If you are teaching women

[aedrasteia]

1: your link is broken

2: this is not a gender specific issue. Not everyone is cut out for martial arts.

is this working? When your body still lives in fear that your mind has gotten over.

 

[dvcochran]

is this working? When your body still lives in fear that your mind has gotten over.

yes.

 

[aedrasteia]

1: your link is broken

2: this is not a gender specific issue. Not everyone is cut out for martial arts.

this works for me: I hope it works for you:
When your body still lives in fear that your mind has gotten over.

 

[Tez3]

i nearly always wear a cup (and they know this) so they can often practice striking there and so that they dont have to worry about genitals in training situations such as bear hugs

How often have I heard that striking to the genitals is effective, females are always told to do that and how many times does it actually work? Well hardly ever. If a man is going to attack someone.... male or female, he comes 'sideways on to protect himself, he expects it. I've seen fighters caught and carry on because the adrenaline masks the pain or at least makes it bearable. Men are very good at protecting their more vulnerable areas. It is such an unreliable strike I rarely teach it.

I know this is off topic but it's something that has always annoyed me, it gives so many females a false sense of security. 'one kick and he's down', nope.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

How often have I heard that striking to the genitals is effective, females are always told to do that and how many times does it actually work? Well hardly ever. If a man is going to attack someone.... male or female, he comes 'sideways on to protect himself, he expects it. I've seen fighters caught and carry on because the adrenaline masks the pain or at least makes it bearable. Men are very good at protecting their more vulnerable areas. It is such an unreliable strike I rarely teach it.

I know this is off topic but it's something that has always annoyed me, it gives so many females a false sense of security. 'one kick and he's down', nope.

Agreed. And even when struck there, it's not always as effective as we'd expect. I teach it like any other strike - it has uses, but you can't depend upon it to shut down the brain. IMO, its most useful feature is that it might draw one of his hands down to protect, to give a better shot at the head and neck.

 

[Christopher Adamchek]

@dvcochran - hahaha, what i meant is that i can do this with my fiancee when teaching a class, i can touch her "inappropriately" so student can see how the defense, escape, etc. really looks

@Tez3 - im not trying to say that that its a one hit wonder, or that i even really focus on teaching women to hit there. But its something they are going to go for, or hit accidentally while practicing so id like to be protected. It does also make them feel much more comfortable practicing things like bear hugs where they opponent/instructor's body is right against theirs.

 

[Tez3]

@Tez3 - im not trying to say that that its a one hit wonder, or that i even really focus on teaching women to hit there. But its something they are going to go for, or hit accidentally while practicing so id like to be protected. It does also make them feel much more comfortable practicing things like bear hugs where they opponent/instructor's body is right against theirs.[/QUOTE]

My instructor never wears a groin guard, says it's restricting and you stop protecting yourself.
I'm not sure women should feel comfortable in class, or men for that matter, self defence is about being able to defend yourself in all situations, once you feel comfortable with people you train with then it comes as more of a shock when it's someone from outside rather than less of a shock. I don't want people pandering to me in class.

 

[Steve]

I think if you are a guy and have been the victim of an abusive relationship. (And I have seen guys tortured) And get bombarded with this script that girls are the victims and guys are the aggressors.


So instead of being able empathize with a victim because both guys and girls are victims of scum bags. You are automatically assumed to be the predator.

You get your narky pants on.

Sure. I see little value in arguing on an individual level. The lessons can be clearly seen on a large scale. Yes, women can harass men. Yes, men can be victimized. But if you're a self defense coach and want to better understand the reactions you witness in class, here is some insight. To respond, "That can also happen to a guy," completely misses the point. Sure. It might. And that is relevant how?

Threads like this aren't about whether something "should" or "shouldn't" be. That's a philosophical discussion. Threads like this are about whether something "is" or "isn't." In other words, when I see a thread like this come up, I see it as a spotlight being shined on something that is already pretty well known among women. It's constructive feedback for those who are inclined to listen. It's peeling back a layer to reveal something that may be in a blind spot. I don't take threads like this as a referendum against men or anything like that, even if they comment on "men" in the plurality. It's a shorthand.

Whether a guy has a completely different perspective on the same situation has no bearing on whether a woman views it as outlined in the OP. Said differently, if women as a group can read that article and relate, then it is tapping into a shared experience. It is completely irrelevant that it may also be true that men can relate to THEIR side of the story. That might be another thread. If Martial D or you, DB, want to start a thread on the emotional or psychological damage women can inflict in a relationship, go for it. I look forward to reading it.

