Self Defense Sales Pitches

[Steve]

Wait a second! Were we unwittingly dragged into a personal beef with another MT member by the OP?

The site was sanitized and the only beef here is with the guy who is acting inappropriately. I think the discussion has been really interesting and productive.

For the record, I think self defense training can be taught well. As others have said, language like the one in the op can be shady.

 

[Chris Parker]

The site was sanitized and the only beef here is with the guy who is acting inappropriately. I think the discussion has been really interesting and productive.

For the record, I think self defense training can be taught well. As others have said, language like the one in the op can be shady.

Garbage, Steve. This is a pattern of behaviour for you. The only way you could have used my site is deliberately selecting it, which you then have questioned the "honesty" found within, and encouraged people to look for red flags.

The "Tucker Carlson" (Oh, I'm only asking questions...) facade is childish, and frankly, as I've said before, I'm sick of it. Whatever your issue with me is, from some, what, 7 years ago, get over it.

 

[Yokozuna514]

Right...



Frankly, Steve, go to hell.

For those unaware, a number of years back, Steve decided that it was impossible to teach self defence, and that anyone claiming to do so was a "fraud"/"dishonest". He decided, for his own little reasons, to focus that on me, and, over the years, has continually had multiple passive attacks on myself, using my school and comments as some kind of example of what he considers evidence of his views (in that he presents my comments, or my school, without specifically naming it, as an example of "can you believe this?" in order to get people to agree with him, devoid of the actual context in each case). Here, he is doing it again with my school's website... something he could not have "stumbled across", and that he got directly from my signature.

This childish, pathetic behaviour is a major reason I don't post much these days. There is simply no discussing anything with him, and he derails any thread I am in (he joined in a discussion on Japanese sword work, with no experience, knowledge, or understanding, something he freely admitted, in order to argue against what was being said... a few days ago, he resurrected a thread on "Can You Be An Expert?" in order to demonstrate that he still didn't understand what was being said then... but in a way that he seems to feel shows that he was somehow right?). That said, as this is my school, and a number of questions have been raised, I am happy to answer any that anyone has on the blurb on my website. We'll start with a few comments already posted.



So... first things first. I wrote a copy, and the guy in charge of the website then rewrote some of it to include a number of SEO-oriented terms and phrases... that said, I don't disavow anything written there, as I okayed it myself.

Next, some context and background for who I am, and what the school is.

The Jukuren Dojo is an independent school teaching the Takamatsuden martial arts... what is commonly referred to as "ninjutsu" (we don't use that term, as it's not overly accurate considering the scope of material covered), and best known through the larger "X-Kan's" (Bujinkan, being the oldest, the Genbukan, and the Jinenkan), but also through Steve Hayes' Toshindo, and a few other groups. We were the original Bujinkan schools in Australia, under Wayne Roy, the first Australian to study in Japan and bring the art back, opening schools here in the very early 80's. The Melbourne dojo opened in 1984.

In 2001, after a more tumultuous relationship for a number of years, Mr Roy decided to formally resign his schools from the Bujinkan, and continued to operate under the name Jyukutatsu Dojos. This continued, with myself being his representative in Melbourne from 2003 (when my teacher retired), until Mr Roy disbanded the organisation at the end of 2016. From the beginning of 2017, the Melbourne dojo has continued as an independent dojo under the name Jukuren Dojo. This was one of a number of options presented to us, including re-joining the Bujinkan, and the unanimous decision from all members was to remain independent. At this stage, I have been involved in studying and teaching these arts for around 3 decades.

Like all other X-Kan groups, the curriculum/syllabus of the school is made up of a number of classical traditions, covering a wide array of unarmed and weaponry skills (as well as weapon defence). In addition to this, Mr Roy had a great deal of focus and emphasis on modern application (self defence), and I would put his prescience up there with people like Geoff Thompson, Richard Dmitri, Deane Lawler, and others at the forefront of the RBSD movement... except we were already employing that approach before any except perhaps Geoff (by the mid-90's at the latest). As a result, each individual class is divided up into four primary sections, in addition to things like the warm-up, breakfalls and rolling skills, and so on that are ever present for a safe training experience.

