual violence can be perpetrated by a complete stranger, or by someone known and even trusted, such as a friend, colleague, family member, partner or ex-partner. Sexual violence can happen to anyone. No-one ever deserves or asks for it to happen.
100% of the responsibility for any act of sexual violence lies with its perpetrator. There is no excuse for sexual violence; it can never be justified, it can never be explained away and there is no context in which it is valid, understandable or acceptable.
If you have been raped or experienced any other kind of sexual violence, no matter where you were, what you were doing, what you were wearing, what you were saying, if you were drunk or under the influence of drugs, _*it was not your fault and you did not deserve this*_.
It might help for you to know that, by law, a person consents to sexual activity if she or he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice. If you said 'yes' to something because you were scared for your life or your safety or for the life or safety of someone you care about, or if you were asleep or unconscious or incapacitated through alcohol or drugs, for example, then you didn't agree by choice and have the freedom and capacity to make that choice. If you froze or your body 'flopped' or went limp through fear, if you didn't say the word 'no' or weren't able to speak at all through shock, if you didn't shout or fight or struggle, it doesn't mean you gave your consent for what happened to you."
_
and in case you think this is just about women. Support for men and boys who have been raped


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 1, 2017)

drop bear said:


> People do that after a sports fight loss as well.
> 
> Doesn't help there either.


Probably more of a chance of it helping in a sports fight, since a similar scenario is likely to replay, assuming it wasn't just a crazy one-off. Mind you, it probably only helps if they know what they are talking about. If I ever give someone advice on how to win an MMA fight, just slap me until I shut up.


----------



## Paul_D (Apr 1, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> _100% of the responsibility for any act of sexual violence lies with its perpetrator.
> _


I am of the (somewhat unpopular I accept) opinion that 100% of your personal safety is your own responsibility (unless you are a child or vulnerable adult for example) and so if you decide to take that short cut through the woods at 2 in the morning, or you drink yourself into uncouncioussness, then you have to take some (not all, not most, but some) of the responsibility for those actions/decisions which have placed you in danger.  You didn't deserve whatever crime you end up being a victim of, but to say it is 100% not your fault, I don't agree with.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 1, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> I am of the (somewhat unpopular I accept) opinion that 100% of your personal safety is your own responsibility (unless you are a child or vulnerable adult for example) and so if you decide to take that short cut through the woods at 2 in the morning, or you drink yourself into uncouncioussness, then you have to take some (not all, not most, but some) of the responsibility for those actions/decisions which have placed you in danger.  You didn't deserve whatever crime you end up being a victim of, but to say it is 100% not your fault, I don't agree with.



However, rape happens in those circumstances very, very rarely when a girl walks through the woods at 2 in the morning. As for the drinking part, the case where the rapist was let off with a few months prison was one where he came across a girl who had passed out and he raped her. he was walking past, saw an unconscious girl and raped her. Yes it was her responsibility to not have passed out but it was 100% his fault he raped her. I have come across more passed out men than I care to think about but no one has raped them, no one did anything to them.
Former Stanford swimmer convicted of rape gets six-month sentence

It is never the victims 'fault', that word is inappropriate, you can say they were careless, unthinking or even ignorant etc but to say it's partly their fault is wrong, it is entirely the fault of the rapist who committed a serious crime.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 1, 2017)

Follow up on the victim's Situation.  There is video on the website as well.  Freaking 200 people signed up for the same self-defense class.  Looks like it's time for one of my female students to get attacked in public lol... just kidding and making light of the 200 people and not the actual attack.  1000 attendees a month?  I wonder if it's a free class.  Maybe one that helps bring them into the karate school   If he's pulling in that many a month then that's awesome.

There seems to be a lack of awareness of just how many women have been able to successfully fight off an attacker.  Here's a quote from one of the attendees "It was definitely empowering," said Julia York, 35, one of the attendees. "I really loved that this was actually a story where the woman was able to fight off the attack. We don't hear about that."
Women and people in general don't actively search for things like this, but I know for many of us here, we see at least 1 or 2 examples of this every month.


*After Seattle woman fights off attacker, self-defense classes boom*


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 1, 2017)

So we peddle the story that taking a 'self defence' seminar is going to empower ( how I hate that word) women to fight back because unless they fight back they aren't really being raped/attacked.
What is it about allowing women to trust their instincts that isn't getting through? What is it about 'all women' must fight that is so attractive here unless it's getting paying customers in through the door. Make no mistake, women's self defence is big business.
 A self defence seminar which empowers women, doesn't, it gives them a false sense of security that they can fight their attacker off easily. I've talked to women like that, the Cub leader who takes them after our Rainbows is one. She went on a course, she is now convinced totally that if someone comes at her with a knife she will successfully fight them off, not only that but disarm them to boot. Nothing I say will dissuade her that she is wrong, it worked when she did it with the partner she had so it works right?
There's plenty of common sense precautions we can teach, there's a fair few things we can also instruct to help but we need really to stop this idea that every time you can fight off your attacker, this dulls the mind, stops people coming up with inventive and instinctive moves that will actually help.
Yes some women do fight off their attacker but look at the rape figures, thousands don't, thousands are battered, raped and even murdered as opposed to the few who successfully ward off an attack. In the 12 months to June 2015, police recorded 95,482 sexual offences in England and Wales - an increase of 27,602 - with the numbers of rapes (31,621) and other sexual offences (63,861) at the highest level since the introduction of the National Crime Recording Standard in 2002/03. Strangely overall, serious crime in England and Wales was down 8% in the year to June to its lowest level since 1981!

*Women have always known how to fight back, they don't need to be told to go for vulnerable points, they don't need to be told how to kick, bite, punch, scratch or anything else* but what people need to understand is that whatever the victim decides to do is good, because only the person being attacked knows her strength, the situation, her abilities, her opportunities   and she probably knows her attacker as well so will react instinctively in the best way for her.

It is good to read of women who have fought off an attacker and I am pleased they do but it's a rarer thing than you think, I would suggest that while it encourages women to join martial arts classes it also teaches women that they don't have any defences unless they do, it teaches them they are helpless until the martial arts instructor shows them the magic tricks.



JowGaWolf said:


> Looks like it's time for one of my female students to get attacked in public lol... just kidding and making light of the 200 people and not the actual attack.



Not even slightly funny, in fact it's bang out of order.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 1, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> So we peddle the story that taking a 'self defence' seminar is going to empower ( how I hate that word) women to fight back because unless they fight back they aren't really being raped/attacked.
> What is it about allowing women to trust their instincts that isn't getting through? What is it about 'all women' must fight that is so attractive here unless it's getting paying customers in through the door. Make no mistake, women's self defence is big business.
> A self defence seminar which empowers women, doesn't, it gives them a false sense of security that they can fight their attacker off easily. I've talked to women like that, the Cub leader who takes them after our Rainbows is one. She went on a course, she is now convinced totally that if someone comes at her with a knife she will successfully fight them off, not only that but disarm them to boot. Nothing I say will dissuade her that she is wrong, it worked when she did it with the partner she had so it works right?
> There's plenty of common sense precautions we can teach, there's a fair few things we can also instruct to help but we need really to stop this idea that every time you can fight off your attacker, this dulls the mind, stops people coming up with inventive and instinctive moves that will actually help.
> ...


I agree with the overall concept, Tez. The only "right" choice is the one she makes at the moment. Nobody else (not even her future self) can remake that decision. Nobody else (including her future self) is in that moment trying to figure out what the right decision is.

That said, I don't agree that women (or men, either) don't gain from learning how to hit, kick, etc. Most people aren't very good at it. In a moment of need, if a person decides to fight, they are best served by having some training to improve the chances of that decision leading to success (however they define it). 

I do think a short course isn't optimal. However, as long as it doesn't leave them feeling invincible (like the Cub leader you mentioned), it can still have value to them. I worked today on some very basic movements with a woman. She might or might not ever come back, but she had a chance today to practice some very simple things she can do in response to some very basic types of attack. If she comes back, she'll learn more and better responses. When I teach these things, I try to ensure people know what they are actually learning. Nobody becomes invincible, regardless of their training. It is a disservice to them if they are allowed to feel they are, because of the manner of training.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 1, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> That said, I don't agree that women (or men, either) don't gain from learning how to hit, kick, etc.



I know they do gain from learning but it has to be the right sort of learning such as you provide. The wrong sort of learning is a Facebook post which purports to show women what to do if attacked because every good attacker is going to stand waiting for his victim to poke him in the eye and let her kick him in the nuts, then of course there was the ground stuff just no. I saw comments on there thanking this women for her fantastic teaching!

There's a lot of money to be made from teaching women self defence, it's very fashionable right now and so much of it quite dangerous.

women self defence | Iain Abernethy.  The discussions on Iain's site are very interesting, I very much agree with Ian's take on things especially the fact that nearly all self defence is taught by men and as he says even the female instructors have been taught by men, that male bias creeps in unknowingly in a lot of cases.

I also like Ian's " whoops wrong” vs. “you are to blame wrong” when it comes to putting the blame where it lies.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 1, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Excuse me? Where did I said anything about 'stopping rape'? I think you have got this all the wrong way around, sentencing is about justice for the victim, so that each one feels that taking their case to the police and the subsequent trial has been worth the effort it took ( and it is considerable). the sentencing should be appropriate to the crime because the perpetrator has to feel the punishment. Justice has to be seen to be done.
> 'Extra' sentencing? *No, we need appropriate sentencing,* not a sentence of a few months because the guilty is a really good swimmer, not a let off because the victim was an educated woman who therefore 'isn't vulnerable'.
> You have fundamentally misunderstood what I have said and twisted into something it's not.



Fair enough. My focus is more about stopping or preventing rape. I am for justice afterwards. But I would rather someone not go through it in the first place.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Not even slightly funny, in fact it's bang out of order.


That's why I put what I was joking about. Not about the my female students getting attacked, but the getting 200 new attendees that joined because they saw another woman was successful in fending off an attack.  Kelly (the lady that was attack) is not the only woman in Seattle that has successfully defended herself against an attack or attempted rape.  Much of Kelly's appeal comes from social media and what she posted about what happened to her.  The only real technique that Kelly claims to have learned from her self defense class was to fight back.  

I know through my own life experiences I have seen girls and women physically defend themselves against boys and men, right before my eyes, so I know there's no way I'm the only one witnessing this natural ability in women and girls.



Tez3 said:


> A self defence seminar which empowers women, doesn't, it gives them a false sense of security that they can fight their attacker off easily.


