confused?you will be!

[captain]

over the past few days,i have read all sorts of conflicting ideas/theories about the best martial art or self defence.
the gracies say that close the distance and then ground/
grapple them.another "ex doorman" said.you only need a
good punch,armlocks wont work.then someone else says,
a punch might cause more trouble than it's worth,lock them
up!
i believe you hould have both.perhaps wck with somthing else.
but,just when you think you're on the right path [ie.not wasting
your time learning something useless]another "expert" says
something that causes doubt.i would imagine that some of this
is business lead,but any thoughts out there??

Russ.

[reneritchie]

Martial arts have very little to do with self-dense, and can in fact be counter-productive. If someone is interested in SD, I would recommend they start by reading something like this (recommeded previously by our own brilliant ANerlich):

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0671535110

[rubthebuddha]

considering how fast some folks i know are who study escrima/silat, i can believe that. i think it all comes down to training, at least in close range. i'd say real close range goes to the knife guy, and as the range increases, the advantage swings to the gun guy.

[namron]

Guns can kill over a distance of 100's of metres.

Gun wounds are shot for shot far more deadly than knives.

Advantage gun.

[namron]

Aahhhhh a little of everything.

Sounds like mixed martial arts debate looming. Bring It on.

Seriously Captain as you know, I think once you scrape off all the BS that comes with marketing most styles will try to round out there styles with at least some augmentation.

ie: grapplers will learn strikes, strikers: locks and groundwork.

To not cover different ranges of combat is an insular backward way of thinking.

Most of the debate then becomes what 'core' style do you stick to, as most arts these days pick and borrow techniques from other specialists to round out their system.

The more tools in the toolbox the better.

[rubthebuddha]

namron -- you're missing the point about ranges. long range and even medium, i'd give advantage to gun hands down. short range between a good marksman and and a good silat player, and my money's on the silat player. the gunfighter may get a shot off, but unless it's an immediate kill or disable, the silat player will have him cut up more ways than a whole team of doctors can fix, and he'll be on the ground with a minute or less before he bleeds out.

the reason? a gun typically has only one direction of force -- straight ahead. if the target is to the side, the effort to re-aim a gun can be a hair too much. a knife, on the other hand, presents several different options in which it can do it's damage. hence my previous comment about close range vs. long range. in long-range combat, a person who steps two feet forward and to the right from where they are standing is virtually the same target, barring new obstacles. in close combat, when a person steps two feet forward and to their right presents an entirely different target -- one that has just possibly flanked the gunman and is about to go to town. to follow someone with the barrel of a gun in close range combat is a difficult proposition. with a blade, it's much simpler.

[rubthebuddha]

btw, captain, sorry for hijacking your thread. :o

[namron]

rubthebuddha, although I see where your coming from I still dont buy it.

Its a bit like the knife vs empty hand scenario, where my money would be on the person with the weapon.

There is a reason the armed forces use guns as their primary weapons and not knives, its because they are more efficient killing tools.

[reneritchie]

A while back I was reading over some police statistics (forget for when/where), but it was interesting to note that, from a distance of 25' or more, gun shots did not have a high hit rate (often missed completely due to officers in stress states and targets in motion); at the same time, when a target was hit within 25', those armed with knives could often still close the distance and stab the officer.

Guns may have longer range and their wounds may be more severe, but gettings stabbed is a [lousy] way to end up 'winning' such an encounter.

[captain]

"martial arts has very little to do with martial arts".wow,rene,that
comment hit me hard!then,besides aerobics,or improving your
social life,what is self defence.i assumed that most people got into
ma for their own safety.and that was the intention of my original
thread.why do some say:"only work on a good punch,the rest is
bs".while others say:"work on grappling,a punch may only annoy
the situation".
russ

[captain]

that should have read self defence,not martial arts![its all the
sugar you see!!]

[reneritchie]

Russ,

Get Strong's book or something similar. Self defense is very different from martial arts. Self defense is mostly mental. They involve mind-setting, modelling, and a lot of self-knowledge and self-awareness.

You wake up to find someone holding a gun on your child and telling your wife to tie you up.

You're ordering your morning egg mcmuffin when someone opens up on the cash counter with a submachine gun.

You get off on the wrong exit on a highway and suddenly notice gang graffiti everywhere.

Someone jumps into the back of your car, pulls a gun and orders you to drive to a more remote location.

