Fundamental pillars of self-defense?

[oftheherd1]

If you choose to leave a laptop in your unlocked car, parked on the street overnight, and someone steals it, are you to "blame"? No. Nobody has the "right" to take your property, regardless of the wisdom of your decision.

Is it wise to leave your laptop in your unlocked car? Was it a decision you made?

If I'm teaching people at a crime prevention class to NOT leave a laptop in an unlocked car should I be concerned that a victim of such a crime is in the audience and may think I'm "blaming" them?

Should I not give that advice in the first place and instead train people that "stealing stuff from unlocked cars is wrong"?

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

I don't think so, unless you were doing something which in fact implies victims are to blame. Would you do that? I don't think you so.

As to your last sentence, if I understand your meaning, wouldn't it depend on the audience? Anyway, I don't think blame has any place in a crime prevention scenario, just how to reduce risk.

 

[Brian King]

I want to ask you some thing Brian how do you see the bigger -the biggest- picture of all of this when you step right back to the best place to observe it?

In discussing the means by which we harm each other whether in offence or defence what is our conceit causing us to miss?

Jx

I am feeling dense - working on some plumbing and carpentry issues and failing at each attempt, with my frustrated muddled brain on over load, I am afraid I do not understand your question. Can you please try again Jenna?

 

[ballen0351]

I've accidentally injured training partners or opponents too stubborn, stupid, or proud to submit to a submission. There's a difference there, and its a difference I've highlighted several times..

NONSENSE You dont accidentally hurt people you feel are too stubborn or stupid to tap. Your too stubborn or stupid to realize you won and let go, you have to prove how much of a tough guy you are and teach them a lesson for being to "Stupid" to tap

 

[drop bear]

NONSENSE You dont accidentally hurt people you feel are too stubborn or stupid to tap. Your too stubborn or stupid to realize you won and let go, you have to prove how much of a tough guy you are and teach them a lesson for being to "Stupid" to tap

You are trying for the tap. He is trying to prevent it. The point of tapping is so you know when to stop.

So the onus is on the person in the submission to opt out. Not the person doi g the submission.

And especially in competition. Because you are there to win. Not there to teach lessons. Not there to be a hero. Not there to be a friend.

One job. Win that fight.

 

[drop bear]

I don't think so, unless you were doing something which in fact implies victims are to blame. Would you do that? I don't think you so.

As to your last sentence, if I understand your meaning, wouldn't it depend on the audience? Anyway, I don't think blame has any place in a crime prevention scenario, just how to reduce risk.

Not so much blame as putting the responsibility on the victim. Self defence is about the victim taking responsibility for their own safety.

Because if the victim has no responsibility for their actions then there is no way for the victim to control their situation.

 

[Hanzou]

NONSENSE You dont accidentally hurt people you feel are too stubborn or stupid to tap. Your too stubborn or stupid to realize you won and let go, you have to prove how much of a tough guy you are and teach them a lesson for being to "Stupid" to tap

When I was a white belt, I rolled against a 4 stripe white belt. During the course of the roll, I tried to pressure his guard by stacking him. He gripped my arm, and performed a triangle choke. I was able to resist the choke and continue standing, and he then immediately went into an armbar.

Me being a dumb white belt, I didn't want to tap because I wanted to prove how awesome I was. However, after feeling a sharp pain in my elbow, I immediately tapped, and my arm hurt for weeks. Now, if I hadn't have tapped, that guy would have snapped my arm in two. The fact that my arm was in pain for weeks was entirely MY fault.

Why? Because if I'm not tapping, it's telling my partner that their technique is ineffective. If their technique IS effective, and I'm not tapping, then I'm being stubborn/stupid/immature/etc. and I'm going to get hurt.

 

[Brian King]

"But my impression is that this is the bulk of self defense instruction"
From conventional MA-based instructors? sure.

