How different are men & women really? (Lise Steenerson's blog)

[Zero]

Generally an interesting blog to read. Has already been said but, despite the pretty graph, I saw no scientific evidence or support as to women experiencing adrenalin dumps differently or peaking later and to a lesser degree than men. I am not a medical practitioner but would be surprised if women did not get the same (pro rata) slug of adrenalin as a man faced in threatening situation or, as Chris points out, when dear kiddie is stuck under a fallen tree etc.

The thing I really did not like was the "women throw punches differently, with their arms rather than hips". Sure if no training but then equally there are a lot of girly-men (oopps, better change that) sissy-men that have had no training or watched boxing or rough housed so they also throw with the arms only or flail about. I do not think biomechanicaly there is any reason why a woman, starting from scratch, would throw a punch differently to a man. The girls/women I have sparred with, with any training know how to punch and to generate power.

That section on oxytocin and why women may be susceptible to rape seemed to have some scientific/hormonal basis but I am not sure if the linkage is correct, I am not sure what to think of that section and whether a women is actually less inclined to fight to defend herself rather than a child or family member. Maybe in times of where the woman has appeared less resistant she has calculated that there is a better chance of her living if she does not fight the rapist to the death. I don't know. I don't want to get into a discussion on rape but any female members, views on whether they agree that women would be more inclined to defend other loved ones rather than themselves would be interesting. This section does not ring that true with the majority women I know (that said, many of such women do MAs and so are trained ballbreakers).

The more I think this over, the less inclined I am to think that women and men inherently come at SD or confrontation from a different position. Yes, men are "generally" more aggressive. Yes, men often have a greater background in fighting and possibly physical confrontation than women when first turning up at an SD class etc. But I am not sure if you fundamentally need to approach SD for women as needing different considerations as to hormonal or emotional factors. Sure women, particularly smaller women may need different techniques, to use in certain SD scenarios than a normal sized or large male. But when you have a man and woman with the same experience and training is there anything more to it than that?

 

[DennisBreene]

That's a good point. In the Hapkido I learned, we generally learned defenses in groups of 7. So 7 strikes for a to a wrist grab, 7 grapples to a wrist grab, and 7 throws to a wrist grap. When testing, we had to demonstrate correct knowledge and application of 3. I knew students who would pick three, often the easiest three, and concentrate on those and use those for their tests. Some here would applaude that approach for its simplicity. Our teacher did not try to dissuade those students.

My approach was to learn all of them as well as I could, and during testing, simply react. Whatever technique sprang to mind/use, was the one I employed and I tried to do it as correctly as possible any time I used it. My thought was that in a real situation, just as you state above, I didn't want to spend any precious micoseconds deciding what was a good technique. I just wanted a technique to be employed that would in fact work. I guess my situational awareness and tongue-fu are better, because I never had to put that to the test in a real SD situation. But I have always thought it was a correct approach to learning.

Our training was similar. We were taught several techniques. When asked to demonstrate a technique the grand master would state the attack and we chose the defense, then he would say show me another one, and a third etc. We also learned to sequence our counters based on presenting targets of opportunity. The initial block and counter might be set but after that it was "if you want to" as he would say as he demonstrated a series of counters based on how the opponent positioned after the preceding counter. It must have had some effect. The only time I used it was when someone at college threw a punch at me as I was leaving the bathroom. I had blocked and the counterpunch was on it's way when I recognized him as a fellow member of the campus Karate club and pulled it. I think both of us were equally shocked by the speed of the response.

 

[chinto]

OK, some of it I do agree with , but for instance I do NOT agree that men only face her so called "social violence". Men are attacked with Homicide and Robbery and even at times Rape in mind by the attacker... the last is not common at all of course but does happen. 2: I would say that if attacked on the street weather your a woman or a man you had better assume its a lethal situation up and until it is shown not to be. and 3: I did not see in the article, though i did scan it not read it completely, her mention the fact that it has been shown that women learn aggression less redially and easily then men. ( military and other studies have shown that. )

That all said I would say the main difference in training a woman is you have to train her to be very proactive and respond quickly to any threat. her smaller size and strength put her at a disadvantage, but a higher level of training can counter act that of course. ( that is after all the idea of Martial Arts )

 

[DennisBreene]

OK, some of it I do agree with , but for instance I do NOT agree that men only face her so called "social violence". Men are attacked with Homicide and Robbery and even at times Rape in mind by the attacker... the last is not common at all of course but does happen. 2: I would say that if attacked on the street weather your a woman or a man you had better assume its a lethal situation up and until it is shown not to be. and 3: I did not see in the article, though i did scan it not read it completely, her mention the fact that it has been shown that women learn aggression less redially and easily then men. ( military and other studies have shown that. )

That all said I would say the main difference in training a woman is you have to train her to be very proactive and respond quickly to any threat. her smaller size and strength put her at a disadvantage, but a higher level of training can counter act that of course. ( that is after all the idea of Martial Arts )

