women's techniques

[Christina05]

Originally Posted by morph4me

I teach aikido, not kempo, but I think the distinction might not be that different techniques are being taught, but the same techniques are being taught differently.

I don't really like to generalize, but in my own experience I've found that when I teach women they learn quicker and easier because they don't try to use strength and pick up the subtleties of the techniques quicker. Men can usually muscle through a technique and make it work women rely on the technique and are better at getting the principles.

You can watch various practioners doing the same style and see the same technique performed a little differently by each one, and see different instructors of the same style teaching the same technique a little differently. Taking a technique and adapting it for one's individual stregnths and weaknesses is what makes a martial art.

Very very true Women are technique oriented. Guess we figure learn it correctly manipulate it later to make it effective in my opinion anyway.

[DavidCC]

We don't teach the women differnet techniques or drills, but that doesn't mean their learning style is the same.

There are certain assualts that are basically gender-specific, that is, it is unlikely that a man will attack another man that way... but we train the men those techniques anyway

[Danjo]

Women have a narrower range of effective techniques than men do due to their relative size and strength. For women to be effective against a larger male aggressor, they need to utilize techniques that have a far higher chance of causing permanent damage or death. Eye gouges, throat strikes, perforating the ear drum, destroying the knee, etc. are vicious moves that should only be utilized in situations that warrant them. When a woman is being attacked by a man, I would say that these type of techniques are warranted. She must not only be taught these moves and targets, but also the most effective delivery methods.

However, if you are law enforcement, a bouncer, security guard, dealing with a lout at a bar, women fighting other women, or a drunk at a party, these are probably too extreme to employ with any justification. Thus the need for other techniques. If one were to only train in those techniques that cause permanent injury or worse, we would have no way to effectively respond to those situations that were not life or death.

[DavidCC]

Originally Posted by Danjo

Women have a narrower range of effective techniques than men do due to their relative size and strength. For women to be effective against a larger male aggressor, they need to utilize techniques that have a far higher chance of causing permanent damage or death. Eye gouges, throat strikes, perforating the ear drum, destroying the knee, etc. are vicious moves that should only be utilized in situations that warrant them. When a woman is being attacked by a man, I would say that these type of techniques are warranted. She must not only be taught these moves and targets, but also the most effective delivery methods.

However, if you are law enforcement, a bouncer, security guard, dealing with a lout at a bar, women fighting other women, or a drunk at a party, these are probably too extreme to employ with any justification. Thus the need for other techniques. If one were to only train in those techniques that cause permanent injury or worse, we would have no way to effectively respond to those situations that were not life or death.

hey Danjo, I just noticed you got the 1st degree! Congrats!

-David

[Danjo]

Originally Posted by DavidCC

hey Danjo, I just noticed you got the 1st degree! Congrats!

-David

Thanks David, but you forgot to say how great my post was.

[marlon]

Originally Posted by Danjo

Women have a narrower range of effective techniques than men do due to their relative size and strength. For women to be effective against a larger male aggressor, they need to utilize techniques that have a far higher chance of causing permanent damage or death. Eye gouges, throat strikes, perforating the ear drum, destroying the knee, etc. are vicious moves that should only be utilized in situations that warrant them. When a woman is being attacked by a man, I would say that these type of techniques are warranted. She must not only be taught these moves and targets, but also the most effective delivery methods.

However, if you are law enforcement, a bouncer, security guard, dealing with a lout at a bar, women fighting other women, or a drunk at a party, these are probably too extreme to employ with any justification. Thus the need for other techniques. If one were to only train in those techniques that cause permanent injury or worse, we would have no way to effectively respond to those situations that were not life or death.

are female officers trained differently than male officers?

marlon

[marlon]

Originally Posted by Danjo

Women have a narrower range of effective techniques than men do due to their relative size and strength. For women to be effective against a larger male aggressor, they need to utilize techniques that have a far higher chance of causing permanent damage or death. Eye gouges, throat strikes, perforating the ear drum, destroying the knee, etc. are vicious moves that should only be utilized in situations that warrant them. When a woman is being attacked by a man, I would say that these type of techniques are warranted. She must not only be taught these moves and targets, but also the most effective delivery methods.

However, if you are law enforcement, a bouncer, security guard, dealing with a lout at a bar, women fighting other women, or a drunk at a party, these are probably too extreme to employ with any justification. Thus the need for other techniques. If one were to only train in those techniques that cause permanent injury or worse, we would have no way to effectively respond to those situations that were not life or death.