Not from me and most of the reality-based teachers I know (99% women). Erik Kondo is an exception: THE PROGRESSIVE BOUNDARY SETTING SYSTEM

Rory Miller gets the dimensions of mental-emotional-psychological conditioning. But even he, as good as he
is and he is very good, does not address the reality of assaults toward girls/women from people 'inside the circle'.
Chiron Convergence

Less and less focus on techniques. More and more focus on consciously facing (and coping with)
what the women and girls already know: we are/have already been molested, assaulted, harassed, raped
by family and friends/people we know; people who are already part of the 'circle of trust'. Stranger assault obsesses regular MA instructors, occurs sometimes and is the most discussed. But is the least frequent. You wouldn't know that by reading this thread, most MT threads or the classes offered by MAs.

Girls/women bring all their personal experience (and experiences of the girls/women in their families and their friends)
into the class. It dominates everything that happens in the class. Creating an environment in the class where they/we can talk about reality and learn to change what happens in the future is my responsibility.

Girls/women, me and my students have been trained/socialized very very very differently. And especially
in even naming, much less stopping, behavior and intrusion/aggression from people inside the circle.

So I share 27 ways to recognize and interupt/stop/derail/deflect/change intrusive behavior....
Recognizing, Naming, Stopping the targeting and testing aggressors use (seldom involves physical strikes etc, but definitely includes physical skills).

Because it happens (happened) to me too.

Wonderful post aedrasteia!
That link to the " the progressive boundary setting system" looks very interesting and beneficial. I have read some of Dr Henry Cloud's books on boundaries. It is interesting how much we have to work on setting and maintaining boundaries in our personal and professional lives. I was only able to briefly look over some of the articles on that page. They look interesting and I liked the tone of them. I will be investigating further.

You wrote: "Girls/women bring all their personal experience (and experiences of the girls/women in their families and their friends) into the class. It dominates everything that happens in the class.

Something I try to always remember with all my martial interactions is that every student brings their own personal experiences to the interaction the same as I bring mine. Interestingly for many of us it is vague feelings and hints of memories sometimes just below the surface and other times long and deeply buried. For others it is immediate, loud, and very clear. No matter what it is relevant in all the training and work. Having witnessed these past and current emotions and trauma's being released by various students (men and women) during training has made me very aware how much care and awareness needs to be applied when training with folks, especially the type of drills, situations, and exercises that often can tap into these emotions. Being aware how many people have buried hurts, injuries and other strong emotions as a way to cope has changed the way that I teach and interact with students. For example, if I should need to touch a student to either correct or to demonstrate I first ask permission. After interaction I express gratitude. When doing ground work for correction and demo I am careful not to loom and to carefully observe the students reactions, breathing and tone and to adjust the work from those observations. If even a single student is expressing (verbally or physically) difficulties I will step back the work and then work forward again from a different line. What are some of the things that you do or you have seen other instructors do to make the work less threatening, more palatable, safer, and more effective to help people either after the crises or hopefully before entering crises.

You also wrote:
"So I share 27 ways to recognize and interupt/stop/derail/deflect/change intrusive behavior....
Recognizing, Naming, Stopping the targeting and testing aggressors use (seldom involves physical strikes etc, but definitely includes physical skills)."

Can you share those 27 ways either in this thread or even better start another? Aggressors seldom come right out attacking, they often interview, test, and groom the victim. If the possible victim can 'fail' this interviewing and testing stage they often will not have further criminal/abusive interaction from the attacker. What do you mean by "Naming"? Do you mean the ability to recognize and call out the behavior, by name?

Thanks again for the post and links.
Great stuff
Regards
Brian King

 

[Brian King]

I have a question for the group at large. Approximately how much time is spent by you with your students teaching them things other than fighting skills? We are talking about pillars of self defense, and the recurring theme seems to be that violence and fighting skills are a very small part of overall self defense. But my impression is that this is the bulk of self defense instruction.

