a weak woman

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

are you afraid a woman is better than you? hang ups? self defence is just that no rules on the streets. I know a woman who was raped. you do not understand. what kind of mod are you?

I know a bunch of women who are better than me. And someone poking you is a far cry from self defense/rape.

If the guy was looking to rape you, as @Tez3 said, he'd be protecting his privates on the initial grab and this wouldn't work at all. It would only work on the non-malicious individual.

 

[Lisa lyons]

If the guy was looking to rape you, as @Tez3 said, he'd be protecting his privates on the initial grab and this wouldn't work at all. It would only work on the non-malicious individual.

how can you know this? you are assuming this but can´t say 100%. no situation is planned or the same. My friend said her situation started with fairly innocent comments then escalated very quickly. Men do not like rejection.

 

[jobo]

[QUOTE="jobo, post: 2027690, member: 36477"]you do know the guy in the vid is throwing himself on the floor to make her look good.?

but anyway most of my 10,000 posts have beem trying to help people, as your not wanting my help, il leave you to it

you may want to look a tezs post above, tez, i have it on good aurthority is femail

so you punch people full power in your dojo? all videos are demonstrations so your comment i find irrelevant. I can only assume you would never train under a female sensei as your ego is rather large![/QUOTE]
yea ok, best of luck with your martial art journey

 

[Flying Crane]

Ok, first, holy ****.

Second, the law regarding the issue of “reasonable force” in response to an aggression, either perceived or immanent or underway, varies a lot from place to place depending on local and regional law (at least in the US) and actual circumstances, and can be a complicated issue. I think this is a serious drift from the topic of this thread and is a whole line of discussion in its own right. I am not a legal expert, but I believe that typically there is at least some room legally, for a decisive response to the threat of attack, even if the attack is not yet underway. Just where those lines are drawn, I won’t try to guess at in this discussion.

So @Lisa lyons, do you have some particular schools in your area in mind, that you would like to discuss?

 

[Lisa lyons]

Ok, first, holy ****.

Second, the law regarding the issue of “reasonable force” in response to an aggression, either perceived or immanent or underway, varies a lot from place to place depending on local and regional law (at least in the US) and actual circumstances, and can be a complicated issue. I think this is a serious drift from the topic of this thread and is a whole line of discussion in its own right. I am not a legal expert, but I believe that typically there is at least some room legally, for a decisive response to the threat of attack, even if the attack is not yet underway. Just where those lines are drawn, I won’t try to guess at in this discussion.

So @Lisa lyons, do you have some particular schools in your area in mind, that you would like to discuss?

yes let´s please get back on topic & please no more rambo comments.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Ok, first, holy ****.

Second, the law regarding the issue of “reasonable force” in response to an aggression, either perceived or immanent or underway, varies a lot from place to place depending on local and regional law (at least in the US) and actual circumstances, and can be a complicated issue. I think this is a serious drift from the topic of this thread and is a whole line of discussion in its own right. I am not a legal expert, but I believe that typically there is at least some room legally, for a decisive response to the threat of attack, even if the attack is not yet underway. Just where those lines are drawn, I won’t try to guess at in this discussion.

So @Lisa lyons, do you have some particular schools in your area in mind, that you would like to discuss?

As you probably know, I almost never make statements about legality. The only reason here, is that the video is of person A poking person B, and person B responding by sexually assaulting person A multiple times. I can not think of any state, and very few circumstances, where that would be legal.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

how can you know this? you are assuming this but can´t say 100%. no situation is planned or the same. My friend said her situation started with fairly innocent comments then escalated very quickly. Men do not like rejection.

I actually went through and wrote a response going over exactly what was wrong with that video, and each way it could be improved, along with a better option for dealing with sudden escalation that didn't send for some reason. Based on your responses so far, along with the lack of clarification asked a couple of times in order to actually give you a recommendation, I'm guessing it's not worth spending more time on this thread. Just wanted to hope you find what you are looking for, whatever that may be, and hopefully you do not have occasion to try something like what is in the video and end up the worse for it.