I presume that the very presence in a martial arts or self defense class demonstrates an active interest in changing how one responds to threats. I realize that some of what I say is a bit tangential to the topics title but I hope it is true to the core message which I see as defending oneself against someone who is significantly larger, stronger, or more aggressive. I don't think that core is restricted to women defending themselves against men. One of my favorite training partners is a gentleman who is probable 6'5" vs my 5'9" and I would estimate 100# heavier. I cannot muscle through anything against him and it forces me to work on precision. It also forces me to analyze my tactics against him (getting away becomes a very high priority). I think that, as a general principle, training that is primarily for self defense within whatever overarching art we practice, should be subject to constant scrutiny. Can we do it (whatever technique "it" happens to be) more efficiently, more effectively and will it work against someone who is significantly more powerful? Ideally, the techniques that are taught early on are ones that can be learned quickly, are more immune to the downside effects of adrenaline and fear (don't rely as much on fine motor skills) and more "universally" applicable to attacks from all aggressors. The obvious intent being to fast track personal safety within the curriculum of the study of a martial art as students are taught the larger body of an art over many years. I don't know how common such an approach is; it just makes sense to me.

 

[chinto]

I presume that the very presence in a martial arts or self defense class demonstrates an active interest in changing how one responds to threats. I realize that some of what I say is a bit tangential to the topics title but I hope it is true to the core message which I see as defending oneself against someone who is significantly larger, stronger, or more aggressive. I don't think that core is restricted to women defending themselves against men. One of my favorite training partners is a gentleman who is probable 6'5" vs my 5'9" and I would estimate 100# heavier. I cannot muscle through anything against him and it forces me to work on precision. It also forces me to analyze my tactics against him (getting away becomes a very high priority). I think that, as a general principle, training that is primarily for self defense within whatever overarching art we practice, should be subject to constant scrutiny. Can we do it (whatever technique "it" happens to be) more efficiently, more effectively and will it work against someone who is significantly more powerful? Ideally, the techniques that are taught early on are ones that can be learned quickly, are more immune to the downside effects of adrenaline and fear (don't rely as much on fine motor skills) and more "universally" applicable to attacks from all aggressors. The obvious intent being to fast track personal safety within the curriculum of the study of a martial art as students are taught the larger body of an art over many years. I don't know how common such an approach is; it just makes sense to me.

yes you are correct!

 

[Swifty20]

Doesn't seem to have been posted yet, so here's the response she gave to critics of her blog post:

http://womenselfprotection.blogspot.com/2013/03/blog-review.html

 

[mook jong man]

This woman does not seem to have heard of Wing Chun has she?

[video=youtube_share;dcx0AqADF0E]http://youtu.be/dcx0AqADF0E[/video]

 

[Cirdan]

Meh, the main things to consider when teaching or sparring is size, age and skill level. Women don`t need special instruction or treatment any more than men do.

 

[szorn]

I'll admit that I am no expert on women's physiology but I don't see any references for her findings. Based on the number of years I have been teaching and the amount of clients, both male and female, I would say that what she details is applicable to both men and women. In fact, I teach almost everything she mentions to both men and women. Through pressure testing, scenario replications and adrenal response drills I haven't seen much of a difference between men or women. Those that show obvious differences are those people that either have been through the adrenal response drills before or work in higher risk jobs that have exposed them to adrenaline in real life on a number of occasions. or victims that have survived violence or some other extreme life-or-death situation. In other word stress inoculation through multi-exposure but it doesn't appear to differ between gender.

While it is true that men often deal with difference forms of violence than women, it's also true that sometimes it's the same. There are essentially 2 basic aspects of violence. While she breaks them down into social and asocial, I prefer to break them down in to symmetrical and asymmetrical. In other words the assault is either two-sided or one-sided. Social violence tends to be two-sided or "symmetrical". For men this is the typical bar brawl. However, the majority of real assaults tend to be one-sided or "asymmetrical" and this is where it's the same, regardless of gender. The types of pre-assault indicators will be the same, weapons and types of threats will be the same, the approach may be the same, it may be either an "interview" or an "ambush" but in either case gender will make little difference.

Yes, we all know that there is an obvious strength difference between the genders, at least on average. However, any solid self-defense program will not be based on strength anyway. It will be based on strategies and tactics that are applicable to everyone regardless of age, strength, gender, or athletic ability. While I do agree that women should be taught how to take advanatage of the physiological strength of their legs and hips, I have to disagree that the entire program will be different from what an average man should learn to survive violence.


Steve

 

[Cyriacus]

There is of course one other thing. At least as far as i know, most boys grow up being rough with other boys. Girls dont get exposed to violence as often as early on.

 

[jks9199]

Ms. Steenerson has posted the beginnings of her response & explanations to criticisms of the first piece:
[h=2][/h] [h=3]Stress response difference between men and women[/h]

 

[nocturnal_]

There are many classes specialized for women self defense in most martial arts/self defense training facilities. I think the reason is obvious. In most cases, women and men would experience different types of attacks. A woman is much more likely to be grabbed, rather than punched or kicked. While a man is much more likely to be punched or kicked, rather than grabbed. In my personal opinion, from a self defense perspective, women should train less blocking movements and more defense against grabs. Men should spend less time on defense against grabs, and more blocking/deflecting.