Victims of MA Feminisation??

[Jenna]

Just an observation, I wondered if anybody girls or guys would have an opinion?

I noticed lately a marked feminisation - a softening up of martial practice. I visited with three different instructors this month (I am out of circulation and maybe that is the problem) and also accompanied friends to a basic SD course. I noticed that in the classes almost without exception (particularly with male/female opps), techniques were very much "held back" even amongst experienced grades; sparring was appallingly gentle, almost ladylike! To my annoyance, the SD course was entirely driven by what the women participants COULD do and COULD tolerate, rather than showing them what MIGHT happen and equipping them FOR it. Perhaps these are coincidental. I wonder have you seen similar??

Though these practices fitted well within the girls' comfort zones and I know from asking, felt to them worthwhile and beneficial, I find these notions of MA/SD feminisation worrying for so many reasons. I worry that it acts conversely to how it should and is disempowering to those women that practice their MA in a highly feminised environment. I worry that it might lead to false confidence and complacency. I worry that the shock of real attacks are not considered and that the requisite gumption to stand up and overcome is completely disregarded in order that the MA/SD practices may not be deemed offensive to women doing them.

I do not think MA feminisation is driven by women solely either. I think miscommunicated or uncommunicated expectations in mixed classes might be an issue. Likewise, the threat (or perceived threat) of litigation if an injury is sustained might have lead to senior practitioners handing down "holding back" didactics, though that is purely opinion.

I practice Aikido and so I am not a RB fanatic, yet I think unless practice is "masculinised" - ie. at full force and full speed (or at least works up to it with novices) then women (and men alike) could be deceived over the effectiveness of their defence. Maybe, I do not know. What do you think?

I am not directing this anywhere, just a casual observation I wonder if anybody has noticed similar feminisation. Or do you practise HARD, full force and if so, do you not feel better equipped for it?

Hope this reads coherently. Thank you :)
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

[Sukerkin]

I think your observations hold a lot of water, Jenna.

We have discussed before on this board the negative aspects of 'going easy' when sparring or instructing ladies and I have to admit that I am guilty of exhibiting my upbringings insistence on 'gentlemanly' behaviour in such circumstances.

The ladies here at MT have been very convincing in their arguments that such behaviour does women in martial arts no favours whatsoever and at an intellectual level I entirely agree.

When it comes to it, however, I am psychologically unprepared to go in as hard at a woman as I am a chap. Given that the majority of instructors are still male out there in the wider world and that many are of my age and have been inculcated with a similar deference for the 'fairer sex', I can see that this could well be a very real and enduring problem.

[harlan]

Not sure that 'feminization' is an appropriate term. How about 'softening', or some term that doesn't reinforce stereotypes? ;)

Regarding the visit to a basic SD course: isn't the point to introduce women to knowledge? Chasing them out the door with harda** attitudes defeats the purpose of getting them through the door. Testing is something else, and advanced courses are offered for women that stay and want to rachet up the realism. I took a RAD course in my town with preconceived notions, and totally changed my opinion and now support that program. I see the good in going slow in that situation.

As for visiting/interviewing other teachers than your own, don't you think it's normal, or least healthy, behaviour to go slow with someone that is just visiting? Until they get a sense of who they are, your skill level, whether or not you are bringing issues to the floor, etc?

Not everyone trains to test their mettle first and foremost, and taking it slow isn't necessarily softening, or dumbing down, a curriculum.

As for who goes soft on women? I took a seminar, and oddly, it was the other female participant that was 'overly considerate'.

[Jenna]

I think your observations hold a lot of water, Jenna.

We have discussed before on this board the negative aspects of 'going easy' when sparring or instructing ladies and I have to admit that I am guilty of exhibiting my upbringings insistence on 'gentlemanly' behaviour in such circumstances.

The ladies here at MT have been very convincing in their arguments that such behaviour does women in martial arts no favours whatsoever and at an intellectual level I entirely agree.

When it comes to it, however, I am psychologically unprepared to go in as hard at a woman as I am a chap. Given that the majority of instructors are still male out there in the wider world and that many are of my age and have been inculcated with a similar deference for the 'fairer sex', I can see that this could well be a very real and enduring problem.
Suke I absolutely understand this and would expect nothing else from a gentleman and yet, male or female, if we are at the muzzle-end of an attack then we have no cause to expect our attacker to display gentlemanly conduct.

Therefore, if you and I are training and I believe (mistakenly) that you are going full-force or full-speed, then I am the one caught by surprise if the worst happens.

Let me ask you, courtesy aside, what would it take in a dojo situation for you to hit hard - I know you are a swordsman and but I know you did KF also. See that is another point I had not considered, that men paradoxically are too considerate of their female contemporaries in the dojo. Man tht is complicated. And but will you tell mw what it would take for you to go "for real"? Or is it not in your make up personally? What if I were to hit you full force first, like a prompter? I do not know if that makes sense?

Thank you again, you have got me thinking (that is never a good thing :))
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

[Sukerkin]

Aboout to lose my Net Nannied connection here at work, so I shall have to get back to this tonight ...

[Jenna]

harlan, thank you very much for your thoughts :)



Not sure that 'feminization' is an appropriate term. How about 'softening', or some term that doesn't reinforce stereotypes?

Of course, I do not want to get caught in semantics, you are right to point that out. And yet, I actually think this is an issue in itself, because I know you know what I mean by feminisation, yet I worry that there is a chance some women in the arts are duping themselves over the extent of their abilities (to defend themselves). If a woman WRONGLY believes she is practising a highly masculinised form of the art (again forgive the stereotype) then I would not want to even think what happens when she IS confronted by that full force "masculinised" attack in reality?



Regarding the visit to a basic SD course: isn't the point to introduce women to knowledge? Chasing them out the door with harda** attitudes defeats the purpose of getting them through the door. Testing is something else, and advanced courses are offered for women that stay and want to rachet up the realism. I took a RAD course in my town with preconceived notions, and totally changed my opinion and now support that program. I see the good in going slow in that situation.

Exactly, nobody wants women running from the room in a state of angsty paranoia. I agree completely. And I admit I have not been to too many of these things so perhaps my knowledge of how they operate is lacking. I did feel that what was being taught was ill-reflective of what happens in the neighbourhood (it was a community thing for women from the area). We have a fairly high degree of knife crime here; anti-social behaviour etc. The fact is though, that if a SD course instructor fills the women participants full of fear by demonstrating what they MIGHT have to deal with at the sharp end, and they run off, well, they are hardly worse off if that instructor treats them very delicately and leaves them feeling they can handle themselves in horrible eventualities.



As for visiting/interviewing other teachers than your own, don't you think it's normal, or least healthy, behaviour to go slow with someone that is just visiting? Until they get a sense of who they are, your skill level, whether or not you are bringing issues to the floor, etc?

Certainly, I would not agree more. Me I was not participating, just invited by one of the seniors and casually observing those in class :) I am not wanting to be disparaging about anyone's classes, just that I worry at times over the perception of preparedness, which might fall way short in reality.



Not everyone trains to test their mettle first and foremost,

Agreed. Not everyone trains for their own defence. I should have clarified my thoughts as being related to practice in a defensive capacity not a sporting one. No problems, thank you :)



and taking it slow isn't necessarily softening, or dumbing down, a curriculum.

Agreed. otoh...

And thank you again for taking the time to reply and I am grateful for having the chance to reply back :)
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

[JadecloudAlchemist]

Hey Jenna I can not speak so much about your experience but I can offer my own. I have visited several Aikido dojos in my area(Aikikai,Tenshin) and found it to be very gentle and held back. I have also visited other schools in which I know they are holding back so it might be a gauge thing for people visiting a school after all you are a guest more than a regular training partner.

I have not been to a dojo yet were women were treated in "weaker" manner or techniques were water down or held back.

Upper ranks tend to take it easier on newbies after all you do not want to scare away your bread and butter. But that has been my experience so far.

[Stac3y]

I think, when learning, you need to go slow and not "hit" full force. Once a technique is fully understood, you can go harder. We typically start off going easy, then ratchet up the contact and force as rank and experience increases. For sparring, we are light to moderate contact, but, once again, that increases with rank.

I have noticed, though, that some people (usually men) think they shouldn't hit women as hard. I much prefer to fight with the ones that don't have that barrier, but I've also found that I can usually convince them that I don't need extra consideration after 30 seconds or so of sparring. We all are taught (in sparring) not to try to hurt anyone, but that harder contact is okay at higher ranks and with mutual agreement.

In SD, at the higher ranks (purple and above) we sometimes apply already-learned defenses at full speed and with considerable power; it's up to the uke to make sure s/he knows how to get out of the way or roll with the technique. Instructors stress uke skills to keep us safe. We don't always do this, though; if we did, it would be too hard to learn the proper form and steps of the techniques. We also do improv SD that can get pretty rough, though we do our best not to hurt anyone.

[morph4me]

I think what happening is that instructors are trying to find a balance betweeen being too hard and losing their female students (and income), and teaching an effective SD, and most fail to achieve that balance. I think that in a dojo, all beginners should be treated the same, have punches and kicks pulled for them etc., but at some point the training has to be kicked up a notch, the strikes and kicks and blocks have to be done harder. I SD courses that should happen sooner, because they are generally much shorter in duration, and anything less provides a false sense of security. I also believe in contact, not hard at first, but an open handed slap or push, something that will let you know that you've been hit, without causing any physical damage. should be acceptable and expected. I think it does a disservice to anyone walking into to a dojo or SD class not to experience what it's like to be hit, not bloodied and beaten, but have there bell rung once or twice, so they can see that it isn't pleasant, but shouldn't stop them either.

[harlan]

Again, a reminder that not everyone taking a SD class, or learning a martial art, needs to learn what it is like to be hit. Some already know...that's why they are there.

[morph4me]

Again, a reminder that not everyone taking a SD class, or learning a martial art, needs to learn what it is like to be hit. Some already know...that's why they are there.


Very good point. It's hwo you respond to being hit that's important. It's what separaes the victims from the survivors.

[harlan]

I hate being the voice of dissent...feel free to ignore. ;)

But...I'm uncertain if all the 'realistic' training in the dojo is going to predict how one is going to react in a real situation. Or even if one can react predictably in multiple dangerous situations. I think some are pointing to the need to familiarize women with panic, adrenaline dump, freezing, etc. and prioritizing that aspect of training. While it's important, it can be introduced slowly in training. (Unless, of course, someone is promulgating the false idea of churning out female warriors overnight.)

The important part is practice. Practice techniques, and gaining strength and confidance. Some say they are opposed to the idea of promoting false confidence in people (that one's art/training/weekend workshop is going to protect them). But confidance is necessary to fight back. That is why priority is longterm/continued training, with increased resistance as approprate. This kind of confidence is constantly tested in the dojo, and in life...it never stops.

[Jenna]

Goodness, I should have said, in all this, I am speaking of experienced grades, shodan plus/minus. No no, being full-force on novices is not at all what I am thinking, sorry if that was confusing, I should not have assumed :)

I worry that course leaders are too bound by group insurance stipulations and as someone said, making money, to give truly realistic, USEFUL counters to common attacks. If that is the case, then why bother rolling out the course? I worry most of all about this. I do not think basic one-day/two-day SD courses are in any ways cynical. No. And but I worry so much that participants have not only wasted time in solidifying their own defence, and but also have secured nothing but a dangerous sense of complacency.

Girls cannot deal with aggressive attack in feminised, soft ways. It is NOT possible. I worry that the need to adopt a temporary masculinised, aggressive standpoint is overlooked on SD courses (from the few I have been to - they might not all be like this). I worry that course instructors - both male and female - feminise or soften defensive requirements in order to make them more palatable to female audiences. Courses are not the place for full contact, obviously. Different from a dojo situation, in these cases, it is not the contact I am referring to and but rather the masculinised mindset that might go wanting - I mean, I do not understand how an instructor can talk of jabbing keys when for most participants that is never a possibility they have ever confronted; it is never perhaps unfortunately an action they could ever take.

I do not know. I could say I have no care for other women and what happens to them is their own fault and but I just cannot adopt that disposition if I could help it otherwise. I am not wanting to argue with anybody or make any more of a pariah of myself than I am already, please forgive me for my ever worsening english if that is how it seems. If you are assured of your own defence then I have no point to make at all. Yet I am sure that what some girls have been lead to believe is sufficiently powerful defence is actually something that falls far short in that full-force, full-speed, masculinised reality.