 

[Flying Crane]

As you probably know, I almost never make statements about legality. The only reason here, is that the video is of person A poking person B, and person B responding by sexually assaulting person A multiple times. I can not think of any state, and very few circumstances, where that would be legal.

Which was always a point of contention in the various Kenpo curriculums, the overkill response to what seems like a moderate attack.

However, self-defense often involves some kind of build-up before the actual assault. In the hypothetical from the video, there could be a history of stalking and threats and domestic violence and even violation of a restraining order. In that case, a finger on the shoulder might justifiably earn a severely violent response.

So, it’s complicated and it depends.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Which was always a point of contention in the various Kenpo curriculums, the overkill response to what seems like a moderate attack.

However, self-defense often involves some kind of build-up before the actual assault. In the hypothetical from the video, there could be a history of stalking and threats and domestic violence and even violation of a restraining order. In that case, a finger on the shoulder might justifiably earn a severely violent response.

So, it’s complicated and it depends.

I agree on the kenpo curriculums having overkill.
At that point that your mentioning though, proper self-defense would be going over how to avoid that situation, and not be that close to the person to begin with. You've already messed up multiple layers of self-defense allowing that person to poke you, and there are better options rather than the reaction in the video for personal safety, in 99.99% of cases.

 

[Flying Crane]

I agree on the kenpo curriculums having overkill.
At that point that your mentioning though, proper self-defense would be going over how to avoid that situation, and not be that close to the person to begin with. You've already messed up multiple layers of self-defense allowing that person to poke you, and there are better options rather than the reaction in the video for personal safety, in 99.99% of cases.

Likely true. But life has a way of throwing curveballs at us. The fellow could be playing psychological games with an ex-lover after a bitter breakup, doing his best to catch her off guard and keeping her afraid and anxious and freaked out. He might take an opportunity to suddenly appear out of nowhere in the parking lot of the grocery store. If life was perfect, she would have avoided the situation. But life isn’t perfect and we often cannot anticipate the actions of others who bear us malice. And she needed groceries. And he was in the area and saw her there and saw an opportunity to further his psychological game.

Life is often out of our control. So I’m not trying to justify an overkill response to a mild situation. All I’m saying is, what is reasonable is often dictated by very specific circumstances, coupled with State and local laws. And often we cannot predict in advance where the hammer will fall. I can easily imagine a situation where a severe response to a “mild” provocation MIGHT be justifiable, depending on the backstory. And I can easily imagine a whole lot of scenarios where such a response is definitely NOT reasonable.

And even if ultimately deemed reasonable, that determination might take place in front of a judge, in defense of prosecution. That’s is stress-inducing and expensive and time-consuming and can really turn your life upside down for a while. And could very well be part of the fellow’s psychological game.

People can be real bastards.

 

[Lisa lyons]

I'm guessing it's not worth spending more time on this thread.

well i am sorry you feel that way but that is your prerogative. Just because you are a mod does not mean you are correct.

 

[Lisa lyons]

Likely true. But life has a way of throwing curveballs at us. The fellow could be playing psychological games with an ex-lover after a bitter breakup, doing his best to catch her off guard and keeping her afraid and anxious and freaked out. He might take an opportunity to suddenly appear out of nowhere in the parking lot of the grocery store. If life was perfect, she would have avoided the situation. But life isn’t perfect and we often cannot anticipate the actions of others who bear us malice. And she needed groceries. And he was in the area and saw her there and saw an opportunity to further his psychological game.

Life is often out of our control. So I’m not trying to justify an overkill response to a mild situation. All I’m saying is, what is reasonable is often dictated by very specific circumstances, coupled with State and local laws. And often we cannot predict in advance where the hammer will fall. I can easily imagine a situation where a severe response to a “mild” provocation MIGHT be justifiable, depending on the backstory. And I can easily imagine a whole lot of scenarios where such a response is definitely NOT reasonable.