This is the other part that my comments touch on.  200 new women enroll into a self-defense class (free one at that), where the majority are only taking the self-defense from the same class that Kelly took, thinking and believing that the same self-defense class will produce the same results.  This is where the danger comes in. The mentality of "Kelly took this class and it worked for her, so I can take this class and it'll work for me." is the worst mentality to have about anything.  Basing my chances of survival on the success of others and not actually on my ability or lack of it.  I would think that if they were honestly inspired that these same women would be joining martial art schools that have sparring and conditioning available on a regular.  I always tell students both men and women that it's important to know and understand their limitations, because that's what helps people to make better choices when it comes to self-defense.  Denial about these limitations will cause a person to be over confident and to make choices that aren't realistic the person's conditioning and ability.  Running isn't always a solution and sometimes winning is not a possibility and when that happens, a person better have a really good plan that will give them the best possible outcome.  Sometimes the ability to delay or draw out an attack is the next best thing.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> That said, I don't agree that women (or men, either) don't gain from learning how to hit, kick, etc. Most people aren't very good at it. In a moment of need, if a person decides to fight, they are best served by having some training to improve the chances of that decision leading to success (however they define it).


I think every person should learn how to do basic hits, kicks, and escapes.  The reason why most people aren't good at them is because they don't train it.  It's like playing a musical instrument, you only get good with practice.  You may not be the best at playing that instrument, but you're much better than someone who has never practice the instrument before.

The only thing about physically fighting is that people have to factor in their limitations, their capabilities, and abilities into their self-defense plans.  I can punch and kick like a monster, but when I injure my hand or leg from training, then I have to factor in those injuries when I think of my self-defense strategy.  Most people will say things like "oh I'll just run away" and never considered that they don't run fast enough to run away.

Hitting, Kicking, and Escaping are skills sets, and our self-defense abilities are only improved by having those skill sets.  Sometimes it's those skill sets that make it possible for us to avoid fights.  Looking like you can physically protect yourself is much better than looking as if you can't physically protect yourself.  People who can punch and kick can recognize when someone else doesn't know how to punch and kick and that will embolden them. Not sure where this took place, but the lady in is definitely befitting from her ability to punch, kick, and escape.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> I do think a short course isn't optimal. However, as long as it doesn't leave them feeling invincible (like the Cub leader you mentioned), it can still have value to them.


If the short course helps the person to better understand the reality of self-defense and some of the factors involved then the course is worth it.   Just like the lady in the article (Kelly), the only thing she stated that she learned from the self-defense class was that it was ok to fight back.  The lecture about being aware of her environment probably has more meaning now, but I think the class that she took helped her to get over the hesitation of the reality of hurting someone.  The class help her to accept that it was o.k. Now she's all pumped up, but I hope she takes an actual martial art class where she can train and get good with some basics.

For example, sparring as the side benefit of teaching students how to be more aware of aggressive movements in people, especial in the context of someone trying to size you (general) up with the intent of causing harm.  Sparring makes it easier to recognize that predatory stalking and focus that people have when they are setting up for an attack.

There's a lot of non-physical skill sets as well, but sometimes people think.  "It won't happen to me" and as a result may not take the "be aware of your surroundings" as seriously as they should.  When woman runs in the leggings (athletic wear) that shows off their body, then she has to realize that it will attract good guys and bad guys.  And sometimes what she wear will send different messages to different types of people. It doesn't mean she can't wear it, it just means that she has to be aware of the risks and be on higher alert.

I'm a black male and all of my life I had to be careful of what I what clothes I wear and the environments that I can wear the clothes in.  I was taught at an early age that people have misconceptions about black culture and fashion where and as a result, I have to be mindful of how my clothing may increase or decrease my safety. 

When in the "hood" I dress like I belong or at the least look like the natives.  When out of the "hood" I have to do the same thing and avoid of looking out of place.  This also meant, not looking lost, even if I am lost.  

If a self-defense course can help people to understand and accept certain realities then that course is worth it.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> I am of the (somewhat unpopular I accept) opinion that 100% of your personal safety is your own responsibility


I'm with you on this one.  I actually teach self-defense and my family this concept of never putting their safety in the hands of someone else based on "how people should behave."  

Here's the reality of the world no matter where we live.  If we look like prey, then we will be prey.  If people think they can take advantage of us then they will.  We must be more responsible for our own safety and stop saying "what people should do and how people should behave."  

When the crap hits the fan "100% rapers fault" is no consolation prize and it won't make being raped any easier to deal with by saying it was someone else's fault.   Fault is insignificant outside of the legal realm.  I often get lectures from my wife about "people shouldn't do stuff like that"  I always respond coldly "I don't put my safety in what people shouldn't do." 

We know that human's rape each other.  This is an unchanging danger, so instead of hoping that someone won't commit the act, people should do all they can to learn how to spot the intent of rape.  These days it's especially difficult because of the rape drugs, but things like, watch your drink, don't get so drunk that you are no longer aware, be careful with who you bring into your home, be careful of the homes you go to.   Most important be aware of how peers treat other people. Sometimes dangerous behaviors may not be directed to us, but if they are directed to someone else, then we are at risk as well.

While it's impossible for us to be 100% responsible of our own safety, we should try to take control of as much of our safety as possible.  If it's something we can control then we should take ownership of being safe.  For everything else, it's going to be up to the attacker of how bad he or she injures someone else.  In other cases, sometimes neglecting our own safety puts others at risk such as texting and driving, drinking and driving, or anything of the sort.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> So we peddle the story that taking a 'self defence' seminar is going to empower ( how I hate that word) women to fight back because unless they fight back they aren't really being raped/attacked.
> What is it about allowing women to trust their instincts that isn't getting through? What is it about 'all women' must fight that is so attractive here unless it's getting paying customers in through the door. Make no mistake, women's self defence is big business.
> A self defence seminar which empowers women, doesn't, it gives them a false sense of security that they can fight their attacker off easily. I've talked to women like that, the Cub leader who takes them after our Rainbows is one. She went on a course, she is now convinced totally that if someone comes at her with a knife she will successfully fight them off, not only that but disarm them to boot. Nothing I say will dissuade her that she is wrong, it worked when she did it with the partner she had so it works right?
> There's plenty of common sense precautions we can teach, there's a fair few things we can also instruct to help but we need really to stop this idea that every time you can fight off your attacker, this dulls the mind, stops people coming up with inventive and instinctive moves that will actually help.
> ...


Did you see that they are selling t-shirts?

The entire sentence below fails to grasp the purpose of self-defense. Not one word in that sentence or on the page about personal safety.  "Without fear of being assaulted."  Self-defense is not about minimizing the fear.  It's about minimizing the risk and on a good day, avoid it completely.  

This is off the page where they sell the t-shirt.  This is what I don't like.
"_Her battle cry "Not Today Motherf@#!er" is now a rallying call for so many who are standing up for their right to do the things they love, like going for a run, without fear of being assaulted."_


----------



## senseiblackbelt (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> However, rape happens in those circumstances very, very rarely when a girl walks through the woods at 2 in the morning. As for the drinking part, the case where the rapist was let off with a few months prison was one where he came across a girl who had passed out and he raped her. he was walking past, saw an unconscious girl and raped her. Yes it was her responsibility to not have passed out but it was 100% his fault he raped her. I have come across more passed out men than I care to think about but no one has raped them, no one did anything to them.
> Former Stanford swimmer convicted of rape gets six-month sentence
> whats six months going do to him. should be for life
> It is never the victims 'fault', that word is inappropriate, you can say they were careless, unthinking or even ignorant etc but to say it's partly their fault is wrong, it is entirely the fault of the rapist who committed a serious crime.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 2, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> Self-defense is not about minimizing the fear. It's about minimizing the risk and on a good day, avoid it completely.



Absolutely. Too many people are buying into the instant 'well I'm safe now' way of thinking however we also have many who are actually making life harder by not taking rape seriously, by not treating it as a criminal offence, by taking the male idea of women being dangerous. When you have prominent men saying they wouldn't not eat alone with a woman or telling us you can't get pregnant if you are raped then it is demeaning women. When sentencing is light because the judge doesn't want to ruin a man's career it send the message that women are there to be used.

Another thing all this 't shirt' stuff is doing is telling women that their attacker is going to be a stranger leaping on them in the dark when there a 99.9% chance their attacker will be known to them, be their partner or even a member of their family. Millions of women go running and will never be assaulted while doing so, however many of them will be assaulted by someone they know and they will be unprepared for that, fighting a complete stranger for your life is different from being assaulted by your partner/husband/friend/family member. Hundreds of thousands of women will also be raped casually as a part of war, it's a very common way of 'marking your territory' in hostile situations, you kill the combatants and rape the men ,women and children.

Rape is still seen in self defence from a male point of view, we are still talking about fighting physically, that women still need to be able to fight....where does it say we never could fight, that we need permission to fight for our lives? Do people think we are stupid? Women have to deal with a great many situations in life men don't, from having their bum patted by a passerby to having their shoulders 'massaged' by a work colleague, from sexual comments to those about her appearance, sexual innuendoes are used by people everyday to women when they shouldn't be. Body shaming, female bodies being used to sell products ( yes I know many women collude with this) and advances made when none were asked for.
I could go on but quite honestly I think it would be pointless, male instructors will always see self defence from a male point of view, from a fighting point of view and I don't think, sadly, this will change though we do have some like Iain Abernethy who do understand.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Absolutely. Too many people are buying into the instant 'well I'm safe now' way of thinking however we also have many who are actually making life harder by not taking rape seriously, by not treating it as a criminal offence, by taking the male idea of women being dangerous. When you have prominent men saying they wouldn't not eat alone with a woman or telling us you can't get pregnant if you are raped then it is demeaning women. When sentencing is light because the judge doesn't want to ruin a man's career it send the message that women are there to be used.
> 
> Another thing all this 't shirt' stuff is doing is telling women that their attacker is going to be a stranger leaping on them in the dark when there a 99.9% chance their attacker will be known to them, be their partner or even a member of their family. Millions of women go running and will never be assaulted while doing so, however many of them will be assaulted by someone they know and they will be unprepared for that, fighting a complete stranger for your life is different from being assaulted by your partner/husband/friend/family member. Hundreds of thousands of women will also be raped casually as a part of war, it's a very common way of 'marking your territory' in hostile situations, you kill the combatants and rape the men ,women and children.
> 
> ...