Thank you for your generous replies so far and I would try to answer each later on and but I promise I am not after confrontation :)
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

[harlan]

I think that honesty is the best policy. No one should be letting people, even shodans, think aggressive response alone is going to save them. Practice and confidance in technique may also make the difference.

As a note, the lack of sparring in my training comes up often. Our kata, and bunkai focus mainly on neck cranks and disrupting the balance. Simply put, going 'hard', even for fit upper dans sparring with each other, is going to be dangerous. One has to weigh the primacy of getting hands on/getting the technique, training it into ones neurology, and whether or not 'taking a punch' is more important.

It all depends on what people want, and honesty in training from the teachers is most important.

[Bruno@MT]

I practice Aikido and so I am not a RB fanatic, yet I think unless practice is "masculinised" - ie. at full force and full speed (or at least works up to it with novices) then women (and men alike) could be deceived over the

I had an interesting talk with my sensei about this.
I practise Genbukan ninpo, which is rather technical, just like aikido.
He said that when learning new techniques, it is much better to start doing them slowly yet fluidly, and build up muscle memory through endless repetition. Then, when you have the form correct, you can increase the speed.

Just practising hard and fast from day 1 is not going to help you in the long run because you will use speed and power to compensate for sloppy technique. That does not mean that attacking hard and fast is wrong, but building proper form should come first.

[Andrew Green]

I think that honesty is the best policy. No one should be letting people, even shodans, think aggressive response alone is going to save them. But practice and confidance in technique may make the difference.


You will never get that confidence if aggressive sparring, with hard contact is not a part of what you do. The first time someone starts swinging with the intent to connect you are in a completely different game if you have never done it before.

One of the hardest things to learn is how to deal with that, how to stay come when it is happening, and not fall back on what are instinctive, but bad responses, things like turning away when hit.



As a note, the lack of sparring in my training comes up often. Our kata, and bunkai focus mainly on neck cranks and disrupting the balance.


Judo, wrestling, etc all manage to disrupt balance just fine. Besides what happens if you are ever in a situation where you need to protect yourself, but not seriously injure the other person?



Simply put, going 'hard', even for fit upper dans sparring with each other, is going to be dangerous. One has to weigh the primacy of getting hands on/getting the technique, training it into ones neurology, and whether or not 'taking a punch' is more important.


That is nonsense, anyone can spar hard. If you have to leave 10% of your stuff out during sparring, that's fine, you still have 90% of it there.

Most of the time when people think they can't go hard it is because of to reasons, they've never tried and no one has taught them how to do so and protect themself properly. Seriously injuring a experienced full contact fighter is not a easy thing to do, at least not without having that experience yourself.

[harlan]

Not disagreeing with you. Only pointing out that honesty in training is important.

Quote: Besides what happens if you are ever in a situation where you need to protect yourself, but not seriously injure the other person?

Very good question. I don't train for that.

[celtic_crippler]

I don't think it's just females...

My sifu used to have trouble recruiting new students because they thought we were insane; beating the snot out of one another. LOL

It's my observation that too many folks want to claim the skill, the bragging rights, the black belt...whatever, but don't want to put the blood, sweat, and tears into it that it takes to actually be able to claim those accolades.

That being said, I've thrown down with some very aggressive females along my martial journey and have encounterd plenty that took offense to being treated...softly. So they do exist, I have scars to prove it! LOL

[Xue Sheng]

Well since I have known some pretty skilled and tough female Martial Artists in my time I do not think I would call it Feminization.

However yup, it has gotten softer....much softer... and that is not good and IMO and its more sales than anything else so more people can walk around thinking "I'm dangerous" (albeit false) and I have gone off on this rant before so I will spare all my rantings of a madman and just end it here.

[harlan]

Yeah. I've read online the cries of the 'blood and guts' types that long for the old days. That changing methodologies equates to 'softening' the training and is actually doing a disservice to the art. They actually couch it in terms that the poor student that isn't taught in this way from day one is actually being set up to fail in the 'real'. To my mind, this is the apologist mantra of the closet misogynist.

Let's decode that to make it applicable to the topic: training hard would exclude anyone not already strong, fit, and basically...male.

[Andrew Green]

Yeah. I've read online the cries of the 'blood and guts' types that long for the old days. That changing methodologies equates to 'softening' the training and is actually doing a disservice to the art.

The "old days" where also full of really bad training methods, that while they may fit the "blood and guts" description where more harmful then good. The introduction of modern sports science into martial arts is what can bring things to the next level, and in a much more efficient and safer way.

Some people that talk a lot about the "old days" I think just watched too many kung fu movies with the old master (the same one in every movie) torturing the student and turning them into a super hero.

[KELLYG]

I am female and have seen what you are talking about not feminisation as much as treating women as if they are fragile.

One of the biggest things that I had to overcome was that all my life I was told, it's not lady like to do this or it's not lady like to do that. Most of the young men that I train with have been instructed (rightly so) during there lives not to hit females. So the way we were brought up is a sword that cuts both ways.

I have actually had to tell them that I do not want special treatment and that they are doing me a greater disservice by going light. I also let them know that if the contact gets to hard or if they start hurting me I'll then tell them to back off. Usually after this conversation and working together a while they understand what my personal intensity level is, then it is OK.

With our instructor is of the opinion that females should be in better physical shape/tougher than the male counterparts due to the fact that among the two the female is the one apt to get attacked.

If a self defense is being worked there may be modifications to allow for smaller frames or personal build but it has noting to do with the sex of the person.

Out of most of the students male/female there is my personal go to guy if I want to make sure a self defense works. There is no man/woman just attacker and defender. I know that if I can work a self defense on him then I have nothing to worry about.

[Jenna]

I think that honesty is the best policy. No one should be letting people, even shodans, think aggressive response alone is going to save them. Practice and confidance in technique may also make the difference.

Oh absolutely, BOTH of these factors that you mentioned are equally necessary. Uncontrolled "masculinised" aggression serves nobody without technique. Yet my concern is that students that are instructed in a manner that omits reality-check force and aggression by their training partners. I believe this full-force and speed training is essential and though I would never in a million years advocate it for novices, I still think it should be something that is worked up to, the same way as any technique or kata must be drilled slowly in the beginning.

In my experience, full force speed and contact is rather seldom practiced. Certainly I understand the safety reasoning, yet we have myriad pads and protectors and full-face helmets for that very reason. I just think that if a girl is training for her own defence then she must at all costs defeminise her training that she can be confidently assured of her ability to cope. To train SD softly I worry is training in an isolated vacuum state. There are girls that believe they can properly defend themselves and there are girls that KNOW they can. That the difference between the two is not always immediately apparent might suggest that one is better at affecting a glass facade.


Yeah. I've read online the cries of the 'blood and guts' types that long for the old days. That changing methodologies equates to 'softening' the training and is actually doing a disservice to the art. They actually couch it in terms that the poor student that isn't taught in this way from day one is actually being set up to fail in the 'real'. To my mind, this is the apologist mantra of the closet misogynist.

Let's decode that to make it applicable to the topic: training hard would exclude anyone not already strong, fit, and basically...male.

I do not know bout closet misogynists. Having been at the muzzle end of it, I would certainly not argue that such people are unfortunately in circulation. And but that is exactly why I am so keen to see other women endowed with the full wealth of skill necessary to confront it. And from what I see, I am not convinced that it is happening, certainly not amongst the general populus and but not even among female martial artists that might practice easy because it suits them.

When I used to take formal classes (we broke away from that because of this exact situation) I got so sick of girls and young women joining because they believed Aikido was a "soft" to paraphrase "harmless" art. And what really irked me was that that is EXACTLY what those Aikido classed became - soft. Feminised. I do not understand what purpose that serves. I think it is ridiculous!

I am saddened that you think training hard is exclusionary. I think that is a little unfair on most guys in MA (in my experience) who are utterly accommodating and courteous. Nevertheless, I do not think you are alone in that view by any means and but by perpetuating such preconceptions are we not ourselves condemning other women to shy away from bolstering their own defences?


Just practising hard and fast from day 1 is not going to help you in the long run

Certainly not, you are absolutely correct, this would have a detrimental and damaging effect on any training. My point would be that (in matters of SD) the kind of contact that epitomises common-or-garden assault could be introduced at an early stage and trained and built upon in tandem with technique. In my experience, this kind of necessary aggression is left so late that even when it is introduced students have to all but un-learn the feminised form that they had been taught. Have you not seen this among your students?


You will never get that confidence if aggressive sparring, with hard contact is not a part of what you do. The first time someone starts swinging with the intent to connect you are in a completely different game if you have never done it before.

I agree completely. I am guessing you practice what you preach and but have you ever encountered this kind of feminisation / softly-softly tutoring in other training places? If I could ask a question I would ask how could you persuade those taking the feminised approach of the necessity to ramp up their levels to match the harsh likelihood of actual defence?


I don't think it's just females...

My sifu used to have trouble recruiting new students because they thought we were insane; beating the snot out of one another. LOL
See that is the kind of what I would call "masculinised" contact that in my experience girls and but guys too shy away from. On the one hand we do not set out to intentionally hurt each other and but on the other hand, how can we gain a solid defence if we have never trained against someone who IS trying to hit us where it hurts? And no you are right, feminised MA is definitely not perpetuated by just women.


Well since I have known some pretty skilled and tough female Martial Artists in my time I do not think I would call it Feminization.

However yup, it has gotten softer....much softer... and that is not good and IMO and its more sales than anything else so more people can walk around thinking "I'm dangerous" (albeit false) and I have gone off on this rant before so I will spare all my rantings of a madman and just end it here.
What I would mean by feminisation is an unnecessarily soft approach; an easing back; a withholding. It seems to me that that occurs regardless of skill. What worries me is that skill without the aggressive masculinised focus could be rendered useless against committed attack. So you have noticed the softening? Can I ask what in particular? Also, what do you think has been the cause? Rant away, I am listening :)


I am female and have seen what you are talking about not feminisation as much as treating women as if they are fragile.

One of the biggest things that I had to overcome was that all my life I was told, it's not lady like to do this or it's not lady like to do that. Most of the young men that I train with have been instructed (rightly so) during there lives not to hit females. So the way we were brought up is a sword that cuts both ways.

I have actually had to tell them that I do not want special treatment and that they are doing me a greater disservice by going light. I also let them know that if the contact gets to hard or if they start hurting me I'll then tell them to back off. Usually after this conversation and working together a while they understand what my personal intensity level is, then it is OK.

With our instructor is of the opinion that females should be in better physical shape/tougher than the male counterparts due to the fact that among the two the female is the one apt to get attacked.

If a self defense is being worked there may be modifications to allow for smaller frames or personal build but it has noting to do with the sex of the person.

Out of most of the students male/female there is my personal go to guy if I want to make sure a self defense works. There is no man/woman just attacker and defender. I know that if I can work a self defense on him then I have nothing to worry about.

Yes you have had the same experience as I have. And I also understand that respect for women means not hitting. Yet the very reason we do our martial arts is to engage in physical contact, whether that is for sport or defence or just for some odd art's sake. Yes, I totally agree about going light serving no purpose. Your opponent might as well stand back far enough that their strikes will not make contact for all the good it is doing! And but I think you hit on another point - that communication needs to be open and forthright because some guys have trouble themselves breaking off from that soft feminised tack especially when sparring a girl. Let me ask you if I am allowed, how would you persuade women not used to going hard of the ultimate benefit to their defensive solidity? How would you persuade an instructor to de-feminise their approach among both sexes?

[KELLYG]

Well it would depend on the school and how comfortable you are with discussing these type issues with your masters. Sometimes a frank discussion is the best way to go. As far as untraining the current mindset it would have to be worked up to it . Work slow soft and then escalate the intensity till it is closer to real life. Or you could randomly hard attack a (willing cohort) and show that the only way to defend is to practice with a harder mindset. Sometimes the attack would not have to be physical I have seen people crumble in self defenses when someone raised their voice or verbally threatened them. I would hate like hell to think that some folks with soft training have what it takes to defend themselves in real life. With that being said how willing is the school to loose a few students in the process. A shift of training methods could drive some folks off.?

[harlan]

We also train kobudo without bogu gear. Anyone want to help me 'defeminize' this, and 'get real' by describing ways we can safely train this?