 

[Steve]

Any emotional content you are reading, you are also adding. In fact, it's the opposite, I'm just the one with the balls to approach these things from the other direction rather than sing along with the chorus.

Everyone has their side of the story, and not surprisingly everyone is the protagonist in their own story.

So we have two issues here. First, the content of the article, which I read as a series of poor life choices that seem to be written in a way to try to evoke sympathy..boring...

And secondly what has being in an unhappy relationship to do with showing up for class, and why specifically only for women?

Real talk here Steve. You up to it this time?

When you say you aren't emotional and are also bringing your balls into the discussion, you're kidding only yourself, my friend.

Regarding your issues, I think you're pretty clear in the first. Noted. So, going forward, I don't know what more we could discuss. You think it's boring. Cool.

Regarding your second question, you're taking a position. What's your rationale? The article and the OP articulated a position, which you seem to disagree with. So far, I have only seen vague, emotional objections that amount to, "What about me?"

Being childish isn't the same as being "real."

 

[Martial D]

When you say you aren't emotional and are also bringing your balls into the discussion, you're kidding only yourself, my friend.

If you actually believe that, you and I aren't even the same species.

Regarding your issues, I think you're pretty clear in the first. Noted. So, going forward, I don't know what more we could discuss. You think it's boring. Cool.

Yes boring..and irrelevant. Are you going to answer the question?

Regarding your second question, you're taking a position. What's your rationale? The article and the OP articulated a position, which you seem to disagree with. So far, I have only seen vague, emotional objections that amount to, "What about me?"

My rational? For asking a question without making any assertions I guess? Rational is something you give to conclusions, not questions.

So are you going to answer or do I have to sit through more of your amateur hour psychology first?

Being childish isn't the same as being "real."

Some might say projecting your feelings onto others is childish. Asking relevant questions never is.

 

[Steve]

If you actually believe that, you and I aren't even the same species.

You caught me. I'm actually a cat.

Yes boring..and irrelevant. Are you going to answer the question?

I did answer it. I just didn't answer it directly.

My rational? For asking a question without making any assertions I guess? Rational is something you give to conclusions, not questions.

"Rationale" is not the same as "rational."

So are you going to answer or do I have to sit through more of your amateur hour psychology first?

You are getting answers. You just don't seem to understand them.

Some might say projecting your feelings onto others is childish. Asking relevant questions never is.

That's true. Projecting your feelings onto others is childish. Had you not done this in your first few posts, where might we be?

 

[drop bear]

Sure. I see little value in arguing on an individual level. The lessons can be clearly seen on a large scale. Yes, women can harass men. Yes, men can be victimized. But if you're a self defense coach and want to better understand the reactions you witness in class, here is some insight. To respond, "That can also happen to a guy," completely misses the point. Sure. It might. And that is relevant how?

Threads like this aren't about whether something "should" or "shouldn't" be. That's a philosophical discussion. Threads like this are about whether something "is" or "isn't." In other words, when I see a thread like this come up, I see it as a spotlight being shined on something that is already pretty well known among women. It's constructive feedback for those who are inclined to listen. It's peeling back a layer to reveal something that may be in a blind spot. I don't take threads like this as a referendum against men or anything like that, even if they comment on "men" in the plurality. It's a shorthand.

Whether a guy has a completely different perspective on the same situation has no bearing on whether a woman views it as outlined in the OP. Said differently, if women as a group can read that article and relate, then it is tapping into a shared experience. It is completely irrelevant that it may also be true that men can relate to THEIR side of the story. That might be another thread. If Martial D or you, DB, want to start a thread on the emotional or psychological damage women can inflict in a relationship, go for it. I look forward to reading it.

I am sharing an insight in to why guys react defensively to these sorts of articles. Which is an expression of psychological damage. You seemed confused as to what someone's motivation might be.

Curious if I started a post on the trauma of being mugged and assaulted by black people if it would recieve the same defense.

 

[Martial D]

You caught me. I'm actually a cat.I did answer it. I just didn't answer it directly. "Rationale" is not the same as "rational." You are getting answers. You just don't seem to understand them.
That's true. Projecting your feelings onto others is childish. Had you not done this in your first few posts, where might we be?