Nobody is saying women are stupid. Nobody is saying women need permission to fight. Skill makes that fighting back more effective. That's what "being able to fight" is about. They always have the option (to fight or not to fight). It's better yet if they have the ability to fight well, to improve their odds if they choose to fight. There is nothing in that concept about giving permission, any more than there is when I teach skills to a man.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 2, 2017)

This thread is so frustrating, posters are still telling women how to behave, what effect their clothes have on people etc. it's still from the male perspective, yes I know you are guys but women know better than men what reaction they get to wearing certain clothes.  Girls are constantly told from an early age about doing things or not doing things that can lead you into danger.You are still lecturing me, telling me how much better it is to be able to kick punch etc, really? and me having been in martial arts for decades wouldn't know that? Why are you telling me it's better to be able to kick and punch? Why aren't you listening instead?

I didn't say not to fight, I said *most women know to fight can be the right thing to do* they also know when not to fight. Why can't you accept that not fighting *is an option* instead of telling me 'oh but if you know how to fight how much better you'd be'? yes I bloody well know that training is better than not training, why can't you accept that not fighting is a viable option if a woman thinks it is, it may not be but *you* don't actually know that.

As for the lecture on safety being our responsibility, well yes _obviously_ BUT as I pointed out most rapes and sexual assaults are committed by someone known often close to the victim, what then? The random rapist is much rarer than you think, these are the ones women are fighting off because frankly it's easier to. Fighting off your husband/boyfriend/uncle/cousin/friend is much harder for many reasons.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> male instructors will always see self defence from a male point of view, from a fighting point of view and I don't think, sadly, this will change though we do have some like Iain Abernethy who do understand.


This won't change because men always factor in the possibility of things getting physical.  While women and childrend have to be more on guard for sexual predators than adult males do, adult males have to deal with a lot of Alpha Male risks that forces us to play a daily game of "dominance chess. "  Most of the times it's settled through non-physical means, but there is a lot of posturing and effort to claim pecking order or a balance.  The younger the male is the more likely it is to change into a fight. I'll put it this way.  It happens so often that men are able to have these non-physical combats even when they are out with their girlfriend or wife, and she never even picks up what just went on.  From a male perspective, stopping an attack before it happens is often done by showing dominance it's subtle but it says "Hey don't mess with me or I'll F-up up and stomp you where you stand."  This non-violent posturing is done within the comfort of having confidence in ones ability to fight or physically get the upper hand.  Much of this is probably where we naturally get our awareness practice from as teens.  This also why some fathers can recognize a guy that's not good for his daughter.

Men also have a perspective that many women don't get a chance to see and that is "How men think" and more specifically "How men think about women." This is why some men seem to be over protective of daughters, sisters, mothers, wives, and girlfriends.  We hear the things from guys that women don't hear, so we are more sensitive about what men will do and what they won't do.  Much of this comes to light during the late teens through our 30's. 

Women have a similar ability and skill set towards other women, which is why a mother can spot a girl that's not right for her son "from a mile away", while the father would be totally clueless.

So when male instructors teach women self-defense it's from the perspective of what she needs to know and be aware of in the context of male mannerisms.


Tez3 said:


> where does it say we never could fight, that we need permission to fight for our lives?


Movies  and cultures.

This is from the front page of my school website
"_Women have been portrayed throughout the centuries as being helpless and weak. Hollywood, toy companies, and beauty magazines create the belief that women cannot be strong and beautiful at the same time. Parents encourage their daughters to be "princesses" who should marry a "prince."  But times are changing as women are showing that they can do what men do.  Women are warriors by nature and today more women are embracing their warrior nature through Martial Arts and combat sports.  Evidence of this can be seen in Hollywood as we continue to see more movies and T.V. with women being shown as being tough, heroic, and brave._"


----------



## Steve (Apr 2, 2017)

I think there are two discussions going in here.   One that is facing backwards, and how we view ad treat victims of sexual assault.   And one that is forward facing, discussing how we might better prevent sexual assaukt from occurring.

Backwards, once assault has occurred, as far as I'm concerned, however the victim survived is the right way in that moment.

Forward facing, I think it can be useful to discuss how to prevent assaults from occurring, from different perspectives,   What can men do?  What can women do?  We all have a role to play as parents, coworkers, friends, and training partners.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I didn't say not to fight, I said *most women know to fight can be the right thing to do* they also know when not to fight. Why can't you accept that not fighting *is an option* instead of telling me 'oh but if you know how to fight how much better you'd be'? yes I bloody well know that training is better than not training, why can't you accept that not fighting is a viable option if a woman thinks it is, it may not be but *you* don't actually know that.



Great post.

You are 100% correct.

That is something we stress in our training....it's easy to sit back a Monday morning QB something, but your perspective is night and day different from the victims perception.  When in a position like that you do what you think you must to survive....that is the correct action.

The #1 thing we (men and women) can do to lessen our chance of being a victim is to be more aware of our surroundings and situation.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I didn't say not to fight, I said *most women know to fight can be the right thing to do* they also know when not to fight. Why can't you accept that not fighting *is an option* instead of telling me 'oh but if you know how to fight how much better you'd be'? yes I bloody well know that training is better than not training, why can't you accept that not fighting is a viable option if a woman thinks it is, it may not be but *you* don't actually know that.


Look back at my posts, Tez. I repeatedly said that not fighting is an option. There's no dichotomy between having that option and being able to fight better. Both are valid. Women (and men) have a very valid option of not fighting, and only the individual in the situation can make the choice. I assert that if one chooses to fight, it is best to have some skill at it, to improve the chances of success. Even a highly trained fighter may decide in the moment that not fighting is a better answer, for reasons that need not be explained to nor understood by anyone else.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 2, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> "_Women have been portrayed throughout the centuries as being helpless and weak. Hollywood, toy companies, and beauty magazines create the belief that women cannot be strong and beautiful at the same time. Parents encourage their daughters to be "princesses" who should marry a "prince." But times are changing as women are showing that they can do what men do. Women are warriors by nature and today more women are embracing their warrior nature through Martial Arts and combat sports. Evidence of this can be seen in Hollywood as we continue to see more movies and T.V. with women being shown as being tough, heroic, and brave._"



Well no. Perhaps in your country, your movies and your culture. We grew up learning about fierce female icons such as Boudicca, Ethelfleda ( an amazing woman), Eleanor of Aquitaine,Emma de Gauder, Countess of Norfolk, Florence Nightingale, Edith Cavell, Queen Elizabeth the First ( and Second), even Queen Victoria, all the women during the First and Second World War and a lot more besides. Celtic and British history is full of strong women many of who were also warriors ( as is European history) There's also the Suffragettes who learnt jujitsu to help defend themselves. I could give you a huge rundown of female notables here who have influenced our life... American movies not so much.
 Parents rarely encourage girls to be princesses here, we have to go out and work, we don't have the wherewithal to stay at home and be indolent. I was taught to box by my father at a very early age, this wasn't uncommon. The Judo club in London had female members from the late 1890s.
I believe we have very different influences to those in the USA where religion seems a far larger part of society than it does here. Much of the nonsense about rape, women and sexuality seems to be coming from certain church leaders, who seem to be mired in the idea of females being  sexually dangerous to men.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 2, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Look back at my posts, Tez. I repeatedly said that not fighting is an option. There's no dichotomy between having that option and being able to fight better. Both are valid. Women (and men) have a very valid option of not fighting, and only the individual in the situation can make the choice. I assert that if one chooses to fight, it is best to have some skill at it, to improve the chances of success. Even a highly trained fighter may decide in the moment that not fighting is a better answer, for reasons that need not be explained to nor understood by anyone else.



Yes you have said that but you are also still telling me that learning to fight is better than not learning, you've done it again in this post, why would I need to be told that? Why do you think I don't know that?


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> We grew up learning about fierce female icons such as Boudicca,



Supposedly part of my family lineage traces back to Boudicca.

Don't know how accurate it is....but I'll take it.


On a side note, I'm also kin to the famous bank and train robbing brothers - the Newton Boys.

Yep, Warrior queens and outlaws....


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> You are still lecturing me, telling me how much better it is to be able to kick punch etc, really? and me having been in martial arts for decades wouldn't know that? Why are you telling me it's better to be able to kick and punch? Why aren't you listening instead?


 Not sure who this is directed to, but just in case I'm lumped in that group. I wasn't specifically speaking of you.   I always try to use the phrase "some...." so if I gave you that impression, then I apologize.

When I spoke about women wearing clothing, I made sure to put an example of when I do the same to highlight that it's not a "woman thing."  Young black men in the U.S. are given the same lecture by parents and friends about being aware that how they dress does matter and does attract certain dangers.   People always use the term "Dress for Success"  and never have any problem with that.  But when it comes to dress to reduce risks, then it becomes less accepted.

*A Black Man Wore Different Kinds Of Clothing To See If People Treated Him Differently*
http://mashable.com/2015/08/08/black-men-dressing-up-police/#oKn0pbWuvGqH
*Black armor
Some black American men are dressing up to deflect negative attention, as a conscious means of survival.*

This is the perspective that I come from when telling women about how they dress affects the behavior of others around them.  When a woman walks by in yoga pants, I'm the guy that gets to hear other guys make rude remarks about "what they would do with that."  I'm the one who gets to see other men display predatory behavior.  The woman doesn't get to see or hear these things because most of this happens behind her back 10ft+ feet away from her.

While ultimately the clothing isn't what is making people rude and predatory, (people like this are this way regardless of who is around), it does trigger behavior.  No one is saying that a person can't wear what they want to wear.  People, men and women, just have to be aware of the reality that it does affect the behavior of people around you.  Unfortunately there are men and women that don't accept this reality and as a result they put themselves in greater risk.

Please don't take this as a Women's only issue or a lecture.  While you don't fit into the category, I'm sure some other people who read what we post will.  And this is information that could actually help them to better navigate risks throughout their daily lives.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 2, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> This won't change because men always factor in the possibility of things getting physical. While women and childrend have to be more on guard for sexual predators than adult males do, adult males have to deal with a lot of Alpha Male risks that forces us to play a daily game of "dominance chess. " Most of the times it's settled through non-physical means, but there is a lot of posturing and effort to claim pecking order or a balance. The younger the male is the more likely it is to change into a fight. I'll put it this way. It happens so often that men are able to have these non-physical combats even when they are out with their girlfriend or wife, and she never even picks up what just went on. From a male perspective, stopping an attack before it happens is often done by showing dominance it's subtle but it says "Hey don't mess with me or I'll F-up up and stomp you where you stand." This non-violent posturing is done within the comfort of having confidence in ones ability to fight or physically get the upper hand. Much of this is probably where we naturally get our awareness practice from as teens. This also why some fathers can recognize a guy that's not good for his daughter.



