Teaching assertiveness from a young age.

[Steve]

yeah but some still don´t have a mind set to go the whole way.
a life or death situation is not like a dojo session.

You know, I've thought about this at times, mostly when suburban salesmen talk about the 'real' dangers lurking around every corner and cultivating an understanding of "real world" violence. Is that actually doing weird things to that person's psyche? And does imparting a real fear of "life or death" situations where someone may need to kill or be killed actually make the person less well adjusted and more prone to falling for weird conspiracies (like Q and the NRA stuff here in the States). It seems to me like it's promoting what resembles an unreasonable fear of something that is highly unlikely to ever occur... like people who are afraid to swim at the beach because they're worried about being attacked by a shark.

So, when you mentioned this about kids, it really struck a chord. Does teaching kids about life or death situations do more for the kid or TO the kid? I mean, there are some kids who live in some pretty dangerous areas. But is the average kid dealing with life and death? And for kids who have run of the mill issues, would sincerely imparting a sense of potential danger lurking around corners where you may need to fight in a kill or be killed scenario be helpful? Maybe more to the point of this thread, is that the same or even related to promoting in them a sense of self confidence and assertiveness?

And on a different note, I think the actual activity kids do is way less important than how they are being coached in the activity. A kid on the chess team with a good coach is going to get just as much positive mental and emotional development as a kid on the wrestling team with a good coach. If we're talking about assertiveness, optimism, resilience, and a host of other positive traits, getting the kid into an activity that builds some kind of actual skill, that they love doing, and with a coach/mentor who has the right skillset makes all the difference. The key is the coach and the building of some real skill. So, if they're taking TKD to compete in TKD, great. If they're taking TKD to manage 'life or death' situations... I think they are headed the wrong direction. Not just for the reasons I outlined earlier, but also because I don't think they're actually learning those skills.

 

[caped crusader]

You know, I've thought about this at times, mostly when suburban salesmen talk about the 'real' dangers lurking around every corner and cultivating an understanding of "real world" violence. Is that actually doing weird things to that person's psyche? And does imparting a real fear of "life or death" situations where someone may need to kill or be killed actually make the person less well adjusted and more prone to falling for weird conspiracies (like Q and the NRA stuff here in the States). It seems to me like it's promoting what resembles an unreasonable fear of something that is highly unlikely to ever occur... like people who are afraid to swim at the beach because they're worried about being attacked by a shark.

So, when you mentioned this about kids, it really struck a chord. Does teaching kids about life or death situations do more for the kid or TO the kid? I mean, there are some kids who live in some pretty dangerous areas. But is the average kid dealing with life and death? And for kids who have run of the mill issues, would sincerely imparting a sense of potential danger lurking around corners where you may need to fight in a kill or be killed scenario be helpful? Maybe more to the point of this thread, is that the same or even related to promoting in them a sense of self confidence and assertiveness?

And on a different note, I think the actual activity kids do is way less important than how they are being coached in the activity. A kid on the chess team with a good coach is going to get just as much positive mental and emotional development as a kid on the wrestling team with a good coach. If we're talking about assertiveness, optimism, resilience, and a host of other positive traits, getting the kid into an activity that builds some kind of actual skill, that they love doing, and with a coach/mentor who has the right skillset makes all the difference. The key is the coach and the building of some real skill. So, if they're taking TKD to compete in TKD, great. If they're taking TKD to manage 'life or death' situations... I think they are headed the wrong direction. Not just for the reasons I outlined earlier, but also because I don't think they're actually learning those skills.

Pheeew !
I hardly see the parallel with chess as we are also talking about fighting here, maybe the kid should join a book club.
Actions speak louder than words or merely thinking too much.

 

[Steve]

Pheeew !
I hardly see the parallel with chess as we are also talking about fighting here, maybe the kid should join a book club.
Actions speak louder than words or merely thinking too much.

Are we talking about fighting or assertiveness? I'd say if you're learning to fight, you need to fight. If you're learning assertiveness, fighting isn't needed.

 

[ThatOneCanadian]

A kid on the chess team with a good coach is going to get just as much positive mental and emotional development as a kid on the wrestling team with a good coach.