[Xue Sheng]

What I would mean by feminisation is an unnecessarily soft approach; an easing back; a withholding. It seems to me that that occurs regardless of skill. What worries me is that skill without the aggressive masculinised focus could be rendered useless against committed attack. So you have noticed the softening? Can I ask what in particular? Also, what do you think has been the cause? Rant away, I am listening

nah… I ranted once already today :)

You are asking, if I may use Chinese terminology, why it appears to be more Yin than Yang.

First it is much easier to get a lot of people through the door if they can come in, train, get rank and not get hurt and let them have bragging rights of belt ranks and believe that the colored belt around their waist makes them dangerous. Second getting hurt, at least in the US, means potential Law suite.

I have told this story before, and I will not go into great detail again, but there was a time I truly believed that Aikido, as a martial art was completely useless. I spared many and none had a clue. I eventually spared a woman that was also an Aikidoka (half my size) and she slammed me to the floor (a couple of times and it was pretty cool) and I gained a bit more respect for the style. I then saw a third generation Aikidoka do a demo and I was impressed enough to go take a look at his school. What I discovered was that there were those training with resistance, and those who were not, and that is what made all the difference.

So unless one trains with some sort of resistance, not a uke that hops to assist your throw, the whole thing is pretty much a dance and the same goes for any MA style. I am not saying go in and punch someone in the face but at least don’t aim and miss so the block is not right aim and pull the punch if necessary must at least use some level of realism. Also you need to train against Yin. Many have no idea what to do if when you go for that lock or block that punch the other guy relaxes.

I train taiji and you are hard pressed to find many that even know taiji is a martial art, little alone train it as such. Some combine it with other things and claim it is now a martial art but in reality it always has been you just need to take the time to train it as such but then no one does these days. Many do taiji and are using to much Yin when there should be balance but this is not to say that you can’t use more yin or more yang depending on what you are doing but to many never get past using to much Yin and little Yang or they get as far as the balance of Yin and Yang in form and application and go no further. Taiji can hit and hit rather hard but it can also absorb and redirect which can uproot someone and they then fall down. Not many do this at all today since, as one of my ex-students said, “This is NOT karate this IS tai chi” and then she stormed out. People generally do not go to taiji these days for martial arts and I am starting to see Bagua go that root too. But then many do not go to martial arts classes these days for anything more than a good workout and they don’t want to get hurt and have it impact their job the next day so training hard and for reality can potentially get you hurt so you don’t train that way.

People do not train like they use to. Sparing is more flailing and trying to not get hurt than technique and if someone gets hurt they are more likely to get mad than learn form it or run to the nearest lawyer’s office to sue someone. An old Wing Chun saying and I have heard this same thing from my Taiji Sifu; “invest in loss” aka “learn by loosing” and no one wants to loose anymore it is just not fair so we train people fairly promote them all at the same time and produce martial artists that are not that good and they go off and train more martial artists that are not that good.

My Jujitsu days the sensei walked in and would tell us when it was time for a promotional test, there was no set time period in between tests. And we would all show up for the promotional and he would then tell us who was going to test, and we were not all going to test. If he did not think you were ready you did not test and just because you did test did not mean you were getting a promotion. Also there were NO black belts that were less than 18. He simply would not allow it and still we all stayed, trained, got beat up, waited for promotional, hoped we could test, and enjoyed it immensely. I got more sprains, cuts and bruises and a fractured knee cap in 2 years of that class then many will get these days after years of training and becoming black belts.

Today, promotions are scheduled and you get charged separately for them (we didn’t) and everyone tests and if student A and student B have been training together all along and student B gets promoted and student A doesn’t then it isn’t fair and student A complains or leaves. And that is not good for business. Basically I feel the level of student has dropped and many teachers, if they want to make money, have to lower their standards or have no business. My first sifu has hundreds of students and teaches crap. My ex-Wing Chun sifu is lucky if he gets 6 students a day to show up and he teaches real live hard core Wing Chun. My Xingyiquan sifu can’t keep a Xingyiquan calls going because real Xingyiquan training hurts but his taiji class is full and without application. My Taiji sifu has few students and has given up trying to teach real taiji because in his opinion no one wants to learn it anymore. I am his last Taiji MA student.

People don’t want to get hurt they don’t want to take the time or simply don’t have the time to train it like they should and they all want to be treated equally no matter what their skill level is, they showed up for class and paid the money so they are all the same and they all want to be masters in 30 days or less.

And I am not sure if any of this answers your question but I tend to ramble and edge ranting on this topic.

[celtic_crippler]

Okay, I guess I should get serious for a moment.

Any good martial art instruction involves self-control, but it also involves contact; regardless of whether you're a male or a female.

You will also suffer injury at some point if studying a legitimate martial art; it happens. It might be a bruise, a bloody nose, a black eye, or even a broken bone...but it will happen; especially the longer you train (law of large numbers.)

If a student exhibits a lack of self-control then they require additional training and should be restricted from things like sparring and high intensity self-defense training until they can demonstrate better control.

I realize that many take up martial arts to feel good about themselves and so forth, but if you're practicing a ...martial art...without contact you might as well be doing ballet because it will be about as useful if and when you need to use it to defend yourself.

Instructors and fellow student's aren't doing their fellow females any favors by going too easy on them. That doesn't mean you don't adapt to your training partner nor does it mean you don't excercise self-control. It means you do your part to help ensure she gets the best training.

[Rich Parsons]

Just an observation, I wondered if anybody girls or guys would have an opinion?

I noticed lately a marked feminisation - a softening up of martial practice. I visited with three different instructors this month (I am out of circulation and maybe that is the problem) and also accompanied friends to a basic SD course. I noticed that in the classes almost without exception (particularly with male/female opps), techniques were very much "held back" even amongst experienced grades; sparring was appallingly gentle, almost ladylike! To my annoyance, the SD course was entirely driven by what the women participants COULD do and COULD tolerate, rather than showing them what MIGHT happen and equipping them FOR it. Perhaps these are coincidental. I wonder have you seen similar??

Though these practices fitted well within the girls' comfort zones and I know from asking, felt to them worthwhile and beneficial, I find these notions of MA/SD feminisation worrying for so many reasons. I worry that it acts conversely to how it should and is disempowering to those women that practice their MA in a highly feminised environment. I worry that it might lead to false confidence and complacency. I worry that the shock of real attacks are not considered and that the requisite gumption to stand up and overcome is completely disregarded in order that the MA/SD practices may not be deemed offensive to women doing them.

I do not think MA feminisation is driven by women solely either. I think miscommunicated or uncommunicated expectations in mixed classes might be an issue. Likewise, the threat (or perceived threat) of litigation if an injury is sustained might have lead to senior practitioners handing down "holding back" didactics, though that is purely opinion.

I practice Aikido and so I am not a RB fanatic, yet I think unless practice is "masculinised" - ie. at full force and full speed (or at least works up to it with novices) then women (and men alike) could be deceived over the effectiveness of their defence. Maybe, I do not know. What do you think?

I am not directing this anywhere, just a casual observation I wonder if anybody has noticed similar feminisation. Or do you practise HARD, full force and if so, do you not feel better equipped for it?

Hope this reads coherently. Thank you :)
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

Jenna,

I have noticed it as well. But it is not time or history, but instructor to level of student and also male and female interactions that have been the cause.

I will explain as I go.


I think your observations hold a lot of water, Jenna.

We have discussed before on this board the negative aspects of 'going easy' when sparring or instructing ladies and I have to admit that I am guilty of exhibiting my upbringings insistence on 'gentlemanly' behaviour in such circumstances.

The ladies here at MT have been very convincing in their arguments that such behaviour does women in martial arts no favours whatsoever and at an intellectual level I entirely agree.

When it comes to it, however, I am psychologically unprepared to go in as hard at a woman as I am a chap. Given that the majority of instructors are still male out there in the wider world and that many are of my age and have been inculcated with a similar deference for the 'fairer sex', I can see that this could well be a very real and enduring problem.

Yes there are many here and elsewhere who do not like the broad use of female martial artist and or terms with soft. But, it happens, and those hear know from our other posts which males are just being silly and which ones have a problem.

I have designations for people:

Boy / Teen / Adult (* Man / Gentleman *) / elderly
Girl / Teen / Adult (* Woman / Lady *) / elderly

IT

Boys and girls usually just need a certain reminder in voice and tone and look. Sometimes more is required (* time outs to other types of punishment *).

Teens be they male or female are trying to get noticed and are trying to find there way. How you handle the situation can also guide them in their path of development. But , once again voice and tone and simple handling may be required.

Elderly, as treated like boys and girls. They should be protected and tolerated some of thier mistakes as sometimes they do not understand or know.

Adults - Males are people I would go drink a beer with. A gentleman is someone who would be just that a gentleman and would not do so to insult someone else.

Adult - Females as women that if single are dateable. They are to treated with respect as I was taught. Ladies are just that Ladies and the question would not even come up.

(* Note: In modern Society Ladies and Gentlemen are hard to find in my opinion *)

IT. An IT can be defined as anyone of the Teen or Adult or elderly that has the capability of hurting me and have shown such intentions. It does not matter if they are male or female to me. I would clock a (wo)man swinging a weapon at me. They have become an It, someone who wants to harm me. This must be stopped. If voice and tone and intent can do this then good. If not then some handling or contact may do it. If not then maybe full contact.

This may not work for others, but it is what I learned, from the female bullies growing up that I had to defend myself be they a male or female bully.



Not sure that 'feminization' is an appropriate term. How about 'softening', or some term that doesn't reinforce stereotypes? ;)

Regarding the visit to a basic SD course: isn't the point to introduce women to knowledge? Chasing them out the door with harda** attitudes defeats the purpose of getting them through the door. Testing is something else, and advanced courses are offered for women that stay and want to rachet up the realism. I took a RAD course in my town with preconceived notions, and totally changed my opinion and now support that program. I see the good in going slow in that situation.

As for visiting/interviewing other teachers than your own, don't you think it's normal, or least healthy, behaviour to go slow with someone that is just visiting? Until they get a sense of who they are, your skill level, whether or not you are bringing issues to the floor, etc?

Not everyone trains to test their mettle first and foremost, and taking it slow isn't necessarily softening, or dumbing down, a curriculum.

As for who goes soft on women? I took a seminar, and oddly, it was the other female participant that was 'overly considerate'.


Terms are used to help define and describe a situation and or event or issue or ..., and in the English language and in others many of the terms are Male and Female centric. This is part of the culture of the language.

So, I support the open discussion of which term would be best to use, but, I think the original term has its' merits as contains certain levels of internal responses that our mind processes.





Suke I absolutely understand this and would expect nothing else from a gentleman and yet, male or female, if we are at the muzzle-end of an attack then we have no cause to expect our attacker to display gentlemanly conduct.

Therefore, if you and I are training and I believe (mistakenly) that you are going full-force or full-speed, then I am the one caught by surprise if the worst happens.

Let me ask you, courtesy aside, what would it take in a dojo situation for you to hit hard - I know you are a swordsman and but I know you did KF also. See that is another point I had not considered, that men paradoxically are too considerate of their female contemporaries in the dojo. Man tht is complicated. And but will you tell mw what it would take for you to go "for real"? Or is it not in your make up personally? What if I were to hit you full force first, like a prompter? I do not know if that makes sense?

Thank you again, you have got me thinking (that is never a good thing :))
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

Jenna,

While I understand you question, I have a problem with the physics. Force is equal to Mass time Acceleration. I know some others will state that the Power equations may be a better description, but this one covers what I am trying to explain quite well with simple mathematics that most if not all here could understand.

F= MA

I have X for M
You have Y for M

X = 2Y (* Please excuse the comparison, I know it most likely is 2 point something in real life, but for simple math I went with whole numbers. *)

So let us assume that we both move at the same acceleration rate.

F(1) = 2Y * A

While

F(2) = Y * A

If a is the same in both as stated then we can call it one.

So F(1) is 2Y and F(2) is only Y. This is why I do not go full force in class and hit anyone be they male or female.

Now that being said, yes, women need to understand the danger. I agree 110%.

I give them the resistance, and allow them to hit and do their techniques until it is right and I could not hang on any longer or did not want to take the strikes anymore. I then will give them more aggression on my side until they have reached their limit. I then stretch that limit over time. So as not to break or rip anything. (* I do the same thing for males. *)

I have some police friends. One has told me that when we spar at 50% he likes it as it is harder than he has been hit on the streets many times be resisting bad guys.

But to give 100% strike is something I do not do in class. I do give committed and intent strikes. I do bait and trick them. I do allow them to work their timing against mine and hopefully help them improve their timing.