I've have worked very closely with men, mostly alphas, since I was18 in situations that were demanding and dangerous as well as in sports, relaxation and practically most other situations you can get. I have watched as well as played the games you are writing about. I know exactly how males work when they are being predatory, when they are vulnerable and when they are being threatening as well as being tender and caring. I know far more than you give me credit for, neither men nor women are so complicated they can't be understood by the people living and working with them.



JowGaWolf said:


> Men also have a perspective that many women don't get a chance to see and that is "How men think" and more specifically "How men think about women." This is why some men seem to be over protective of daughters, sisters, mothers, wives, and girlfriends. We hear the things from guys that women don't hear, so we are more sensitive about what men will do and what they won't do. Much of this comes to light during the late teens through our 30's.



I suppose you do realise women know men better than you think? After all we brought them up, married them, had affairs with them, hated and loved them. They are our brothers, fathers, uncles and cousins, often they are our best friends, there is no magic side to men that women don't understand. We see them at their worst, best and everything in between including the violence or passive side. So no, it doesn't work like that.



JowGaWolf said:


> Women have a similar ability and skill set towards other women, which is why a mother can spot a girl that's not right for her son "from a mile away", while the father would be totally clueless.



No, women don't, the girls that aren't right for their sons aren't right because nobody but mother is. Most mothers are actually wrong about who is right for their sons because they can't see past the fact that someone wants to take their son away from them...



JowGaWolf said:


> So when male instructors teach women self-defense it's from the perspective of what she needs to know and be aware of in the context of male mannerisms.




No, that's not right either, men teach what they think women should know from their perspective which is usually one of the 'protector', which is why most relationships break up after the female is raped, the male believes he should have 'protected' her, feels guilty etc. The other side of course is that many men, specially from a religious background, feel they only have the right to have sex with their female, someone else violating 'their' female makes that female 'dirty' to them. Then there's those men who feel that somehow the women did something that precipitated the attack ie it was her fault. Male instructors teach from their own perspective, I'm afraid this 'oh men know men better' is quite patronising to women. We have fended off more men that you have, we have listened to more 'chat up lines' than you have, 'we have listened to more abuse when we've rejected them' than you have, we've had our bums pinched, breasts ogled, hear more sexist comments, seen more drama than you can imagine so please don't tell me that men know men better than we do. We've seen more men promoted than women, we've fought for the vote, we've fought for equality, all against men who have played every trick in the book against us, we've been married to abusive men, calculating men, nasty men, game playing men than you can imagine. Oh and women talk, they talk to each other, they swap stories, coping strategies and fought, dear god, women have fought so please don't tell me that the self defence lessons are in the women's best interests because the male instructors know best.


----------



## Steve (Apr 2, 2017)

I just hope this doesn't become a thinly veiled, anti America rant.   Too late. 


Tez3 said:


> Well no. Perhaps in your country, your movies and your culture. We grew up learning about fierce female icons such as Boudicca, Ethelfleda ( an amazing woman), Eleanor of Aquitaine,Emma de Gauder, Countess of Norfolk, Florence Nightingale, Edith Cavell, Queen Elizabeth the First ( and Second), even Queen Victoria, all the women during the First and Second World War and a lot more besides. Celtic and British history is full of strong women many of who were also warriors ( as is European history) There's also the Suffragettes who learnt jujitsu to help defend themselves. I could give you a huge rundown of female notables here who have influenced our life... American movies not so much.
> Parents rarely encourage girls to be princesses here, we have to go out and work, we don't have the wherewithal to stay at home and be indolent. I was taught to box by my father at a very early age, this wasn't uncommon. The Judo club in London had female members from the late 1890s.
> I believe we have very different influences to those in the USA where religion seems a far larger part of society than it does here. Much of the nonsense about rape, women and sexuality seems to be coming from certain church leaders, who seem to be mired in the idea of females being  sexually dangerous to men.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 2, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> The woman doesn't get to see or hear these things because most of this happens behind her back 10ft+ feet away from her.



Do you honestly think we don't know? WE DO.


----------



## Steve (Apr 2, 2017)

http://nyti.ms/2mWmeqS

This was interesting...  Mexican campaign against sexual assault.   Thoughts?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Do you honestly think we don't know? WE DO.


I think you know because of your exposure an by your comments but I can't say this of all women.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 2, 2017)

Clothes and looks don't matter.

Rape is a crime of opportunity and sexual deviancy.

That is why situational awareness and awareness of surroundings are what is important.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 2, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> I think you know because of your exposure an by your comments but I can't say this of all women.



Most women do, if you think the things you hear are bad you want to hear stuff that is said to women when other men aren't listening.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Yes you have said that but you are also still telling me that learning to fight is better than not learning, you've done it again in this post, why would I need to be told that? Why do you think I don't know that?


I don't think you don't know that. I initially was responding to your post where you said


Tez3 said:


> Women have always known how to fight back, they don't need to be told to go for vulnerable points, they don't need to be told how to kick, bite, punch, scratch or anything else



 Not all do, any more than all men do. If a woman chooses not to fight back, whether they have training or not is not terribly relevant. If she chooses to fight back, having some decent training can help her in that fight.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 2, 2017)

Steve said:


> http://nyti.ms/2mWmeqS
> 
> This was interesting...  Mexican campaign against sexual assault.   Thoughts?


There is some portion (I'm not sure how much) of sexual assault that appears to be based in out-of-balance gender views. Perhaps ongoing campaigns like this will help with that portion. It won't be a quick fix, but perhaps it will open some eyes and help lead to a generational shift in gender views.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 2, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> If she chooses to fight back, having some decent training can help her in that fight.



You just said it again!



gpseymour said:


> There is some portion (I'm not sure how much) of sexual assault that appears to be based in out-of-balance gender views. Perhaps ongoing campaigns like this will help with that portion. It won't be a quick fix, but perhaps it will open some eyes and help lead to a generational shift in gender views.



A small proportion, most sexual assaults and rapes are done not for sexual motives but to demonstrate power over the victim along with humiliating them and putting them 'in their place' often non homosexual men will rape another man just for this reason.

When you have politicians who blatantly denigrate and degrade women then any campaign is not going to succeed very well. MEP says women are ‘smaller, weaker, less intelligent’ and should be paid less


----------



## Steve (Apr 2, 2017)

I don't know whether the Mexican president denigrates and degrades women.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Do you honestly think we don't know? WE DO.


If women understand this then why do some of the woman not exercise preventive measures better?


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Well no. Perhaps in your country, your movies and your culture. We grew up learning about fierce female icons such as Boudicca, Ethelfleda ( an amazing woman), Eleanor of Aquitaine,Emma de Gauder, Countess of Norfolk, Florence Nightingale, Edith Cavell, Queen Elizabeth the First ( and Second), even Queen Victoria, all the women during the First and Second World War and a lot more besides. Celtic and British history is full of strong women many of who were also warriors ( as is European history) There's also the Suffragettes who learnt jujitsu to help defend themselves. I could give you a huge rundown of female notables here who have influenced our life... American movies not so much.
> Parents rarely encourage girls to be princesses here, we have to go out and work, we don't have the wherewithal to stay at home and be indolent. I was taught to box by my father at a very early age, this wasn't uncommon. The Judo club in London had female members from the late 1890s.
> I believe we have very different influences to those in the USA where religion seems a far larger part of society than it does here. Much of the nonsense about rape, women and sexuality seems to be coming from certain church leaders, who seem to be mired in the idea of females being  sexually dangerous to men.


 It would be nice if more women here had that exposure.  From what I can tell women in their 20's are more likely to have those experiences than those who are 30 and older.
 You have had an exposure that many women in their 30's and older didn't have here.   To put some perspective on it, the U.S. still has a lot of resistance to a female president and for Americans it would be a big historical thing for the country.  The U.S. is ahead in some areas, but this isn't one of them.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

CB Jones said:


> Clothes and looks don't matter.


Clothes and looks do matter and they affect how people behave around you.  One of the first assumptions that all of us usually make from time to time, is based on how a person dresses, then on how the person behaves or speaks.  Usually the second part is what we do to verify the first assumption about how a person looks. 

If clothing and looks didn't matter then people would spend so much time trying to look good.  How many of us have dressed to give off a certain appearance?  Have you been to an job interview before?  It's the same thing.  Clothing and looks matter.  Even on a biological scale of skin color, to some people the color of the skin matters.  We can up date the "clothing and looks matter"   Are Muslims treated differently by non-muslims based on how they dress and look?

If the importance of clothing and/ or looks matter to everyone in the world, then why would a rapist be exempt for it.  The problem is that just like some men like skinny men women, some men like fat women, and some men like men or boys, we don't know what if the clothing is going to be a trigger or if a person's size, or ethnicity is going to be the trigger, or if the person looks vulnerable is going to be the trigger.  Each criminal is different but the one thing that stands out, is that the criminal picked a certain person to victimized and didn't pick the others that he could have.  In the case of a serial criminal, that criminal has a long list and often plans his or her attack on the victim.  Be it a stranger attacking or a friend drugging their friend and taking advantage of them in that way.

The only place it doesn't matter is in the creating or not creating a rapist.  A rapist is a rapist regardless.  A criminal is a criminal regardless.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 2, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Most women do, if you think the things you hear are bad you want to hear stuff that is said to women when other men aren't listening.


I don't know what women say when other men aren't around, but I wouldn't expect it to be less than what the men say.  If men can have dark and sick conversations then I don't see why women wouldn't be able to have them.  I know it's not all men and women, and that some of the stuff is probably unacceptable where the "skin crawls" when you hear it and it makes you want to say to people,  You need to go get help.

As a teen I remember guy talking about how he would force himself onto girls and that stuff was so wild that I didn't know if it was true or if he was being stupid in trying to hide his virginity.  I literally didn't know what to do with that information other than change the conversation and walk away.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 2, 2017)

I actually used to work rape cases and I can tell you with 100% certainty clothes do not matter.

Most rapes are a crime of opportunity not because of how someone is dressed.

Except for the real deviants that cruise for specific victims and typically their triggers are hair color, body type, race, height, etc... not what the victims are wearing.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 3, 2017)

CB Jones said:


> I actually used to work rape cases and I can tell you with 100% certainty clothes do not matter.
> 
> Most rapes are a crime of opportunity not because of how someone is dressed.
> 
> Except for the real deviants that cruise for specific victims and typically their triggers are hair color, body type, race, height, etc... not what the victims are wearing.


Hair color, body type, race, height ?  You do realize that those are some of the same things that regular guys look for too. I don't know if you could find a man or a woman that wouldn't find those characteristics important in selecting a husband, wife, girlfriend, or boyfriend.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 3, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> If women understand this then why do some of the woman not exercise preventive measures better?