There are many things you need to know about yourself in such situations; about what you are and are not prepared to do (and it can involve the pain and sacrifice of others, not just yourself), the elimination of ego and machismo (which, through 'hero factor', can get even a good fighter shot dead), the elmination of self-blame and recrimination.

Self defense a very, very serious subject that involves not very much martial arts, and is something many martial arts teachers and experts, despite claims to the contrary, often know little about.

[yuanfen]

Rene sez:
Self defense a very, very serious subject that involves not very much martial arts, and is something many martial arts teachers and experts, despite claims to the contrary, often know little about.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agree in part disagree in part. For martial arts learning which emphasizes only techniques- agree- unreliable in real self defense.

But if you learn some arts specially wing chun in great depth- the awareness, alertness, quick judgement, sharpening of fight/flight
reflexes are heightened- because the "self" in self defense is also shaped.

I know that there are good self defense books out there. Authors, policemen. ex military folks and others summarizing their experiences. But they may or may not have had exactly the same experience that you might face. No harm reading that stuff- but
good martial art will develop the self which will be a major variable in a problematic situation. Of course IMO.

Joy Chaudhuri

[old jong]

I am in total agreement with Rene on this subject.
Even if a good martial art system (when mastered to a certain level) can be very helpful in some kinds of situation,self-defense should be seen as a very serious subject. It goes a lot more "deeper" than actual physical techniques or the never ending and futile schools/methods debates we have here or elsewhere.

[old jong]

Joy said: " But if you learn some arts specially wing chun in great depth- the awareness, alertness, quick judgement, sharpening of fight/flight
reflexes are heightened- because the "self" in self defense is also shaped."

You are talking about something no theory books could teach. I believe it is the little something extra that very patient and serious practice can give to a practitioner. It could even show you the way out of a probable danger spot instead of pushing you into it .

[yuanfen]

Yes Old Jong- I am not referring to book learning at all.
If I get into real trouble- no author or sifu or article will bail me out
and trying to remember what a how to do book advises will be too late and not really transferable knowledge.

The development of the martial self through incessant and correct practice and alertness and mental toughness and "experience"
are invaluable companions. None of that comes from books and dont and didnt come from books for me.

The very best of the martial arts however did not come from sports-they came from people who defended themselves.

In publications and net talk folks do a lot of chest beating- but in
self defense- you are truly alone.
i f someone gets worthwhile self defense ideas froma book-good for them.

But I am generally skeptical about commercial do it yourself
books on self defense---- or how to become rich.! Being a book person- I dont always trust books.

[reneritchie]

There are Jackie Collins books, then there are William Shakespeare, then there are dictionaries, then there are poems, then there is the Art of War. Books aren't the answer, but they can help you better understand what the answer needs to be.

Strong on Defense doesn't offer a quickie guide to SD. Quite the opposite. It provides a great outline as to what one might really face in a SD situation, and then shows tools on how to better train yourself (not through MA, which is about as good as a poor-to-average athletics program, but through mind-setting, modelling, and other specific and focused drills).

MA is okay at many things, but not great at much specifically. However, most MAists tend to think it is, which is why we get some of the tragedies (recent ones included) that we do.

If you walk towards your car in the lot and several bad looking people (be they large drunken bikers, or small but possible armed hoodlems) are hanging off it, MA may let you try to fight them (and maybe not end up so well off), but SD would first get you back in the store, or over to the bus stop, or where-ever safety could first be ensured.

[old jong]

Joy.
I have not read the book rene is talking about so I can't comment about it. But, if a book talks about being aware of the surroundings and people and how not to get ourselves in potentionaly dangerous situations and gives good hints about what to be wary of on the streets,it is O.K.
A good book should also include some psychological knowledge about the various kinds of agressors and how to react accordingly to them.The goal is to get out of a situation,not make it worse.

Physical techniques or self-defense tricks from a book are (imo) more dangerous than knowing nothing.

I think knowing ourselves and our capacities is primordial but adding some knowledge about the psychology and physiology of agression is a good bonus to any good martial art.
Of course,products may vary!...

[yuanfen]

Rene sez:
If you walk towards your car in the lot and several bad looking people (be they large drunken bikers, or small but possible armed hoodlems) are hanging off it, MA may let you try to fight them (and maybe not end up so well off), but SD would first get you back in the store, or over to the bus stop, or where-ever safety could first be ensured.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rene:
It would be bad MA training to fight them.

A good wing chun person would not automatically fight in the examples provided. Good wing chun should give razor sharp judgement.
-------------------------------------
Old Jong- sure some psych books can give some profiles of potential attackers.