I go slow at first both in learning and teaching. I make sure the technique works. I then make sure the timing is right for the speed they are going at (* slow *) and then from their we can speed it up slowly and improve timing.

I have had some males who want to go full out to show me something. I usually let them. I use timing and skill to show them that it is better over the long run to not burn out early and not to waste energy on all that strength.

Not that being said, I have no probleming picking someone up male or female and letting them do their release. I have no problem feeding a good strike that would hit them and hurt (* just not 100% *) so they can practice their techniques.

Resistance is good. Live training is good.

False belief is bad.


I think what happening is that instructors are trying to find a balance betweeen being too hard and losing their female students (and income), and teaching an effective SD, and most fail to achieve that balance. I think that in a dojo, all beginners should be treated the same, have punches and kicks pulled for them etc., but at some point the training has to be kicked up a notch, the strikes and kicks and blocks have to be done harder. I SD courses that should happen sooner, because they are generally much shorter in duration, and anything less provides a false sense of security. I also believe in contact, not hard at first, but an open handed slap or push, something that will let you know that you've been hit, without causing any physical damage. should be acceptable and expected. I think it does a disservice to anyone walking into to a dojo or SD class not to experience what it's like to be hit, not bloodied and beaten, but have there bell rung once or twice, so they can see that it isn't pleasant, but shouldn't stop them either.


Yes balance in the class versus the balance sheet to pay the bills. This is a difficult equation that as most in life are in flux and must be adjusted as we go, which is why it is hard for people to keep it all in balance.



I hate being the voice of dissent...feel free to ignore. ;)

But...I'm uncertain if all the 'realistic' training in the dojo is going to predict how one is going to react in a real situation. Or even if one can react predictably in multiple dangerous situations. I think some are pointing to the need to familiarize women with panic, adrenaline dump, freezing, etc. and prioritizing that aspect of training. While it's important, it can be introduced slowly in training. (Unless, of course, someone is promulgating the false idea of churning out female warriors overnight.)

The important part is practice. Practice techniques, and gaining strength and confidance. Some say they are opposed to the idea of promoting false confidence in people (that one's art/training/weekend workshop is going to protect them). But confidance is necessary to fight back. That is why priority is longterm/continued training, with increased resistance as approprate. This kind of confidence is constantly tested in the dojo, and in life...it never stops.

Harlan,

Always be the voice of dissent. Keep up the challenges, even as the Devil's advocate. If you can argue and express your points on both sides and or make peopel question then you are a very valuable member to this site or any site. Just like those who can ask a question or make an observation and get good discussion going. :)



Goodness, I should have said, in all this, I am speaking of experienced grades, shodan plus/minus. No no, being full-force on novices is not at all what I am thinking, sorry if that was confusing, I should not have assumed :)

I worry that course leaders are too bound by group insurance stipulations and as someone said, making money, to give truly realistic, USEFUL counters to common attacks. If that is the case, then why bother rolling out the course? I worry most of all about this. I do not think basic one-day/two-day SD courses are in any ways cynical. No. And but I worry so much that participants have not only wasted time in solidifying their own defence, and but also have secured nothing but a dangerous sense of complacency.

Girls cannot deal with aggressive attack in feminised, soft ways. It is NOT possible. I worry that the need to adopt a temporary masculinised, aggressive standpoint is overlooked on SD courses (from the few I have been to - they might not all be like this). I worry that course instructors - both male and female - feminise or soften defensive requirements in order to make them more palatable to female audiences. Courses are not the place for full contact, obviously. Different from a dojo situation, in these cases, it is not the contact I am referring to and but rather the masculinised mindset that might go wanting - I mean, I do not understand how an instructor can talk of jabbing keys when for most participants that is never a possibility they have ever confronted; it is never perhaps unfortunately an action they could ever take.

I do not know. I could say I have no care for other women and what happens to them is their own fault and but I just cannot adopt that disposition if I could help it otherwise. I am not wanting to argue with anybody or make any more of a pariah of myself than I am already, please forgive me for my ever worsening english if that is how it seems. If you are assured of your own defence then I have no point to make at all. Yet I am sure that what some girls have been lead to believe is sufficiently powerful defence is actually something that falls far short in that full-force, full-speed, masculinised reality.

Thank you for your generous replies so far and I would try to answer each later on and but I promise I am not after confrontation :)
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna


Even senior students and ranks I do not go 100%. I have seen to many people go away in an ambulance while I was doing security and bouncing many years ago. My fear and or strength and fear caused much of the damage. So to me 100% is meant for when it is on, and I do not care about the other person.

But I do care about the person I am training with so I do give them resistnace and make sure it is not false belief.


Yeah. I've read online the cries of the 'blood and guts' types that long for the old days. That changing methodologies equates to 'softening' the training and is actually doing a disservice to the art. They actually couch it in terms that the poor student that isn't taught in this way from day one is actually being set up to fail in the 'real'. To my mind, this is the apologist mantra of the closet misogynist.

Let's decode that to make it applicable to the topic: training hard would exclude anyone not already strong, fit, and basically...male.

I agree, and those that have challenged me, have found that I was not the usual person and I could overwhelm them (* sometimes *) and they realized that their strength and conditioning were not enough.


I am female and have seen what you are talking about not feminisation as much as treating women as if they are fragile.

One of the biggest things that I had to overcome was that all my life I was told, it's not lady like to do this or it's not lady like to do that. Most of the young men that I train with have been instructed (rightly so) during there lives not to hit females. So the way we were brought up is a sword that cuts both ways.

I have actually had to tell them that I do not want special treatment and that they are doing me a greater disservice by going light. I also let them know that if the contact gets to hard or if they start hurting me I'll then tell them to back off. Usually after this conversation and working together a while they understand what my personal intensity level is, then it is OK.

With our instructor is of the opinion that females should be in better physical shape/tougher than the male counterparts due to the fact that among the two the female is the one apt to get attacked.

If a self defense is being worked there may be modifications to allow for smaller frames or personal build but it has noting to do with the sex of the person.

Out of most of the students male/female there is my personal go to guy if I want to make sure a self defense works. There is no man/woman just attacker and defender. I know that if I can work a self defense on him then I have nothing to worry about.

It is good to not want special treatment. It is good to not be fragile.

But understand that males are simple and many will fall back on treating you as fragile, and you will have to remind us males fomr time to time. It is nto us trying to be difficult (* there will be some but they will have other issues and attitudes as well *) it is just a socialized training constraint placed upon many males.


Oh absolutely, BOTH of these factors that you mentioned are equally necessary. Uncontrolled "masculinised" aggression serves nobody without technique. Yet my concern is that students that are instructed in a manner that omits reality-check force and aggression by their training partners. I believe this full-force and speed training is essential and though I would never in a million years advocate it for novices, I still think it should be something that is worked up to, the same way as any technique or kata must be drilled slowly in the beginning.

In my experience, full force speed and contact is rather seldom practiced. Certainly I understand the safety reasoning, yet we have myriad pads and protectors and full-face helmets for that very reason. I just think that if a girl is training for her own defence then she must at all costs defeminise her training that she can be confidently assured of her ability to cope. To train SD softly I worry is training in an isolated vacuum state. There are girls that believe they can properly defend themselves and there are girls that KNOW they can. That the difference between the two is not always immediately apparent might suggest that one is better at affecting a glass facade.



I do not know bout closet misogynists. Having been at the muzzle end of it, I would certainly not argue that such people are unfortunately in circulation. And but that is exactly why I am so keen to see other women endowed with the full wealth of skill necessary to confront it. And from what I see, I am not convinced that it is happening, certainly not amongst the general populus and but not even among female martial artists that might practice easy because it suits them.

When I used to take formal classes (we broke away from that because of this exact situation) I got so sick of girls and young women joining because they believed Aikido was a "soft" to paraphrase "harmless" art. And what really irked me was that that is EXACTLY what those Aikido classed became - soft. Feminised. I do not understand what purpose that serves. I think it is ridiculous!

I am saddened that you think training hard is exclusionary. I think that is a little unfair on most guys in MA (in my experience) who are utterly accommodating and courteous. Nevertheless, I do not think you are alone in that view by any means and but by perpetuating such preconceptions are we not ourselves condemning other women to shy away from bolstering their own defences?



Certainly not, you are absolutely correct, this would have a detrimental and damaging effect on any training. My point would be that (in matters of SD) the kind of contact that epitomises common-or-garden assault could be introduced at an early stage and trained and built upon in tandem with technique. In my experience, this kind of necessary aggression is left so late that even when it is introduced students have to all but un-learn the feminised form that they had been taught. Have you not seen this among your students?



I agree completely. I am guessing you practice what you preach and but have you ever encountered this kind of feminisation / softly-softly tutoring in other training places? If I could ask a question I would ask how could you persuade those taking the feminised approach of the necessity to ramp up their levels to match the harsh likelihood of actual defence?


See that is the kind of what I would call "masculinised" contact that in my experience girls and but guys too shy away from. On the one hand we do not set out to intentionally hurt each other and but on the other hand, how can we gain a solid defence if we have never trained against someone who IS trying to hit us where it hurts? And no you are right, feminised MA is definitely not perpetuated by just women.


What I would mean by feminisation is an unnecessarily soft approach; an easing back; a withholding. It seems to me that that occurs regardless of skill. What worries me is that skill without the aggressive masculinised focus could be rendered useless against committed attack. So you have noticed the softening? Can I ask what in particular? Also, what do you think has been the cause? Rant away, I am listening :)



Yes you have had the same experience as I have. And I also understand that respect for women means not hitting. Yet the very reason we do our martial arts is to engage in physical contact, whether that is for sport or defence or just for some odd art's sake. Yes, I totally agree about going light serving no purpose. Your opponent might as well stand back far enough that their strikes will not make contact for all the good it is doing! And but I think you hit on another point - that communication needs to be open and forthright because some guys have trouble themselves breaking off from that soft feminised tack especially when sparring a girl. Let me ask you if I am allowed, how would you persuade women not used to going hard of the ultimate benefit to their defensive solidity? How would you persuade an instructor to de-feminise their approach among both sexes?

Your last post here had lots of stuff that I agree with. So I copied it.

[Jenna]

Work slow soft and then escalate the intensity till it is closer to real life.
Yes, KELLYG exactly. I would never suggest battering novices, absolutely that would be absurd and but as you say, easing women especially into the necessary temporary aggressiveness is ideal, whilst keeping in mind the eventual goal of full-speed attacks necessitating full-speed defence. Yes.


We also train kobudo without bogu gear. Anyone want to help me 'defeminize' this, and 'get real' by describing ways we can safely train this?
Forgive me harlan I cannot tell if that is rhetorical and but I would only say that training with weapons (particularly defending against them) is of a truly diminished value if it is not trained at full speed (or at least if that is not the ultimate aim after a period of learning). I would have assumed protection was imperative for that and but then I am not at all familiar with those systems.


I have told this story before, and I will not go into great detail again, but there was a time I truly believed that Aikido, as a martial art was completely useless. I spared many and none had a clue. I eventually spared a woman that was also an Aikidoka (half my size) and she slammed me to the floor (a couple of times and it was pretty cool) and I gained a bit more respect for the style. I then saw a third generation Aikidoka do a demo and I was impressed enough to go take a look at his school. What I discovered was that there were those training with resistance, and those who were not, and that is what made all the difference.

I could elaborate on that for you XS and say that in all my time as Aikidoka I have found three distinct types of stylist - the weak tori/compliant uke that you mentioned and as I say youtube is full of this nonsense; the non-compliant squad whose only remit it seems is to make themselves immovable - again, nice as a parlour trick; and those with a consummate grasp of true (full speed and force) randori. When I see the first two I am shamed to be Aikidoka because what are they cept non-martial yoga adepts. I cannot have those people about me and which is why I walked in the first place.

You have ennumerated exactly many of the reasons I had been thinking for this kind of feminisation as I see it, thank you. You said, “My first sifu has hundreds of students and teaches crap” Goodness, I think that is very telling. Though I do not understand the point of this kind of teaching unless for purely financial reasons. And but that is to digress I think. I get the impression that you have a sense of disillusionment and I wonder if I could ask, if you could with a broad brush paint sweeping changes, how would you eradicate what you perceive as unnecessary “softness” in your particular systems?


I realize that many take up martial arts to feel good about themselves and so forth, but if you're practicing a ...martial art...without contact you might as well be doing ballet because it will be about as useful if and when you need to use it to defend yourself.