So it's women's fault and the argument is that men can't help themselves?



JowGaWolf said:


> The problem is that just like some men like skinny men women, some men like fat women, and some men like men or boys, we don't know what if the clothing is going to be a trigger or if a person's size, or ethnicity is going to be the trigger, or if the person looks vulnerable is going to be the trigger. Each criminal is different but the one thing that stands out, is that the criminal picked a certain person to victimized and didn't pick the others that he could have.



Rape isn't about sex as we've said. it isn't about having sex with a man/women of a particular type, it's about forcing yourself on someone to gain power over them, to make them feel small and weak while the rapist feels powerful.



JowGaWolf said:


> I don't know what women say when other men aren't around, but I wouldn't expect it to be less than what the men say.


You have misunderstood this, it's what some men say to women when other people aren't around.


I think you have to understand that it's not 'men' per se, it's *some* men who think and treat women like this just as it's some women who are complete and utter bitches. It's the people's personalities that make them like this not their gender. The majority of men don't rape, they don't treat women badly. You seem to think that men can't help themselves, well of course they can and as I keep saying this isn't about sex, about men unable to control their 'urges' as the Victorians would have said.



JowGaWolf said:


> Hair color, body type, race, height ? You do realize that those are some of the same things that regular guys look for too. I don't know if you could find a man or a woman that wouldn't find those characteristics important in selecting a husband, wife, girlfriend, or boyfriend.



Again this isn't really how rapists look for victims ( apart from as CB has said the deviants but then we are into a whole different subject), they, like muggers, look for vulnerability, someone they can victimise hence targeting victims who are drunk quite often. it's about opportunity and self justification, 'well she was asking for it' something other people also think. Marked for Mayhem
This of course is in the 'stranger' attacks, as most rapes aren't done by strangers at all then the victim profile is different but it isn't about preferring a single type of woman to have sex with, when the rapist attacks his victim he isn't haven't sex with them he is exercising his power over them, he is making them pay for all the things wrong in his life, that he's got his own back on those who have done something he see as against him, he comes out of the rape feeling powerful and in the right, he hasn't done anything wrong in his eyes, just made his world feel right.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 3, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> Hair color, body type, race, height ?  You do realize that those are some of the same things that regular guys look for too. I don't know if you could find a man or a woman that wouldn't find those characteristics important in selecting a husband, wife, girlfriend, or boyfriend.



Difference is you are simply attracted to those traits.

The deviant is not necessarily attracted to that trait.... fact is he might even hate that trait.

The deviant is looking for a specific set of traits that allow the victim to fulfill his crazy fantasy.

Rape to the crazed deviants isn't about sex...it's about power, violence, hate, sadism, etc...

Typically when rapist motives are purely sex they will focus on just the opportunity and less on the victim.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> So it's women's fault and the argument is that men can't help themselves?


That's not my argument.  Far from it.  This isn't a blame game because it's clear who is in the wrong.  When a man rapes another person he is doing it because he wants to or feels the need to. end of analysis.  Unless rape is one of the symptoms of tourettes, then he's doing it because he wants to or feels he needs to.  No one in this world should ever base their safety on their assumption about what "self-control people have," "don't have," or "should have."  

In my opinion self-defense and awareness should always be carried out in the context of risk in the environment and the person's ability and capabilities to defend themselves.  This is not a gender based perception of self-defense to me. 



Tez3 said:


> You have misunderstood this, it's what some men say to women when other people aren't around.


oh what I was referring to is the predatory language that men use when women aren't around.  Things that they say as part of their "guy talk." with their friends or peers.  If the man doesn't think his male peers shares the same view point then he won't use predatory language.  If the male is big on showing off his masculinity then he'll use predatory language even if he knows his male peers disapprove.  We recently had a high profile example of this in the U.S.  The sad part is that is not the worst of that type of talk.

As for what men say to women when no one else is around.  I wouldn't be shocked because in my 20's I had more female friends than male friends and they used to tell me all of those stories of what happened to him.  Let's just say I was the guy that was willing to listen to everyone.

I'm also aware that some guys get turned down for "being to nice" and they get to watch the "bad and rude boys" have the girl.  This frustrations often gets morphed into, "If that what women like then that's what I'm going to do to them."  I had a couple of conversations with guys like that where I spoke out against it and tried to pull them away from going down that path.  Sometimes it worked and other times the guy went down the dark path of being rude to women.   I personally don't know how far those guys took it, so I'm say one way or the if what it lead to.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 3, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> oh what I was referring to is the predatory language that men use when women aren't around. Things that they say as part of their "guy talk." with their friends or peers. If the man doesn't think his male peers shares the same view point then he won't use predatory language. If the male is big on showing off his masculinity then he'll use predatory language even if he knows his male peers disapprove. We recently had a high profile example of this in the U.S. The sad part is that is not the worst of that type of talk.



I know and what I was referring to was what men say to women when no one else is around. 
We, well, everyone around the world knows of this example sadly. I think though that men who do this don't actually understand that it doesn't show off how masculine they are, quite the opposite, they may think it's big man talk but it's actually looked at as 'those who talk can't do'. I don't think they realise how much it makes most people laugh at them.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Rape isn't about sex as we've said. it isn't about having sex with a man/women of a particular type, it's about forcing yourself on someone to gain power over them, to make them feel small and weak while the rapist feels powerful.


i would like to add a few things on this. in the US back in the 1960 it was believed that a lack of sex and affection was the driving force behind rape. " _its because the woman at home was not doing her womanly duties"_
this was the prevelant view.  how ever studies by Dr. Groth and others here in my home state of Massachusetts.  on sexual preditors found this was not the case at all.  that there is an underlying fusion between sex and power.  so i often hear that rape is about power not sex.  well it is more nuanced than that.  to use the blanket statement is not 100% correct.  the statement should be used for the proper argument and sometimes it is used as an argue point in the wrong context.



CB Jones said:


> Rape is a crime of opportunity and sexual deviancy.


this is not 100 % accurate either.  again rape is a complex subject and any statement will sometimes be correct and sometimes be wrong.

TEZ,
i do think rape is a very complex subject. its a very big pie of a problem. however you cant blame us for talking about the punches and kicks. we are only martial artists and that is why we are here on a martial arts forum.  we are only qualified to discuss this one very small slice of a very complex pie.  while is may be a worthy subject on something like how cosmopolitan magazine portrays women in a womens magazine and they still by that thing....that is not our line of specialty.
please give us some slack.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 3, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> so i often hear that rape is about power not sex. well it is more nuanced than that. to use the blanket statement is not 100% correct. the statement should be used for the proper argument and sometimes it is used as an argue point in the wrong context.



Unfortunately, as you point out we are not in a position to discuss in too great a depth here without it becoming a technical discussion, so it wasn't a 100% blanket statement more of a general one to give an idea of the subject. 



hoshin1600 said:


> i do think rape is a very complex subject. its a very big pie of a problem. however you cant blame us for talking about the punches and kicks. we are only martial artists and that is why we are here on a martial arts forum. we are only qualified to discuss this one



To an extent I agree BUT and this is a very big BUT when martial artists are advertising complete systems of self defence which only consist of kicks and punches then we should be pointing out that there are more ways to defend yourself that them. When you have martial artists who think that all one has to do is fight your way out of an attack we have to say something. I'm not pointing or including anyone here in this by the way. As I've said before self defence for women is big business now, to a certain extent these places are spreading a certain amount of alarm with their advertising screaming how dangerous it is for women therefore you need the acme school of kickass fighting for women. We have places offering complete systems of self defence so that women 'never need worry again' etc then we have to discuss the wider implications of this  and how it damages not just the women who 'train' there but all of us.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> You just said it again!


Can you help me understand what you find objectionable about that statement, Tez? To me, it's just stating a truism, that if a person is going to be fighting for their survival/protection, it is better to be a better fighter. Is the problem that it's a statement of the obvious? If so, that's something I often do to get those obvious points out of the way (perhaps a habit from dealing with argumentative people in debate). The statement isn't meant to imply you don't know it, but to point out my view.



> A small proportion, most sexual assaults and rapes are done not for sexual motives but to demonstrate power over the victim along with humiliating them and putting them 'in their place' often non homosexual men will rape another man just for this reason.
> 
> When you have politicians who blatantly denigrate and degrade women then any campaign is not going to succeed very well. MEP says women are ‘smaller, weaker, less intelligent’ and should be paid less


Agreed. The out-of-balance gender views actually contribute to the power thing, I think. A man who feels men should be have all the power feels emasculated by women gaining power, and takes that out by using rape to take power. I think that's less common than it once was in Western society. I hear reports from some countries where gender roles are still greatly out of balance. And yeah, some of the messages coming from political "leaders" in unspecified countries near my location do not help the issue.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Unfortunately, as you point out we are not in a position to discuss in too great a depth here without it becoming a technical discussion, so it wasn't a 100% blanket statement more of a general one to give an idea of the subject.
> 
> To an extent I agree BUT and this is a very big BUT when martial artists are advertising complete systems of self defence which only consist of kicks and punches then we should be pointing out that there are more ways to defend yourself that them. When you have martial artists who think that all one has to do is fight your way out of an attack we have to say something. I'm not pointing or including anyone here in this by the way. As I've said before self defence for women is big business now, to a certain extent these places are spreading a certain amount of alarm with their advertising screaming how dangerous it is for women therefore you need the acme school of kickass fighting for women. We have places offering complete systems of self defence so that women 'never need worry again' etc then we have to discuss the wider implications of this  and how it damages not just the women who 'train' there but all of us.



I think this is why I've never felt comfortable enough to advertise a SD for women program. I can teach them some SD skills and techniques, but I'm not sure that's the right approach for someone who's looking for something specifically for women. I feel like that kind of program ought to get specifically into the issues surrounding rape and domestic violence. Those are outside my area. Some of what I teach can help in some of those situations, but I don't really cover them in depth. And I try to be clear with all students (all genders, ages, etc.) that what I teach will fit many possible circumstances, but not all. And I do occasionally touch on some of the things that have come up in this thread, to make sure everyone is clear where I stand on them, and to make sure I'm not communicating another message unintentionally.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Can you help me understand what you find objectionable about that statement, Tez?



I don't find it objectionable but you keep saying it in answers to my posts so it looks like you are repeating it to me! 