Call me a heathen but this is EXACTLY why I prefer sport Karate over self-defense Karate. Take this video for example: try to spot which schools seem to be "self defense" focused and which ones seem to be competition focused:

The "self defense" people seem worse off than an untrained fighter while the competitors at least appear to be physically conditioned. Yes, kata is not a good measure of one's self-defense ability but performing it at such a high level usually means that you're conditioned to the point where you're probably a somewhat decent fighter. I actually remember reading someplace that, in theory, most athletes are good fighters; in other words, a soccer player has more drive and physical resilience than the untrained fighter and will most likely see themselves the victor of any altercation. Going back to my initial post, sport appears to train assertiveness a lot more effectively than someone in a black gi doing the same 50 or so knife disarm drills over and over again.

 

[caped crusader]

Are we talking about fighting or assertiveness? I'd say if you're learning to fight, you need to fight. If you're learning assertiveness, fighting isn't needed.

very true but most parents send a child to Judo or boxing for competition & to "wake them up". Girls are mainly sent for self defence.
just how i see it.

 

[Steve]

Call me a heathen but this is EXACTLY why I prefer sport Karate over self-defense Karate. Take this video for example: try to spot which schools seem to be "self defense" focused and which ones seem to be competition focused:

The "self defense" people seem worse off than an untrained fighter while the competitors at least appear to be physically conditioned. Yes, kata is not a good measure of one's self-defense ability but performing it at such a high level usually means that you're conditioned to the point where you're probably a somewhat decent fighter. I actually remember reading someplace that, in theory, most athletes are good fighters; in other words, a soccer player has more drive and physical resilience than the untrained fighter and will most likely see themselves the victor of any altercation. Going back to my initial post, sport appears to train assertiveness a lot more effectively than someone in a black gi doing the same 50 or so knife disarm drills over and over again.

I know I probably sound like a broken record, but I agree completely. You can measure performance in a competition, because it is an application of one's training. And as a result, people move beyond simple application and into higher levels of expertise.

 

[Steve]

very true but most parents send a child to Judo or boxing for competition & to "wake them up". Girls are mainly sent for self defence.
just how i see it.

Err... not sure I'd go so far as to say all that. I've mentioned in other threads that Judo is a high school sport here, just like football, baseball, volleyball, etc. Lots of kids turn out, both girls and boys, to compete.

Also, for what it's worth, there are typically at least a few girls on the wrestling squad. Not nearly as rare as it once was, and they compete well against kids their own size.

Regarding the "wake them up," I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Speaking for me and for my kids, we encouraged them to get into whatever they were interested in. While we didn't push them into any particular activity, we did require them to be involved in SOMETHING all the time. I was not much concerned about what they wanted to do. Rather, it was about them being engaged in something that would foster a lot of the traits we are talking about in this thread. And it's interesting how all of them ended up getting into very different things, and also interesting that my daughters are the competitive athletes, not my son.

 

[dvcochran]

Err... not sure I'd go so far as to say all that. I've mentioned in other threads that Judo is a high school sport here, just like football, baseball, volleyball, etc. Lots of kids turn out, both girls and boys, to compete.

Also, for what it's worth, there are typically at least a few girls on the wrestling squad. Not nearly as rare as it once was, and they compete well against kids their own size.

Regarding the "wake them up," I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Speaking for me and for my kids, we encouraged them to get into whatever they were interested in. While we didn't push them into any particular activity, we did require them to be involved in SOMETHING all the time. I was not much concerned about what they wanted to do. Rather, it was about them being engaged in something that would foster a lot of the traits we are talking about in this thread. And it's interesting how all of them ended up getting into very different things, and also interesting that my daughters are the competitive athletes, not my son.

Judo in high school is fairly new and rather rare taking the whole country into scope. Not a good comparator.

I do agree with getting kids involved and what sport/thing that center's around is not hugely important. That said there are certain things parents should not let their kids get overly involved in.

