Do self defense programs work?

[Steve]

I don't think so. I said there was a reasonable argument to be made. That we can't expect to get good data around it doesn't eliminate the idea of a reasonable argument (though it does probably eliminate the possibility of a scientific assertion).


If both include similar fitness levels (to eliminate the argument that it's just the fitness), then - assuming the "self defense" training is actually developing fighting skills, it's definitely likely to be more use in some situations. Of course, there will always be situations where nothing helps significantly...and some where almost anything (assuming it provide some fitness/strength benefits) helps. I'm not sure what your point is about the incorrect attack.

That is questionable logic.

However you seem happy to believe the UK stats are correct? I could have posted a list of hundreds of articles about sexual harassment, assault and rape in the Us that give lie to your assertion but I get it, you don't want to believe it.

Can we agree that it's a problem in the USA and in the UK, without being unreasonable and accusing folks on this forum? Whether it's worse here or there seems like a stupid waste of time.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

However you seem happy to believe the UK stats are correct? I could have posted a list of hundreds of articles about sexual harassment, assault and rape in the Us that give lie to your assertion but I get it, you don't want to believe it.

You provided stats for the UK. Unless I missed it, you provided examples, but not stats for the US. I haven't looked at the source of the UK stats yet, either, so I don't know what (if any) problems there might be there, either. I'm just accepting that if you posted it, you likely already looked at the source to be sure it's not a biased sample.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

but that's not the point I'm making, it's about if that will manifest itself under extreme stress, when its instincts rather than habit that's the issue, instincts are far more deeply embedded f than habbits, in my recent issue all my karate training deserted me every bit of it, all those hours were a waste of time, as under stress I just reverted back to my instincts and rugby tacked him to the ground a technique I developed when I was 6

and expressly if 300 hours or three thousand hours makes you better able to defend yourself than 30, for which there is no data what so ever, just an assumption it must be so, made by people who have dedicated many hours to it.

if one karate expert loses to one untrained bum then it throws doubt on it, unless you can supply data that shows it's an aberration against the mean.

But that's not instinct. As you pointed out, you used a technique you developed earlier in life. Probably one you've used under stress more often.

Do some folks revert to instinct under duress? Yes. Do "people"? That's the question, and there's evidence in several fields that training can ingrain skills so they survive stress. There's also evidence in several fields that the less stress is used in that training, the less likely the training is to survive sudden stressors.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

That is questionable logic.

Which part gives you a headache, Steve? I thought it was loose, but still logical (accepting the limits of the evidence).

 

[Steve]

but that's not the point I'm making, it's about if that will manifest itself under extreme stress, when its instincts rather than habit that's the issue, instincts are far more deeply embedded f than habbits, in my recent issue all my karate training deserted me every bit of it, all those hours were a waste of time, as under stress I just reverted back to my instincts and rugby tacked him to the ground a technique I developed when I was 6

and expressly if 300 hours or three thousand hours makes you better able to defend yourself than 30, for which there is no data what so ever, just an assumption it must be so, made by people who have dedicated many hours to it.

if one karate expert loses to one untrained bum then it throws doubt on it, unless you can supply data that shows it's an aberration against the mean.

I agree... Sort of. Broadly, We do know that building skill translates to application, even under stress. we see it in all human activities. However, it's true that some people fail to perform. If everyone could do everything, if only they were properly trained, then hiring would be so easy. This isn't the case, though. Some people just don't have aptitude. So, broadly, we can say with certainty that well designed training leading to application can be directly linked to application under pressure. True, even if individually some people fail.

And, i also agree that part of the problem is we don't really know what the key skills are in self Defense.

 

[Dirty Dog]

And, i also agree that part of the problem is we don't really know what the key skills are in self Defense.

I'm fairly confident that we never will, either. Because there is a near-infinite variety of situations.

 

[Steve]

But that's not instinct. As you pointed out, you used a technique you developed earlier in life. Probably one you've used under stress more often.

Do some folks revert to instinct under duress? Yes. Do "people"? That's the question, and there's evidence in several fields that training can ingrain skills so they survive stress. There's also evidence in several fields that the less stress is used in that training, the less likely the training is to survive sudden stressors.

"We don't rise to the level of our expectations, we fall to the level of our training.” Archilochus

 

[Steve]

I'm fairly confident that we never will, either. Because there is a near-infinite variety of situations.

Which allows some folks to make a living selling snake oil.

 

[Dirty Dog]

Which allows some folks to make a living selling snake oil.

Or, at the very least, oil that only works on a rare breed of snake.