I can only speak from my own training which is based on the Systema that I have learned, teach and practice, Steve. I do not divide the training between "fighting skills" and other skills. All drills, all exercises, all work is designed to help the student learn about themselves at the core. All the drills and exercises should work the student on multiple levels depending only on the students experience and drive as too how deep the work can go. For a quick example, a simple drill- one student attacks the other with kicks. It is almost never specified what kick or which leg. The attacker gets to decide what attack to launch and the defender gets to defend how he or she wishes or even if. This kind of drill might be seen as a "fighting drill" by some, and they would I suppose be correct. But some students will be working on timing, learning to see the attacker form the attack in their head prior to their launching it. Some students will be working on fear and ego by letting the attack hit and absorbing the strike, some students will be concentrating on their (or the attackers) breathing and learning how to control and manipulate it. Some students will be working on being able to commit to an attack, some will be working on balance, some will be deliberately bringing forward different emotions while they are working (either attacking or defending) to explore how the different emotions might effect their (and their partners) work and abilities, One might be watching the wall clock in an attempt to be mindful and aware of every single second of the drill (not easy but interesting work),one might be doing math problems out loud while doing the work, Some might be working on cleansing the nervous system spikes, we often see eyes shut and working 'blind', but no matter what all will be working with a playful goal of exploration. We teach that the focus should not just be merely on their own work and not even on just their and their partners work, but rather on all of the work happening around them, and they are often tested on this. It can be chaotic which of course is another lesson. Is it a fight drill or a balance drill, timing work, absorption work, emotional exploration or can it be all of those and more depending on the student? Another example that can help demonstrate this concept is the push-up plank. It might be seen as a conditioning exercise and this would be correct. It is both a physical and mental exercise. It helps to physically and mentally condition the student. The plank can also teach the student several different ways to organize and let the body do the work. It helps to teach striking. It helps the student to explore breathing and working from structure, it can explore tendon work or working from the nervous system. It can teach muscle control and efficiency. It can teach the student methods of remaining or regaining calmness while they are under stress and physical load. It is not merely for muscle development. It works many different systems depending on the students perspectives, needs, and desires.

To be honest Steve, it kind of puzzles me the preoccupation with the perception that a class must be a divided up by fighting or other. It is often the students perceptions that divid up the work and the instructors goal to widen and deepen those perceptions.

Regards
Brian King

 

[Steve]

I can only speak from my own training which is based on the Systema that I have learned, teach and practice, Steve. I do not divide the training between "fighting skills" and other skills. All drills, all exercises, all work is designed to help the student learn about themselves at the core. All the drills and exercises should work the student on multiple levels depending only on the students experience and drive as too how deep the work can go. For a quick example, a simple drill- one student attacks the other with kicks. It is almost never specified what kick or which leg. The attacker gets to decide what attack to launch and the defender gets to defend how he or she wishes or even if. This kind of drill might be seen as a "fighting drill" by some, and they would I suppose be correct. But some students will be working on timing, learning to see the attacker form the attack in their head prior to their launching it. Some students will be working on fear and ego by letting the attack hit and absorbing the strike, some students will be concentrating on their (or the attackers) breathing and learning how to control and manipulate it. Some students will be working on being able to commit to an attack, some will be working on balance, some will be deliberately bringing forward different emotions while they are working (either attacking or defending) to explore how the different emotions might effect their (and their partners) work and abilities, One might be watching the wall clock in an attempt to be mindful and aware of every single second of the drill (not easy but interesting work),one might be doing math problems out loud while doing the work, Some might be working on cleansing the nervous system spikes, we often see eyes shut and working 'blind', but no matter what all will be working with a playful goal of exploration. We teach that the focus should not just be merely on their own work and not even on just their and their partners work, but rather on all of the work happening around them, and they are often tested on this. It can be chaotic which of course is another lesson. Is it a fight drill or a balance drill, timing work, absorption work, emotional exploration or can it be all of those and more depending on the student? Another example that can help demonstrate this concept is the push-up plank. It might be seen as a conditioning exercise and this would be correct. It is both a physical and mental exercise. It helps to physically and mentally condition the student. The plank can also teach the student several different ways to organize and let the body do the work. It helps to teach striking. It helps the student to explore breathing and working from structure, it can explore tendon work or working from the nervous system. It can teach muscle control and efficiency. It can teach the student methods of remaining or regaining calmness while they are under stress and physical load. It is not merely for muscle development. It works many different systems depending on the students perspectives, needs, and desires.

To be honest Steve, it kind of puzzles me the preoccupation with the perception that a class must be a divided up by fighting or other. It is often the students perceptions that divid up the work and the instructors goal to widen and deepen those perceptions.