However these days those narrow "criminal" profiles are not that
reliable. Perhaps ok for common types of attackers- but we live in a very diverse world- where apart from the standard robber or thief(if there is a standard). gender, ethnic and nationality and religion prejudices can playa a role. Heck the attacker can be someone you know or thought you knew them.

Being "alert to the moment" and seeing things instantly without paranoia and reacting accordingly (not necessarily fight) are important qualities to develop. How not to over or under react..
important qualities to develop.

I will pass up the anecdotes.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Self defense and martial arts were always meant to go hand-in-hand , but in today's world of commercialism, tournament fighting, belts, sashes, and grades being handed out haphazardly, the rush to publish books, videos, open schools, make money at seminars, etc. - a separation between real, effective martial arts and the whole concept of self defense has unfortunately taken place to a great extent.

Martial arts and Self Defense ARE BOTH highly mental, as well as physical. I suppose you could say that self defense training is the big picture - while martial arts is one specific way of going about preparing to apply the paint to the canvas.

[reneritchie]

Martial arts don't teach when to fight and when not to, though some teachers may address this; likewise, they do not teach what to do when you can't fight (though some few teachers may also address this non-superficially).

Books like Strong on Defense take you inside SD and the really hard questions you must ask yourself *before* you end up in such situations. For women, it helps explore subjects like trying to fight off an attacker, and not feeling guilty if you choose, in the moment, not to (whether they fear pain/death more than rape, an individual and situational question to which no guilt (self or family) should be assumed). For men, it addresses issues like the 'hero complex', where some men successfully prevent a primary encounter, then in the adrenal rush, try to capture a perpetrator, and end up getting badly hurt or dying in a secondary encounter (avoid a mugging only to get shot while trying to chase down a mugger, for example), and of hard choices like should you try to fight a home invader holding your children as captives and perhaps die, leaving them without you, or not fight and get tied up and be just as helpless, or to jump out a window and shout fire and change the rules on the invader. Should you duck behind a counter like everyone else at mcdonalds and maybe or maybe not catch a bullet while many people die, or should you rush a spree-killer, increase your chance of injury or death, but snap everyone else out of their terror-induced paralysis and potentially save more lives in the long run? Should you crash your car, maybe with your children in the back seat, so that a car jacker can't take you to a secondary, more controllable, location?

These are very difficult, very personal questions that come into play in real SD (ie. not bar fight or MMA or kwoon/dojo/studio play) situations, and its difficult to formulate responses if you don't know them. Books by experts in the field can help with the formulation, or at least give you the start with material you can disagree with.

Martial arts touches medicine, but if you've been in a car accident, you should go to a doctor. MA might touch SD, but if its an area of primary concern, go to an expert.

Old Jong - I always liked one of Mitose's lines - True self defense involves no body contact.

[old jong]

I prefer it that way for many reasons (legal or else!)...I hope that if I have to fight to defend myself or somebody else,it will be the only choice I have.

[old jong]

Joy was talking about the "self"...This can be "realised" through practice of many things beside martial arts or the experiences of life.Now, how do we give good perceptive jugement to a young hyper-testosteronoid wannabe "fighter" who close his fist a lot faster than he can open his mind,even a little bit?...

[yuanfen]

Comments in brackets. First Rene's post then Old Jong's

Martial arts don't teach when to fight and when not to,

((Some do- if one stays the course-and reaches the calm quick decision making stage. Some martial acyvities that are only about techniques or ring fighting may not)))

though some teachers may address this; likewise, they do not teach what to do when you can't fight (though some few teachers may also address this non-superficially).

((One should avoid teachers who are superficial on this score))

Joy was talking about the "self"...This can be "realised" through practice of many things beside martial arts or the experiences of life.

((True- but that is not enough. Good martial arts connect the self to the limbs and motion and things needed for flight or fight.
Not dealing with personal stories- but- not insignificantly- Ip Man not only had real fights but he knew when and what to do to survive in the Japanese occupation and also later in 49 when to
escape to Macao and Hong Kong.
But far be ot for me to discourage reading books if you need them.))

[yuanfen]

Comments in brackets. First Rene's post then Old Jong's

Martial arts don't teach when to fight and when not to,

((Some do- if one stays the course-and reaches the calm quick decision making stage. Some martial acyvities that are only about techniques or ring fighting may not)))

though some teachers may address this; likewise, they do not teach what to do when you can't fight (though some few teachers may also address this non-superficially).

