bae@fisher.UUCP (The Master of Sinanju) (02/15/84)
I may shortly find myself in the position of teaching a self-defense
course for women. As I have never taught a course strictly focused on
self-defense, I would like to solicit your opinions. If any of you have
ever taken such a course, I would be most appreciative if you would take the
time to answer the following questions :
1) What was the most useful thing you learned in the course?
This includes things such as technique, mental attitude, etc.
2) What was the teaching style of your instructor, and how could it
have been improved?
3) Have you ever had to use your knowledge in a critical situation?
Have you avoided unpleasant situations through either increased
self-awareness, or application of physical force?
4) What situations were covered in your course?
5) What situations were not covered that you feel should have been?
6) How have your attitudes changed since you learned self-defense?
Thank you for your help in this matter.
p.s. - please mail your responses
--
Brian A. Ehrmantraut
Ad Maioram Gloriam Hasturi!
{allegra,alice,astrovax,rabbit,sickkids}!fisher!baesaquigley@watmath.UUCP (Sophie Quigley) (02/17/84)
I once took a self-defense course. I did find a few things useful about it even though I was never put in a real situation where I had to try them out. The most useful thing about the course was the attitude of the profs. They followed very closely a very controversial book called: "how to say no to a rapist and survive" (I forgot the name of the author but will post it when I remember it). I consider this book excellent but it is hated in many feminist circles for some reasons only three of which I can remember: the author has a sense of humor, it is not in bad taste, but many people believe that people should never smile when rape is mentioned even if it is to describe in graphic details what happened when a potential rape victim stuck her fingers down her throat and managed to discourage her assailant. Another more serious criticism that feminists make against this book is that the author urges the reader to recognise that rapists are human, try to analyse what's going on in the rapist's mind and play on that. The author takes the stand that it is better to not stand ny your principles (by not calling the rapist a scum for example) than be raped, but better to be raped than raped and beaten up, and better to be raped and beaten up than murdered. I tend to agree. Other feminists disagree and would rather be straightforward with the rapist and stand a chance of been beaten up rather than be cunning and get away with less damage. Some feminists also want to think of rapists as sub-humans. I tend to have the same view, but I would rather let a rapist think I think of him as a human being if that means I will get away with less damage than tell him he is a monster and be killed. (Call me a chicken if you will). The other thing that feminists have against this book is that the author urges the victim not to be violent because he thinks that most women do not stand a chance physically against most men, so they are better off trying to get out of the situation by other means than fighting. All this was quite emphasised in the course, but we also did some physical work. Of all the physical work we did, I can only find two that have been of any use to me and they were so only in a conciousness raising fashion. The first one was that we were forced to be agressive by hitting newspapers that other people were holding. It was AMAZING how hard it was for us to put all our strength, concentration and anger in hitting something. This is something for which us women definitely need some practise if we are ever to expect to defend ourselves physically by returning agression. The second one was that the instructor, who was an average-sized man, would take turns at strangling us, or grabbing us and we'd have to get out of his grip. I don't think I can remember any of the ways to get out, but I can sure remember how strong an average sized man can be!!!! From this I know that I wouldn't stand a chance against one, so I would rather run than fight. (I have found once by practice how fast I can run when being attacked, I know now that for myself, I am a more dependable runner than fighter, even though I was always the last in running in Gym class (I am not joking, I was really LAST, it's not a figure of speech)) What I didn't get from the course but would be interested in getting is some training in Ju-Jitsu (sp?). Before I go any further, let me add that I know nothing about martial arts, so I might have gotten the name of this specific one completely wrong. The one I am thinking about is a martial art which is Japanese, I believe (I'm not even sure of that) and which is a passive martial art rather than an active one like all the others. It concentrates on non- violent ways to get your opponent's force to act against him/her. It is a completely different way of looking at defense. Examples are, when someone is running after you to grap you, quickly roll into a ball on the floor to trip them and that kind of stuff. Anyway, I don't know much more about it. As I said I would be interested in learning about it, and it seems like it would be a much more appropriate method of self defense for women who are not more agressive than men physically i.e most rapists' victims. Sophie Quigley watmath!saquigley