These four sections are:
Fundamental Skills, covering the basic aspects of our unarmed methods; strikes, postures, throws, locks, chokes, escapes, etc)
Ryu-ha Study, teaching the tactical lessons from the classical schools that make up our syllabus
Weaponry Study, looking at classical weapons, such as staff, sword, naginata, and modern applications of weapons such as knives, improvised weapons, everyday carry objects, up to and including defensive methods against firearms
Modern Self Defence, looking at how the traditional movements need to adapt to a modern environment, focusing on HAOV (Habitual Acts of Violence, understanding common threats), pre- and post-fight realities, awareness of threat indicators, psychology (both yourself and the assailants), legal repercussions, verbal and physical de-escalation, and more. Like the Ryu-ha Study, this is a tactical approach in the main, as most of the mechanical lessons come from the Fundamental Skills section (with some adaptation, highlighted as needed).

Like almost all classical (and classical based) Japanese arts, there is no competitive side to the training at all. There is a form of free-form training (not what I would class as "sparring" in the common sense), both in our traditional and modern methods, however the basis of training is kata-geiko. Bear in mind, kata in Classical Japanese arts is not the same as systems like karate... to that end, there are a number of reasons we specifically comment that we do not engage in sport training... it's because we don't. And, for many people, that's what they expect when they look for a martial art, even to the point of thinking that without it, it's not a martial art (which, frankly, is very funny to those of us that train in the older systems... which are, bluntly, a lot more "martial art" than any of the modern ones).

A sporting context, versus a "real world" context, are notably different, in pretty much all ways you might choose to look at it. A sporting contest involves a known opponent, at a known time, in a known place, with a known set of parameters, a known (or expected) set of potential threats, techniques, and tactics that you will encounter, and so on. A "real world" situation has none of that surety. A sporting contest has an aim of "win", with a need to engage (in fact, being penalised for not being "aggressive" enough). In a real world encounter, that can get you hurt or killed... your priority is to get away safely, not to needlessly engage... in fact, that turns quickly from defence to assault, legally speaking, which is again something to be avoided. The sense of adrenaline is different, due to the very different time-line. The tactics used are different. The length of the encounter is different. The number of variables goes up exponentially for "real world", whereas, due to the smaller number of variables in a sport context, there can be a wider variety of expressions of the more limited skillsets, leading to a greater sophistication in technique... which is largely meaningless in reality, but a great boon in a competition against similarly trained competitors. Hopefully that explains why we don't have a "sporting" focus, whereas many modern arts do (Kendo, Judo, Karate, MMA, Kickboxing, and so on).

With regards to the comment about "some come with strength, but not control" (paraphrasing), that is actually in reference to a particular student, and what he has gained with me... his background included some "hard" kung fu systems, Judo, and a few others, and came in with a lot of physical strength and power, which he relied upon to the detriment of applying technique... he could simply "out muscle" most people... I highlighted the shortcomings there, demonstrated to him how it was a limited approach, and encouraged him to work more on his control... the strength is still there, if he needs it, but it had other students less worried about being injured with him, and he improved immensely in all aspects. So, if it sounds "overblown", okay... but it's also a pretty direct account of a current student.



And the problem there, Steve, is that, despite having it spoon-fed and explained to you ad nauseam for literally years, you still don't have the first clue what self defence means, how it differentiates from sporting methodologies, and what's required for it. It's not "dishonest", it's simply outside of your experience and understanding... and that, frankly, is down to your own stubbornness.



I don't think we cater to everyone... people who want a sports system, for example, won't be happy with us. People who want a lot of sparring won't be staying long either... people who think that ground fighting is the be-all, end-all, same... we do some, but it's quite rudimentary, and geared around getting up and away more than actually fighting there... but hopefully a look at the above list of how a regular class is laid out should give some idea as to how much is actually covered each class (which runs around 2 and a half to 3 odd hours, depending on how chatty I get...).