((One should avoid teachers who are superficial on this score))

Joy was talking about the "self"...This can be "realised" through practice of many things beside martial arts or the experiences of life.

((True- but that is not enough. Good martial arts connect the self to the limbs and motion and things needed for flight or fight.
Not dealing with personal stories- but- not insignificantly- Ip Man not only had real fights but he knew when and what to do to survive in the Japanese occupation and also later in 49 when to
escape to Macao and Hong Kong.
But far be ot for me to discourage reading books if you (generic you)need them.))

[anerlich]

actually in the bladeforums a body of individuals think a knife guy could beat a gun guy to the draw and kill him before he could fire a shot

I think Rene is right here - the more often quoted proposal is that, while the gun guy might be able to draw and maybe fire, the guy with the knife could still close and stab. I certainly wouldn't want to try the old "knife at a gunfight" scenario.

That is, you might shoot the guy, but you would still probably get stabbed. He might die, but then so might you and if so it's hardly a win. Of course, it's never clear cut - the gun might intimidate a sane attacker, but probably not a roid rager jacked on PCP. Drugs can sginificantly reduce the pain threshold and stopping power of any weapon also.

I really got to recommend Strong on Defense (again). It's the only book I've seen that I'd feel I could give to my wife, nieces, mother (were she alive), anyone, people with no other training, and feel that their reading of it would better prepare them to survive a violent crime. I'd MUCH rather they read the book and took its recommendations than do any "women's self defense" class I've seen or heard about. If you haven't read it, please do.

[yuanfen]

Andrew- I plan to look at the Strong book. I agree that most self defense seminars are nonsense.
Regards, Joy

[yuanfen]

I ordered the book. What convinced me was NOT the original point of trying to distinguish between good martial art and self defense but the later point of folks who dont do martial arts and need some guidance. Thanks for the discussion.

joy c.

[lotus kick]

if someone toss a basball at me, i catch it.
if someone toss a knife at me in the same fashion, do i catch it as well?

ps, this is a rhetorical question.

as for other, MA is SD. you just have to find the bridge.

[Gandolf269]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
actually in the bladeforums a body of individuals think a knife guy could beat a gun guy to the draw and kill him before he could fire a shot
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The main fact that was left out of the above quote is "within a range of 12 feet or less". The trick for the man with the gun is he has to 1. unholster his weapon (most holsters are made to hold the weapon securly, not like the quick draw holsters in the old west), 2. find the tigger while drawing his weapon, 3. aim and 4. pull the trigger (and not shoot himself in the leg while freaking out at the guy getting closer with that shiny blade). ****, the safety was on and now I have a knife stuck in me!!!

Namrons quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But if you learn some arts specially wing chun in great depth- the awareness, alertness, quick judgement, sharpening of fight/flight
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is because they are planning on long range encounters where they are more efficient killing tools. But, they are also taught to use a knife, for those rare occasions when they are toe to toe.

Yanfuen quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But if you learn some arts specially wing chun in great depth- the awareness, alertness, quick judgement, sharpening of fight/flight
reflexes are heightened- because the "self" in self defense is also shaped.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
True, but also taught FREE in only 2 years at any public shcol in any American ghetto. :D

[foolinthedeck]

in answer to the original question, consider the delphic oracular "know thyself". dont beleive experts. if it feels right for you it is, and try not to disrespect others on the basis of your own perception of quality.

[old jong]

Originally posted by yuanfen
I ordered the book. What convinced me was NOT the original point of trying to distinguish between good martial art and self defense but the later point of folks who dont do martial arts and need some guidance. Thanks for the discussion.

joy c.

I decided to order the book also. I went though the sample pages on Amazon and it looks very good and serious.

[kj]

Originally posted by old jong


I decided to order the book also. I went though the sample pages on Amazon and it looks very good and serious.

Yes, it's an excellent book, IMHO, and very pragmatic.
- kj

[namron]

Originally posted by Gandolf269
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Namrons quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But if you learn some arts specially wing chun in great depth- the awareness, alertness, quick judgement, sharpening of fight/flight
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is because they are planning on long range encounters where they are more efficient killing tools. But, they are also taught to use a knife, for those rare occasions when they are toe to toe.



Me thinks I've been misquoted.

BTW I still back the gun based on survival rate.

[Gandolf269]

Namron:
Sorry, I somehow copied the wrong text into your quote. My response was to your statement:
"There is a reason the armed forces use guns as their primary weapons and not knives, its because they are more efficient killing tools"

I never thought Cut and Paste could be so difficult. :)

[Miles Teg]

I have to agree with Rene 100%.

