Discussion in 'General Martial Arts Talk' started by hoshin1600, Jan 25, 2018.
my first thought is that we as martial artists have to acknowledge the limitations of MA training. very often martial arts are aimed at children (lets say under the age of 13, for the sake of the thread) but physical skills for this age group has almost no impact on preventing danger or keeping them from harm from adult threats. at best it is an advantage for peer to peer conflict.
so applying this idea to the protection of young women and girls, it would seem to me that there is a severe misunderstanding of the role MA can play for this group in keeping ones self safe.
Many of us proclaim Martial Arts training includes more than just physically fighting. That 'self defense/personal protection' is much more than physically fighting.
One of the major aspect of our particular youth & teens programs covers:
1) Stranger Danger
2) Danger from known persons
3) Talking to adults and persons of authority.
4) Who can touch, when, & why. Who can't touch and why. Tell, Tell, Tell.
yes and no, from other threads i think there is a misunderstanding on the benefits of ma training for defence every one, including , but perhaps more so, for women .
the greater the physical advantage the attacker has over you, the greater you ma skills need to be to compensate, or rather the greater the,advantage you have over the attacker skills needs to be.
converse, the greater your physical condition is, the less physical advantage an attacker has, the more useful your ma skills will be
i think there is a difference in the way schools approach Ma. some teach with self defense in mind. the style curriculum is a vehicle; a means to an end, of self defense. others adhere to a style curriculum and do not waver from it. the style is the end result. i do not know the percentages but i have a suspicion most schools teach their particular style curriculum; the punches and kicks, and that is it. that is all well and good but there has to be more included for self defense to be addressed.
i think one of the problems is the tendency for confirmation bias. sexual assault (and all assault actually) has many different MO (modus operandi) methods. individuals will pick one type of assailant MO , the one that fits the formula of their own bias and use that as a base line as evidence that what they do is effective and that their philosophy is correct.
Your third and fouth points are very appropriate for me as a swimming teacher. My job heavily involves being in close proximity to almost naked children on a daily basis. It always amazes me just how trusting some children are and makes me aware of how vulnerable they are.
It makes me wonder how many of them would actually speak up if I tried to touch them inappropriately. There is also the issue of getting them to tell you about any abuse at home. Given how little clothing they wear during lessons it's a lot easier to spot odd marks on their skin which might have come from abuse somewhere else. Would they tell me the truth if I asked them about possible signs of abuse?
@aedrasteia This is the thread you suggested, and a copy of your whole post. I think it will be easier if forum members who wish to comment can see the whole post instead of having to jump back and forth. It might also slow thread drift, although probably not. I may contribute to drift myself. There are so many facets to something as charged as this.
Or would they go home and tell their parents? Would that get you in to trouble for meddling? Would an abuser convince the child to make allegations against you?
Tough decision, but I would suggest if you really suspect that, try to find a friendly cop who might be willing to look around on his own. Or at least become a buffer for you. Don't strike out on your own. Many jurisdictions require you to report suspected abuse to the police anyway.
Agreed. And many of those who teach MA market very heavily to women and girls.
I agree that they 'severely misunderstand' the role MA can play for this group.
That does not stop them from presenting themselves as expert resources in the protection
of women and girls. Some are here on MT or other sites.
That is the reality. What do you suggest?
Do you want me to repost this in the current thread? Your including this here is exactly right but if neede I will re-do it. I also have other links and will post them. You can also contact me by PM w/other suggestions. I appreciate your help.
No to a friendly cop looking around on his own....
If you feel that the child is a victim of some type of abuse you should notify child protective services or police and make an official report that will be followed up on.
Unofficial investigations allow things to slip between the cracks.
Good insight. Very accurate. I might describe it as 'selection bias'.
All of the examples, descriptions of assailants, scenarios, all of the language used in training relates to sudden, violent, fast, physical attacks committed 'in the street' or outdoors by an unknown person, male, larger, faster and physically stronger than the target. I have been asked to go to a class or school by a woman thinking going there. I attend, watch and listen and report as honestly as I can. 'Known assailant' assault is occasionaly mentioned, usually superficially and very briefly. Nothing else changes: the presenter discusses the assault in exactly the same terms as a stranger situation. The attacker is described as 'maybe someone you know'
who is behaving exactly as a stranger is described.