The issue I have with your paraphrasing, though, is the seeming link of certain comments, where they're rather separate. Yes, some of our classical arts incorporate training in armour... especially the weaponry systems. And yes, we also deal with modern situations... in a different section of the class. Military? Occasionally touched upon, but I'm not military myself, and the only mention in the blurb linked is the comment that the classical arts studied were the military technologies (tools) of their day... not that they are modern military approaches or methods. And the "hand to hand combat, swift and final AND safe... minimising impact of physical training" section... yeah, you're conflating a range of sections there... Yes, we teach hand-to-hand (unarmed) combative methods, both in modern contexts, and in classical techniques, and in a number of the classical methods, they are designed to be "swift and final"... a number of throws are designed to end in a broken neck, for example... not so much in the modern context, as there are certain legal considerations... then it skips a bit before it talks about the safe training methods that "minimise the impact of physical training". By that, we mean that you won't (often) have to go into work the next day with a black eye... or broken fingers... consideration is given to the safety factor each time, whether in kata-geiko, or in free-form training, with safety equipment allowing for more "rough and ready" training at certain times.



We advise that potential students watch a class first to get a "feel" for the kind of things we cover... then that they try a class or two to see how they enjoy being a part of the group, before finally deciding to join officially. Most do that, although some want to just join in straight away, which is also okay. Of course, this comes from the way we do things in koryu... in which case, watching one class is considered light, ha!



Again, the only mention of "military" is in regards to the way the classical techniques were regarded in their day, Tez...



See the above history for how we became an independent dojo, and if you have further questions, please ask them.

The "Japanese sounding words" are Budo Heiho (武道兵法), pretty literally "martial art (budo) strategies (heiho)", with the full name of the dojo being Jukuren Dojo Budo Heiho, or the "Jukuren Dojo Study of Martial Strategies". This was chosen for a few reasons, one of which was to both acknowledge our heritage as Bujinkan (they refer to their arts as Budo Taijutsu) by having the term "budo" in, but also to differentiate us, as we are not a part of the Bujinkan, we do not claim to be teaching their Budo Taijutsu system.

Again, if you genuinely think that "not being used in sport" means there's something to hide, then you really only see a very small part of what martial arts actually entails... these are classical and traditional systems, and none of them have ever been sports. To become so would alter the arts to the point where they are no longer the same thing... and one of the points of doing an old art is to help preserve it... which is why our "modern self defence" section is, well, a different section. But again, as listed above, if that was treated as a sport, it would not really be something that should be described as "self defence" either.



See above.



We aren't an association, we're a dojo. We have no interest in either joining a large group, or having other groups join us.



Ha, no, it's not that the techniques are "too deadly" (that idea is just... wrong), it's that the concept of sporting aims seeks to develop a set of tactics and approaches that are, at best tangential to the aims of self defence, and, commonly, directly opposed to it. As a result, we do not enter into anything we see as counter-productive to our aims... and, really, if someone wants a sporting system, no problem. I'm happy to recommend any of the BJJ, MMA, Judo, TKD, or other schools around me that I know.



I don't have "customers", I have students and training partners. Slightly different mentality.



I also don't teach kids. The youngest I'll accept (excepting very unusual circumstances) would be 16... but I prefer if they're over 18, really. At 16 they're still going through the last years of High School, which is enough pressure as it is, so I prefer that to be behind them.

First of all, thank you for the in depth explanation. I understand and can appreciate you stepping up and providing context even though you really did not have to. It is utterly ridiculous to me that anyone should have to be put in this situation.