More nonsense. Ukip donor says women cannot be raped by their husbands
They may have “a long history of chauvinism”, but Ukip is not the only party failing women


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I know and what I was referring to was what men say to women when no one else is around.
> We, well, everyone around the world knows of this example sadly. I think though that men who do this don't actually understand that it doesn't show off how masculine they are, quite the opposite, they may think it's big man talk but it's actually looked at as 'those who talk can't do'. I don't think they realise how much it makes most people laugh at them.


Men who feel the need to show masculinity have tons of other issues that complicate things.  I took a look at prison rapes to see what triggered those incidents but couldn't get through much of it, so I'll probably read about it and skip the videos.  Some of what the attackers were saying about what they do to other prisoners could be used as a "scared straight" campaign.

Thanks for you input throughout this discussion because this has definitely been productive.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> We have places offering complete systems of self defence so that women 'never need worry again'


I would like to add that this isn't a gender specific marketing theme.  Guys get hit with this as well. If a school uses any type of marketing service then, it's going to be common to see that type of imagery.  People who know about marketing often has little understanding of the product but know how to sell the product and get people to invest.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I don't find it objectionable but you keep saying it in answers to my posts so it looks like you are repeating it to me!
> 
> 
> More nonsense. Ukip donor says women cannot be raped by their husbands
> They may have “a long history of chauvinism”, but Ukip is not the only party failing women


Okay that makes sense. I think I was feeling like I hadn't said it the right way the first time, so tried a different way. So yeah, I kept repeating it. Bad habit of mine, sometimes.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 3, 2017)

JowGaWolf said:


> I would like to add that this isn't a gender specific marketing theme. Guys get hit with this as well



I'm afraid the ones I'm talking about are gender specific, they are aimed at women.
Women’s Self Defence | Combat Academy
Self Defence for Women | Pro Holistic
Womens Self Defense | Krav Maga Scotland | Scot Krav Maga | SKMS
Home - Reading Womens Self Defence

There's hundreds and hundreds more if you Google them. I haven't seen any male specific ones yet, plenty of 'family and children's ones' though.

As is probably fairly obvious I'm extremely passionate about the right training for everyone but especially women because I do feel many martial arts places are letting them down by providing poor training. So I guess I have been quite insistent, even more than usual  on putting my point across, yes women should be able to fight but properly and with the understanding that in the event of an attack they use their instincts and gut feeling about what to do. Poor training leading to a false sense of security fails women who want to keep themselves safe. Poor training demeans us all.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> As I've said before self defence for women is big business now, to a certain extent these places are spreading a certain amount of alarm with their advertising screaming how dangerous it is for women therefore you need the acme school of kickass fighting for women.


i dont really see that here in the united states. i mean its here but not anymore than there was for the last 30 years.  where i see all the bell and whistles and alarms going off is from political groups, activists and college groups and the like.  when a group that is supposed to help victims is dependent on federal tax dollars any downward trend is bad for business. so they tend to inflate statistics and use scare tactics to create an epidemic fear, more fear means more attention which is translated into political movement to satisfy their constituents and that friends is more money for these groups. to question the motivations of any such group would be political suicide and as popular as a fart in an elevator.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I do feel many martial arts places are letting them down by providing poor training.


YES YES YES!! thank you..
but i will add this works in both genders, teachers love the arts but fail to take on the concept of responsibility. if any student is in a violent situation and does not come out alive, martial arts teachers often fail to understand that this is a possibility and that, that particular student may have been depending on the teacher to give him proper skills.


Tez3 said:


> women should be able to fight but properly and with the understanding that in the event of an attack they use their instincts and gut feeling about what to do.


TEZ and others ,,
i am going to recommend to you the book "Left of bang" if you have not already or are familiar with it. i think you Tez would be able to appreciate the context.
not so much the details but for the over arching philosophy.  i teach and train something very similar.  however modified for civilian self defense. 
in my context there is a time line.  there is.....pre event-- event--post event.   most people only focus on the EVENT. this is where the focus of martial arts comes in for some cases, however there is  PRE EVENT  and  POST  EVENT that is totaly ignored or given lip service.  


Tez3 said:


> they use their instincts and gut feeling about what to do.


  no no no....anything that has not been thought about and defind will more likely fail during a violent event.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 3, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> no no no....anything that has not been thought about and defind will more likely fail during a violent event.



I think you are misunderstanding this, I have been in many situations where physically fighting would be the wrong thing to do, I have talked people 'down' and taken them without violence, I have used violence when I considered there was no other way, I have prevaricated, flirted, joked and talked my way out of situations that had the potential to go very wrong. A woman who is being threatened must be able to decide how she acts and what she does without having to later defend her actions. For some acting passively and letting the rape go on is the right thing to do for them, the situation may demand that such as the safety of her children/family, horrible as it is, it would be the right thing to do for her and her family to survive. It might be the right thing for another women to talk her way out of a situation, for another to trick her way and yet another can fight her way out but it has to be down to the victim to use her instincts and gut feeling about how she deals with the attacker. There is nothing in that that means she doesn't think about it, trust me, she will and will also do what seems the right thing for her. And there must be no victim blaming afterwards telling her she should have done this or that.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 3, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> .....pre event-- event--post event. most people only focus on the EVENT. this is where the focus of martial arts comes in for some cases, however there is PRE EVENT and POST EVENT that is totaly ignored or given lip service.



How does this work when the majority of rapes are committed by someone known and often close to the victim, most rapes aren't 'stranger' rapes where the attacker leaps out of the woods but are perpetrated by someone close to the victim?

*"Myth:*_ Women are most likely to be raped outside, after dark and by a stranger, so women shouldn't go out alone at night._



*Fact*_: Only around 10% of rapes are committed by 'strangers'. Around 90% of rapes are committed by known men, and often by someone who the survivor has previously trusted or even loved. People are raped in their homes, their workplaces and other settings where they have previously felt safe. Rapists can be friends, colleagues, clients, neighbours, family members, partners or exes. Risk of rape shouldn't be used as an excuse to control women's movements and restrict their rights and freedom."
_
Myths about rape


----------



## drop bear (Apr 3, 2017)

Steve said:


> I think there are two discussions going in here.   One that is facing backwards, and how we view ad treat victims of sexual assault.   And one that is forward facing, discussing how we might better prevent sexual assaukt from occurring.
> 
> Backwards, once assault has occurred, as far as I'm concerned, however the victim survived is the right way in that moment.
> 
> Forward facing, I think it can be useful to discuss how to prevent assaults from occurring, from different perspectives,   What can men do?  What can women do?  We all have a role to play as parents, coworkers, friends, and training partners.



There is also supporting the victim and solving the problem. And they tend not to go hand in hand either.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I'm afraid the ones I'm talking about are gender specific, they are aimed at women.
> Women’s Self Defence | Combat Academy
> Self Defence for Women | Pro Holistic
> Womens Self Defense | Krav Maga Scotland | Scot Krav Maga | SKMS
> ...



Wait. Wait. but if they are happy doing the training. Whats the real harm?


----------



## hoshin1600 (Apr 3, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I think you are misunderstanding this, I have been in many situations where physically fighting would be the wrong thing to do, I have talked people 'down' and taken them without violence, I have used violence when I considered there was no other way, I have prevaricated, flirted, joked and talked my way out of situations that had the potential to go very wrong. A woman who is being threatened must be able to decide how she acts and what she does without having to later defend her actions. For some acting passively and letting the rape go on is the right thing to do for them, the situation may demand that such as the safety of her children/family, horrible as it is, it would be the right thing to do for her and her family to survive. It might be the right thing for another women to talk her way out of a situation, for another to trick her way and yet another can fight her way out but it has to be down to the victim to use her instincts and gut feeling about how she deals with the attacker. There is nothing in that that means she doesn't think about it, trust me, she will and will also do what seems the right thing for her. And there must be no victim blaming afterwards telling her she should have done this or that.



yeah we are kinda talking two different things.



Tez3 said:


> How does this work when the majority of rapes are committed by someone known and often close to the victim, most rapes aren't 'stranger' rapes where the attacker leaps out of the woods but are perpetrated by someone close to the victim?
> 
> *"Myth:*_ Women are most likely to be raped outside, after dark and by a stranger, so women shouldn't go out alone at night._
> 
> ...



i am not ignorant of this. it works.  it would take me three pages to describe it and spell it all out.   your still taking the defense stance on this topic when there is no need.  the concept of a pre event solution is exactly what you are talking about.   give it some thought rather than going on the defensive. i am not talking about physical self defense.

please dont keep repeating the 90% rule like that you are misusing the data and misleading readers.  the data says 90% (for the sake of conversation we will agree on the percent) of rape offenders are known to the victim.  this does not imply that there is a close relationship between the two.   they may be known but.... as examples
_i didnt really know him but we worked in the same building
i recognized him, he had stopped by the daycare center a few weeks before asking about prices for his child
he was the boyfriend of one of my friends_
in situations like this yes he is known but there is no close relationship.  i would like to clarify i am not talking about molestation, or spousal.  so yes the data may say 90% but  the data should not be misunderstood to mean that rapes happen most often by people inside a circle of trust.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Apr 3, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> YES YES YES!! thank you..
> but i will add this works in both genders, teachers love the arts but fail to take on the concept of responsibility. if any student is in a violent situation and does not come out alive, martial arts teachers often fail to understand that this is a possibility and that, that particular student may have been depending on the teacher to give him proper skills.
> 
> TEZ and others ,,
> ...



Left of bang is a great book!


----------



## Steve (Apr 3, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Wait. Wait. but if they are happy doing the training. Whats the real harm?


False sense of security... I think that's a real problem with all self defense training.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 3, 2017)

Steve said:


> False sense of security... I think that's a real problem with all self defense training.


All? That's a big container, Steve.


----------



## Steve (Apr 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> All? That's a big container, Steve.


okay.  Almost all.   It's a business model.  

First you create a market by building up unreasonable fear and insecurity, and then you sell a product that will impart an unrealistic sense of security.

It's like selling a brand of car.  You hyper focus on dead children, preying on a parent's natural concern for the safety of their kids.  Then you sell them a product that liberates them to drive like maniacs because their car is so safe.   

I'll defer to @Tez3  and @aedrasteia  about how most women's self defense falls short.   I think it's bigger than just this subset of training.   

I applaud programs that focus on solving a specific puzzle and helping people within a specific context, and who routinely review their training to asses whether it's having the desired impact.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Apr 3, 2017)

left of bang as i am using it , is a concept. that an event happens along a time line and with the event in the center.  think about driving your car,  if you could see an accident  5 miles ahead you could easily avoid it.  you would move to a different lane, slow down ect.  but the way we teach martial arts is to learn swift counter measures within a few seconds of the accident. now fast reaction driving can be important but should not be the goal.  it is by far better to avoid long in advance. this is being left of the bang or the event.  so training should include things like verbal communication, how to control a conversation and direct it, how to recognize compliance behavior and make correct behavioral decisions. simple things that can change the situation.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 3, 2017)

Steve said:


> okay.  Almost all.   It's a business model.
> 
> First you create a market by building up unreasonable fear and insecurity, and then you sell a product that will impart an unrealistic sense of security.
> 
> ...