I have a phrase I commonly use(d) with our son; "take a swing at it". We wanted him willing to try anything within reason. He figured out what things were important enough to devote time to. There were a few times I had to reel him back and show him he was bordering on obsession (football/weights/grades). This is a difficult and important component for parents. There are times it should not be a hands off, 'let them figure it all out themselves' approach. Conversely, some parents take it too far, pushing kids right out of what they enjoy. It is a tough balance sometimes.

 

[Steve]

Judo in high school is fairly new and rather rare taking the whole country into scope. Not a good comparator.

Judo has been a high school sport in our school district since the 50s. But of course, Seattle is also the home of the very first Judo school in the USA, so, maybe that has something to do with it.

I do agree with getting kids involved and what sport/thing that center's around is not hugely important. That said there are certain things parents should not let their kids get overly involved in.

Like what? Do you think I have in mind joining the local gang or getting in on the ground floor of a drug ring?

I have a phrase I commonly use(d) with our son; "take a swing at it". We wanted him willing to try anything within reason. He figured out what things were important enough to devote time to. There were a few times I had to reel him back and show him he was bordering on obsession (football/weights/grades). This is a difficult and important component for parents. There are times it should not be a hands off, 'let them figure it all out themselves' approach. Conversely, some parents take it too far, pushing kids right out of what they enjoy. It is a tough balance sometimes.

I agree, and it depends on the kid. We spent most of my son's childhood pushing him and most of my older daughter's childhood keeping her from overextending herself. But either way, if I gave you the impression that I think parents should be hands off, I am sorry to have misled you.

 

[isshinryuronin]

There are habits that make one successful, and succeeding leads to more success. Overcoming increasingly difficult obstacles/goals sets a pattern for great successes. Assertiveness, confidence, and a healthy self-image are good basic building blocks. While many activities can instill these qualities, I believe MA is one of the most effective to achieve all the above.

Why MA? On an instinctual, gut, primal level, knowing you can stand toe to toe with most others gives a certain peace of mind. Freedom from fear when walking down the street, or from bullies in school, is something not everyone has but wishes they did. Some may not admit it, but many feel this self doubt in their core, and it can affect, not only their enjoyment of life, but their actions and choices in life as well. It can affect the development of the basic building blocks listed in the 1st paragraph.

Properly taught in increasingly difficult phases, children can develop the habits and patterns and skills that will stay with them for a lifetime. A good MA program does just that. Here is the importance of belt colors, especially for kids. They signify achieving a goal (hopefully, and not just having paid a test fee), provides positive feedback and builds confidence. It builds a pattern of success.

There is moral and verbal assertiveness which should be instilled, but the additional capability of physical assertiveness is a force multiplier.

 

[hoshin1600]

Prepare for a long rant but this is an important issue in martial arts that I think deserves some attention.

Growing up, I was always taught to sit silent when confronted or to not attempt to defend myself or de-escalate a violent situation if I was attacked. I was raised with the idea that instigative violence against me is OK while defending myself is wrong, a ridiculous dogma that is both legally and morally reprehensible. I was basically taught to be a passive, weak person under the guise that it will somehow make me morally superior. But all it did was make my life more difficult and let people walk all over me.

Fast forward a couple decades and after 6 years of studying Shotokan Karate, I am an assistant instructor who has been assigned to a kids class (as apparently you have to teach kids before you can teach adults). My job involves teaching children not just how to physically defend themselves but also how to de-escalate bad situations using their words. Just as a maths teacher teaches arithmetic, it is now apparently my job to teach assertiveness.

One thing that I notice about the classes I teach is that there is a 50/50 split between assertive and non-assertive children. The assertive ones strike the hardest, are the most social/happy, and have an easy time paying attention and following directions. The non-assertive ones strike the bags/targets hesitantly, have a harder time socializing, and often find it challenging to follow instructions. They are also often told to sit out of class due to behavioral reasons and appear to be quite passive during sparring matches, rarely scoring any points. And from what I hear, they apparently have a lot of difficulties in school as well.