I brought something like this up a long time ago. Wondering about self defense for kids teaching things like how to break out of zip ties or duct tape, how to get away from someone when they grab you, etc. The self defense skills we teach in our classes are more for if someone throws a punch or a kick at you.
The general consensus on here at that point in time (a few years ago) was that teaching kids these skills would scare them into thinking that danger is around every corner and would make them paranoid, and people wouldn't want to take a class that makes them paranoid. It's something I disagreed with, and the way people berated me almost made me leave the forum.
As to this thread, each thread should be largely contained in and of itself. If you're going to bring in a sidebar from another thread, it shouldn't be presented as such. If it's its own idea, present the thread as an original post with original content.
I think there will be limitations of the scope of self-defense that is taught in an MA school. There will be some "self-defense issues" where the instructor is not the the appropriate person to teach that topic. Things like child molestation and sexual abuse may be out of the scope of the instructors knowledge and capabilities. There are people professionally train to talk about how to deal with things like that. Like what to do if it's a parent, sibling, friend or someone they know that is violating the other person. As a parent I don't an Martial Art teacher who isn't a professional that works in that area to talk to my child about "people who you know victimizing."
The only thing I know for a fact about "people who you know victimizing you" is that it's often not a preventive issue. It's a recognition issue and denial issue. Sometimes the lines are clear and sometimes they aren't. Some people know that others are ignorant about what a doctor can and can't do. They exploit that ignorance and tell the victim that it's a normal procedure, and out of trust the victim goes with it even though they are uncomfortable. There is no way a Martial Art instructor would even be qualified to address such an issue on that level unless their full-time job deals with that.
This is my view. And it's why I use the narrow definition of self-defense I usually use. I generally see MA (from a protection standpoint) as an answer to physical attack. It has other benefits (and some train purely for those benefits), and some of those benefits (confidence, assertiveness, etc.) seem to have some effect on these areas. But that's not really a direct effect of MA - it's a result of the disciplined development (which can be had elsewhere, as @Steve often points out).
I don't actually find many making that gender-specific claim. I think their mistake is in not understanding that there is a gender-biased difference in some kinds of "attack". I can teach you how to stop someone who throws a haymaker punch at you, even if you only see it coming at the last moment. That doesn't help a bit if someone isolates you and uses coercive techniques to sexually assault you. Too many instructors don't recognize that gap - nor that they are ill-equipped to fill it.
You're getting side-tracked into what this thread is saying we too often get caught up in. The point is about those times when physical defensive ability isn't the answer.
A martial art teacher should understand where martial arts can help and where it can't help. Martial arts isn't a one size fits all solution, but if a woman wants to physically be able to defend herself then a Martial Arts school that is focused on self-defense is a good start. When taught correctly, at the very minimum, a woman will learn to fight back physically. My personal thoughts is that a woman doesn't need to be taught Martial Arts or Self-defense any differently than a man. UFC and Women's boxing makes that very clear. The only difference is that you may add topics that aren't specific to a man.
For example, the way a man lures a woman isn't the same way that a woman lures a man., but as far as physically fighting, recognizing dangers before they happen. All of that will have similarities. Me watching out for a mugger is no different than a woman watching out for a mugger. A mugger will "fly the same flight path" regardless of being male or female. Rape may be a different issue depending on if it was done by force or by "kindness / trick" it's still the same flight path and the methods are still the same. Boys are more likely to be raped by force than men, but it happens to men as well too. There are homosexuals, transgender, gay, and even straight guys who get raped. I would be willing to bet that the forced attack is brutal.
I truly think that a Martial Arts school isn't going to be able to cover all bases, nor should they make an attempt to. They should only cover what they good at and are qualified to cover.
I think many folks here, myself included, agreed before - there is no magic pill, or unbeatable technique, or perfect strike. I like the idea of combining martial arts training with police-sponsored basic self-defense and awareness training.
Of course... in the end, the hardest thing to tell to ANY student - male or female - is that there is no way to guarantee their training will protect them 100%.
When I've taught kids self-defense, I've always thought of it as primarily teaching them how to handle bullies and such. I'm not an expert on escape from kidnapping, so trying to teach that would be inappropriate. It would also probably bother parents, if we're honest about it.
Separate names with a comma.