Regards
Brian King

Thank you for the thoughtful post, Brian. In the end, after reading this thread and a few others, I'm honestly puzzled at any preoccupation with fighting at all. It seems to me that any time spent training fighting techniques is a distraction from what you guys suggest is self defense.

 

[Hanzou]

Thank you for the thoughtful post, Brian. In the end, after reading this thread and a few others, I'm honestly puzzled at any preoccupation with fighting at all. It seems to me that any time spent training fighting techniques is a distraction from what you guys suggest is self defense.

Seems a bit like false advertising really. People tend to equate self defense with fighting prowess. Essentially a person who could fight was well adept at defending themselves against someone doing them harm.

It seems rather bizarre to hear instructors say that the point isn't to fight at all. Well if that's the point, why are you teaching people how to kill someone for the vast majority of your class time? That's quite the contradiction.

Of course it would be difficult to fill those training halls with people if you spent the entire lesson teaching about how to de-escalate a situation or turn the other cheek instead of teaching people how to smash windpipes. Right?

 

[Brian King]

Thank you for the thoughtful post, Brian. In the end, after reading this thread and a few others, I'm honestly puzzled at any preoccupation with fighting at all. It seems to me that any time spent training fighting techniques is a distraction from what you guys suggest is self defense.

Steve, do you teach at your gym/dojo.. jeez, I am not sure what you BJJ/MMA types call your schools LOL. I do not know about your business/professional teaching, perhaps that is different. In martial arts, the difficulty in teaching a class or seminar is not what to teach but what not too teach. There is a limit of time and never enough of it. An instructor has to pick and chose what they think that the class (a class of individuals - each with their own expectations, experiences, and needs) needs and what they can help them to explore in the allotted time. a good instructor strives to meet those needs. Students have to be engaged and inspired to help them do the exploration necessary. Many have situations that they are currently dealing with and some of those are or are potentially violent. Not maybe some day, but now. Steve, some of the 'physical techniques' can save their lives. It is a known. The 'other' work as you name can also save their lives but it is not always a known. The situation avoided is not always known or acknowledged. Steve, have you ever had a student call you in the middle of the night to thank you for a lesson you gave that ended up saving their life? Ever received a letter from a solder serving in a combat zone thanking you for the lessons which they have put to good use on the job (in this case an army sniper with a number of credited kills). I have yet to receive the call at 2AM from someone telling me that they avoided an alley, had a mugger decide against interviewing, had a robber ignore them on the public transit. These benefits are not measurable and often not even noticed. The lessons have to be sneaked in. The fighting helps to drive those lessons home and make them real. Rory Millar does a drill where the students demonstrate a defense dealing with some situation or another. After a number of participants go thru the exercise he asked them and everyone watching why none turned around and left thru the door? I was once up in Toronto attending a seminar. This exercise has two determined fellows with blades stabbing and slashing at all the other students. If the blade merely touched you at all you were out and had to stand against the wall. It was chaotic and violent. I stood besides Vladimir uninvited and acted like I was observing the drill even engaging him in light conversation. The attackers stormed on by me attacking several others. This went on for a minute or two then looked at Vlad, shrugged that I was bored and entered the fray to be almost immediately 'killed'. It was perhaps a fighting drill, but it also had many other lessons as I am sure that you can imagine. What was most interesting to me was that by my 'not getting involved' the attackers went on by and did not even notice me. This was an important lesson for me that came about in a fighting drill, but does not only have to do with fighting.