This concerns me a great deal, largely due to the fact that I know what it is like to be conditioned as a passive, weak individual early on in life. It is my hypothesis that the latter group of children are being taught by their parents and teachers the same dishonest, counterintuitive doctrine that I was taught, i.e. "always be the bigger person regardless of the situation, even if it means being a total pushover." And it appears that this doctrine has subconsciously conditioned some of these children to be quiet, weak, sensitive individuals. This weakness is evident in their behavior as much as it is in the roundhouse kicks they throw at the heavy bags. From my perspective, being emotionally passive and having weak technique has transcended correlation and has become a full-on connection with almost 100% accuracy. In other words, if a confident kid walks in, they throw strong punches on day 1; if a quiet, shy kid walks in, they throw weak punches several months into their training.

By sheer luck, I personally managed to break free of this "always be gentle and passive" nonsense around the time I started university and currently live a happy life, finding it easy to stand up for myself when appropriate. However, in my experience, the people who choose to be passive and non-confrontational into adulthood end up being miserable, unsuccessful, unhealthy individuals that then pollute the world by instilling this destructive logic onto their own offspring. Even some of the friends I grew up with have fallen victim to this toxic state of mind, and of course, they have grown up as miserable, unsuccessful, unhealthy individuals.

As if that wasn't bad enough, I see this same kind of passive behavior in some of the adults that I train with. Now, I am by no means good at sparring, nor an intimidating-looking individual, and yet I have had kumite matches with high-ranking opponents in which they continuously back away from me despite plenty of openings from them to attack and me not throwing a single technique. I can see the hesitance in their eyes and it is easy for me to capitalize on it simply by being the least bit assertive in my technique. Once again, it is my prediction that they were taught from a young age to be passive, and that these teachings are responsible for their lack of vigor. This seems to even show up when they do kata, with the same people still being afraid to kiai properly even after several years of training.

I don't want my young students to turn out like this. I want them to grow up as strong, assertive people. I want to override any passive, anti-confrontational rubbish that their parents and teachers might be poisoning them with and let them know that being a confident, assertive person is the one true key to success and happiness. I don't want to see any of them sent into the adult world as weak pushovers, as it will only bring them disappointment in the long run. Does anyone have any advice on how best to teach this? It could be something as small as a physical drill or something or as big as a pep talk, and it can be as small as what a single lesson would cover or as big as something to teach over the course of several years. Granted, I don't want to teach them to be aggressive, as that emotion is just as harmful as being passive; I want to teach them to be assertive yet still civil.

More importantly, do any other instructors here face this dilemma? Am I the only one who notices this assertive vs. passive split, not just in the dojo but in everyday life? This is a topic that has fascinated me for quite some time now and I would like to know what other martial artist - students and instructors alike - think about it.

P.S. I am by no means trying to judge or denounce anyone, as I am a firm believer that everyone has the potential and deserves the opportunity to better themselves. I am simply looking to bring light to a certain problem and assist people in getting rid of it.

What you are describing is in part taught in psychology as the Big 5 personality traits. 2 of these traits are neuroticism and disagreeableness. People vary on a scale of how much of each trait they exhibit. People higher in disagreeableness stand up for themselves more. While people high in neuroticism do not.
That being said, psychology shows that in general people are not conditioned into one state or another but rather they are born that way. In part it may be genetic. Which would lead to the misconception that parents teach the behavior to their kids but it would be more accurate to say it was passed down. However some conditioning might exist so inate behaviors could be enhanced or suppressed.
I do feel there is a link between social behaviors and the amount of Ruff and Tumble play children are exposed to. Children who have engaged in more ruff play seem to have more ownership of their bodies and a greater presence in the space they inhabit.
My 2 cents is not to force kids into doing things that are beyond their comfort zone but rather set up the conditions for them to step out of that zone voluntarily. As a karate instructor you role is limited. Parents are the only ones who can decide how they want to raise their children. I have told my son that if he gets in a fight at school he would not be in trouble with me or his mother, the school will follow their policy but don't worry about it too much as long as he didn't start it.

 

[J. Pickard]

That's a lot to absorb and I think I agree for the most part but I gotta marinate on this a bit. Good post.

 

[isshinryuronin]

My two previous posts on this thread give my general thoughts on assertiveness and relationship to MA. Someone posted about kids possibly getting freaked out with talk of life and death. This opens up a somewhat related discussion of kids' realistic look at the world and life.