 

[jobo]

well yes it was i

But that's not instinct. As you pointed out, you used a technique you developed earlier in life. Probably one you've used under stress more often.

Do some folks revert to instinct under duress? Yes. Do "people"? That's the question, and there's evidence in several fields that training can ingrain skills so they survive stress. There's also evidence in several fields that the less stress is used in that training, the less likely the training is to survive sudden stressors.

well yes ut was instinct , as it was an instinctive reaction, !, a lot of ma training is in training habit to over ride instinct, , on the rather questionable premise that its superior.

so theres not any data on if ma can maintain there skill under stress ( it's a biased sample as people who are required to be able to perform under pressure are selected on that basis, which clearly ma are not)and non that 30 hours is less useful than say 500 hours, which coincidentally is the of the habit traing that deserted me. at this stage I'm lacking belief that it made any difference at all. the aggressor was dismantled and and crying in 10 seconds , even with my training I'm not sure it would have improved that any,

 

[jobo]

I agree... Sort of. Broadly, We do know that building skill translates to application, even under stress. we see it in all human activities. However, it's true that some people fail to perform. If everyone could do everything, if only they were properly trained, then hiring would be so easy. This isn't the case, though. Some people just don't have aptitude. So, broadly, we can say with certainty that well designed training leading to application can be directly linked to application under pressure. True, even if individually some people fail.

And, i also agree that part of the problem is we don't really know what the key skills are in self Defense.

do we ? we know it does for some people, but we have no idea what percentage of the population that is and how that relates to ma. I've seen many a professional footballer miss an open goal and their not short of practise

 

[Steve]

Or, at the very least, oil that only works on a rare breed of snake.

More like, at the very most.

 

[Steve]

do we ? we know it does for some people, but we have no idea what percentage of the population that is and how that relates to ma. I've seen many a professional footballer miss an open goal and their not short of practise

You're mixing up micro and macro. It's like the difference between climate and weather. The footballer can miss a goal under pressure. I hate soccer, but my understanding is that more are missed than made.

The question is, would an untrained person be able to make any goals under pressure?

 

[jobo]

You're mixing up micro and macro. It's like the difference between climate and weather. The footballer can miss a goal under pressure. I hate soccer, but my understanding is that more are missed than made.

The question is, would an untrained person be able to make any goals under pressure?

I'm not mixing up anything, I'm asking a difficult question to see if anybody has more than a bucket full of assumptions, that additional training increases your chances of robustly defending your self and the answer so far is no , not at all. people ut seems have little doubt but no evidence which moves it in to the same category as religion.

the soccer analogy is just to show that even the most trained and skilful people are prone to forget how to move their leg under pressure, if they have a fairly high failure rate then it must be even greater for non elite atteletes

 

[Steve]

I'm not mixing up anything, I'm asking a difficult question to see if anybody has more than a bucket full of assumptions, that additional training increases your chances of robustly defending your self and the answer so far is no , not at all. people ut seems have little doubt but no evidence which moves it in to the same category as religion.

the soccer analogy is just to show that even the most trained and skilful people are prone to forget how to move their leg under pressure, if they have a fairly high failure rate then it must be even greater for non elite atteletes

Sometimes people just miss. If you really believe a pro soccer player misses a shot on goal because they forget how to move their leg under pressure, I'm not sure I can help .

 

[jobo]

Sometimes people just miss. If you really believe a pro soccer player misses a shot on goal because they forget how to move their leg under pressure, I'm not sure I can help .

they dont forget how to move it, they forget their technique of how to move it to hit a ball in the required direction, I said open goals or tap ins, the sort your granny could do, not just any miss

 

[Gerry Seymour]

well yes it was i
well yes ut was instinct , as it was an instinctive reaction, !, a lot of ma training is in training habit to over ride instinct, , on the rather questionable premise that its superior.

You said it was the rugby tackle you learned at 6. That's not an instinct, but a well-learned action. That's exactly what we're aiming for in MA training.

so theres not any data on if ma can maintain there skill under stress ( it's a biased sample as people who are required to be able to perform under pressure are selected on that basis, which clearly ma are not)and non that 30 hours is less useful than say 500 hours, which coincidentally is the of the habit traing that deserted me. at this stage I'm lacking belief that it made any difference at all. the aggressor was dismantled and and crying in 10 seconds , even with my training I'm not sure it would have improved that any,

There are definitely some variables that can confound data. There are also studies that have controlled for those variables.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

do we ? we know it does for some people, but we have no idea what percentage of the population that is and how that relates to ma. I've seen many a professional footballer miss an open goal and their not short of practise