Steve, perhaps your perception that fighting is about fighting is misguided? The confidence, the being able to express yourself physically, the knowing that you can take a punch or a fall and live, that a bruise isn't anything and that a rubbing some dirt in the cut will stop the bleeding are lessons that come from what I am assuming you are calling "fighting". I was at a seminar that Ken Good was teaching to a bunch of law enforcement officers in Huntington Beach California I think. One officer had ended on the ground and four others were stomping him and hitting him with stiff training batons. While this was going on Ken looks over to the melee and asked the officer "does it hurt?" Gasping and grunting with the kicks and baton strike the officer replies positively (I believe there was a bit of cussing and a H double L yes it does) to which Ken calmly asked the officer, "if it hurts why don't you move?" The officer didn't understand at first. To his defense it is hard to think sometimes while being stumped and beat with sticks. Finally Ken yells "IF IT HURTS, MOVE." Finally it dawns on the officer and he fights and claws his way back onto his feet. A lesson that I am sure he remembers to this day. George Ledyard Sensei says that "movement resolves conflict." For many this a reminder that when doing a throw and getting stuck to move, for some it is a reminder that if the hits/stomps/kicks hurt...to move. The "fighting" drills give immediate reinforcement to the idea that movement resolves conflict. The bruises are the pathway to beat the lesson into the soul. But it doesn't take very long for the student to realize that movement resolves conflict has more to do with life and not merely fighting. It can be applied on the highway. It can be applied during stressful work meetings. It can be applied to relationships. I don't mean to necessarily leave your loved one, but by adjusting a position a bit it gives yourself and others room to work. Even here on Martial talk, during heated keyboarding, movement resolves conflict, can go a long a ways in promoting better thread.

The fighting is a tool that leads to exploration and understanding Steve. It is also a tool that might save the students life an hour or ten years after class. Do instructors get it right? Hopefully sometimes. Like all tools, it is not always used efficiently or productively. I have been known to use my electric drill as a hammer and have used an extension cord as a rope. It doesn't make the cord and drill wrong and it did get the job done. It is not an either/or thing Steve and I can see that not being either or drives you a bit crazy. It is ok, crazy is a big club and Teddy Roosevelt liked to carry a big club. It seems like when you do you art Steve, you put on your gi, and go to your club and practice your art. Finished you change clothes and go about your life. Your life and your training are separate. It is ok and there are thousand and thousands of people that train just that way. For others, the training and the living are the same and the lessons are intwined.

Regards
Brian King

 

[Steve]

Brian, thanks again for your thoughts. I'm not suggesting anything contrary to what you said. I'm simply concluding from your posts and others that what you're describing isn't self defense training. That doesn't mean it has no value. It's just not self defense. As you and others have well stated, self defense is more about lifestyle, wise choices, and one's approach to a situation. Any physical component is something other than self defense. Truly, I didn't really appreciate this distinction until I considered your opinions, and the educated opinions of others here.

It's rare around here for someone to admit having changed their mind. But in this case, I have. Thank you.

 

[Brian King]

Hanzou wrote:
"Of course it would be difficult to fill those training halls with people if you spent the entire lesson teaching about how to de-escalate a situation or turn the other cheek instead of teaching people how to smash windpipes. Right?"

You're playing right? Otherwise it might be taken that you are implying dishonesty for financial gain. You are quoting Steve quoting me so you are implying that dishonesty directly to me. I can assume a few things from your post Hanzou, some of which might be true or not. I can assume that you are playing and merely trying to jab someone to get a reaction for your own giggles. I can assume that you have not taken the time to read the thread or are unable to understand the simple lessons in it. I can assume that you are purposely being ignorant trying to prove some point. I can clearly see that you have no problem accusing people of being dishonest and trying in your own sneaky snarky underhanded way of impugning my reputation. Good luck with that LOL. Or, you could be playing. Yeah, I bet thats it. Thanks for posting.

Brian King

 

[Brian King]

Brian, thanks again for your thoughts. I'm not suggesting anything contrary to what you said. I'm simply concluding from your posts and others that what you're describing isn't self defense training. That doesn't mean it has no value. It's just not self defense. As you and others have well stated, self defense is more about lifestyle, wise choices, and one's approach to a situation. Any physical component is something other than self defense. Truly, I didn't really appreciate this distinction until I considered your opinions, and the educated opinions of others here.

It's rare around here for someone to admit having changed their mind. But in this case, I have. Thank you.