There are many reasons why some businesses feel the need to stay independent while others feel an association framework would suit them better. Whether one is better than the other is in the eye of the beholder. Being part of an association SHOULD benefit your business by setting up a framework for larger regional and national tournaments if that can exist for your sport or art. It should give you access to more knowledgeable instructors that will benefit your curriculum. It should help grow awareness and exposure for your sport or art. I am sure I have missed many other reasons but these are the main ones that would warrant the paying of dues to the association. If you do not get these things or you feel that your sport or art is better served with you steering the helm based on your own research and contacts or if your association bars you from training with others that would help you grow your knowledge, what would be the point of joining ?

Again, I respect that you came here to provide this explanation and again it is utterly ridiculous for you to have to do so.

 

[Steve]

Yeah... and not cool. Very easy to find out what school is being talked about, regardless of if you remove names.

Think it was a bit poor form...

I disagree. had someone not come into the thread and thrown a rhetorical grenade into it, the discussion would have proceeded in a friendly and productive manner. I don't see that happening now. It has become very personal.

I think the discussion until last night was interesting, site appropriate, respectful, friendly, and on a topic that is often discussed on this forum.

I have participated minimally in the thread, letting it go where it may, and intend to continue to do so.

 

[Steve]

Garbage, Steve. This is a pattern of behaviour for you. The only way you could have used my site is deliberately selecting it, which you then have questioned the "honesty" found within, and encouraged people to look for red flags.

The "Tucker Carlson" (Oh, I'm only asking questions...) facade is childish, and frankly, as I've said before, I'm sick of it. Whatever your issue with me is, from some, what, 7 years ago, get over it.

I have shared many times my opinions on self defense, in which I have shared many examples of self defense training I think has structural integrity.

Your posts so far are entirely inappropriate, Chris. You need to calm down. If you'd like to participate constructively in the discussion, feel free. But your posts so far are overt personal attacks.

 

[Chris Parker]

No, Steve. Considering our history, you can't claim innocence in choosing my site. Your posts here, minimalist though they are, are all skewed to get people looking for issues so you can feel validated. You start by asking people "if you read this, would you go there?" without any real context (no one knew what type of art the dojo was offering, for starters)... then you commented about indications of "dishonesty", then here you talk about the language on the website being "shady"... you have exactly zero legs to stand on. Get over it.

 

[Steve]

First of all, thank you for the in depth explanation. I understand and can appreciate you stepping up and providing context even though you really did not have to. It is utterly ridiculous to me that anyone should have to be put in this situation.

There are many reasons why some businesses feel the need to stay independent while others feel an association framework would suit them better. Whether one is better than the other is in the eye of the beholder. Being part of an association SHOULD benefit your business by setting up a framework for larger regional and national tournaments if that can exist for your sport or art. It should give you access to more knowledgeable instructors that will benefit your curriculum. It should help grow awareness and exposure for your sport or art. I am sure I have missed many other reasons but these are the main ones that would warrant the paying of dues to the association. If you do not get these things or you feel that your sport or art is better served with you steering the helm based on your own research and contacts or if your association bars you from training with others that would help you grow your knowledge, what would be the point of joining ?

Again, I respect that you came here to provide this explanation and again it is utterly ridiculous for you to have to do so.

Once again, no one was put in any situation. The language stands on its own, and was sanitized. I didn't share any clues about where it came from to discourage it from becoming personal, and until someone started acting foolish, the discussion remained on the language itself. The discussion started about the language, and the discussion until last night was very fair, presented a lot of different opinions and perspectives, and was entirely impersonal.

Now that someone has come into the thread and, frankly, crapped all over it, it has devolved instantly into a "wah, he always does this" whine fest. I think that's really disappointing. But c'est la vie.

 

[Steve]

No, Steve. Considering our history, you can't claim innocence in choosing my site. Your posts here, minimalist though they are, are all skewed to get people looking for issues so you can feel validated. You start by asking people "if you read this, would you go there?" without any real context (no one knew what type of art the dojo was offering, for starters)... then you commented about indications of "dishonesty", then here you talk about the language on the website being "shady"... you have exactly zero legs to stand on. Get over it.