And even if ultimately deemed reasonable, that determination might take place in front of a judge, in defense of prosecution. That’s is stress-inducing and expensive and time-consuming and can really turn your life upside down for a while. And could very well be part of the fellow’s psychological game.

People can be real bastards.

situations can change at any moment and very quickly. as a a member of the "weaker sex" i think i would rather defend myself first then worry later. a poke in the chest can very quickly lead to a punch or a head lock or being thrown to the floor then you are in trouble. then the judge is not there to help you in that moment. your reply was i think the best so far as i think you understand where i am coming from. Arm chair warriors can´t

 

[Tai Mantis Warrior]

situations can change at any moment and very quickly. as a a member of the "weaker sex" i think i would rather defend myself first then worry later. a poke in the chest can very quickly lead to a punch or a head lock or being thrown to the floor then you are in trouble. then the judge is not there to help you in that moment. your reply was i think the best so far as i think you understand where i am coming from. Arm chair warriors can´t

Lisa, don’t let the other “experts” in this thread cloud you with their negativity and “legal analysis.”

There’s always risk with the law when you put your hands on someone, but your focus now should be on finding a good school to learn useful techniques, get exercise, and develop a good mindset of aggressive self protection.

I’m not quite sure why all these posters are complaining about a self defence measure that is practiced in virtually all women’s self defense programs anywhere in the world (going for the nuts) but such is the wonderful world of martial talk, where everyone is an expert.

Pretty much any technique you learn in martial arts/self defense (other than running away) involves physically touching your aggressor and thus lays open the potential for criminal charges. But this is no reason to not learn how to defend yourself ..

Did you make any contact with the schools in your ara you’re interested in? If you have questions about specific schools the more helpful posters here would love to help you pick one.

Don’t forget to have a list of questions..

 

[jobo]

Lisa, don’t let the other “experts” in this thread cloud you with their negativity and “legal analysis.”

There’s always risk with the law when you put your hands on someone, but your focus now should be on finding a good school to learn useful techniques, get exercise, and develop a good mindset of aggressive self protection.

I’m not quite sure why all these posters are complaining about a self defence measure that is practiced in virtually all women’s self defense programs anywhere in the world (going for the nuts) but such is the wonderful world of martial talk, where everyone is an expert.

Pretty much any technique you learn in martial arts/self defense (other than running away) involves physically touching your aggressor and thus lays open the potential for criminal charges. But this is no reason to not learn how to defend yourself ..

Did you make any contact with the schools in your ara you’re interested in? If you have questions about specific schools the more helpful posters here would love to help you pick one.

Don’t forget to have a list of questions..

pre emtive striking is a really good way of turning an argument into a fight, apart from the somewhat cloudy legality of that, it matters greatly, if your strike is complely ineffective, as the next stage is all most certainly they will hit you back.

groin strikes, by that i mean the lower abdomen, can be deverstating, grabbing the dangly bits a lot less so, even more in tight pants, if they as seems likely only finds it mildly irritating, you are perfectly in range to be head butted amongst many other possible retaliations, which would most probably be found by a court to be reasonable self defence on their part

there does seem a high dependancy in womens self defebce on going for the nuts as you put it, one can only conclude that the people putting this forward have never been grabved by the nuts or they would know it was a bit scretchy

 

[Lisa lyons]

Lisa, don’t let the other “experts” in this thread cloud you with their negativity and “legal analysis.”

There’s always risk with the law when you put your hands on someone, but your focus now should be on finding a good school to learn useful techniques, get exercise, and develop a good mindset of aggressive self protection.

I’m not quite sure why all these posters are complaining about a self defence measure that is practiced in virtually all women’s self defense programs anywhere in the world (going for the nuts) but such is the wonderful world of martial talk, where everyone is an expert.

Pretty much any technique you learn in martial arts/self defense (other than running away) involves physically touching your aggressor and thus lays open the potential for criminal charges. But this is no reason to not learn how to defend yourself ..

Did you make any contact with the schools in your ara you’re interested in? If you have questions about specific schools the more helpful posters here would love to help you pick one.

