Self Defense from rape

[Gerry Seymour]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

To raise brave girls, encourage adventure

This is what we want...brave girls!

 

[Steve]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.