Women Self Defence!

[AngryHobbit]

"Constipated elephant" is a new one. In the Army we used to talk from time to time about someone moving or yelling like a constipated ape, but an elephant. Wish I could have heard that.

From my experience, your experience of not remembering explicit details is not uncommon. People either seem to remember great detail, or some variation of snatches or nothing. Often the details come back later.

Well, he was right over my ear, so it was pretty loud. I remember flashes of it at times - very randomly. You know how sometimes something small triggers a memory? A smell, a flash of color? Kind of like that. I pieced it together over time.

No, I haven't. Something similar must have happened?

I haven't seen the movie either. I want to know!

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I really wish we could do another seminar like the one we did with that fantastic group of ladies who chose us as the first stop for their girls' day out.

That was hands-down the most fun I've had teaching beginners.

 

[hoshin1600]

The thing is, neither group of people, nor myself as the instructor, has to go through what you will go through, if you are in that situation. Therefore, we should not be making your decision. You need to make that decision, and you need to be ok with that decision, because you are going to live with the consequences,

i like it.

the worst time to make that decision, is when you realize you are in the middle of this type of situation.....The goal being to decide how you want to respond if you are ever in such a situation..... Make a plan and know how you want to respond, before ever getting into such a situation. I also encourage them to be open minded about their choices... as they get older, as their situation changes, as they learn more... their decision may change as well. Just like we plan fire escape routes and evacuation routes, we should choose how to respond in this type of situation.

for myself, i would refine this for more clarity.
the idea of making a choice before a fateful attack on how one should respond is based on a presuppisition that a choice is possible. as i dig into this idea it seems to me that a conscious decision cannot be made.
in order to predetermine a response you would need to know all the variables that will occur in a future event and that is impossible. so it is impossible to know HOW to respond. the next piece is will the person respond actively or passively. what we are really inferring here is physical action with a determined attitude VS compliance. nature has been making this decision for millions of years. another term for this is "Fight - Flight or Freeze. these choices are made deep within the sub-conscious brain. these primal systems make decisions based on a cost-benefit analysis. "if i do..X... what will be the cost (consequences) and what will be the benefit?" the problem is fear. Fear will hyper inflate the perceived costs. the next factor is what resources does the person posses that can maximize the benefits. what skills, force multipliers or consequences for the assailant are there in this event that can be leveraged?

so does the person have a choice? yes... but not as first thought. the decision is not a pre determined action for the future but rather a decision for the NOW. the future doesnt exist. the only thing that does exist is the present. the best we can do, is to invest some of our present in hopes for a profitable return in the future. so plan and train NOW. training today is an investment.
if your plan is to put out any fires in your house you need to invest in an extinguisher. another analogy would be making a decision to dead lift 500 pounds next year on march 15th. that is the fallacy of pre-ordained action. it isnt going to happen unless you choose to do the work between now and then. the choice is in the day to day effort to get on with training and learning.

this brings me to my next thought.it has been said that being compliant is something that some women choose and that their decision should not be judged or ridiculed. ok, no judgement or ridicule but is compliance really a choice if the victim has no skills, no force multiplier and no determined attitude? i would say that is not a choice. if a women is in possession of those three things i find it hard to believe she would choose compliance. the victim may not choose to hurt , maim or kill but to have those three attributes opens up a wide array of options that do not exist without them.

 

[JR 137]

@oftheherd1 and @AngryHobbit

I can’t find the clip from the movie. I think it might been a little too, not good? for YouTube. Right after a “love” scene, a woman takes her metal high heeled shoe and rams the pointed heel into the guy’s eye. It’s an older movie, early 90s, and that was THE scene in the movie.

 

[hoshin1600]

so i am going to post some ideas in no particular order. a mish mash of concepts i cover in a self defense class, please forgive the mess.

Can i defend myself?
there are five factors to the ability to defend ones self.

1. motivation
2. fear management
3. ability
4. moral
5. legal

Victimology
this is a controversial area for some. but i like to point out the purpose of victimology is not to blame the victim but rather to calculate percentages for prevention.
so on the macro level where do you live? if your in urban Brazil or Chicago your percentages go way up, live in rural Maine? then your percentage numbers go down.. on the micro level do you lock your doors? how often do you socialize? do you do drugs? ect ect.. behavior will add or subtract from your score. the goal is to be aware of your behaviors and keep your score in check. minimize the risky behaviors when possible.

on the MA skills i teach.

• the fence
• common platform stance
• post - frame- 2c & index (similar to the militarys post- frame- hook)

i teach
strikes, limb controlls, throws, ground work and weapons. there is a large focus on control and domination in the stand up similar to the ground work.

