I thought these days were over :(

I wouldn't generalise like that, because I've seen far too much variation of the attitudes of men and women to rely on stereotypes.

I still remember being horrified at a woman's story of a SD course she took, over a number of sessions. She was feeling like she was learning legit techniques that could stop an attacker, until the final "pressure testing" part of the course. A bloke pinned her down and wouldn't let go, until she did the prescribed techniques taught in the course and the bloke would just turn passive and let go. She came away feeling less confident than when she started.

I've known a fair few blokes who want some confidence but are put off by actually having to train, so they download WWII military H-H manuals and think they can kill someone. Equally, I've known women be more feisty and rough-and-tumble than most blokes.

Sadly, women are most vulnerable to people they know and think they can trust. To repeat the Geoff Thompson quote Simon posted recently:

If we're talking about sexual assault by acquaintances, which is one of the biggest threats to women, then fighting is not what needs to be taught. Really, the problem is as deep seated in our culture, and arguably our biology, as displays of social aggression is to men.

 

Just to add:

People like Geoff Thompson and Richard Dmitri end up following the SD rabbit hole to its roots - the insecurities in people that lead to violence. I think that life coaching and self-improvement is a natural progression from teaching self-defence, because it is the ultimate preventative measure.

I'm not aware of a female equivalent to address these issues for women though. Hopefully one day there will be an author as respected and authoritative as Thompson for women's self-defence.

 

"Just go along with it so you don't make the perpetrator angry" is a good strategy for someone taking a wallet or a purse, but not for sexual assault. And I think most people, including those who take these sorts of self defense classes, can tell the difference between those two scenarios.

Building confidence is a feature, not a bug. Someone who has done a three month self defense class has far less than a 100% chance of fighting off an assailant, but somebody who lacks the self confidence to fight back has a zero percent chance of fighting off an assailant. So I really, really disagree that hitting pads and wrestling out of holds for 12 weeks is worse than nothing.

These sorts of classes can also be gateway drugs to longer term, more committed training. Which obviously would be a lot more effective than this class alone...but again, the people who already knew they wanted to study grappling or striking as a primary hobby are not the ones signing up for these classes.

The sort of pacifist/nonviolent self defense classes some people mention are not representative of all "women's self defense" classes. Others have a lot of pad work (many attendees have literally never hit something before; folks like you and me are not the target market) and focus on striking as part of any escape. Not sure what this particular school is.

Every sixty second video ad is a gross oversimplification. That's the nature of sixty second advertising. And as far as self defense advertising goes, this is far from being the worst I've seen.

 

As I was trying to say above; the confidence to hit someone isn't what is most needed, it is the confidence to say no to the manipulation of social conditioning that would be the higher percentage technique.

 

Why not both? Taking a self defense class doesn't prevent you from also seeking that sort of stuff out.

Also, they're not entirely unconnected. Hitting things can also give people self confidence in situations that don't involve hitting things.

 

Funny you should say that.

Geoff Thompson and his senior instructors (Matty Evans and Tony Somers) have often covered an element of life coaching in their courses.

In fact, Tony Somers is a counsellor and life coach.

 

From their website:

I love that. Just in a different league to kicking a guy in a Redman suit in the knackers and calling it a day.

 

Just so I'm clear, do you have actual experience that the club that's the subject of this thread is like that, or are you jumping to conclusions because you don't like a ninety second video ad?

It's pretty harsh to judge an entire club on a chesesy website or a single cheesy video ad, wouldn't you agree?

Heck, even Matty Evans, who you are holding up as an example of self defense workshops done right, can make a cheesy 90-second video ad:

 

You're jumping to conclusions. I never said anything about cheesy videos, I just said that I really liked some blurb on a website. I didn't see any Redman suits in the OP video, so I don't know why you are presuming that comment was aimed at them. I also haven't said that I hold Matty Evans up as someone who does workshops right. I said I liked something he wrote. I also said I didn't like the look of something on the internet. Discussions were then had, in general terms, about the validity and efficacy of self-defence classes.

It's sweet that you are galloping to the defence of the guys in the OP, but I think your chivalry is misplaced here.

I'm like, y'know, giving my opinion on stuff that comes up on a forum. I'm not delving through everything a school has done, as well as attending their classes, just so that I can give a full and balanced overview of their training.

 

I just watched the video you posted.

It had actual statistics and footage of real violence. That is a very different kettle of fish to some fantasy choreography of a woman doing ineffectual techniques against a limp noodle rapist.

What was it you didn't like about that video? The music? The video filter?

 

The above is fine, as long as people are being shown techniques that work and get some chance to test them with resistance... even minimal resistance.

This came up in my youtube feed and thought it was relevant. See how a system without pressure anywhere to test application can give people techniques that are worse than almost any natural reaction you can think of:



It's one thing to have no pressure or resistance in an SD class, it's another level of bad when the instructors haven't ever pressure tested their techniques.

 

Maybe there's someone you could email to ask?

 

A decade or so ago on another forum a wing chun instructor was arguing about grappling saying catch was much better than bjj and trying to convince a bjj brown belt and D1 wrestler,myself and a bjj blackbelt and original dog brother.

We all argued grappling is grappling but he wouldn't have it, catch was unique, different better he even went so far as to send a video to us to.prove it.

It then turned out although he claimed 30 years of catch experience it was all seminars and video training and he had never stepped into a bjj club in his life. And this guy was in new York a few blocks fr renzo Gracie's.

I thought nothing of this until recently when I met a student of another teacher who claimed to be teaching grappling a mix of catch and no gi bjj who also turned out to be dvd and YouTube trained and had never actually trained in a proper gym but was teaching his students ...

Why do people do that, good grappling can be found in any city these days, within 30 minutes of me I can find three bjj black belts, two browns good wrestling and judo so why are people still hell bent on avoiding good training and being video or YouTube students ?? I just don't get it

 

I probably should have changed the title as it's slightly different and speaks less to bad advertising and more to asking why in this day and age would people chose to be dvd or seminar trained in an art which is so widely practised and available.

By art I mean grappling in general as anyone who has grappled for a while knows it's all the same thing with just different emphasises.

It's really doing their students a disservice as this student thought he knew grappling but his basics were woeful.
But ify yourteacher has little to know real experience, never competes and your fellow students are also equally clueless how are you ever going to know any better?

 

You say "anyone who's done grappling" but I've met a few judo folk who are flat out in denial about BJJ too. One green belt was under the impression I'd never tap a black belt in judo. I went to his club and did exactly that... as a blue belt.

 

Fair enough but some judo guys are less grapplers and more traditional martial art guys in their outlook and never stepped outside a judo club

Catch, judo, bjj, sambo, free style all really at the core are the same with different emphasises due to their rule sets.

One isn't more unique or better than the other so why would you chose to be dvd or video trained in one when another very similar art is available with high quality instruction close to you?
That's what I really don't understand, 15years ago when good grappling clubs were rare I get it, but now as I said I can find world class bjj, wrestling and judo within 25mins of my house and I'm I'm the sticks lol