Thanks Steve. You will pardon me if I say it seems contrary to me. If one is calling something by one term and another says no it is not that... ummm seems contrary. Now, I do not call my teaching self defense but I do see the obvious cross overs and am surprised that you are unable or unwilling to. Perhaps we are speaking around each other a bit? In your opinion, as someone who trains in a martial art, who either has been involved or knows others that have been involved in 'self-defense' situations, what do you consider should be a pillar of self defense? Please in your own words Steve describe what is self defense training. If you could describe self defense training course, what would it be? I think further up thread it was purple or brown belt in BJJ? Was that you?

Here is an exercise that might help us to communicate to each other.
Steve, you are now an instructor at say an open community college and have been asked to teach a self defense course for students at that college. It is a twice a week for 12 weeks course each class lasting 1.5 hours. There have been a number of violent assaults and robberies, a number of fights at the dorms, a couple of reported rapes (no arrests), and a few gay men have recently been beaten up (no arrests). Many of the crime suspects are considered non students but many are also students. All of the victims have either been students or university staff. Due to budget cuts campus security is a single mobile (driving) patrol but the university has put a few more lights on the pathways and cut down some bushes. They have made available emergency whistles for the students to purchase at a discount.

Please describe your curriculum and testing methods for the above course.

Thanks Steve
Regards
Brian King

 

[oftheherd1]

Not so much blame as putting the responsibility on the victim. Self defence is about the victim taking responsibility for their own safety.

Because if the victim has no responsibility for their actions then there is no way for the victim to control their situation.

Well, I think I understand what you mean. I think you mean a potential victim, as regards self defense, must be willing to take certain actions to enhance their survivability. Of course, that is the self of self defense. But not everyone wants to be involved in their own defense. What right do we have to require them to do so? So I wonder if your choice of words, that is "putting the responsibility on the victim (not some potential victim)" doesn't sound like blaming the victim again? As I said, I am sure you didn't mean that, and maybe I am reading things into your choice of words that I shouldn't be. Apologies if I am.

 

[Hanzou]

Hanzou wrote:
"Of course it would be difficult to fill those training halls with people if you spent the entire lesson teaching about how to de-escalate a situation or turn the other cheek instead of teaching people how to smash windpipes. Right?"

You're playing right? Otherwise it might be taken that you are implying dishonesty for financial gain. You are quoting Steve quoting me so you are implying that dishonesty directly to me. I can assume a few things from your post Hanzou, some of which might be true or not. I can assume that you are playing and merely trying to jab someone to get a reaction for your own giggles. I can assume that you have not taken the time to read the thread or are unable to understand the simple lessons in it. I can assume that you are purposely being ignorant trying to prove some point. I can clearly see that you have no problem accusing people of being dishonest and trying in your own sneaky snarky underhanded way of impugning my reputation. Good luck with that LOL. Or, you could be playing. Yeah, I bet thats it. Thanks for posting.

Brian King

And all of those assumptions would be false Brian. Just like your assumptions surrounding my training methods earlier.

 

[drop bear]

Well, I think I understand what you mean. I think you mean a potential victim, as regards self defense, must be willing to take certain actions to enhance their survivability. Of course, that is the self of self defense. But not everyone wants to be involved in their own defense. What right do we have to require them to do so? So I wonder if your choice of words, that is "putting the responsibility on the victim (not some potential victim)" doesn't sound like blaming the victim again? As I said, I am sure you didn't mean that, and maybe I am reading things into your choice of words that I shouldn't be. Apologies if I am.

Self defence is victim blaming. All of it. Because you are taking the victim and saying that their behaviour determines if they are a victim or not. Rather than the actions of the aggressor.

Saying the potential victim is still victim blaming.

So what you are saying is true.

 

[drop bear]

But not everyone wants to be involved in their own defense. What right do we have to require them to do so?

And this.
Nobody is requiring them to. It doesn't phase me if they learn self defence or not.

 

[drop bear]

Being able to mostly avoid violence is not self defence. That is called being a normal functional member of society.

Being able to handle a violence is.

 

[ballen0351]

Being able to mostly avoid violence is not self defence. That is called being a normal functional member of society.

Being able to handle a violence is.

Yes and no. Being able to avoid violence at the hands of non normal members of society is self defense. It's easy for 2 normal people to avoid violence because as you said that's normal behavior. Avioding physical confrontation with crazy, intoxicated, or criminals is self defense