LOV
logic of violence

• who
• where
• selection
• isolation
• psychological control
• physical destruction

LOV is from Rory Miller but i have been revising my own concepts using an Ethology dominance hierarchy model.

part of LOV and victimology is de-valuing your self as a target.

pre-contact clues & pre assault indicators of weapons

the action triangle

• run
• hide
• fight

coopers color codes
boyd's cycle or OODA loop


this is turning into a list rather than a discussion. i apologize.

 

[CB Jones]

The goal being to decide how you want to respond if you are ever in such a situation. I would encourage them to read articles and studies similar to those presented here earlier to use in making their choice, study both sides. I want them to be educated and to consider how they want to respond from an educated point of view. Make a plan and know how you want to respond, before ever getting into such a situation. I also encourage them to be open minded about their choices... as they get older, as their situation changes, as they learn more... their decision may change as well. Just like we plan fire escape routes and evacuation routes, we should choose how to respond in this type of situation.

While I agree that you should take some time and be mentally prepared.

Every situation is going to have different variables and the ultimate decision is going to have to be made then and there.

The main thing is to give yourself more options via CCW or SD training.

 

[AngryHobbit]

@oftheherd1 and @AngryHobbit

I can’t find the clip from the movie. I think it might been a little too, not good? for YouTube. Right after a “love” scene, a woman takes her metal high heeled shoe and rams the pointed heel into the guy’s eye. It’s an older movie, early 90s, and that was THE scene in the movie.

Ow....

 

[CB Jones]

Victimology
this is a controversial area for some. but i like to point out the purpose of victimology is not to blame the victim but rather to calculate percentages for prevention.

I advocate just be smart.

Think about your surroundings and take some preventive measures.

Think about trouble spots where you spend a lot of your time and take necessary precautions. Too often we are in too much of a hurry to just take a little precaution.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

so i am going to post some ideas in no particular order. a mish mash of concepts i cover in a self defense class, please forgive the mess.

Can i defend myself?
there are five factors to the ability to defend ones self.

1. motivation
2. fear management
3. ability
4. moral
5. legal

Victimology
this is a controversial area for some. but i like to point out the purpose of victimology is not to blame the victim but rather to calculate percentages for prevention.
so on the macro level where do you live? if your in urban Brazil or Chicago your percentages go way up, live in rural Maine? then your percentage numbers go down.. on the micro level do you lock your doors? how often do you socialize? do you do drugs? ect ect.. behavior will add or subtract from your score. the goal is to be aware of your behaviors and keep your score in check. minimize the risky behaviors when possible.

on the MA skills i teach.

• the fence
• common platform stance
• post - frame- 2c & index (similar to the militarys post- frame- hook)

i teach
strikes, limb controlls, throws, ground work and weapons. there is a large focus on control and domination in the stand up similar to the ground work.

LOV
logic of violence

• who
• where
• selection
• isolation
• psychological control
• physical destruction

LOV is from Rory Miller but i have been revising my own concepts using an Ethology dominance hierarchy model.

part of LOV and victimology is de-valuing your self as a target.

pre-contact clues & pre assault indicators of weapons

the action triangle

• run
• hide
• fight

coopers color codes
boyd's cycle or OODA loop


this is turning into a list rather than a discussion. i apologize.

Nothing to apologize for. I like the quick information that comes in an outline like that - it's good stuff to chew on and consider what it might reinforce - or cause me to question - in my own thinking.

 

[AngryHobbit]

so i am going to post some ideas in no particular order. a mish mash of concepts i cover in a self defense class, please forgive the mess.

Can i defend myself?
there are five factors to the ability to defend ones self.

1. motivation
2. fear management
3. ability
4. moral
5. legal

Victimology
this is a controversial area for some. but i like to point out the purpose of victimology is not to blame the victim but rather to calculate percentages for prevention.
so on the macro level where do you live? if your in urban Brazil or Chicago your percentages go way up, live in rural Maine? then your percentage numbers go down.. on the micro level do you lock your doors? how often do you socialize? do you do drugs? ect ect.. behavior will add or subtract from your score. the goal is to be aware of your behaviors and keep your score in check. minimize the risky behaviors when possible.

on the MA skills i teach.

• the fence
• common platform stance
• post - frame- 2c & index (similar to the militarys post- frame- hook)

i teach
strikes, limb controlls, throws, ground work and weapons. there is a large focus on control and domination in the stand up similar to the ground work.

LOV
logic of violence

• who
• where
• selection
• isolation
• psychological control
• physical destruction

LOV is from Rory Miller but i have been revising my own concepts using an Ethology dominance hierarchy model.

part of LOV and victimology is de-valuing your self as a target.

pre-contact clues & pre assault indicators of weapons

the action triangle

• run
• hide
• fight

coopers color codes
boyd's cycle or OODA loop


this is turning into a list rather than a discussion. i apologize.