Instructors and fellow student's aren't doing their fellow females any favors by going too easy on them. That doesn't mean you don't adapt to your training partner nor does it mean you don't excercise self-control. It means you do your part to help ensure she gets the best training.

I agree completely c_c, though I think there are two reasons for this conscious softening when sparring women: 1). Simple lack of communicated expectations and but 2). some women absolutely do not want to hurt themselves (and potentially worse, are worried about hurting someone else). I have always felt that a natural part of being a woman and but something that I would consciously annul when fighting. That is what I think is often missing. I do appreciate how you train alongside women though – and I much prefer that kind of open disposition. It is the attitude that I think should be universally adopted :)



Even senior students and ranks I do not go 100%. I have seen to many people go away in an ambulance while I was doing security and bouncing many years ago. My fear and or strength and fear caused much of the damage. So to me 100% is meant for when it is on, and I do not care about the other person.

But I do care about the person I am training with so I do give them resistnace and make sure it is not false belief. .

Rich I understand exactly why you would not operate in a training situation at 100%. Reasons are largely self-evident and I would not espouse dojo bloodbaths as routine training methodologies, no. I would just make a few points if that is ok. If you never hit me in a controlled training situation at 100%, then I will never have the chance to learn how to defend against that. I might think that if I am attacked, I will do this then I will follow up with something else, and but in reality, if I have never taken a full-force and speed hit, my actual reaction when it happens might be to either flinch away or worse, take the hit and fall KO’d. My point is that I will never know for sure.

I am not saying I want to get hurt, yet if I only ever sustain light sparring contact, I may be liable to become complacent “I can handle anything and anybody” when actually, no, I can only handle 30, 40, 50% of what I might encounter in the worst case scenario. It is that worst case scenario that I want to be able to competently defend myself against. And if I have never trained for it, then I am scarcely better than some other woman that does not train at all.

The other point I would make is that my defensive techniques will differ when you are going half-force and half-speed from full-force and full-speed. If I only ever practice the former, then in that worst case scenario, my techniques themselves will be a useless jumble, lacking necessary stability (which would have been untested) and lacking requisite speed (which would also have been unproven in training).

So while I totally appreciate your reasons, still, I worry that any concession to feminisation or softness can leave us not fully competent in that area of our defence.

Oh and I like your Newton’s, though you have assumed a is constant across both opponents. I might be faster than you think, specially if my a = 2*your a then we are matched ;)

[KELLYG]

RICH,

I think that if we were training together you would be one of my go to guys to make sure the defenses would work for me. I can do without all the math thought.(LOL) As for reminding fellows that I work with I don't mind doing that at all. As a matter of fact I had to do that just the other night. We were doing shield kicking drills and the fellow I was working with was kicking very light. I just asked him if something was wrong with his legs. He said no I said then kick. After that he started throwing some good strong kicks. Sometimes I think that you have to know who you are working with. From here out that guy will not feel that he has to hold his kicks back!

[morph4me]

There is another component that I believe is missing when you take it easy on advanced students of either gender, and that's resepect. If I don't give a decent attack to an advanced student, I'm in effect saying "I don't think you can handle a real attack, so I'll take it easy on you", and that, IMO, is being very disrespectful. If I've been training for several years to be able to defend myself, but I can't do it against a hard and fast attack, then I've been wasting my time, and I'd want to know about it. I'd hope that my training partner respects me enough to show me that they believe I have the skill to defend myself, or show me that I need to work harder.

[Rich Parsons]

Rich I understand exactly why you would not operate in a training situation at 100%. Reasons are largely self-evident and I would not espouse dojo bloodbaths as routine training methodologies, no. I would just make a few points if that is ok. If you never hit me in a controlled training situation at 100%, then I will never have the chance to learn how to defend against that. I might think that if I am attacked, I will do this then I will follow up with something else, and but in reality, if I have never taken a full-force and speed hit, my actual reaction when it happens might be to either flinch away or worse, take the hit and fall KO’d. My point is that I will never know for sure.

I am not saying I want to get hurt, yet if I only ever sustain light sparring contact, I may be liable to become complacent “I can handle anything and anybody” when actually, no, I can only handle 30, 40, 50% of what I might encounter in the worst case scenario. It is that worst case scenario that I want to be able to competently defend myself against. And if I have never trained for it, then I am scarcely better than some other woman that does not train at all.

The other point I would make is that my defensive techniques will differ when you are going half-force and half-speed from full-force and full-speed. If I only ever practice the former, then in that worst case scenario, my techniques themselves will be a useless jumble, lacking necessary stability (which would have been untested) and lacking requisite speed (which would also have been unproven in training).

So while I totally appreciate your reasons, still, I worry that any concession to feminisation or softness can leave us not fully competent in that area of our defence.

Oh and I like your Newton’s, though you have assumed a is constant across both opponents. I might be faster than you think, specially if my a = 2*your a then we are matched ;)

Jenna,

I have been hit and hit hard so that my eye crossed and looked at my nose. I had to continue to fight or the guys I was trying to defend already knocked out, would be my partners in the hospital or morgue form the guys who were looking to use some steel toe boot stomps and kicks to people face on the ground.

That being said, I seriously understand your points. I really do.

I think that training an advanced and serious timing and speed and with intent can give people the training they need, to learn to react.

The only way to know who one will react when they are hit hard to be knocked out is to have it done. The damage to the head for TBI (* traumatic Brain Injury *) is at a risk level I do not like.

That being said, I would hit you and kick you and lock you so it would hurt and hurt bad just not seriously (* hopefully *) as we worked on the level of training. Any student be they male or female needs to be worked up slowly so as not to overwhelm them. But, you are right, if you have never been hit before how will you know how you will react.


Here are some questions one needs to ask next:

1) Do I need to be hit with a blunt weapon to know who it feels and what I will do under that stress?

2) Do I need to be cut and then stabbed to understand the loss of blood and or trauma to the body?

3) Do I need to also do my training in wierd environments such as the door frame of the entrance door? (* You would be surprised the number of times I found myself there. *)

4) Moving vehicles - being hit by them, fighting in them, on top of them while they are moving, understanding survival at speeds or 100 kpa and above, becuase you are on the outside of the vehicle?

5) Do I need ot be shot at? (* Pistol / Rifle / Shot Gun *) to understand the noise and impact of the sound in closed quarters?

6) Do I need to be shot?


With the excpetion of 6 I have had all of these and close encounters with lots more items. Does this mean I think I am bad? Nope. I still get hit jsut like the other guy. Just because I survived does not mean that what I teach is the best. Far from it could be an arguement, as why did I get into so much trouble. ;) But, by having the students work with insturctors that are feeding intent and good timing and good speed then I think proper practice can be obtained for people to learn.

My Friend Ian Kinder (* Live Safe Academy & GLSDA - and sponsor here at MT of the Fire Arms Forum *) teaches self defense classes where he forces the students to hit the instructors hard. The Instructors could start with them pinned and standing to the "pinned" (* Still able to move *) and on the ground to or take them to the ground, ... , and they were something similar to the red man suits, so the students can learn to strike with intent. I think this is very helpful and even with all the controls and safety equipment the instructors still get bruised and hurt.

I am not for a non agressive training and no threat of injury, but I also think that the blood bath is not good either. I try to give solid intent to give feedback so the students can react and or learn.

(* Keep the comments coming and your concerns expressed as they are valid issues. *)

[Xue Sheng]

I could elaborate on that for you XS and say that in all my time as Aikidoka I have found three distinct types of stylist - the weak tori/compliant uke that you mentioned and as I say youtube is full of this nonsense; the non-compliant squad whose only remit it seems is to make themselves immovable - again, nice as a parlour trick; and those with a consummate grasp of true (full speed and force) randori. When I see the first two I am shamed to be Aikidoka because what are they cept non-martial yoga adepts. I cannot have those people about me and which is why I walked in the first place.

Thank You.



You have ennumerated exactly many of the reasons I had been thinking for this kind of feminisation as I see it, thank you. You said, “My first Sifu has hundreds of students and teaches crap” Goodness, I think that is very telling. Though I do not understand the point of this kind of teaching unless for purely financial reasons.

That is exactly what it is, purely financial and if you tell people they are a teacher/master of a style after a year of training they love it and keep coming back for more.



And but that is to digress I think. I get the impression that you have a sense of disillusionment and I wonder if I could ask, if you could with a broad brush paint sweeping changes, how would you eradicate what you perceive as unnecessary “softness” in your particular systems?

I honestly do not think at this time you can and I am sad to say I see Baguazhang and Aikido going the same route but it is very early stages in Bagua and not to far gone yet for Aikido. Even Chen Xiaowang (current Chen Taijiquan family head) has said he feels taiji as a martial art is dead due to the large number of people that do taiji for health only as compared to those that know the true martial arts bits, and Chen Xiaowang is big on the martial arts of Chen style Taijiquan and rather skilled at it too.

To turn taiji around, IMO, it would need to be rather drastic; for one thing you would need to eliminate (or separate from) virtually all of a direct lineage branch of one taiji family (I won’t name names, I don’t want your post turning into a flame war) That and/or make hard separations between the Health taiji and the Martial taiji and then have the sifus to teach it and many that really knew it are already gone and the many of the few that are left in certain styles are so disillusioned themselves they will not waste their time teaching it anymore. There are a few of us out there training it as a martial art and I use to get really upset about the people training the neutered version and the types of students that were showing up and getting annoyed at those that were training the MA of it, (see some of my early posts on MT) but now I just train what I want and let them do what they want. I stopped worrying about what they were doing and focused on what I needed to do. And my taiji got better. However part of taiji is push hands and the more people you do push hands with the better but there is are only 2 other people (besides me) that has any interest in push hands in my sifu’s class and my sifu. I learn from my sifu and teach the other 2.

It is so easy for someone in America to open a taiji school and say they are a student of famous teacher X just because they went to a seminar or two and teacher X may or may not ever know, may or may not even care, and if teacher x did what can he/she do about it in the USA. My first Sifu ran afoul of the Chen family and was told to stop teaching Chen but he still teaches it and there is noting the Chen family can do in the USA. I was given the impression (by a Chen family member) that if it were China that this refusal would be a bit more painful.

As to my addiction, and past CMA, Xingyiquan I have no worries it will get more Yin I do believe it will die off however due to its aggressiveness, lack of pretty forms and painful training such as santi shi. And the only way to change that is to change the practitioners view of training or make it easier by eliminating santi shi and then you have something that is not Xingyiquan and going soft but, so far, it appears that a Xingyiquan Sifu is a stubborn type and rather resistant to change for the softer, it just isn’t Xingyi :EG: but again I know my first Sifu has taught application free, santi shi free Xingyiquan and he has a lot more student than my second Xingyi Sifu who can’t keep a class going because the training is hard, painful and at times boring (see standing still in santi shi, wuji, Zhan Zhuang for 10 minutes at the beginning of every class). But then with Xingyiquan and my first sifu it is not profitable to teach since even in its neutered form it is not a pretty form so he does not have enough interested students for him to bother teaching it either.

[Xue Sheng]

I am not for a non agressive training and no threat of injury, but I also think that the blood bath is not good either. I try to give solid intent to give feedback so the students can react and or learn.

Rich

Great post.

I am not a fan of overly aggressive training either I have take Qinna classes that were incredibly painful, for days afterwards, and yet my taiji Sifu can teach me qinna rather effectively and not hurt me to the point where I spend days in pain afterwards actually there is no pain after he releases. My first MA teacher (jujitsu) had us start learning how to fall and roll first so when we trained throws we wouldn't get hurt and striking was generally pulled or light as to not hurt the other guy, there was no protective gear. But you still learned how to fight rather well and there were injuries from time to time but no one died or went to the hospital. In wing chun there were drills that are not aggressive per say but train blocking and striking rather well but they do hurt in the beginning however but it is necessary training and fun too.

But you didn't get seriosly injured from the training you just learned how to block and toughend up your arms a bit and I think, if I am getting the feel of this thread, there would be none of this is a class like jenna is talking about

[Touch Of Death]

Just an observation, I wondered if anybody girls or guys would have an opinion?

