SD is avoidance

[Kung Fu Wang]

It's wrong to start a fight without a good reason. It's also wrong to avoid a fight when it's necessary.

A: They are beating up your wife, are you going to do something?
B: She is not my wife. I don't know her.

B is safe, but his wife is not.

What's your opinion on this?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I don't know, but I'm sure circular punches are involved somehow.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

MA is used to protect your family members. Is that not true in the 21the century?

 

[Deleted member 39746]

I don't know, but I'm sure circular punches are involved somehow.

Nobody expects the circular punch to their occipital bone!

 

[Deleted member 39746]

Overal the post isnt wrong, its avoidance and observation predominately but violence is needed and forced onto you, hence why the actual fighting part isnt completely deleted from SD teaching. Although in its most extreme point, the best self defence action would be to bail on the person you are with. (although everyone acknowledges this as something 99% of people wont do, and probbly including themselves)

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I don't know, but I'm sure circular punches are involved somehow.

To use your forearm to hit on the back of your opponent's head is the easiest way to knock him down. The back of your opponent's head is weaker than the front of his head.

- Your opponent steps in and punches at your face.
- You spin your body, move yourself out of his attacking path, use circle punch to hit on the back of his head, and knock him down.

Even from the SD point of view, if someone attacks you, you knock him down, what's wrong is that?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

To use your forearm to hit on the back of your opponent's head is the easiest way to knock him down. The back of your opponent's head is weaker than the front of his head.

- Your opponent steps in and punches at your face.
- You spin your body, move yourself out of his attacking path, use circle punch to hit on the back of his head, and knock him down.

Even from the SD point of view, if someone attacks you, you knock him down, what's wrong is that?

Nothing is wrong with it. It's just that everything you post eventually comes back to you describing some amazing martial arts move.

How's the weather? I circular punch it. Who makes the best hamburger? Circular punch. Barefoot or shoes in dojo? CIRCULAR PUNCH!

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Nothing is wrong with it. It's just that everything you post eventually comes back to you describing some amazing martial arts move.

How's the weather? I circular punch it. Who makes the best hamburger? Circular punch. Barefoot or shoes in dojo? CIRCULAR PUNCH!

I do like circular punch better than straight punch.

A straight punch is just a punch, no more and no less.

A circular punch can be

1. hook punch.
2. haymaker.
3. fingers attack across the eyes.
4. downward parry.
5. wrist grab.
6. head lock.
7. beginning of a spiral punch.
8. beginning of under hook.
9. used to protect your center from outside in.
10. used to obtain a clinch.
11. ...

By using 10, it can be a bridge between the striking art and the grappling art.

One can write a research paper on "circular punch".

 

[Martial D]

Overal the post isnt wrong, its avoidance and observation predominately but violence is needed and forced onto you, hence why the actual fighting part isnt completely deleted from SD teaching. Although in its most extreme point, the best self defence action would be to bail on the person you are with. (although everyone acknowledges this as something 99% of people wont do, and probbly including themselves)

No. It's something 99% of people SAY they wouldn't do, and maybe even believe it. The hard truth is flight is every bit, if not more common than fight.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Egads.

 

[MadMartigan]

It's wrong to start a fight without a good reason. It's also wrong to avoid a fight when it's necessary

True... the operative word being "necessary".

A: They are beating up your wife, are you going to do something?
B: She is not my wife. I don't know her.

B is safe, but his wife is not.

MA is used to protect your family members. Is that not true in the 21the century?

Of course. Someone trying to harm my wife (or kids if I had them) would see a very different side of me (the side capable of things not fit to describe on a public forum).

As a thought experiment lets change the hypothetical situation though.

You and another guy friend are out for a couple drinks and he starts getting a bit rowdy. You can tell he's ramping up to potentially get into a confrontation by the end of the night. Do you
- A: Stick by him (babysitting) and try to run interference;
- B: Just have his back regardless of who started things;
- C: Ditch him early and tell him to call you in the morning if he needs bail money.

I agree with the title of the thread. Self Defense is Avoidance. I've had the above scenario happen, and told him flat out, 'I don't babysit adults'. If he went and got himself into trouble, I wouldn't be around to see it. Then I went home.

Inescapable violence, by definition cannot be avoided. Your options there are win/lose. Anything else can, and should be avoided. That's at least how I view SD.

 

[JowGaWolf]

It's wrong to start a fight without a good reason. It's also wrong to avoid a fight when it's necessary.

A: They are beating up your wife, are you going to do something?
B: She is not my wife. I don't know her.

B is safe, but his wife is not.

What's your opinion on this?

My opinion probably starts on defining what self-defense is or isn't. For me Self-defense isn't avoidance or starting a fight. Because of that perception a lot of things become open for me.

I think how a person defines self-defense is going play a major rule in defining what avoidance is and what is considered necessary. For me my goal is to avoid unnecessary fights. It doesn't mean I avoid fights. It just means I avoid the unnecessary ones. Those are thing that do not have any real benefit for me to be in. If the benefit isn't bigger than the consequences of the fight then I'm probably going to look at it as unnecessary.

 

[Dirty Dog]

My opinion probably starts on defining what self-defense is or isn't. For me Self-defense isn't avoidance or starting a fight. Because of that perception a lot of things become open for me.