Nothing wrong with lists. I really like the way you outline things. I like putting things in tables or lists when explaining things too. It actually makes a lot of sense.

I very much like the concept of "devaluing yourself as a target". You know? I don't think a lot of people think about it this way. How quickly and effectively can I suggest to a potential assailant this is not the kind of trouble he is looking for? And I am not talking about being butch or talking tough - nothing like that. But small things - walk, posture, awareness, other things I don't even have names for, all of which comprise a picture of "are you sure I am the person you want to attack?"

This and other posts of yours have given me some serious food for thought. I am still working through that phase in my training (after 10 years) where I know I'll be terrified if an attack occurs - and I don't care. Only fools and madmen are unafraid. But I want to be at the level where being terrified does not impede my ability to fight back.

 

[hoshin1600]

I advocate just be smart.

Think about your surroundings and take some preventive measures.

Think about trouble spots where you spend a lot of your time and take necessary precautions. Too often we are in too much of a hurry to just take a little precaution.

the thing is being smart is common sense, and we know how common that is.
i like to use victimology and review some behaviors in a class to get participants active in thinking about their own behaviors. a statement will go in one ear and out the other. especially when there are physical skills being done that day which are more fun.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

While I agree that you should take some time and be mentally prepared.

Every situation is going to have different variables and the ultimate decision is going to have to be made then and there.

The main thing is to give yourself more options via CCW or SD training.

The ultimate decision is made in the moment, but I seem to recall some research indicating pre-consideration based on principles reduced the time and effort toward a decision, and reduced the doubt about the decision after the fact. My hazy memory says the research wasn't around assault, but was about stressful and difficult decisions that need a quick answer and would raise emotion in the moment. I'll see if I can dredge up enough detail to track down some information on it.

In any case, the principle is that you decide on the principles. What kind of attack would make it clearly okay to do X? What is a situation where you are clearly not okay doing X? This pre-decision makes it easier to make the decision when it clearly fits one of those definitions. The closer it is to a definition, the easier/faster the decision (and the less doubt there is after the fact). For most of us, there are some situations where we are clear we'd be very willing to hurt someone badly on purpose (threatening a loved one is usually the easiest example). And most of us have examples where we wouldn't be willing to do so (someone so drunk he can't stand straight, no weapon, making ridiculous threats he can't possibly follow up on, for instance). There are also situations where most of us would be readily willing to hand over our wallet, rather than take a chance on defending, etc.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

Nothing wrong with lists. I really like the way you outline things. I like putting things in tables or lists when explaining things too. It actually makes a lot of sense.

I very much like the concept of "devaluing yourself as a target". You know? I don't think a lot of people think about it this way. How quickly and effectively can I suggest to a potential assailant this is not the kind of trouble he is looking for? And I am not talking about being butch or talking tough - nothing like that. But small things - walk, posture, awareness, other things I don't even have names for, all of which comprise a picture of "are you sure I am the person you want to attack?"

This and other posts of yours have given me some serious food for thought. I am still working through that phase in my training (after 10 years) where I know I'll be terrified if an attack occurs - and I don't care. Only fools and madmen are unafraid. But I want to be at the level where being terrified does not impede my ability to fight back.

This is the stuff I talk about as "changing their math". I want to change their math before they attack. If I can't, do that I want to change it fast once they do attack.

 

[hoshin1600]

I am still working through that phase in my training (after 10 years) where I know I'll be terrified if an attack occurs - and I don't care. Only fools and madmen are unafraid.

let me think,, am i the madman??? ummm...no maybe the fool...

my problem when i was younger is i was very cold emotionally. my old instructors used to call me cool cucumber. this was great for sparring and tourney forms preforming in public. but in an actual fight it was a big detriment. i couldnt get it in gear so to speak. i found i had to get angry to fight and i just didnt get angry.
it was something i really had to work on. but now im a grumpy old man so im not sure how things worked out. lol

 

[hoshin1600]

The ultimate decision is made in the moment, but I seem to recall some research indicating pre-consideration based on principles reduced the time and effort toward a decision, and reduced the doubt about the decision after the fact. My hazy memory says the research wasn't around assault, but was about stressful and difficult decisions that need a quick answer and would raise emotion in the moment. I'll see if I can dredge up enough detail to track down some information on it.