I think we have enough data to make some reasonable inferences on the percentage. I think you're right that we have some problems in generalizing some of that data to include MA, though experiments that deliberately invoke high-stress reactions ("fight or flight") are reasonable sources for such inferences.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I'm not mixing up anything, I'm asking a difficult question to see if anybody has more than a bucket full of assumptions, that additional training increases your chances of robustly defending your self and the answer so far is no , not at all. people ut seems have little doubt but no evidence which moves it in to the same category as religion.

the soccer analogy is just to show that even the most trained and skilful people are prone to forget how to move their leg under pressure, if they have a fairly high failure rate then it must be even greater for non elite atteletes

You're conflating errors in technique with a complete absence of technique. Most of those misses - even the really easy ones - don't involve them failing to kick well. Most involve them mis-targeting or (more commonly) simply using more power than is useful for the situation. It's still a kick, and more or less the same kick they intended.

 

[hoshin1600]

My post was about those who tell women 'not to' do various things because it's considered it leads to their rapes, when in fact it should be made clear that women aren't to blame, the rapists are.

ill take on this argument, but i wont argue about it...merely point out a few things.
the current popular ideology is a victimization mindset. the mind set says....we are victims (of various things, im not focused on sexual assault here) therefore YOU (those who dont belong inside our group) should "check your privilege" because you white male men are bigots, homophobic, transphobic, mysoginistic full of toxic masculinity blah blah blah...everyone know all of the slander terms that get thrown out. frankly it gets boring after awhile.
but the issue is that the world get divided into We the oppressed and You the oppressors. its a dividing ideology that shuts down the conversation and does so on purpose because YOU oppressors shouldnt have a "platform". this Marxist derivative does not believe in free speech, how could it. free speech doesnt exist in this ideology. any speech is seen as an expression of your group not the ideas of an individual. there is no sovereign individual.
the rape culture thing is an extension of this quasi Marxist, post modern feminism. its just another group to belong to in order to virtue signal your victim status.

ok back to the program...

problems arise in this victim climate because it is unpopular to have a counter voice. therefore there is only ONE narrative. no debate is possible in order to come up with better solutions. as Tez has pointed out in many posts that the problem is "MEN" that boys should be taught not to rape. im sorry i have two young boys, at no time have i ever told them that it is ok nor did my Dad tell me it was either. but how convenient that the answer was sooooo simple all this time. you figure that since women have been being raped since the beginning of time (you know in corsets and all) that someone would have thought of that before...i guess Nancy Reagan was soooo close ..."JUST SAY NO" maybe we should go to all the prisons and tell everyone in there that crime is bad that they shouldnt do it. that should solve the problem. just tell the criminals its bad to kill and steal and all the crime will go away.
im sorry this solution seems a little ridiculous to me. the facts are, a small minority of the population does bad things and history has shown that it isnt going to just go away. so instead of playing ideology politics how about we have a conversation and actually deal with the issue.

back to the issue......

as much as some people want to blame the oppressors, statistics matter. my friend has a tendency to ride his motorcycle at very high speeds once in a while. he says he only does it "once in a while" the more often you ride like that the better the chances are your going to die but if you only do it a few times chances are youll be ok. the same statistics hold true in this argument. again the fact is there are bad people and they WILL DO BAD THINGS we cannot change that with wishful thinking. my question is where does individual responsibility exist in this problem? the current argument says all of the blame lies on the assailant and NONE on the victim. so statistics dont exist? they are not real? the stats say if a women lives alone the chances of being a victim increases...maybe only a little. lets say the number raises .05% then if she lives in a less affluent city the percentage of being a victim goes up 10 % her age also is a factor under 30 years of age,,,increase of 20%. the frequency of going out to clubs and bars where alcohol is served % goes up again the more she socializes. every life choice will either decrease or increase the % chance of being a victim of a violent or sexual crime.
so yes there is personal responsibility that can be advised. this is different than putting blame on the victim. responsibility is not blame. however the ideology likes to ignore this because it doesnt serve their ulterior motive.
i feel this Feministic view actually puts women more at risk because they refuse to explain personal responsibility and that there is a very real thing called consequences.
the argument says: "we shouldnt have to tell women to dress conservatively , women should be able to do what ever they want to do"
yeah well ,, my Doctor shouldnt have to tell me to not eat Mcdonalds every day because it will lead to heart attack and death but he still does. why because its sound advise. i have the right to eat what ever i want, where ever i want. lets blame Mcdonalds and have a "Me To Fat" movement that forces all fast food to have less calories and be more healthy......oh wait we already did that and it failed because people hated it. they wanted that BigMac not a salad.
its called personal responsibility people. deal with it.