Kids in the first world countries (outside of some American inner cities) are very well insulated against the harsh realities of survival nowadays in many parts of the world. In the past, few kids anywhere were well insulated.

Not too long ago, it was common for kids to whack off the heads of chickens for mom to cook. They saw dad butcher cattle and hogs. They went out and shot rabbits and maybe deer to harvest the meat. They were aware of mountain lions, bears and rattlesnakes that could kill them. They lived without 911 or phones to summon help in emergencies. Doctors were scarce as were meds and most families experienced loved ones dying in the home. Those kids in war zones saw horrors and death that would shock us. Samurai kids as well as those in ancient civilizations fought in wars while 14 or 15 years old. In some parts of the world they still do.

My point is that most of us, especially kids, are far removed from death as a constant companion. Staying alive was/is serious business in other places and times. Situational awareness, listening to the elders, being responsible, TCB and so on were not just being "good kids", but things they knew their life depended upon. Certain skills and attitudes were a survival imperative.

Those whom we honor this upcoming Veteran's know better than I the thin line between life and death.

So, I don't think it's too much to ask of today's youth to look up from their damn phones and get a grip on reality. If presented as a matter of fact without hysteria, kids will get a feel for the dangers we face. We owe them the chance to prepare themselves to deal with reality. We are all spoiled in many respects and too easily expect the government to take care of us and our kids. In the end, we are responsible for ourselves. If we want to buck the trend of becoming sheep, assertiveness comes in. Physical assertiveness is our last line of defense. Peace is good, but can be enjoyed only if we're prepared for war.

 

[dvcochran]

My two previous posts on this thread give my general thoughts on assertiveness and relationship to MA. Someone posted about kids possibly getting freaked out with talk of life and death. This opens up a somewhat related discussion of kids' realistic look at the world and life.

Kids in the first world countries (outside of some American inner cities) are very well insulated against the harsh realities of survival nowadays in many parts of the world. In the past, few kids anywhere were well insulated.

Not too long ago, it was common for kids to whack off the heads of chickens for mom to cook. They saw dad butcher cattle and hogs. They went out and shot rabbits and maybe deer to harvest the meat. They were aware of mountain lions, bears and rattlesnakes that could kill them. They lived without 911 or phones to summon help in emergencies. Doctors were scarce as were meds and most families experienced loved ones dying in the home. Those kids in war zones saw horrors and death that would shock us. Samurai kids as well as those in ancient civilizations fought in wars while 14 or 15 years old. In some parts of the world they still do.

My point is that most of us, especially kids, are far removed from death as a constant companion. Staying alive was/is serious business in other places and times. Situational awareness, listening to the elders, being responsible, TCB and so on were not just being "good kids", but things they knew their life depended upon. Certain skills and attitudes were a survival imperative.

Those whom we honor this upcoming Veteran's know better than I the thin line between life and death.

So, I don't think it's too much to ask of today's youth to look up from their damn phones and get a grip on reality. If presented as a matter of fact without hysteria, kids will get a feel for the dangers we face. We owe them the chance to prepare themselves to deal with reality. We are all spoiled in many respects and too easily expect the government to take care of us and our kids. In the end, we are responsible for ourselves. If we want to buck the trend of becoming sheep, assertiveness comes in. Physical assertiveness is our last line of defense. Peace is good, but can be enjoyed only if we're prepared for war.

I am not fully clear what your point is but felt you have hit on enough thoughtful topics worth adding to.

First, because I did not say this yesterday, THANK YOU to all our veterans.

Your initial paragraph exampled much of my growing up. I grew up in a mostly subsistence lifestyle, not even knowing what that was until I got older. We hunted or harvested all our own meats and grew all our own vegetables and gathered things like milk and eggs. Ground our own flower and sometimes sugar cane. Things like toiletries came from the store. Some clothes as well but mom made clothes and, being the youngest of three boys, all my clothes were hand-me-downs. And I had a damn great upbringing.

I say all that to explain that hunting was and is not akin to violence as you infer. It is either a necessity or, for some a sport.

When you blurred into wartime and youth in battle that seemed quite a radical jump in your argument.