In any case, the principle is that you decide on the principles. What kind of attack would make it clearly okay to do X? What is a situation where you are clearly not okay doing X? This pre-decision makes it easier to make the decision when it clearly fits one of those definitions. The closer it is to a definition, the easier/faster the decision (and the less doubt there is after the fact). For most of us, there are some situations where we are clear we'd be very willing to hurt someone badly on purpose (threatening a loved one is usually the easiest example). And most of us have examples where we wouldn't be willing to do so (someone so drunk he can't stand straight, no weapon, making ridiculous threats he can't possibly follow up on, for instance). There are also situations where most of us would be readily willing to hand over our wallet, rather than take a chance on defending, etc.

i think there are two facets to what you are thinking. one is Hicks Law. this says that for every decision a person has to make it increases the reaction time. so if an officer has to decide between his firearm and a stun-gun that increase from 1 to 2 increases the response time by 50%

the second which i think is really what your thinking of is that the decision point (shoot or not shoot) has a better outcome with a clear guideline of when it is acceptable vs non acceptable. i teach this for civilians as "rules of engagement".
each individual should make that moral and legal decision prior to the event. which as i think about it stands in contrast to my post to what Wab25 was pointing out. my brain is fried for tonight so maybe i will have to wait to write something with any sense of readability.

 

[AngryHobbit]

let me think,, am i the madman??? ummm...no maybe the fool...

my problem when i was younger is i was very cold emotionally. my old instructors used to call me cool cucumber. this was great for sparring and tourney forms preforming in public. but in an actual fight it was a big detriment. i couldnt get it in gear so to speak. i found i had to get angry to fight and i just didnt get angry.
it was something i really had to work on. but now im a grumpy old man so im not sure how things worked out. lol

That's interesting. I haven't had a fight in the street outside class, so I don't really know what I will feel if it happens. I just remember what I felt when it happened a long time ago, long before I started training - and at those points, I was terrified... although... not paralyzed.

When I do fight in class, I feel a bit alarmed - afterwards. At the point of the fight... I feel a bit monstrous. Which is unsettling. Not unfamiliar though - I've had TERRIBLE fits of rage before I got diagnosed, went into therapy, and got about getting things into balance. Not a bad thing if I can learn to control it.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

i think there are two facets to what you are thinking. one is Hicks Law. this says that for every decision a person has to make it increases the reaction time. so if an officer has to decide between his firearm and a stun-gun that increase from 1 to 2 increases the response time by 50%

the second which i think is really what your thinking of is that the decision point (shoot or not shoot) has a better outcome with a clear guideline of when it is acceptable vs non acceptable. i teach this for civilians as "rules of engagement".
each individual should make that moral and legal decision prior to the event. which as i think about it stands in contrast to my post to what Wab25 was pointing out. my brain is fried for tonight so maybe i will have to wait to write something with any sense of readability.

That second is mostly what I was talking about (thought the first applies, as well). If you have paradigms set up, your brain only has to compare the situation to the paradigms and choose the best fit, rather than running all the variables. It's the basic premise of training when to shoot/not shoot, and the like.

 

[AngryHobbit]

That second is mostly what I was talking about (thought the first applies, as well). If you have paradigms set up, your brain only has to compare the situation to the paradigms and choose the best fit, rather than running all the variables. It's the basic premise of training when to shoot/not shoot, and the like.

I would say - not just deciding when to shoot/not to shoot, but also making that decision in a tiny amount of time. Having your brain trained to a point where all the behind-the-scenes work for a specific choice happens within milliseconds. And having your body trained to a point where it responds to what your brain decides just as quickly.

Remember that fencing duel description in Heinlein's Glory Road? Where his wrist "takes charge" and he skewers the Eater of Souls? Like that.

 

[drop bear]

That's interesting. I haven't had a fight in the street outside class, so I don't really know what I will feel if it happens. I just remember what I felt when it happened a long time ago, long before I started training - and at those points, I was terrified... although... not paralyzed.

When I do fight in class, I feel a bit alarmed - afterwards. At the point of the fight... I feel a bit monstrous. Which is unsettling. Not unfamiliar though - I've had TERRIBLE fits of rage before I got diagnosed, went into therapy, and got about getting things into balance. Not a bad thing if I can learn to control it.

Moods are for cattle and love making.

Not for fighting.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I would say - not just deciding when to shoot/not to shoot, but also making that decision in a tiny amount of time. Having your brain trained to a point where all the behind-the-scenes work for a specific choice happens within milliseconds. And having your body trained to a point where it responds to what your brain decides just as quickly.

Remember that fencing duel description in Heinlein's Glory Road? Where his wrist "takes charge" and he skewers the Eater of Souls? Like that.

That latter part is a different topic. That gets back to muscle memory and unconscious-incompetence (in that case, taken to near-automation). Making decisions in advance means your decision-making apparatus doesn't need to interfere with that loop.