Except that the folks I know who teach "self-defense" don't seem to do that. I'm sure some do, but I haven't run into much of that. Look at my website - no fear mongering there, and my site is about average (if less well thought out in places) compared to others I know of. I offer to teach them techniques for defending themselves, using methods that have shown reasonable success in the past. I make sure they are aware of the limitations of their training. I make sure they get chances to fail during training, so they don't believe they are learning anything that is invincible. Where's the false sense of security?


----------



## Steve (Apr 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Except that the folks I know who teach "self-defense" don't seem to do that. I'm sure some do, but I haven't run into much of that. Look at my website - no fear mongering there, and my site is about average (if less well thought out in places) compared to others I know of. I offer to teach them techniques for defending themselves, using methods that have shown reasonable success in the past. I make sure they are aware of the limitations of their training. I make sure they get chances to fail during training, so they don't believe they are learning anything that is invincible. Where's the false sense of security?


Oh come on.  We see it around here all the time.  People are getting sliced by strangers with razors, and shot and stabbed and mayhem and you have to sweep the leg and stomp the head.   I could point you to several examples within the last few days of exactly this kind of hyperbolic approach.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Apr 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Except that the folks I know who teach "self-defense" don't seem to do that. I'm sure some do, but I haven't run into much of that. Look at my website - no fear mongering there, and my site is about average (if less well thought out in places) compared to others I know of. I offer to teach them techniques for defending themselves, using methods that have shown reasonable success in the past. I make sure they are aware of the limitations of their training. I make sure they get chances to fail during training, so they don't believe they are learning anything that is invincible. Where's the false sense of security?


I don't do the fear mongering sales pitch either.  I've discovered that many people who have excessive fear usually will have a poor training experience because they are obsessed with the fear instead of the actual training..  They will go through the entire class with the mindset "What if.....?"  I think people like that are looking for someone to say, here's a fail proof technique, that works on even small people.  They won't that reassurance that if they do the technique that all will be well.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 4, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> please dont keep repeating the 90% rule like that you are misusing the data and misleading readers. the data says 90% (for the sake of conversation we will agree on the percent) of rape offenders are known to the victim. this does not imply that there is a close relationship between the two. they may be known but.... as examples



Have you had police training on this? Have you taken statements from victims? I can assure you that like previous misunderstandings of my posts you are reading this incorrectly. Most rape victims _know_ their attacker, I'm sorry you disagree with that.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Wait. Wait. but if they are happy doing the training. Whats the real harm?



Not my point about the training, I was showing Hoshin that training* is* advertised as being gender specific. I said that training is targeted ( not whether it was good training or bad) towards women these days because it's good business, he said he wasn't seeing that but if you use Googlefu you will see hundreds if not thousands of gender specific classes.
I wasn't looking at it as whether the women liked the training or not just that he was wrong when he said they weren't targeting women. I'm not saying they shouldn't be either, it's a good idea for women to train and to train in female only classes.


Self defence training should be realistic, not just in the techniques taught but the rest of the self defence arsenal, it shouldn't scaremonger, it should give all possibilities of how to deal with an attack rather than 'scratch his eyes out' ( yes I've seen that advice on a video on FB) you could but it has to be in context, unlike the video the attacker isn't going to stand there and let you. Working with unresisting partners which allow people to think their techniques work is ridiculous in all training never mind self defence training, giving people a false sense of security likewise. If you are thinking I'm not advocating self defence training for women then you are incorrect, I just want it to be useful and correct training which has been thought out from a victims view point not that of a black belt who wants to show how he can help and tells a woman she must fight under all circumstances because that's what he would do, it's well meaning but deadly advice.

Yes victims are most likely attacked by someone they know, the statistics aren't just that, each one is a story of misery and horror for the victims.


----------



## hoshin1600 (Apr 4, 2017)

Tez, this is an important topic and one that is worth talking about. But your verbally attacking everyone and anyone. We all want the same end result but your aggressive posts are counterproductive to the discussion. Rather than crap on everyone and tell us how wrong we all are because we are men how about offering up some solutions. You've turned this thread and every one like it into your own soap box rant.
And because of that I'm out.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 4, 2017)

hoshin1600 said:


> Tez, this is an important topic and one that is worth talking about. But your verbally attacking everyone and anyone. We all want the same end result but your aggressive posts are counterproductive to the discussion. Rather than crap on everyone and tell us how wrong we all are because we are men how about offering up some solutions. You've turned this thread and every one like it into your own soap box rant.
> And because of that I'm out.



Really, after others have said it was a good discussion? Okay, if you feel defensive about this I'm sorry but I'm not attacking anyone, with DB's post he misunderstood what I meant, perhaps I didn't phrase it properly but I was just pointing out what I actually meant. Misunderstandings happen and I would point out you attacked me over the 'statistics' you said were misleading and I was completely wrong about despite what I know from my experience in dealing with rape cases and yes I've had training on how to investigate and deal with these.
As for the 'aggressive' part, often people will say a woman is being aggressive when she is actually being passionate about the subject. I haven't dumped on people because they are male, *you *are making this about my gender which is odd. I have offered several solutions and ways forward, you choose to ignore them and turn it on me instead.

Think it's time for me to take a break from MT as obviously I'm not wanted here.


----------



## drop bear (Apr 4, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Not my point about the training, I was showing Hoshin that training* is* advertised as being gender specific. I said that training is targeted ( not whether it was good training or bad) towards women these days because it's good business, he said he wasn't seeing that but if you use Googlefu you will see hundreds if not thousands of gender specific classes.
> I wasn't looking at it as whether the women liked the training or not just that he was wrong when he said they weren't targeting women. I'm not saying they shouldn't be either, it's a good idea for women to train and to train in female only classes.
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah the issue is the same as self defence. There is no standard and nobody really knows.

So solving the problem means you have to wade through a lot of half truths. The idea is to arm yourself with as many tools as you can to defend yourself. For me I can't do grief counceling or really help mentally rebuild a raped woman. So I don't. I can teach someone to beat on a guy untill they pee themselves. So that is what I do.

Now I am not discounting the other stuff it is important. It absolutely is but  you would need to go to someone else to discuss it.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 4, 2017)

Steve said:


> Oh come on.  We see it around here all the time.  People are getting sliced by strangers with razors, and shot and stabbed and mayhem and you have to sweep the leg and stomp the head.   I could point you to several examples within the last few days of exactly this kind of hyperbolic approach.


I'm sure it is done. I don't read advertising from self-defense schools much (I probably should, but I don't). I'm familiar with what's on the websites of the places I know, since I visit their sites to see what's going on.

And I have heard instructors get themselves caught up in that loop in their own heads, and bring it to class after an incident that shakes them. I just haven't seen it used in advertising very often, nor have I ever heard it discussed with a prospective student. My point is that it's surely out there, but since I've not seen it among the folks I know, I find it hard to believe it's almost everyone. Surely a significant portion of SD programs do - it seems an easy marketing idea, and many will jump for whatever brings in students.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 4, 2017)

drop bear said:


> For me I can't do grief counceling or really help mentally rebuild a raped woma



I didn't do that either, my job was to take the evidence and catch the rapists.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Apr 4, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Not my point about the training, I was showing Hoshin that training* is* advertised as being gender specific. I said that training is targeted ( not whether it was good training or bad) towards women these days because it's good business, he said he wasn't seeing that but if you use Googlefu you will see hundreds if not thousands of gender specific classes.
> I wasn't looking at it as whether the women liked the training or not just that he was wrong when he said they weren't targeting women. I'm not saying they shouldn't be either, it's a good idea for women to train and to train in female only classes.
> 
> 
> ...


I will say that I know of a couple of instructors who use gender-specific advertising to women, because they don't seem to respond much to the non-specific marketing. An instructor who offers a women's self-defense program will probably find one or two women who want some actual training and will join classes. Men who want classes seem to be easier to attract through generic advertising. I don't know if that's because the "generic" advertising actually isn't as gender-generic as it is thought to be (including that written by women), or if it's because there's a population of women who prefer to get their introduction in a single-gender environment (for reasons you've pointed out earlier - the same reasons some women-only fitness places exist).


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 4, 2017)

As I said gender specific advertising is fine, I was saying it is out there in answer to a comment that it wasn't. Why some women want to train on their own whether for self defence or martial arts is a whole different thread. I know men who prefer to train with only men ( and women who want to train with men), it's a preference based on what individuals want, it's neither right or wrong just a preference.


----------



## jobo (Apr 6, 2017)

u treating and quite wide ranging discussion, my thought in no logical order
the best way to avoid date/friend rape is to have a psychotic brother/ father/ boy friend. What happened may or may not be rape to a criminal standard. But the certain knowledge that that will be kicked in to intensive care has quite a calming effect on peoples amour.

personal responsibility has some degree of importance, not that that shifts the blame in anyway, nor perhaps to the degree that some are suggesting on here. As soon as you have a situation where women can't go out alone in the park or out of the way places, then you have lost control of society and effectively imprisoned them. That said there are some places I wouldn't go,after dark and a few I would avoid at all times, so what's good for me as a big bloke is equally good advice for them.

getting so drunk you cant even makes an attempt at defending yourself never mind having passed out, is a exercise that both sexes should avoid except for being in trusted places with trusted people. At the very least you should know who you are, where you are and roughly how to get home and be capable of doing so with out someone carrying you. Otherwise your just places your responsibility for your own safety on to others, who may let you down.

mode of dress is a tricky one, women should just be able to dress as they wish, but dressing provocatively to get attention might end up with attention you don't want. I had to stop my wife going out in a leather dress slashed to the hip and across the chest line in which she looked lovely, as it just attracted leching drunks and i got fed up with punching them. If having a 200 lb 6 Footer on your arm doesn't discourage them I'm not sure what would


----------



## Buka (Apr 6, 2017)

Mode of dress can indeed be tricky. Then there's this -

Had a radio call the other night at work. "_Caucasian female, early twenties, appears intoxicated, coming down the side walk - naked."_

I used to hear these and think, "What the hell is that all about?" Now I just think, "Swell, another one."