I am in full agreement that today most kids are so insulated from harm and tragedy that it has changed our culture, and yes some of it is for the worse. I question things like the violence in video games and how 'realistic' they can be; making killing the key component in the game. This is an insulation that does not translated to reality at all. To the point kids do not fully understand the difference between holding a video game controller and pulling the trigger versus holding a pistol and pulling the trigger.

Being one of the older guys on the forum I agree with some of your comments. But I also understand that smart phones are a work companion that has become a modern part of culture. I work in a geek environment with a bunch of EE's and programmers. Everyone has their phone or pad up when we have project meetings or discussions around the coffee pot. Multi-tasking has become more natural and much, much easier because of the tools we have available today.
In terms of communication, it is truly a new world.

 

[Steve]

My two previous posts on this thread give my general thoughts on assertiveness and relationship to MA. Someone posted about kids possibly getting freaked out with talk of life and death. This opens up a somewhat related discussion of kids' realistic look at the world and life.

Kids in the first world countries (outside of some American inner cities) are very well insulated against the harsh realities of survival nowadays in many parts of the world. In the past, few kids anywhere were well insulated.

Not too long ago, it was common for kids to whack off the heads of chickens for mom to cook. They saw dad butcher cattle and hogs. They went out and shot rabbits and maybe deer to harvest the meat. They were aware of mountain lions, bears and rattlesnakes that could kill them. They lived without 911 or phones to summon help in emergencies. Doctors were scarce as were meds and most families experienced loved ones dying in the home. Those kids in war zones saw horrors and death that would shock us. Samurai kids as well as those in ancient civilizations fought in wars while 14 or 15 years old. In some parts of the world they still do.

My point is that most of us, especially kids, are far removed from death as a constant companion. Staying alive was/is serious business in other places and times. Situational awareness, listening to the elders, being responsible, TCB and so on were not just being "good kids", but things they knew their life depended upon. Certain skills and attitudes were a survival imperative.

Those whom we honor this upcoming Veteran's know better than I the thin line between life and death.

So, I don't think it's too much to ask of today's youth to look up from their damn phones and get a grip on reality. If presented as a matter of fact without hysteria, kids will get a feel for the dangers we face. We owe them the chance to prepare themselves to deal with reality. We are all spoiled in many respects and too easily expect the government to take care of us and our kids. In the end, we are responsible for ourselves. If we want to buck the trend of becoming sheep, assertiveness comes in. Physical assertiveness is our last line of defense. Peace is good, but can be enjoyed only if we're prepared for war.

I think you might be referring to my post, but how you got that I am worried kids will be freaked out by the concept of death is beyond me. My post had nothing to do with the reality of death, or avoiding answering questions like, "where does my food come from?"

My point is that we have some people who are obsessed with an idea of imminent danger, where they will at some point be required to fight for their very life. This is like death fantasy, in my mind, where these folks promote an idea that death may be lurking around any corner, and if you're ready for it, you may emerge the hero.

I see this fantasy played out on these forums from time to time, and I think it's incredibly unhealthy in adults. I believe that it has led to the huge increases in the number of guns that have been purchased over the last 30 or so years, and has led to a paranoia induced criminal conspiracy against our government... that alarmingly came close to working.

So, what I'm not talking about are realities of life and death. I'm talking about the idea of imminent death that is integral to selling the fantasy of self defense. Much better, in my opinion, to teach kids a real skill and provide them with a venue for applying those skills. For MA, this would be things like joining the wrestling team, learning Judo or BJJ, or TKD and Karate schools that promote competition. XMA is way better for kids, IMO, than "self defense" oriented schools.

 

[dvcochran]

I think you might be referring to my post, but how you got that I am worried kids will be freaked out by the concept of death is beyond me. My post had nothing to do with the reality of death, or avoiding answering questions like, "where does my food come from?"

My point is that we have some people who are obsessed with an idea of imminent danger, where they will at some point be required to fight for their very life. This is like death fantasy, in my mind, where these folks promote an idea that death may be lurking around any corner, and if you're ready for it, you may emerge the hero.