So, you will be avoiding questions that you cant answer and offering more noise instead. Noted. Im doing my surprised face.

Always a pleasure...

Just for the record the answer to the question is 'nothing at all'

 

[Buka]

I just read this thread. It saddened me, I get like that at times, I've dealt with these things over the course of my career.

But I'm kind of at a loss for words.

 

[Steve]

I am sharing an insight in to why guys react defensively to these sorts of articles. Which is an expression of psychological damage. You seemed confused as to what someone's motivation might be.

Curious if I started a post on the trauma of being mugged and assaulted by black people if it would recieve the same defense.

I understand what you meant and why you posted it. I think this is more analogous to a black person posting about risks young black men have of being shot by police, and cops responding defensively by saying, "We shoot white people, too."

 

[Steve]

So, you will be avoiding questions that you cant answer and offering more noise instead. Noted. Im doing my surprised face.

Always a pleasure...

Just for the record the answer to the question is 'nothing at all'

Good luck to you, man. I hope you and your balls stay well. LOL.

 

[dvcochran]

Sure. I see little value in arguing on an individual level. The lessons can be clearly seen on a large scale. Yes, women can harass men. Yes, men can be victimized. But if you're a self defense coach and want to better understand the reactions you witness in class, here is some insight. To respond, "That can also happen to a guy," completely misses the point. Sure. It might. And that is relevant how?

Threads like this aren't about whether something "should" or "shouldn't" be. That's a philosophical discussion. Threads like this are about whether something "is" or "isn't." In other words, when I see a thread like this come up, I see it as a spotlight being shined on something that is already pretty well known among women. It's constructive feedback for those who are inclined to listen. It's peeling back a layer to reveal something that may be in a blind spot. I don't take threads like this as a referendum against men or anything like that, even if they comment on "men" in the plurality. It's a shorthand.

Whether a guy has a completely different perspective on the same situation has no bearing on whether a woman views it as outlined in the OP. Said differently, if women as a group can read that article and relate, then it is tapping into a shared experience. It is completely irrelevant that it may also be true that men can relate to THEIR side of the story. That might be another thread. If Martial D or you, DB, want to start a thread on the emotional or psychological damage women can inflict in a relationship, go for it. I look forward to reading it.

I do worry that thread and articles like this predispose women to think ALL men have a douchebag side. We have to acknowledge the exceptional, whether good or bad, to learn form it. But that is not the norm.

 

[Steve]

I do worry that thread and articles like this predispose women to think ALL men have a douchebag side. We have to acknowledge the exceptional, whether good or bad, to learn form it. But that is not the norm.

Regarding the actual article, I truly don't understand how anyone would take this poorly. I didn't read the article as an indictment of all men, nor did I get the impression that it was saying all women are victims of abuse. I wonder why some men are so defensive about articles like this.

Honestly, we all have d-bag sides. I picked my avatar because I like the message. I like that it doesn't say, "Don't be a dick." Instead, it says, "Try not to be a dick." Just try. We are all a-holes sometimes. Just try not to be an a-hole. And some women think all men are jerks, just like some men think all women are jerks, and some white people think all black people are bad and etc. That's called being a bigot. But that's on them. I'm not going to worry about trying to convince a bigot who thinks all men are evil that I am an exception.

And, all that said, I think it's interesting and helpful to understand why they think it. This was an article posted to share some insight with men who teach women, posted by a woman.

 

[dvcochran]

I understand what you meant and why you posted it. I think this is more analogous to a black person posting about risks young black men have of being shot by police, and cops responding defensively by saying, "We shoot white people, too."

I am not savvy on using the code editor so I have to copy/paste.
@drop bear said:
I am sharing an insight in to why guys react defensively to these sorts of articles. Which is an expression of psychological damage. You seemed confused as to what someone's motivation might be.

Curious if I started a post on the trauma of being mugged and assaulted by black people if it would recieve the same defense.

I have to disagree with both of you. I am old enough that being "macho" and having a male ego is ok. Thinking it weak or wrong to allow yourself to be assaulted is normal. It doesn't mean I have psychological damage. I think that may be an answer from the "educated" perspective.

 

[Buka]

I understand what you meant and why you posted it. I think this is more analogous to a black person posting about risks young black men have of being shot by police, and cops responding defensively by saying, "We shoot white people, too."

Doh!