----------



## Paul_D (Apr 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> I had to stop my wife going out in a leather dress


Sorry but am I actually reading this right?  Since when does a wife need a husbands approval to wear whatever the hell she wants?  I thought this was 2017 not 1917.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 6, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Sorry but am I actually reading this right?  Since when does a wife need a husbands approval to wear whatever the hell she wants?  I thought this was 2017 not 1917.



I'd worry too about the big guy dangling off her arm, the rest of us have designer handbags because we are allowed out on our own.


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 6, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> the big guy dangling off her arm



Wouldn't really consider 6' 200 lb as a big guy.


----------



## jobo (Apr 6, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Sorry but am I actually reading this right?  Since when does a wife need a husbands approval to wear whatever the hell she wants?  I thought this was 2017 not 1917.


it was right after I had head butted a prospect for the local outlaw motorcycle club for oppenly suggesting a lewd act he fancied doing to her. That put my foot down. I was only saved by the fact the rest of the chapter new me and id set fire to their Harleys if they took it any further


----------



## jobo (Apr 6, 2017)

CB Jones said:


> Wouldn't really consider 6' 200 lb as a big guy.


no not in the states, but its quite large for England. Particularly if its 200 lb of bone and muscle ( with a few organ obviously)


----------



## CB Jones (Apr 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> no not in the states, but its quite large for England. Particularly if its 200 lb of bone and muscle ( with a few organ obviously)



   Just busting your ****s a little


----------



## Paul_D (Apr 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> it was right after I had head butted a prospect for the local outlaw motorcycle club for oppenly suggesting a lewd act he fancied doing to her. That put my foot down. I was only saved by the fact the rest of the chapter new me and id set fire to their Harleys if they took it any further


Violent assault and arson.  Either you are attempting to be humerous, or you are serious.  I'm not an expert but I think the latter would classify you as a psychopath.


----------



## jobo (Apr 6, 2017)

Paul_D said:


> Violent assault and arson.  Either you are attempting to be numerous, or you are serious.  I'm not an expert but I think the latter would classify you as a psychopath.


I dont think I've ever tried to be numerous. Nor indeed denied being phycotic, having a reputation for being a psychopath gets you out of more trouble than it gets you in. I didn't have to burn the Harleys as they knew I would so didn't touch me


----------



## Paul_D (Apr 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> I dont think I've ever tried to be numerous./QUOTE]
> Oh the irony, my Humerous typo was itself humerous


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 6, 2017)

jobo said:


> no not in the states, but its quite large for England. Particularly if its 200 lb of bone and muscle ( with a few organ obviously)



Actually no, unless you live either in Newmarket or Middleham.




jobo said:


> it was right after I had head butted a prospect for the local outlaw motorcycle club for oppenly suggesting a lewd act he fancied doing to her. That put my foot down. I was only saved by the fact the rest of the chapter new me and id set fire to their Harleys if they took it any further


----------



## jobo (Apr 6, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Actually no, unless you live either in Newmarket or Middleham.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


slip ons mate


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> slip ons mate



I have no idea what this means and I'm not your mate.


----------



## jobo (Apr 7, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I have no idea what this means and I'm not your mate.


shoe laces, no slip on(shoes) well your my mate


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> shoe laces, no slip on(shoes) well your my mate



Nope, I'm nobody's mate unless Tom Hardy becomes available.


----------



## jobo (Apr 7, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Nope, I'm nobody's mate unless Tom Hardy becomes available.


well tough, I like you and apart from your obvious anger issue are a good guy


----------



## Steve (Apr 7, 2017)

I thought "mate" was a casual term for a buddy.  I'm confused.


----------



## Steve (Apr 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> well tough, I like you and apart from your obvious anger issue are a good guy


Lady!  Tez3 is not a guy.   And she will let you know it in 3...  2...  1...


----------



## jobo (Apr 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> Lady!  Tez3 is not a guy.   And she will let you know it in 3...  2...  1...


wow she hide it well, never mind guys is applicable to both genders, I hope it doesn't,cause her temper to flare up


----------



## jobo (Apr 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> I thought "mate" was a casual term for a buddy.  I'm confused.


it is, depending context, but as  she is female she seems to have taken it as one you mate with, never mind il call her luv in future


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> it is, depending context, but as  she is female she seems to have taken it as one you mate with, never mind il call her luv in future



I have no idea why you are talking to yourself but never mind, it's probably a sign of age. For your information though I haven't got a temper, I'm not angry either, I am just very sarcastic and sardonic when posting answers to people who love boasting how tough they are.  I'm also not sure why you don't get the British sense of humour............... unless you are a non Brit living here.


----------



## Jenna (Apr 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> never mind il call her luv in future


..because you know what all the ladies like.. pffft..


----------



## Steve (Apr 7, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> I have no idea why you are talking to yourself but never mind, it's probably a sign of age. For your information though I haven't got a temper, I'm not angry either, I am just very sarcastic and sardonic when posting answers to people who love boasting how tough they are.  I'm also not sure why you don't get the British sense of humour............... unless you are a non Brit living here.


@jobo To explain, @Tez3 has me on her ignore list, so she doesn't see what I post.  Same as you, I like Tez3, but she doesn't like me back.   So, when you respond to my posts, it looks like you're talking to yourself.

She doesn't understand my sarcastic and sardonic sense of humor, I think.


----------



## jobo (Apr 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> @jobo To explain, @Tez3 has me on her ignore list, so she doesn't see what I post.  Same as you, I like Tez3, but she doesn't like me back.   So, when you respond to my posts, it looks like you're talking to yourself.
> 
> She doesn't understand my sarcastic and sardonic sense of humor, I think.


well that makes more sense,( tez I'm talking to Steve who you have on ignore). I've always been mystified about why people use an ignore facility, its like they haven't got the will power to ignore you with out electronic assistance, I suppose its the internet equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears.

just me being sarcastic


----------



## Steve (Apr 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> well that makes more sense,( tez I'm talking to Steve who you have on ignore). I've always been mystified about why people use an ignore facility, its like they haven't got the will power to ignore you with out electronic assistance, I suppose its the internet equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears.
> 
> just me being sarcastic


Honestly, it helps.  I've recently embraced the ignore function, putting a couple folks on it for at least a while.  I don't think it's a will power thing.  Everyone has buttons that get pushed from time to time.


----------



## Paul_D (Apr 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> wow she hide it well


She doesn't hide the fact that she is female at all.  She just speaks as a martial artists, which is what she is.  She plays no part in you assuming she's male.


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 7, 2017)

jobo said:


> well that makes more sense,( tez I'm talking to Steve who you have on ignore). I've always been mystified about why people use an ignore facility, its like they haven't got the will power to ignore you with out electronic assistance, I suppose its the internet equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears.
> 
> just me being sarcastic



Advice from Mods for dealing with a particularly unpleasant hater. You will find that following my posts there is nearly always one accusing me of something so rather than go through the tedious business of reporting every time, he's on ignore. It's nothing to do with 'fingers in the ears' more to do with the anti British, accusations and anti 'me' stuff that comes up as well as the documented insults made on the 'secret' forum here he used to be on that I saw when we changed ownership etc of the site. I certainly have enough willpower, but the posts have gone beyond that so when someone tells me a particularly unpleasant post has come up I can report it and tell the Mods hand on heart I have him on ignore and I'm not retaliating, this has gone on for a few years now. 

Now, I have to get off, it will be Shabbos in a bit and have a lot to do.


----------



## Buka (Apr 7, 2017)

Steve said:


> I thought "mate" was a casual term for a buddy.  I'm confused.



Welcome to my world, bro.


----------



## Steve (Apr 8, 2017)

Tez3 said:


> Advice from Mods for dealing with a particularly unpleasant hater. You will find that following my posts there is nearly always one accusing me of something so rather than go through the tedious business of reporting every time, he's on ignore. It's nothing to do with 'fingers in the ears' more to do with the anti British, accusations and anti 'me' stuff that comes up as well as the documented insults made on the 'secret' forum here he used to be on that I saw when we changed ownership etc of the site. I certainly have enough willpower, but the posts have gone beyond that so when someone tells me a particularly unpleasant post has come up I can report it and tell the Mods hand on heart I have him on ignore and I'm not retaliating, this has gone on for a few years now.
> 
> Now, I have to get off, it will be Shabbos in a bit and have a lot to do.


It's true that I don't like anti-American things.  But I do wish I lived near Tez3, if only because she seems like she'd be a tremendous role model for my daughters.  I'm very pro-British, except when all these Brits start playing American superheroes!   I mean, almost every superhero is either British or Australian.  It's a conspiracy.  At least Superman is an American actor.


----------



## jacksmall (Apr 14, 2017)

Here is a site with some useful info and media (imo)

Dr. Ruthless® - Practical personal safety and self defense strategies every woman MUST know.

Obviously helpful for men as well (again imo).


----------



## Tez3 (Apr 17, 2017)

jacksmall said:


> Here is a site with some useful info and media (imo)
> 
> Dr. Ruthless® - Practical personal safety and self defense strategies every woman MUST know.
> 
> Obviously helpful for men as well (again imo).



Oh dear.


----------



## Paul_D (Apr 18, 2017)

jacksmall said:


> Here is a site with some useful info and media (imo)
> 
> Obviously helpful for men as well (again imo).


More like self defence for X-Men "Morph your legs into battering rams." 

On a more serious note however she seems have made up awards that she had apparently received, as a Google search for "Best women’s self-defense (2008) voted by the Self Defense Industry" doesn't seem to come up with anything.


----------



## ShortBridge (Apr 18, 2017)

Steve said:


> It's true that I don't like anti-American things.  But I do wish I lived near Tez3, if only because she seems like she'd be a tremendous role model for my daughters.  I'm very pro-British, except when all these Brits start playing American superheroes!   I mean, almost every superhero is either British or Australian.  It's a conspiracy.  At least Superman is an American actor.



How do you feel about Sherlock Holmes and Bridget Jones being played by Americans?


----------



## Buka (Apr 19, 2017)

jacksmall said:


> Here is a site with some useful info and media (imo)
> 
> Dr. Ruthless® - Practical personal safety and self defense strategies every woman MUST know.
> 
> Obviously helpful for men as well (again imo).



I worked out with her many years ago. She can flat out fight. Watched her teach a couple classes as well. Good instructor.


----------



## jobo (Apr 19, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> How do you feel about Sherlock Holmes and Bridget Jones being played by Americans?


how do you feel about rick grimes being played by an English bloke


----------



## drop bear (Apr 19, 2017)

ShortBridge said:


> How do you feel about Sherlock Holmes and Bridget Jones being played by Americans?



Dissapointed that all the Australians were busy


----------