I noticed lately a marked feminisation - a softening up of martial practice. I visited with three different instructors this month (I am out of circulation and maybe that is the problem) and also accompanied friends to a basic SD course. I noticed that in the classes almost without exception (particularly with male/female opps), techniques were very much "held back" even amongst experienced grades; sparring was appallingly gentle, almost ladylike! To my annoyance, the SD course was entirely driven by what the women participants COULD do and COULD tolerate, rather than showing them what MIGHT happen and equipping them FOR it. Perhaps these are coincidental. I wonder have you seen similar??

Though these practices fitted well within the girls' comfort zones and I know from asking, felt to them worthwhile and beneficial, I find these notions of MA/SD feminisation worrying for so many reasons. I worry that it acts conversely to how it should and is disempowering to those women that practice their MA in a highly feminised environment. I worry that it might lead to false confidence and complacency. I worry that the shock of real attacks are not considered and that the requisite gumption to stand up and overcome is completely disregarded in order that the MA/SD practices may not be deemed offensive to women doing them.

I do not think MA feminisation is driven by women solely either. I think miscommunicated or uncommunicated expectations in mixed classes might be an issue. Likewise, the threat (or perceived threat) of litigation if an injury is sustained might have lead to senior practitioners handing down "holding back" didactics, though that is purely opinion.

I practice Aikido and so I am not a RB fanatic, yet I think unless practice is "masculinised" - ie. at full force and full speed (or at least works up to it with novices) then women (and men alike) could be deceived over the effectiveness of their defence. Maybe, I do not know. What do you think?

I am not directing this anywhere, just a casual observation I wonder if anybody has noticed similar feminisation. Or do you practise HARD, full force and if so, do you not feel better equipped for it?

Hope this reads coherently. Thank you :)
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
JennaJenna,
I feel women will benefit the most from training that shows an understanding that not everyone is ready to just dive in. I think you will notice that this "feminization" is also a way for a school to retain both male and female students a little longer than what you are used to seeing and therefore the school is making more money. If this dumbing down keeps more women interested and can keep just a few more that are willing to see through the pain to a level of mastery not seen before' then bust out the Pink gi tops! LOL
Sean

[Rich Parsons]

Oh and I like your Newton’s, though you have assumed a is constant across both opponents. I might be faster than you think, specially if my a = 2*your a then we are matched ;)

Jenna,

I for got this earlier.

My assumptions were for simple mathematics.

They do not respresent your a as being equal to mine. I think it is possible under the right conditions that you could be 2+, so please do not beat within an inch of my life. ;) :D

Thanks

[Live True]

Great thread and discussion; thanks Jenna for broaching the subject!

I prefer the use of Xue's terms of Yin and Yang rather than feminisation and masculisation. In part, because I agree with Harlan that it perpetuates stereotypes. Also, though, I think it's a matter of attitude or culture more than gender trait. I've known many blood thirsty and dangerous females and enough wimpy guys to believe that our culture encourages women to be weaker, softer, more vunerable, but that is not necessarily their natural state. You can be nurturing and still be strong, forceful, etc. I'm willing to accept that women may not be as direct, because we are generally physically smaller, but that does not mean we cannot train to be strong, forceful, and brutal, when necessary.

But I think your point is more that MA in general is being trained as a feel good, move ahead, let's "give you a taste" experience...instead of a train hard, here's the worst case of what could happen, and here's how you can react. If i'm reading you correctly, you are concerned that this sets up many to feel they are READY for confrontation, when they really have no clue.

sigh...you are correct. But, I think it's what the majority of folks are seeking. They are looking for a way to get in good shape, and perhaps pick up a few good SD techniques along the way. I also think some folks are looking for titles/trophies,etc. that show how good they are, without the underlying foundations and the time put in to justify it all. For them, that is thier choice, and will do for them.

For me, to some degree, I practice to get in shape as well. But the other reason I got into MA was to tap into and direct my more aggressive side...which was a surprise to my sensei.:duh: :confused: That and something you just said speak to my current focus
"some women absolutely do not want to hurt themselves (and potentially worse, are worried about hurting someone else). ".

I'm not worried about hurting myself. I'm actually proud of my bruises when they are a product of me learning something or figuring something out...it's simply part of training. But I AM worried about hurting other folks. I'm kinda big and overweight, and I apparently "kick like a mule" according to one of my partners. Fortunately for me, she encouraged me to keep it up, but work on my targeting.

Which, I guess leads me to the point I was trying to make in my rambling way this afternoon....My issue and to your point, is that I think I create my own watering down of my training, without meaning to do so. I hold back out of fear of hurting my opponent. How sad is that? I worry about my ability to scale my punches, etc. to the level of my partner, which is a good thing. But I'm not trusting my partners to know thier own skills. As a by blow, I start to train softer instead of harder. So, the question becomes: is that a outcome of my cultural environment, my own self-confidence, simply a need for more practice, typical newbie issue, or a lack in my training?

I think, it's a bit of all that. In my last training sessions, and after that comment from my sensei, I got to go all out in my kicks and punches with him, and it felt GOOD! I also learned a few things about my follow-through and torque...so...go figure...training harder worked better.....heh...guess I'm starting to get a clue after all!:rolleyes:

So, I think it's not just the instructors and the McDojos...it's also student expectations and personal issues that can contribute.

[Jenna]

There is another component that I believe is missing when you take it easy on advanced students of either gender, and that's resepect. If I don't give a decent attack to an advanced student, I'm in effect saying "I don't think you can handle a real attack, so I'll take it easy on you", and that, IMO, is being very disrespectful. If I've been training for several years to be able to defend myself, but I can't do it against a hard and fast attack, then I've been wasting my time, and I'd want to know about it. I'd hope that my training partner respects me enough to show me that they believe I have the skill to defend myself, or show me that I need to work harder.
Hello my friend, yes I appreciate exactly what you are saying. I am under no illusions - there are two sides to this. Guys can also worry about women being more easily hurt (and sometimes that is truly the case). Can I ask you the same question then as I asked Sukerkin earlier – what would it take for you to go hard on a girl in your group? Would that open communication “let us try this full speed” etc. would that do? Would you feel the need to hold back because you were engaging in randori with a girl (assuming you are both proficient in your Aikido)?



Here are some questions one needs to ask next:

1) Do I need to be hit with a blunt weapon to know who it feels and what I will do under that stress?

2) Do I need to be cut and then stabbed to understand the loss of blood and or trauma to the body?

3) Do I need to also do my training in wierd environments such as the door frame of the entrance door? (* You would be surprised the number of times I found myself there. *)

4) Moving vehicles - being hit by them, fighting in them, on top of them while they are moving, understanding survival at speeds or 100 kpa and above, becuase you are on the outside of the vehicle?

5) Do I need ot be shot at? (* Pistol / Rifle / Shot Gun *) to understand the noise and impact of the sound in closed quarters?

6) Do I need to be shot?

When you lay it out like that Rich, it seems so barbaric and but that is exactly the point I think. In mirroring a real attack in our training rooms, we become acclimatised and toughened and are thus better prepared and better able to defend against it. No boxer ever made it without being as adept at taking hits as giving them. I wonder sometimes if we overlook this in our arts? I mean, if we are not prepared to train as forcefully hard as we possibly can within our limits, then we may as well advocate learning the arts via diagrammatical MA books and youtube vids.

It would be facile of me to say that being shot is unnecessary in understanding our reaction to it. What I am seeing from how you have outlined this - and I wonder what you think - we are in our arts saying that we want to AVOID being hit, stabbed, shot, whatever, and if we train sufficiently to AVOID then we will surely survive. That is to miss a very key point that your outlines have made me think of - if we train exclusively to avoid, and train primarily using avoiding mechanisms and techniques and never experience that hurt, then we can as you say, never be certain of our ability to cope in that eventuality. By ignoring this key factor (our coping ability) we risk making ourselves the potential one-shot-kills or single-strike-KOs.

I do not need to be shot to know that I do not WANT to be shot. This all sounds very extreme. We can learn from prior experiences of others certainly and but that is not an equivalent.

You know about what happened to me before. I had heard and read plenty about people's experiences with electroshock weapons or taser type weapons and had read plenty of how it was nothing more than a spasmodic judder almost a laugh. I may have taken that as read and assumed I could do one thing or another when faced with it. Until I was shot with one and was hospitalised because of my existing cardiac problems. My point being that whilst it is foolish to disregard the wisdom and experience of others, still experience does not always correlate across individuals.


I do believe it will die off however due to its aggressiveness, lack of pretty forms and painful training.
Xue Sheng, you have cut through all my dross with two very neat phrases. That one and you have also referred to one of those yin-toppled arts as the “neutered version”. I think these are incisive observations. Thank you so much, I appreciate that level of concision, though as you can see, I am no purveyor myself!



If this dumbing down keeps more women interested and can keep just a few more that are willing to see through the pain to a level of mastery not seen before' then bust out the Pink gi tops! LOL

Sean, you have a very positive outlook, I had not thought of it like that – getting more women through the doors with suitably appealing forms that will serve a purpose (if not be the full monty of SD) in order to fully equip the few that are willing to go that extra mile. See but I will only be worried about the others that ran away to escape into the Tae-bo class next door! That is not to take away from a very valid point you make and so thank you :)


But I think your point is more that MA in general is being trained as a feel good, move ahead, let's "give you a taste" experience...instead of a train hard, here's the worst case of what could happen, and here's how you can react. If i'm reading you correctly, you are concerned that this sets up many to feel they are READY for confrontation, when they really have no clue.
Yes, this is exactly what I am worried about with friends that have been to the community run SD Basics courses filled with confidence about these key strike things and clavicle grabs and eye gouges when I know most of them are simply not at the level to execute these ideas. And I do not want you to misinterpret. I am not expecting anybody to be tomboy. Still, to confront an attack we cannot use any part of our femininity. We must adopt a temporary masculinised aggression and this is why I used the terms as opposed to the yin/yang which I would agree are probably more semantically accurate.


sigh...you are correct. But, I think it's what the majority of folks are seeking. They are looking for a way to get in good shape, and perhaps pick up a few good SD techniques along the way. I also think some folks are looking for titles/trophies,etc. that show how good they are, without the underlying foundations and the time put in to justify it all. For them, that is thier choice, and will do for them.

For me, to some degree, I practice to get in shape as well. But the other reason I got into MA was to tap into and direct my more aggressive side...which was a surprise to my sensei. That and something you just said speak to my current focus
"some women absolutely do not want to hurt themselves (and potentially worse, are worried about hurting someone else). ".

I'm not worried about hurting myself. I'm actually proud of my bruises when they are a product of me learning something or figuring something out...it's simply part of training. But I AM worried about hurting other folks.

Yes, I notice this so much and but again, I do not believe we are hardwired for physical aggression in the same way as a guy would have testosterone on-tap. Still, that does not mean we cannot BE aggressive, and but we must have trained for it, otherwise, we cannot expect to turn it on same as a normal guy can when confronted.


Which, I guess leads me to the point I was trying to make in my rambling way this afternoon....My issue and to your point, is that I think I create my own watering down of my training, without meaning to do so. I hold back out of fear of hurting my opponent. How sad is that? I worry about my ability to scale my punches, etc. to the level of my partner, which is a good thing. But I'm not trusting my partners to know thier own skills. As a by blow, I start to train softer instead of harder.

That is another point I had not really considered – that this softening, yin-loaded mindset can be borne of the individual and not be a received doctrine handed down from the instructors. And but you are saying how sad is that. No, I think this is another issue that I cannot abide in the dojo. Courtesy is one thing and but I know we can take it too far so that we are worried about every little scrape and scratch we might accidentally inflict. Girls especially are SO bad for this. This was an old bugaboo of mine because as I see it, we were in the dojo to train ourselves how to fight and how to defend ourselves against others. A girl with the unkempt nails would ladder my arm and be all over me as though seeking some eternal forgiveness for it. No, no, no, if I could not take that, how am I supposed to come back from a knuckled punch to the side of the head or worse, a bottle or a Stanley knife? No, we can be nurturing and considerate talking a friend through a bad day with the boss. In the dojo, I would apply a different personal etiquette, one in which I am not little miss feminine.

I know that is not an easy transition because it is contrary to basic human nature. Still, women are not bred with the inherent capability of hurting. It must be learned and trained. Sorry, I sound as if I am crusading. I am not I promise. I am just concerned for friends and annoyed by their apathy even though they know too well what happened to me. Self-defence ignorance is bliss only until we are enlightened otherwise.