Dude. You just need to stop. You're making this all about me, when the topic of the thread is commonly used rhetoric. If you have nothing to share on the topic, you really just need to step on. Context was kept to a minimum to ensure I shared as little information about where the language came from as possible. I opened the discussion up with minimal context specifically to allow the discussion to go where it may. I contributed minimally, and appreciated all of the responses, including the ones that were supportive or didn't see the language as particularly problematic.

 

[Yokozuna514]

Once again, no one was put in any situation. The language stands on its own, and was sanitized. I didn't share any clues about where it came from to discourage it from becoming personal, and until someone started acting foolish, the discussion remained on the language itself. The discussion started about the language, and the discussion until last night was very fair, presented a lot of different opinions and perspectives, and was entirely impersonal.

Now that someone has come into the thread and, frankly, crapped all over it, it has devolved instantly into a "wah, he always does this" whine fest. I think that's really disappointing. But c'est la vie.

I don't know you and and I don't know Chris but I do know a DICK move when I see one. You could have selected ANY other source to start this thread but you didn't. That says a lot more about YOU than it does about anything else.

 

[Chris Parker]

Are you really playing victim here, Steve? Seriously?

I made one direct comment to yourself, then explained the background to other members reading. After that, I responded (in detail) to all comments in the thread. Without the context of what the art being offered on the site you selected, it's impossible for anyone to judge the description... you took the details out so you could feel vindicated if people took issue with it. Thats how you get off? Really?

I'm more than happy to continue to answer anyone who wants to know the thinking and reasoning behind what's written on the site, but to try to claim innocence on your part is the height of dishonesty. You're in the US, I'm in Melbourne, Australia. I wouldn't come up in a local search for you, and you wouldn't be searching for a random, independent, Takamatsuden dojo website across the Pacific Ocean without looking for a Bujinkan or similar (which wouldn't bring mine up) site. You chose mine deliberately. You've been called out for this behaviour. Own it, and get over it.

 

[Steve]

I don't know you and and I don't know Chris but I do know a DICK move when I see one. You could have selected ANY other source to start this thread but you didn't. That says a lot more about YOU than it does about anything else.

Fair enough. Initially, I did consider including some explanation of where I stumbled on the language, but was concerned that it would lead folks to the site, which wasn't my intention. We've had several threads on self defense, including the women's self defense thread. As I think I mentioned in that thread, this led me down the MT rabbit hole of reading through many other threads on self defense, which include many posts by Chris Parker. I click on links, clicked on a link in his sig. line, and saw the language.

I thought for a while about whether or not I could share the language in a way that was fair, objective, and impersonal, to try and get some good conversation going. I believe I did that, until last night.

 

[Steve]

Are you really playing victim here, Steve? Seriously?

I made one direct comment to yourself, then explained the background to other members reading. After that, I responded (in detail) to all comments in the thread. Without the context of what the art being offered on the site you selected, it's impossible for anyone to judge the description... you took the details out so you could feel vindicated if people took issue with it. Thats how you get off? Really?

I'm more than happy to continue to answer anyone who wants to know the thinking and reasoning behind what's written on the site, but to try to claim innocence on your part is the height of dishonesty. You're in the US, I'm in Melbourne, Australia. I wouldn't come up in a local search for you, and you wouldn't be searching for a random, independent, Takamatsuden dojo website across the Pacific Ocean without looking for a Bujinkan or similar (which wouldn't bring mine up) site. You chose mine deliberately. You've been called out for this behaviour. Own it, and get over it.

Not at all. I think you're doing that enough for us both, son.

 

[Steve]

Just one last comment and I'm going to let this go. This thread was following the natural arc of all threads. They either initiate some good discussion that pretty quickly moves into other tangential discussions, or they die on the vine. By last night, the thread wasn't really even about the OP anymore, and was moving into a general and productive discussion about marketing language, and in particular the rhetoric around self defense. It wasn't and still shouldn't be, about a single site, and was never about a single person. Until that person made it so.

But for my part, to those who think it was a dick move, I respect your opinion. I'm just sorry to see some actual productive discussion on this site get sucked down the toilet.