I think how a person defines self-defense is going play a major rule in defining what avoidance is and what is considered necessary. For me my goal is to avoid unnecessary fights. It doesn't mean I avoid fights. It just means I avoid the unnecessary ones. Those are thing that do not have any real benefit for me to be in. If the benefit isn't bigger than the consequences of the fight then I'm probably going to look at it as unnecessary.

I think most people will agree that avoidance is part of self-defense, but it is certainly not the be-all and end-all of self-defense.
Avoid the avoidable, and end the unavoidable as quickly as possible.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I think most people will agree that avoidance is part of self-defense, but it is certainly not the be-all and end-all of self-defense.
Avoid the avoidable, and end the unavoidable as quickly as possible.

Some people go overboard with things. You say "Avoid the fight" and people will go to the extreme with that, they won't stand up for themselves when necessary because in their mind "avoiding the fight" means to not to engage in the conflict. A

In today's society a lot of people think "Either one extreme or the opposite extreme" things get narrowed down too quickly.

Not to pick on Wang, but in his original post.

"A: They are beating up your wife, are you going to do something?
B: She is not my wife. I don't know her.

B is safe, but his wife is not."

The assumption is that B. requires fighting in order to stop it. The truth is that there may be a possibility that B can be addressed without fighting. As long as the person doing the beating feels like his own safety is a risk. He will stop beating the woman and prioritize his own own safety. He may fight you, he may walk away, he may stalemate the situation. There are a lot of options. Calling the police is one of them. Or. Do both. Call the police, confront the guy. OR do all three. Call the police, confront the guy beating up the woman, and get into a fight lol.

For me personally. I've actually tried to help women in abusive relationships and all of them except for one turned on me. So I'm kind of on the approach with the mindset that I have more to worry about from the woman than the guy beating her. I'm more likely to physically assist if a woman is being attacked by a stranger. If a woman is being attacked by an abusive boyfriend, then I'm more likely to call the police and keep my distance. Not sure if you've ever experienced before, but there's nothing like trying to help someone from physical harm only to have that person turn on you and accuse you of being the bad guy. Abusive relationships have way too many layers for me.

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

Some people go overboard with things. You say "Avoid the fight" and people will go to the extreme with that, they won't stand up for themselves when necessary because in their mind "avoiding the fight" means to not to engage in the conflict.

If someone attacks you, you just play defense and block all his punches, do you think he will continue to attack you?

One of my students got into a bar fight. In 10 minutes fight, his opponent could not even land a punch on him. Finally his opponent sat down on the couch and mad at himself.

My point is why not just try to play defense instead of avoid the fight completely.

 

[JowGaWolf]

If someone attacks you, you just play defense and block all his punches, do you think he will continue to attack you?

If your defensive posture is to "return fire" it's a possibility and not many punches will land after the attacker comes to the conclusion that you are getting ready to beat him down. Some people will attack you because they see that you aren't ready. But once you get into that ready state, they may back down as they realize that they are minutes away from being the one who gets a beating. It's been known to happen.

One of my students got into a bar fight. In 10 minutes fight, his opponent could not even land a punch on him. Finally his opponent sat down on the couch and mad at himself.

The reason the attacker probably kept attacking for 10 minutes is because he realized that there were no consequences to his action. But if you can dodge punches with ease, then that's an option too. I've seen people do that and in 1 minute the attacker tired herself out. I've only seen this with men who were defending themselves against a woman and they didn't want to hit the woman.

My point is why not just try to play defense instead of avoid the fight completely.

This is an option. Just not my option. I rather defeat people mentally as soon as possible so I can have an advantage if the person decides to attack me. One thing that has always worked for me is to first be calm and say to the person, "you might beat me up, you might not." and then show confidence in the situation. Not sure why it worked back then, but no one was willing to get into a physical fight with me after stating that. They may not have like the idea that I appeared to be willing to "fight to the end." and had so calmly accepted that I might lose but was still willing to defend myself. When I was a teen, the saying on the street was. "You might beat me up, but I'm about to give you hell." Back then the rule was, "win or lose you don't back down." That was many years ago and there was less to worry about. These days people are quick to pull out guns. Things change. Now I just find it easier to make people doubt themselves and fill their minds with uncertainty. If I can make a person doubt their chances and feel uncertain about their abilities then I can pretty much end most aggression where they can leave and save face.

You would be surprised with how many people have low self-esteem. In a world of youtube attention and face book likes, people today are really fragile mentally. I'm not referring to those who are struggling with mental issues and know it. I'm talking about everyday people who don't feel important or of value unless they can dominate someone verbally or physically. The best thing is that you can "get into people's head without being aggressive or threatening."

 

[Kung Fu Wang]

I rather defeat people mentally as soon as possible

Your opponent punches at you. You block his punch. Your blocking hurt his arm badly. IMO, that's the easiest way tp destroy the attacker's confidence.

If I kick at you, and you use your elbow joint to meet on my kick. I won't kick you again.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Your opponent punches at you. You block his punch. Your blocking hurt his arm badly. IMO, that's the easiest way tp destroy the attacker's confidence.

If I kick at you, and you use your elbow joint to meet on my kick. I won't kick you again.

Valid methods

 

[wolfeyes2323]

It's wrong to start a fight without a good reason. It's also wrong to avoid a fight when it's necessary.

A: They are beating up your wife, are you going to do something?
B: She is not my wife. I don't know her.

B is safe, but his wife is not.

What's your opinion on this?

When the mind is right, the sword is right. When the mind is not right, the sword is also not right. He who wishes to study kendo, must first study his mind. —Toranosuke Shimada