Here are some random thoughts and questions:

Could anyone explain the value of reality training? You know- multiple oponents running at you with rubber knives and padded bats.
How about sparring? How does that add any realism into things?


This topic raises some interesting questions:
e.g. Is it better to take a few hits from some one in a gang and pretend to go down rather than defend yourself well and then have to deal with the rest who could quite possibly have weopons stored away. By taking a hit and pretending it has done damage your agressors ego has been nourished and he has gained respect amongst his peers.
Whats worth more, your pride or your life?

I heard there is a statistic that says 90% of murder cases are done by people that the victim personally knows. If this is so then being nice to people is probably better self defense than martial arts.

Can being a martial artist actually be more dangerous that not being one? I know lots of martial artists who seem to jump at the opportunity to fight in conflict situations. Among my firends who do this no one has been hurt but they could easily have been if there oponents were carrying weopons.


Why do we practice martial arts then?
Because its fun of course!

[yuanfen]

I took Andrew N's advice(thanks Andrew) and got the book "Strong in Defense". Enjoyed it. It is as KJ points out- a very practical book which goes over different street self defense
scenarios and gives good advice on them.

Some of it is good common sense specially for a street wise
person with top flight martial arts training. "Top flight" would mean knowing when not to fight and also would teach the widest possible "awareness". But for non martial artists it's a very good book. For martial artists its also a good check point..
One of the problems --just like having a weapon-people may not pay close attention to details and not go though the awareness
and the methods including decision making that that Strong suggests.

My niece who has been accosted on the street- I have tried to say the same things as Strong. But getting her attention is not easy. She kept the pepper spray deep in her purse- forgot about it-- and it was taken away at a airport check point- when she forgot not to leave it in her purse. Similarly her cell phone gets buried often and is not within easy reach on the street..

The book may be more relevant in the US with it's comparatively deeper gun culture- but some of it's advice is universal.

Having said the good things- a brief critique...

1. the book is written froma cop perspective--- and does not really speak much about the kind of forces that result in violence from people you know--families, friends and neighbors.

2. many societies including the US is becoming ethnically and culturally diverse- and it is also important to understand diversity including differences in body languages-so that neither over-reaction or under reaction occurs,

3. some of the suggestions of stop and frisk police actions -
are too oblivious to the erosion of civil rights- at least for me.

4. working on creating kinder and gentler communities could minimize some types of crimes. ((stealing a loaf of bread- Victor Hugo and Les miserables). Outside the scope of the book but worth reflecting about...different communities indeed ave different crime rates.

Bit if you pay attention to the "how to" and not buy some of the
cop culture values involved- its a good book.

joy chaudhuri

[John Weiland]

Originally posted by anerlich
I really got to recommend Strong on Defense (again). It's the only book I've seen that I'd feel I could give to my wife, nieces, mother (were she alive), anyone, people with no other training, and feel that their reading of it would better prepare them to survive a violent crime. I'd MUCH rather they read the book and took its recommendations than do any "women's self defense" class I've seen or heard about. If you haven't read it, please do.
Hi Andrew,

After reading your post, I picked up the book online at Amazon for $5.95US in hardcover. Quite a bargain if it's all you say. I'll post again when I've finished reading it.

Regards,

[anerlich]

"Here are some random thoughts and questions: "

And good questions they are (the answers maybe not quite so ;) )

"Could anyone explain the value of reality training? You know- multiple oponents running at you with rubber knives and padded bats.
How about sparring? How does that add any realism into things?"

In a multiopponent situation with weapons, you want to escape if you possibly can. There is benefit in such rehearsal if you don't have that choice.

The cops and soldiers still seem to do this sort of stuff, and situational rehearsal, and I'm sure they'd drop it if it had no value. However, those people generally don't have the luxury of being able to run away.

"e.g. Is it better to take a few hits from some one in a gang and pretend to go down rather than defend yourself well and then have to deal with the rest who could quite possibly have weopons stored away. By taking a hit and pretending it has done damage your agressors ego has been nourished and he has gained respect amongst his peers."

IMO (and probably Strong's too) far too many variables in play here. you shouldn't even think about fighting if all they want is property. As violence is often random and sudden and involves people who are hopped up on crack, etc., psychological analysis of such a situation while you're in it is impossible. The top do might be satisfied with your submission, but one of his minions might decide that shooting you might give him the ego or peer respect boost he needs (logic may play little part here). Beating one guy and then fighting the others in turn sounds too risky.