Don’t forget to have a list of questions..

I am not too worried about the fairly negative comments. I have been out drinking with friends and i saw one time a woman glass another woman. her ear was hanging off ! it can happen so quick. I have found a guy through a friend who is training jeet kune do but just a selected few people. i will go and look at it. everything else is closed at the moment.

 

[Tai Mantis Warrior]

pre emtive striking is a really good way of turning an argument into a fight, apart from the somewhat cloudy legality of that, it matters greatly, if your strike is complely ineffective, as the next stage is all most certainly they will hit you back.

groin strikes, by that i mean the lower abdomen, can be deverstating, grabbing the dangly bits a lot less so, even more in tight pants, if they as seems likely only finds it mildly irritating, you are perfectly in range to be head butted amongst many other possible retaliations, which would most probably be found by a court to be reasonable self defence on their part

there does seem a high dependancy in womens self defebce on going for the nuts as you put it, one can only conclude that the people putting this forward have never been grabved by the nuts or they would know it was a bit scretchy

Preemptive striking is the very basis for effective self defence. If a woman waits for an aggressor to strike first the fight has most likely already been lost.

Grabbing nuts is not the most effective self defence move, but it has worked and that’s why it’s taught so much in pretty much EVERY women’s self defence program.

But you must know more about women’s self defense than ALL the other reputable self defence instructors around the told who teach such techniques.

By the way: this thread is meant to help the OP find a good martial arts school, not for non-lawyers to discuss the legality of the martial arts technique taught.

Virtually every martial arts technique discussed in this forum is potentially illegal - depending on the personal whim of the sitting judge.

So a bunch of non-lawyers coming to this thread to write “you can’t do that, it’s potentially illegal!” is the ultimate in stating the obvious.

I am not too worried about the fairly negative comments. I have been out drinking with friends and i saw one time a woman glass another woman. her ear was hanging off ! it can happen so quick. I have found a guy through a friend who is training jeet kune do but just a selected few people. i will go and look at it. everything else is closed at the moment.

Definitely try the JKD school, depending on the instructor it may be even better than the KM.

 

[jobo]

Preemptive striking is the very basis for effective self defence. If a woman waits for an aggressor to strike first the fight has most likely already been lost.

Grabbing nuts is not the most effective self defence move, but it has worked and that’s why it’s taught so much in pretty much EVERY women’s self defence program.

a pre emtive strike has to be effective other wise it isnt prempting anything its just turning up the level of violance in the encounter and they will probably hit back.

they may or may not have hit you anyway, if someone is just finger jabbing you, they most probably wont if you retreat, if they intended to hit you they would have done so already, im not big on retreating but im not a " weak woman" but if i was signiificantly out gunned, id give it a try before really antagnising the guy

as a said, a well delivered punch to the lower abdomen will stop most people, a stike or a grab of the dangly bits, is not anywhere near as a effective as some people would have you belive,

that women self defence tends to towards it is realy an indictment of the courses, rather than evidence its effective

 

[Deleted member 39746]

There is not cloudy legality in pre emptive striking if its not addresed in law, if the criteria of threat are met you may act before the threat does. (obstructing your path is a physical threat and they have initated a fight with you, plenty of people forget that and stuff of that nature are fights) If its a clear you cant do it, then you cant, if its a clear you can do it with these crtieria then you follow these criteria, but i dont think many places address it at all beyond common law. So it just falls under the same assesment criteria as using force to defend yourself, you can just act before the threat does. (as you should be able to as the first action usually wins, its one of those myths its unalwful when its really not in places) There is a reason why every good self defence cirrculem includes the fence and hitting the person before they hit you. Well, looking for and indentifying the threat, then taking follow up action.


And for the direct above, a flincing response is usually sufficent to break contact and a secondary point to self defence is buying as much time as possible and fighting back increases your odds of surviving a lot more than not. You make yourself not look like a victim so they will go to a easier target, and if they spend 30 mintues grappling with you in a public area there is a chance someone will along or someone will hear the scuffle.