So, the question becomes: is that a outcome of my cultural environment, my own self-confidence, simply a need for more practice, typical newbie issue, or a lack in my training?
Do you know, since this is not psychology or law, the precedent factors are immaterial I think. I think all that really matters is that you have identified a potential shortfall in your training. If the gap is bridged, then it does not matter why there was a gap. It will have gone :)


I think, it's a bit of all that. In my last training sessions, and after that comment from my sensei, I got to go all out in my kicks and punches with him, and it felt GOOD! I also learned a few things about my follow-through and torque...so...go figure...training harder worked better.....heh...guess I'm starting to get a clue after all!

Of course, you letting loose is only half the Shana SD package. Your partner / instructor must also let go so that you know you can defend yourself against it. Whether that is with fancy, well posed stances or simply weathering the blows, well, maybe it does not matter. Anyways, goodness, I will give this up fore I turn all Emmeline Pankhurst! Thank you again for your thoughts :)

[morph4me]

Hello my friend, yes I appreciate exactly what you are saying. I am under no illusions - there are two sides to this. Guys can also worry about women being more easily hurt (and sometimes that is truly the case). Can I ask you the same question then as I asked Sukerkin earlier – what would it take for you to go hard on a girl in your group? Would that open communication “let us try this full speed” etc. would that do? Would you feel the need to hold back because you were engaging in randori with a girl (assuming you are both proficient in your Aikido)?

Sukerkin is a gentleman, I don't suffer from that affliction :D. The only thing that it would take for me to go hard on a girl in my group is for her to show up. Depending on her rank, I would treat a 6' 2" 275 lb white belt man the same way as a 5' 2" white belt woman, same with a black belt and every rank between. If I'm going too hard, I expect that my partner will tell me to back it down, and I'll comply. I will also defend myself against a woman the same way I would against a man, if I'm being attacked it's not by a gender, but by a person, and I'll deal with the person.

[Jenna]

Sukerkin is a gentleman, I don't suffer from that affliction :D. The only thing that it would take for me to go hard on a girl in my group is for her to show up. Depending on her rank, I would treat a 6' 2" 275 lb white belt man the same way as a 5' 2" white belt woman, same with a black belt and every rank between. If I'm going too hard, I expect that my partner will tell me to back it down, and I'll comply. I will also defend myself against a woman the same way I would against a man, if I'm being attacked it's not by a gender, but by a person, and I'll deal with the person.
Goodness my friend, you would go hard on your novices too? I certainly applaud your integrity and understand your logic. And will you tell me how do you ensure that your novice students can defend properly against your full-speed strikes? I had noticed that with any of my former students (I have not taught for some years), that the true full-speed defence was only coming sort of at around sankyu/nikyu level. I know our styles are completely different and but I would be interested certainly in hearing what kind of approach you are using, specially with girls! that they both experience the tough reality of full-speed attack and but can also successfully defend against it :) Thank you again :)
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

[morph4me]

Goodness my friend, you would go hard on your novices too? I certainly applaud your integrity and understand your logic. And will you tell me how do you ensure that your novice students can defend properly against your full-speed strikes? I had noticed that with any of my former students (I have not taught for some years), that the true full-speed defence was only coming sort of at around sankyu/nikyu level. I know our styles are completely different and but I would be interested certainly in hearing what kind of approach you are using, specially with girls! that they both experience the tough reality of full-speed attack and but can also successfully defend against it :) Thank you again :)
Yr most obdt hmble srvt,
Jenna

Of course I don't go hard on the novices, LOL. We start with slow attacks, as the students get more advanced, the attacks and throws get harder and faster. I do try to take novices outside their comfort zone. Each promotion we add techniqes, and increase speed and power, but even in the beginning, with slow attacks, we expect that the attacks are on target and if nage doesn't move, they get hit. An open handed attack that lands will still sting, even slowly.

[Rich Parsons]

When you lay it out like that Rich, it seems so barbaric and but that is exactly the point I think. In mirroring a real attack in our training rooms, we become acclimatised and toughened and are thus better prepared and better able to defend against it. No boxer ever made it without being as adept at taking hits as giving them. I wonder sometimes if we overlook this in our arts? I mean, if we are not prepared to train as forcefully hard as we possibly can within our limits, then we may as well advocate learning the arts via diagrammatical MA books and youtube vids.

It would be facile of me to say that being shot is unnecessary in understanding our reaction to it. What I am seeing from how you have outlined this - and I wonder what you think - we are in our arts saying that we want to AVOID being hit, stabbed, shot, whatever, and if we train sufficiently to AVOID then we will surely survive. That is to miss a very key point that your outlines have made me think of - if we train exclusively to avoid, and train primarily using avoiding mechanisms and techniques and never experience that hurt, then we can as you say, never be certain of our ability to cope in that eventuality. By ignoring this key factor (our coping ability) we risk making ourselves the potential one-shot-kills or single-strike-KOs.

I do not need to be shot to know that I do not WANT to be shot. This all sounds very extreme. We can learn from prior experiences of others certainly and but that is not an equivalent.

You know about what happened to me before. I had heard and read plenty about people's experiences with electroshock weapons or taser type weapons and had read plenty of how it was nothing more than a spasmodic judder almost a laugh. I may have taken that as read and assumed I could do one thing or another when faced with it. Until I was shot with one and was hospitalised because of my existing cardiac problems. My point being that whilst it is foolish to disregard the wisdom and experience of others, still experience does not always correlate across individuals.



Jenna,

I agree that for the best chances one should be hit and also deal with adrenalin and stress to get the ultimate training.

I agree for me I did take such a route.

It is not for everyone who wishes to study an art.

Some prefer to have peace in their hearts and in their training. Not the brute force of violence that some people have.

I agree that many bad guys have that brute force experience and also mindset.

On average though, the average person would not train like that, but could still gain a lot of benefit from training. Including AVOIDING the bad situations with awareness and some resistance. By being aware you do nto give off the prey traits. You are not an easier target that the predator types go after for theft or assault. You also pay attention to your surroundings and do not go down bad streets in the first place. You do not get blind drunk and walk to your car parked in the dark alley alone. You have some escort you, you travel with weapons in hand and watching and you had parked under lights. So, not an easy target as the predator usually wants to separate the weak prey from the herd. Many times they do it for the predator all on their own.


That being said, we both know that bad things happen to good people who do pay attention. That being said if you are the target of someone specifically as you fit their profile or they know you, then there is very little that can be done without confrontation. They have to be removed from the equation or you do. This can be done by moving away or them being chased off by the police or others. (* I am not saying for anyone to take the law into their own hands. *) Sometimes as we both know, the confronttion needs to happen and escalate over time before the police can do anything legally. This SUCKS. This SUCKS REALLY BAD. Can I say this really really really SUCKS?

If you are in that situation, then you may need a lot. In this case, knowing how to use blunt weapons is a good start. Also using and thinking of weapons of opportunity is very important. I would also sugest blade training, small, medium and large. Also axe and hatchet and saw training as these are common tools around the house still today, not just a pocket knife or a kitchen knife. I would also say firearm training is a must. I would also suggest getting tacticle gear and knowing how to get into it quick and using it.

Now many places do not allow firearms period or are very restricted. And many places also limit bladed weapons and training and equipment. This is why the weapons of opportunity and odd tools around the house become important. I tell female friends to have the 20 foot / 6 meter of bee spray. This shoots out in a nice stream under pressure and is easy to control the target and will allow you to hit the opponent in the face with practice. It also is usefule if there are bees nests you need to get rid of. Of course once used it is gone and you need to not be there.

So, I personally think once a person has reached a certain point, they can make the decision and I support that for them as it must be made as an indivdual to individual basis. These people take it to the next level and they can use a mindset that most people would not find acceptable in general public.


Of course opinions vary, and I am glad they do, so people can express opinions and points and we can try to see new points of view and or at least understand how others may see it from their point of view.

:asian:

[Live True]

Yes, I notice this so much and but again, I do not believe we are hardwired for physical aggression in the same way as a guy would have testosterone on-tap. Still, that does not mean we cannot BE aggressive, and but we must have trained for it, otherwise, we cannot expect to turn it on same as a normal guy can when confronted.


That is another point I had not really considered – that this softening, yin-loaded mindset can be borne of the individual and not be a received doctrine handed down from the instructors. And but you are saying how sad is that. No, I think this is another issue that I cannot abide in the dojo. Courtesy is one thing and but I know we can take it too far so that we are worried about every little scrape and scratch we might accidentally inflict. Girls especially are SO bad for this. This was an old bugaboo of mine because as I see it, we were in the dojo to train ourselves how to fight and how to defend ourselves against others. A girl with the unkempt nails would ladder my arm and be all over me as though seeking some eternal forgiveness for it. No, no, no, if I could not take that, how am I supposed to come back from a knuckled punch to the side of the head or worse, a bottle or a Stanley knife? No, we can be nurturing and considerate talking a friend through a bad day with the boss. In the dojo, I would apply a different personal etiquette, one in which I am not little miss feminine.

I know that is not an easy transition because it is contrary to basic human nature. Still, women are not bred with the inherent capability of hurting. It must be learned and trained. Sorry, I sound as if I am crusading. I am not I promise. I am just concerned for friends and annoyed by their apathy even though they know too well what happened to me. Self-defence ignorance is bliss only until we are enlightened otherwise.


Do you know, since this is not psychology or law, the precedent factors are immaterial I think. I think all that really matters is that you have identified a potential shortfall in your training. If the gap is bridged, then it does not matter why there was a gap. It will have gone :)



Of course, you letting loose is only half the Shana SD package. Your partner / instructor must also let go so that you know you can defend yourself against it. Whether that is with fancy, well posed stances or simply weathering the blows, well, maybe it does not matter. Anyways, goodness, I will give this up fore I turn all Emmeline Pankhurst! Thank you again for your thoughts :)
I don't apologize for every scrape as that would be silly, but I am aware of my size and strength, and I don't want to hurt anyone..but you DO have a very good point in that this is something we must learn to deal with and understand from both sides...so I will continue to train harder and challenge that gap I have discovered...what's a few bruises among freinds if it means we are better prepared, eh?

I agree, we shouldn't breed over-confidence, but we should start soft and work up to it...for the reason Sean states...it will help folks figure out and perhaps discover something they didn't know they wanted....


and...I am a strong believer that knowledge is generally not a bad thing. So overconfidence might hurt some folks...but sometimes a little knowledge will help you get a better outcome....

but I am rambling and ready to beat outta work and head on vacation....see ya on the flip side!

Thanks for the good food for thought!

[Jenna]

Of course I don't go hard on the novices, LOL. We start with slow attacks, as the students get more advanced, the attacks and throws get harder and faster. I do try to take novices outside their comfort zone. Each promotion we add techniqes, and increase speed and power, but even in the beginning, with slow attacks, we expect that the attacks are on target and if nage doesn't move, they get hit. An open handed attack that lands will still sting, even slowly.
Wow, good, I was wondering morph, just how crazy NGA really was for a minute :D Yes I am educated in mostly rumours thereof, phew :) And but I am glad you are practising with resistance even in the beginning. I am sure you are as tired as I am of the Aikido-as-soft-and-harmless stereotype (perpetuated by stereotypical Aikidoka it must be said!!) Good, thank you my friend :)


Jenna,

I agree that for the best chances one should be hit and also deal with adrenalin and stress to get the ultimate training.

I agree for me I did take such a route.

It is not for everyone who wishes to study an art.

Some prefer to have peace in their hearts and in their training. Not the brute force of violence that some people have.

I agree that many bad guys have that brute force experience and also mindset.

On average though, the average person would not train like that, but could still gain a lot of benefit from training. Including AVOIDING the bad situations with awareness and some resistance. By being aware you do nto give off the prey traits. You are not an easier target that the predator types go after for theft or assault. You also pay attention to your surroundings and do not go down bad streets in the first place. You do not get blind drunk and walk to your car parked in the dark alley alone. You have some escort you, you travel with weapons in hand and watching and you had parked under lights. So, not an easy target as the predator usually wants to separate the weak prey from the herd. Many times they do it for the predator all on their own.


That being said, we both know that bad things happen to good people who do pay attention. That being said if you are the target of someone specifically as you fit their profile or they know you, then there is very little that can be done without confrontation. They have to be removed from the equation or you do. This can be done by moving away or them being chased off by the police or others. (* I am not saying for anyone to take the law into their own hands. *) Sometimes as we both know, the confronttion needs to happen and escalate over time before the police can do anything legally. This SUCKS. This SUCKS REALLY BAD. Can I say this really really really SUCKS?