I see this fantasy played out on these forums from time to time, and I think it's incredibly unhealthy in adults. I believe that it has led to the huge increases in the number of guns that have been purchased over the last 30 or so years, and has led to a paranoia induced criminal conspiracy against our government... that alarmingly came close to working.

So, what I'm not talking about are realities of life and death. I'm talking about the idea of imminent death that is integral to selling the fantasy of self defense. Much better, in my opinion, to teach kids a real skill and provide them with a venue for applying those skills. For MA, this would be things like joining the wrestling team, learning Judo or BJJ, or TKD and Karate schools that promote competition. XMA is way better for kids, IMO, than "self defense" oriented schools.

I was with you until the end. Man, you have to let the 'self defense' thing go.

 

[Steve]

I was with you until the end. Man, you have to let the 'self defense' thing go.

I have a thing against con artists. Call it a trigger.

 

[isshinryuronin]

we have some people who are obsessed with an idea of imminent danger, where they will at some point be required to fight for their very life. This is like death fantasy, in my mind, where these folks promote an idea that death may be lurking around any corner.

Yeah, this is unhealthy. Whether one is obsessed with it, or a victim of one promoting it. One should definitely have an awareness and appreciation of danger, as well as a strategy (and trained ability) to handle the most likely occurrences of it. But when taken to the extreme of paranoia, it can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. One's brain gets overloaded and then cannot detect the true threats out there. If you're scared of everything, you can't react to anything.

Musashi wrote that one's combat stance and everyday stance should be the same. In other words, put danger in its place as an everyday reality and deal with it objectively, taking care of business in a disciplined manner. This is what my previous post was about and how to present it to kids. Don't scare them - educate and train them.

I'm talking about the idea of imminent death that is integral to selling the fantasy of self defense.

This fear tactic is common to a lot of sales, and often quite effective. When an MA school promotes itself thusly, it is excluding the other facets of the art which can give one skills and outlook that can benefit their entire life. While these facets may not entail actual fighting, they aid in one's reaction to it.

Ed Parker explained this marketing/sales strategy to me: "Life insurance works only when something bad happens. Life assurance works all the time." Good MA training assures one of a better quality of life, having a broad set of skills to handle not only danger, but many challenges of life itself.

 

[Steve]

Yeah, this is unhealthy. Whether one is obsessed with it, or a victim of one promoting it. One should definitely have an awareness and appreciation of danger, as well as a strategy (and trained ability) to handle the most likely occurrences of it. But when taken to the extreme of paranoia, it can be a self-fulfilling prophecy. One's brain gets overloaded and then cannot detect the true threats out there. If you're scared of everything, you can't react to anything.

Yeah, I think we're on the same page.

Musashi wrote that one's combat stance and everyday stance should be the same. In other words, put danger in its place as an everyday reality and deal with it objectively, taking care of business in a disciplined manner. This is what my previous post was about and how to present it to kids. Don't scare them - educate and train them.

Ummm... maybe? Depends on the "danger." I mean, if a kid genuinely lives in an area where danger is pervasive, man, what a hard childhood, but I get it. But in general, kids aren't warriors, and to be honest, the idea of suggesting a child should have a combat stance at all (much less at all times) is repulsive to me.

This fear tactic is common to a lot of sales, and often quite effective. When an MA school promotes itself thusly, it is excluding the other facets of the art which can give one skills and outlook that can benefit their entire life. While these facets may not entail actual fighting, they aid in one's reaction to it.

Totally.

Ed Parker explained this marketing/sales strategy to me: "Life insurance works only when something bad happens. Life assurance works all the time." Good MA training assures one of a better quality of life, having a broad set of skills to handle not only danger, but many challenges of life itself.

I agree with the idea, but I think there's room to debate what improves quality of life and what doesn't.

 

[isshinryuronin]

But in general, kids aren't warriors, and to be honest, the idea of suggesting a child should have a combat stance at all (much less at all times) is repulsive to me.

Yes, a kid should be a kid, but know how to recognize and react to danger.

I actually meant the opposite re: combat stance. A child should have an everyday stance and view danger in this context - not have a combat stance and view everyday life as deadly. It's a subtle but important distinction.