When a fight can be avoided then i do so, if my life is in danger or the lives of people i care about or other innocents around and a fight cannot be avoided i am entering the conflict with the idea that the person does not care and is capable of anything so then i would use techniques and delivery methods that are most effective. I am not a very big person nor am i small i will not be attacked by a 5" 80lb anybody without a weapon unless they are stupid and if they are very little technique would be needed. The change are more in favour of someone bigger and fast jumping me. For each individual i teach i consider that anyone attacking them will be a 'bad' person, usually bigger and wanting to do nasty things to them. The curricullum and teaching incorporates different styles of fighting depending on the size and speed of your opponent. I am not going to try and arm lock a 6"6' 300lbs fighter who has intentions on separating me from my family permanently
interesting to see how others think. The differences help me become a better teacher and martial artist
thanks for the post Danjo and congratulations on your dan!

respectfully,
Marlon

[LawDog]

For the most part female officers under go the same training as their male couterparts. In Massachusetts as of late the powers to be are softening up the physical training standards for the female cadets. Why, of course, lawsuits.
Many of the old school female police officers are very upset by these new easier standards.

[MeatWad2]

Originally Posted by marlon

are female officers trained differently than male officers?

marlon

No. They aren't. They are taught the same things as male officers. IMHO, some of the female police officers out here are more scary than the males.

[kidswarrior]

Originally Posted by MeatWad2

No. They aren't. They are taught the same things as male officers. IMHO, some of the female police officers out here are more scary than the males.

I remember a class early on in my training when a much smaller man couldn't break my wrist grab using the tech being taught. I could have easily shown him how to make it work, but didn't want to overstep my bounds. Finally the female instructor came over and showed him ways to soften me up (low kicks, etc.) to make it work. To me, that was an injustice to him because he never got to see that the original tech worked on everyone if done right. A different female instructor at that school would have handled it differently, had she been there, but oh well.

The point is, as several have said, if a tech doesn't work on a larger, more powerful person, it shouldn't be in our 'small' tool box--the 6-12 techs that we'd count on to save our lives. Our 'big' toolbox maybe--the one that includes al the techs learned, so we can pass them on and let others choose from that their own small set of 'all purpose' half dozen lifesavers. But male or female, if it doesn't work on someone much larger, what good is it?

[Touch Of Death]

Originally Posted by marlon

i do not disagree that everyone should personalize their art. However, my point is about what makes a self defense technique effective. the things i have heard discussed about how a person with a more slight built and less wieght (many women fall into this category) should execute a technique always sounds to me like a more effective technique, this assuming that proper stances and positioning are taught. The wrist example above is a perfect example of what i am taking about. why not make the technique with the things that made it effective for the woman. What happens when the big strong man meets a bigger stronger man? Should we not teach the techniques in the mosst effective way to everybody?

respectfully,
Marlon

Yes, however, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater when you do have the advantage of size in your favor. To dominate or evade is situation specific. Even whisps of a female should learn to dominate body types smaller than theirs.
Sean

[Touch Of Death]

Originally Posted by MeatWad2

No. They aren't. They are taught the same things as male officers. IMHO, some of the female police officers out here are more scary than the males.

They are trained the same. Its just that mistakes on the street can be much more costly.
Sean

[MeatWad2]

Originally Posted by kidswarrior

I remember a class early on in my training when a much smaller man couldn't break my wrist grab using the tech being taught. I could have easily shown him how to make it work, but didn't want to overstep my bounds. Finally the female instructor came over and showed him ways to soften me up (low kicks, etc.) to make it work. To me, that was an injustice to him because he never got to see that the original tech worked on everyone if done right. A different female instructor at that school would have handled it differently, had she been there, but oh well.

The point is, as several have said, if a tech doesn't work on a larger, more powerful person, it shouldn't be in our 'small' tool box--the 6-12 techs that we'd count on to save our lives. Our 'big' toolbox maybe--the one that includes al the techs learned, so we can pass them on and let others choose from that their own small set of 'all purpose' half dozen lifesavers. But male or female, if it doesn't work on someone much larger, what good is it?

I agree with you 100%. The way that I see it though, if the instructor can't make the technique work in its original context, for males and females, then it really shouldn't be taught. Techniques will always and forever have to be modified to work in the streets...but, one should have the 6-12 techniques that will always work, no matter what.

[marlon]

Originally Posted by Touch Of Death

Yes, however, don't throw out the baby with the bathwater when you do have the advantage of size in your favor. To dominate or evade is situation specific. Even whisps of a female should learn to dominate body types smaller than theirs.
Sean

i agree completely. the five animal system of shaolin kempo is actually about different fighting styles for different situations and body types. Ex.: the tiger techniques are for dominating smaller oppponents. Yet within the tiger techniques there are a myriad of detail that make it 'easier ' to pull off. Therefore there is technique that makes it less "strength" dependant. And before i get slammed i know that a martial artist need strength and muscle to be good at thier art

respectfully,
Marlon

[Touch Of Death]

Originally Posted by marlon

i agree completely. the five animal system of shaolin kempo is actually about different fighting styles for different situations and body types. Ex.: the tiger techniques are for dominating smaller oppponents. Yet within the tiger techniques there are a myriad of detail that make it 'easier ' to pull off. Therefore there is technique that makes it less "strength" dependant. And before i get slammed i know that a martial artist need strength and muscle to be good at thier art

respectfully,
Marlon

It stacks the odds in your favor.
Sean