If you are in that situation, then you may need a lot. In this case, knowing how to use blunt weapons is a good start. Also using and thinking of weapons of opportunity is very important. I would also sugest blade training, small, medium and large. Also axe and hatchet and saw training as these are common tools around the house still today, not just a pocket knife or a kitchen knife. I would also say firearm training is a must. I would also suggest getting tacticle gear and knowing how to get into it quick and using it.

Now many places do not allow firearms period or are very restricted. And many places also limit bladed weapons and training and equipment. This is why the weapons of opportunity and odd tools around the house become important. I tell female friends to have the 20 foot / 6 meter of bee spray. This shoots out in a nice stream under pressure and is easy to control the target and will allow you to hit the opponent in the face with practice. It also is usefule if there are bees nests you need to get rid of. Of course once used it is gone and you need to not be there.

So, I personally think once a person has reached a certain point, they can make the decision and I support that for them as it must be made as an indivdual to individual basis. These people take it to the next level and they can use a mindset that most people would not find acceptable in general public.


Of course opinions vary, and I am glad they do, so people can express opinions and points and we can try to see new points of view and or at least understand how others may see it from their point of view.

Rich yes I agree this is not for everyone. I would agree with you and hazard a guess though that working up to full-speed and force attack in training is not even for MOST martial artists. Likewise, I appreciate that not everyone WANTS to train like this. I would not contest anybody’s choices -unless- they ARE training their MA for fully-shielded self defence, in which case, if they are not working it around (at some point in their MA career) then are they not going to come up short??

I hear what you are saying too about “brute force”. And but for me, I am not inclined or even made physically to brute-force somebody. I am happy being all “peace” day-to-day and even in my Aikido, it is inefficient to brute-force somebody. Nonetheless, I still need to know that I can REACT to that brute force using my own technique whichever way it might happen. Likewise, I still need to know that I could switch on that masculinised mindset if it came to it. I do not know if that makes sense? I am just trying to show that there is no contradiction between a temporary switch in women of that masculinised mindset and how they are at other times.

And yes, I think I am talking bout those situations when avoidance has come and gone regardless. Sucks, yes!

You list a lot of weaponry both bona fide and improvised. I agree, that to be proficient in their use may serve well, still, that is a task that some MAists devote their entire careers to – I am sure you have been training for a long time with various weapons. And again then we get into the situation of covering every potential literally. Empty handed is how I usually travel. Guns are illegal for the most part here, nor am I proficient at all with knives or sticks. At the same time, we do train as exhaustively as we can against them in a -defensive- way. I am not disagreeing with you Rich, rather outlining a preference :) Would that I were skilled in all those things, though it is just unrealistic here :)

So of course it is for the individual to decide on masculinising their training, yes, yet I still think that soft, feminised forms of SD training are purely ostentatious, pretty and for show and without the substance they might otherwise claim.

And but yes, you are not going to argue with me are you? :) Well that is ok, least you are still communicating with me and so thank you :)



and...I am a strong believer that knowledge is generally not a bad thing. So overconfidence might hurt some folks...but sometimes a little knowledge will help you get a better outcome....

but I am rambling and ready to beat outta work and head on vacation....see ya on the flip side!

Thanks for the good food for thought!
Oh of course Shana any knowledge is better than none. My only objection is to that knowledge which, by its MA implication, seems to suggest completeness when it is anything but. Ten years training SD in an insubstantial manner I would worry was less useful than one or two years with proper focus on the realities of attack and formulating suitable defences. The problem to me is that women regard the harsher training as some way unfeminine, when that is not even a factor with any relevance in matters of defence. I hope that makes sense too? I am not campaigning, just trying to make a small point :) Thank you my friend for taking the time and enjoy your time off :)

[Xue Sheng]

Oh of course Shana any knowledge is better than none. My only objection is to that knowledge which, by its MA implication, seems to suggest completeness when it is anything but. Ten years training SD in an insubstantial manner I would worry was less useful than one or two years with proper focus on the realities of attack and formulating suitable defences. The problem to me is that women regard the harsher training as some way unfeminine, when that is not even a factor with any relevance in matters of defence. I hope that makes sense too? I am not campaigning, just trying to make a small point :) Thank you my friend for taking the time and enjoy your time off :)

There is a big difference from training to be hit and being hit and no matter how you train it (and I recommend under very controlled and safe conditions in the beginning) when you actually get hit it is a whole different world. However constantly training and not at least admitting that one could very likely be hit or looking at it from a softer POV can hurt you. I have seen this countless times in Taiji during push hands. If I get a free hand and even slowly and lightly throw in a strike the response is almost always one of two things "You can do that in Taiji" or "You can't do that in Taiji" And it is always accompanied by a look of utter shock.

I was at a seminar once where a guy left himself wide open for a lock and I took advantage of it (lightl, not a hard lock). His immediate response was "You can't do that" and when I asked why he called his Sifu over and complained to which he got the response form his Sifu "Why can't he do that... he obviously can, since he did". His Sifu then showed him the proper response to what I have done. It was a bit painful for me but rather cool.

Training the lighter side a good thing and can promote learning but denying the harder side will hurt you.

[morph4me]

Wow, good, I was wondering morph, just how crazy NGA really was for a minute :D Yes I am educated in mostly rumours thereof, phew :) And but I am glad you are practising with resistance even in the beginning. I am sure you are as tired as I am of the Aikido-as-soft-and-harmless stereotype (perpetuated by stereotypical Aikidoka it must be said!!) Good, thank you my friend :)


Training hard is good, breaking your uke's or your students is bad, it interferes with your practice while you're waiting for someone to drag them off the mat :D

[Rich Parsons]

I don't apologize for every scrape as that would be silly, but I am aware of my size and strength, and I don't want to hurt anyone..but you DO have a very good point in that this is something we must learn to deal with and understand from both sides...so I will continue to train harder and challenge that gap I have discovered...what's a few bruises among freinds if it means we are better prepared, eh?


This is true. One has to be aware of their size and strength and that of others as well.

Even if you train in a complete peace non agressive system, you should have people not familiar with your art atttack you so you can not only see how others move but also learn how you will react to them.

I have found that bruises help make some friendships. ;) :D




I agree, we shouldn't breed over-confidence, but we should start soft and work up to it...for the reason Sean states...it will help folks figure out and perhaps discover something they didn't know they wanted....


This is also true in my opinion.



and...I am a strong believer that knowledge is generally not a bad thing. So overconfidence might hurt some folks...but sometimes a little knowledge will help you get a better outcome....


Knowledge is always good. The only time is usually is bad is when it is given in too large of doses so the student cannot grasp any of it and looses all of it.

We have a saying in our class, "The easiest way to teach nothing is to try to teach everything."

If one treats the knowledge aspect as described by the physical aspect then people will learn over time.


It is hard to stop what I call the Green Belt Gitters and Blue Belt Blues. The Green Belt Gitters are those that get nervous and are afraid they might hurt someone unintentionally. The Blue Belt Blues are those that think they really know something and want to oh so try it out for real, and find out many times it never looks as good as it does in the movies. :(



but I am rambling and ready to beat outta work and head on vacation....see ya on the flip side!

Thanks for the good food for thought!


Vacation for the mind body and soul is always good. I hope you enjoyed it when you get back and read this. :)

[Rich Parsons]

Rich yes I agree this is not for everyone. I would agree with you and hazard a guess though that working up to full-speed and force attack in training is not even for MOST martial artists. Likewise, I appreciate that not everyone WANTS to train like this. I would not contest anybody’s choices -unless- they ARE training their MA for fully-shielded self defence, in which case, if they are not working it around (at some point in their MA career) then are they not going to come up short??


Yes, that are coming up short in my opinion.

A person needs to truly understand being hit and hit hard in this case. They also need to understand that the animals they will be going up against do not play by the same rules. :(





I hear what you are saying too about “brute force”. And but for me, I am not inclined or even made physically to brute-force somebody. I am happy being all “peace” day-to-day and even in my Aikido, it is inefficient to brute-force somebody.


I agree it is very inefficient to brute force someone. That is not to say proper technique of force to force strickes/blocks are not effective. There is a difference from my experience.



Nonetheless, I still need to know that I can REACT to that brute force using my own technique whichever way it might happen.


I completely agree.

You can start with a guy just picking you up. From behind, from the front, from the side. With you base off the ground, techniques needs to be modified to work in many cases. With some resistance this is good training against brute type force.

Understand though that most people who pick you up (* which is just an example of brute force and is not limited to this only *), they usually have a plan even if it is just to drop you on the ground, or put you into a vehicle, or place you with an interferrance fit with the wall or other large object.

Finding someone who trains with you to do this might be harder than just someone from another system or someone who does not train at all. But you have to trust them to give you time to think up front so you can react and if it does not work think and try something else. This way you get to play question and answer and try to find a good answer or optimum answer for yourself.

(* Yes I am being a normal / average guy and offering solutions and examples and not just listening and being sympathetic or apply skills in empathy. ;) *)



Likewise, I still need to know that I could switch on that masculinised mindset if it came to it. I do not know if that makes sense?


It makes lots of sense to me. I work with engineers. Most of the people I work with have never been in a fight and those that say they have, it was in elementary school and at an early age.

There are some who even do martial arts, but they either do just the sport sparring (* nothing wrong with this *) or the forms only with absolutely no contact (* Also nothing wrong with this *). They really have no idea of what I can do.

That being said, one of my best friends has done martial arts since the 60's in one style or another. He is also an engineer, and we get along great. I wonder if it was luck that we met and became friends or fate gien our backgrounds and mindset.


The switch needs to come on and off when you want it, and when you need it. Training will help, but exposure to stress and adrenaline also helps you get used to reaction.

The problem with the above though is that it is too easy to step over into paranoia, and always be switched on even at a low level. The person is not just accessing all threats they are reacting physically and psycologically to all inputs. This can lead to addiction to adrenaline and also to not reacting to somethings as your body might need more adreanaline to give you that kick. The other option more likely at first is that you over react to almost everything.

Being aware and evaluating is good. Being on the hair's trigger and ready to fight every second is bad.

So your terminology of the switch is very good mindset and very good way to approach this. I wanted to draw this out this way, so that the compliment in the usage of the term, would make sense, and not just be an unknown warm fuzzy.



I am just trying to show that there is no contradiction between a temporary switch in women of that masculinised mindset and how they are at other times.



This is profound as you see from the above statements I made. I agree, but yes you should be able to walk around and be the woman you want to be, and still be able to turn the switch and of the masculinised mindset and address the situation and then move on.






And yes, I think I am talking bout those situations when avoidance has come and gone regardless. Sucks, yes!





You list a lot of weaponry both bona fide and improvised. I agree, that to be proficient in their use may serve well, still, that is a task that some MAists devote their entire careers to – I am sure you have been training for a long time with various weapons. And again then we get into the situation of covering every potential literally. Empty handed is how I usually travel. Guns are illegal for the most part here, nor am I proficient at all with knives or sticks. At the same time, we do train as exhaustively as we can against them in a -defensive- way. I am not disagreeing with you Rich, rather outlining a preference :) Would that I were skilled in all those things, though it is just unrealistic here :)





So of course it is for the individual to decide on masculinising their training, yes, yet I still think that soft, feminised forms of SD training are purely ostentatious, pretty and for show and without the substance they might otherwise claim.





And but yes, you are not going to argue with me are you? :) Well that is ok, least you are still communicating with me and so thank you :)

[Live True]

This is true. One has to be aware of their size and strength and that of others as well.

Even if you train in a complete peace non agressive system, you should have people not familiar with your art atttack you so you can not only see how others move but also learn how you will react to them.

I have found that bruises help make some friendships. ;) :D[...]

Knowledge is always good. The only time is usually is bad is when it is given in too large of doses so the student cannot grasp any of it and looses all of it.

We have a saying in our class, "The easiest way to teach nothing is to try to teach everything."

If one treats the knowledge aspect as described by the physical aspect then people will learn over time.


It is hard to stop what I call the Green Belt Gitters and Blue Belt Blues. The Green Belt Gitters are those that get nervous and are afraid they might hurt someone unintentionally. The Blue Belt Blues are those that think they really know something and want to oh so try it out for real, and find out many times it never looks as good as it does in the movies. :(



Vacation for the mind body and soul is always good. I hope you enjoyed it when you get back and read this. :)

Thanks Rich...it was a wonderful break, and I have found a new teacher, so I'm hoping to get back to some serious training and work on those Green Belt Jitters!