 

[Yokozuna514]

Fair enough. Initially, I did consider including some explanation of where I stumbled on the language, but was concerned that it would lead folks to the site, which wasn't my intention. We've had several threads on self defense, including the women's self defense thread. As I think I mentioned in that thread, this led me down the MT rabbit hole of reading through many other threads on self defense, which include many posts by Chris Parker. I click on links, clicked on a link in his sig. line, and saw the language.

I thought for a while about whether or not I could share the language in a way that was fair, objective, and impersonal, to try and get some good conversation going. I believe I did that, until last night.

I can understand someone being passionate about their beliefs and doing research to prove their point. What YOU did was not appropriate. How would you like it if someone took something about you and put it up for discussion in a similar manner ? Do you feel that you are that perfect ? If you do, just post your real address so people can learn more about YOU and we can analyze and discuss your decisions.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

I also don't teach kids. The youngest I'll accept (excepting very unusual circumstances) would be 16... but I prefer if they're over 18, really. At 16 they're still going through the last years of High School, which is enough pressure as it is, so I prefer that to be behind them.

Which is fair. Keep in mind that my post wasn't actually directed at the original description Steve posted, it was in response to Geezer (and then watergal) talking about people not being honest. And just one way that MA allows people not to be honest.

Personally, I think teaching kids is fine so long as you have different goals and expectations for them, and they (and their parents) are aware of that.

 

[Steve]

I can understand someone being passionate about their beliefs and doing research to prove their point. What YOU did was not appropriate. How would you like it if someone took something about you and put it up for discussion in a similar manner ? Do you feel that you are that perfect ? If you do, just post your real address so people can learn more about YOU and we can analyze and discuss your decisions.

Okay, to be honest, I think you're going off the rails here. We can agree to disagree about whether what I did was appropriate or not. I respect your opinion.

The rest is just simply not what I did. I posted nothing personal about anyone, and would never do so. THAT, I think we can agree, is inappropriate. You're taking a side, which i guess once someone makes a thread all about me or him, is to be expected. But this was never anything personal from me. All of the personal attacks are coming from one direction, and you're just jumping onto that side at this point.

You can call me a dick again, if it would make you feel better, I guess.

 

[Steve]

Which is fair. Keep in mind that my post wasn't actually directed at the original description Steve posted, it was in response to Geezer (and then watergal) talking about people not being honest. And just one way that MA allows people not to be honest.

Personally, I think teaching kids is fine so long as you have different goals and expectations for them, and they (and their parents) are aware of that.

I've heard from more than one school owner that the kids pay the bills.

 

[Chris Parker]

No, Steve, you don't get to ride off as if you're noble and innocent. This is not a one-off, this is a pattern of behaviour for you. You have consistently sought to undermine my experience and qualifications, ignored answers when given, claimed I have "no experience" even when presented with it, argued constantly even when you have admitted no knowledge yourself, consistently used a veiled reference to myself to indicate a lack of "self defence expertise" (such as asking, almost randomly, if someone "studied and taught ninjutsu, would that make them an expert in self defence by default?", then, when someone says no, respond with "you have no idea how happy it makes me to hear you say that!" with no further context... despite me telling you repeatedly that my expertise and knowledge in the field of self defence comes from study in that field, separate from and concurrent with the ninjutsu side... the thread you recently necro'd is basically 13 pages of the same...

Oh, and my website isn't hyperlinked, so you couldn't have "clicked" on it... you would have needed to type it in (or copy/paste)... still, a lot of effort to go to a website of someone who hasn't posted regularly for 4 years and that you've had such issues with.

You have no leg to stand on. And cute use of "son"... but you still don't get how that works either.

That all said, as mentioned, I'm more than happy for anyone else to ask questions regarding the site and it's language... now that we have the context of what the site is actually for.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf]

Thread locked pending staff review.

@Monkey Turned Wolf
William H
MartialTalk Moderator