Just not installing a nature of passivity/submission and defeatism could be argued as a decent self defence "training" as you would desuade anyone looking for a easy target once they have to fight you for 30 minutes.

If you cant go anywhere i would just echo what i read in dead or alive (paraphrase) "Just learn how to do one technique at a time starting with your strong hand, even if you can only straight punch well with your strong hand, it beats not being able to do anything and gives you a technique to use." (actually Geoff Thompsons Dead or Alive is a pretty good book if you are intrested in self defence)

I think thats a apt paraphrase i cant remember the wording for the life of me and cant fish the book out currently. I dont think punching is the hardest thing to learn by yourself if you get some good information on how to do it, the main issue is the latter.

 

[jobo]

There is not cloudy legality in pre emptive striking if its not addresed in law, if the criteria of threat are met you may act before the threat does. (obstructing your path is a physical threat and they have initated a fight with you, plenty of people forget that and stuff of that nature are fights) If its a clear you cant do it, then you cant, if its a clear you can do it with these crtieria then you follow these criteria, but i dont think many places address it at all beyond common law. So it just falls under the same assesment criteria as using force to defend yourself, you can just act before the threat does. (as you should be able to as the first action usually wins, its one of those myths its unalwful when its really not in places) There is a reason why every good self defence cirrculem includes the fence and hitting the person before they hit you. Well, looking for and indentifying the threat, then taking follow up action.


And for the direct above, a flincing response is usually sufficent to break contact and a secondary point to self defence is buying as much time as possible and fighting back increases your odds of surviving a lot more than not. You make yourself not look like a victim so they will go to a easier target, and if they spend 30 mintues grappling with you in a public area there is a chance someone will along or someone will hear the scuffle.

Just not installing a nature of passivity/submission and defeatism could be argued as a decent self defence "training" as you would desuade anyone looking for a easy target once they have to fight you for 30 minutes.

If you cant go anywhere i would just echo what i read in dead or alive (paraphrase) "Just learn how to do one technique at a time starting with your strong hand, even if you can only straight punch well with your strong hand, it beats not being able to do anything and gives you a technique to use." (actually Geoff Thompsons Dead or Alive is a pretty good book if you are intrested in self defence)

I think thats a apt paraphrase i cant remember the wording for the life of me and cant fish the book out currently. I dont think punching is the hardest thing to learn by yourself if you get some good information on how to do it, the main issue is the latter.

its very cloudy legally, as you will find out if you ever premptivly stike someone and they report you to the police , i know this as it happend to me

people get into heated arguments all the time, this is seldom justification for kicking them in the nuts

 

[Tai Mantis Warrior]

its very cloudy legally, as you will find out if you ever premptivly stike someone and they report you to the police , i know this as it happend to me

people get into heated arguments all the time, this is seldom justification for kicking them in the nuts

In this case jobo has a point there’s always legal risk to touching someone without their permission.

But I don’t see any judge (even an unreasonable one, which seems to be the norm these days) who will convict a frail woman with lung disease for assault against a man, yes stranger things have happened but that’s still no reason for the OP not to learn how to defend herself.

Lisa, I suggest you begin stretching on your own now while you prepare to possibly attend your first in-person or online training session.

Do the yoga cat stretch, and the upside down V stretch thing I see my gf do every morning. Make sure to focus on slowly and gradually stretching your hamstrings, groin, and hips. Try out the front and side splits. The increased flexibility and range of motion will make you feel like a million bucks, and it’ll make your body healthier too.

Also practice some basic punching in the mirror.. things like the classic 1-2 (left jab then right cross punch) as well as the hook and upper cut. This is your introduction to shadow boxing.

I find the single most the effective self defence technique for women is the upper cut palm strike to the opponent’s chin, temporarily stunning him and giving you a chance to run away.

After that, review these two videos by a couple of excellent judoka - including an Olympic gold medallist - demonstrating the first few basic trips and throws that everyone should know:

After we’ve turned you into a self defence expert, just promise us you won’t go around randomly beating up large men