Better to choose beforehand a strategy which has maximum chance of success whatever the circumstance, and that is concentration only on ESCAPE.

Not the same thing I know, but stats indicate that rape victims who submit get hurt just as bad as those that resist. And no one who submitted avoided the rape, but some that resisted did.

"Whats worth more, your pride or your life?"

I'm going for option 2.

"I heard there is a statistic that says 90% of murder cases are done by people that the victim personally knows. If this is so then being nice to people is probably better self defense than martial arts."

Not ****ing people off is good advice. A healthy suspicion of strangers and their motives is probably sensible however. Niceness is not always reciprocated, some mistake friendliness for sexual interest, psychopaths can be nice till they get you alone and then the injuries begin. Plenty of battered spouses and children would probably tell you that niceness and appeasement is no defense.

"Can being a martial artist actually be more dangerous that not being one? I know lots of martial artists who seem to jump at the opportunity to fight in conflict situations. Among my firends who do this no one has been hurt but they could easily have been if there oponents were carrying weopons. "

I think you're right. Defeat is not the sole prince of non martial artists, and even a modicum of martial skill doesn't mean you shouldn't use common sense or avoid danger, let alone try to attract it.


"Why do we practice martial arts then?
Because its fun of course!"

IMO this is one of the purest motives. If I didn't have fun I would have given it up long ago.

[Ng Mui]

The style does not make the man ( or woman).......................... the man makes the style.

Kung fu, Karate, Jujitsu, etc, etc.......
It boils down to how hard you work out and practice.

Remember Captain, You don't have to be good at all ranges, if you are excellant at one.

[anerlich]

Remember Captain, You don't have to be good at all ranges, if you are excellant at one.

Unless the person you are fighting si better than you in one or more other ranges, and can successfully keep you out of the range you are excellent at and in the range where he is better.

[yuanfen]

Anrew-

Happens often enough...the person is good outside- not letting the insider in and vice versa.

[Miles Teg]

Anerlic says:

{In a multiopponent situation with weapons, you want to escape if you possibly can. There is benefit in such rehearsal if you don't have that choice.}

Yes perhaps there is value in it. If the point of these reality drills were to try run away and escape first and then fight if you found you couldnt, that would be really good. Perhaps thats what they already do, I dont know.
In my Karate years we practiced self defense sinarios with rubber knives. Looking back on some of the techniques that were taught, I think it would have been safer for the students if the Sensei just left knife defense out of the curriculum.

{IMO (and probably Strong's too) far too many variables in play here. you shouldn't even think about fighting if all they want is property. As violence is often random and sudden and involves people who are hopped up on crack, etc., psychological analysis of such a situation while you're in it is impossible. The top do might be satisfied with your submission, but one of his minions might decide that shooting you might give him the ego or peer respect boost he needs (logic may play little part here). Beating one guy and then fighting the others in turn sounds too risky.
Better to choose beforehand a strategy which has maximum chance of success whatever the circumstance, and that is concentration only on ESCAPE.}

Right, at least if you do that you have some control. If you play dead like I suggested, your left at their mercy and judgement.

{Not the same thing I know, but stats indicate that rape victims who submit get hurt just as bad as those that resist. And no one who submitted avoided the rape, but some that resisted did.}

Good point. Women are in a somewhat different position than men in that male victims probably have some possession that the attacker wants. But in the case of women there is the rape motive. In this case women cant give the attacker what they want so easily. This is one of the only sinarios I can think of when martial arts can come in useful in dangerous confrontations. The attacker may not think that its neccessary to use a weopon when dealing with what he may think of as a weak helpless victim. With martial skill a women could take the attacker by surprise.
There was an incident in NZ a few years ago when a small lady with a black belt in Tae Kwon DO managed to knock out 2 large aggressors. The male aggressors definitely would have been taken by surprise.

{Not ****ing people off is good advice. A healthy suspicion of strangers and their motives is probably sensible however. Niceness is not always reciprocated, some mistake friendliness for sexual interest, psychopaths can be nice till they get you alone and then the injuries begin. Plenty of battered spouses and children would probably tell you that niceness and appeasement is no defense.}

Actually this is true in the case of my cousin who went to England for a few days. He went into a bar, had a few drinks, and got into a friendly conversation with a local for a few hours. When they both left the bar together to go some where the guy pulled a gun on him.