From: eskrima-digest-owner@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com To: eskrima-digest@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Subject: Inayan_Eskrima/FMA-Digest V6 #267 Reply-To: eskrima@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Errors-To: eskrima-digest-owner@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com Precedence: Inayan_Eskrima/FMA-Digest Wed, 23 June 1999 Vol 06 : Num 267 In this issue: eskrima: Re: Balintawak and TJC eskrima: Re: Women, knives and self-defense (part 1) eskrima: Re: Inayan_Eskrima/FMA-Digest V6 #266 eskrima: Re: Women's knife video eskrima: (no subject) eskrima: Women, knives, self-defense etc. eskrima: Knife eskrima: Instructor's Liability/ Attack of the Lawyers eskrima: good fighters = long fights??? eskrima: good fighters = long fights??? Re: eskrima: good fighters = long fights??? eskrima: me too eskrima: . .......................................................................... Eskrima-Digest, serving the Internet since June 1994. ~1100 members strong! Copyright 1994-99: Ray Terry, Inayan System of Eskrima, Martial Arts Resource Replying to this message will NOT unsubscribe you. To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe eskrima-digest" (no quotes) in the body of an e-mail (top line, left justified) addressed to majordomo@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com To send e-mail to this list use eskrima@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com See the Filipino Martial Arts (FMA) FAQ and online search the last two years worth of digest issues at http://www.MartialArtsResource.com Mabuhay ang eskrima! Ray Terry, PO Box 110841, Campbell, CA 95011 FMA@MartialArtsResource.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: n9yz@unb.ca Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 11:22:05 -0300 (ADT) Subject: eskrima: Re: Balintawak and TJC > From: gmzimmer@islandnet.com > I have been dabbling in Chen Tai Chi Chuan for a couple of years > now, but know about the 13 fundamental motions of Yang Tai Chi > Chuan. There are definite similarities, but I wouldn't push it too > far. Oh no. Mike, forget the motions. The motions or postures is merely an application (one of many) of the 13 concepts. It is actually 8 energies (Jinn) and 5 directions. If you could find literatures that "unzip" the chinese words for these 13 concepts and you will see there are more to just press, parry,squeeze, lean, push, pull,... Believe or not, I believe people who have a FMA background will tend to understand TJC (the combat applications) a lot easier. PL ------------------------------ From: "Todd D. Ellner" Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 08:44:39 -0700 Subject: eskrima: Re: Women, knives and self-defense (part 1) James Farthing writes: >This sounds a bit dodgy to me - surely the best 'self-defence' would be to >teach people (women??) how not to put themselves in situations where these >skills could be needed. >I was told a true (?) story once: >A woman did some baby-sitting every Saturday night and walked to and from >the house through a dark park. She was a bit wary so she decided to do a >'self-defence' course. After completing the course she commented that she >"felt much safer now when walking through the park". >Surely it would have been better to teach the woman to take that extra five >minutes and go the long way round, past houses and under the street lights >etc. The 'self-defence' course just instilled a false sense of security. >I hope you "get my drift" as it were with this. I get your drift, and only the light but firm editorial hand of our own Ray Terry prevents me from setting the flamethrower to "extra toasty". Women have been taking "that extra five minutes and [going] the long way around the park" forever. The advice that women get from the cradle is to restrict their actions, their activities, where they travel, what they wear, how they walk, talk, and think in order to be safe. When we polled our students we found that the degree of restriction they place on themselves would be unthinkable for most men. And most of them do it reflexively. I can provide plenty of evidence off-line for anyone who is interested, but let's consider one small example. Take a look at the tall, large framed men you know. They tend to hold their heads up, shoulders back, speak in at least normal tones of voice, and give the impression of taking up a fair amount of space. Now take a close look at tall, large framed women. Almost without exception they keep their feet close together, hunch their shoulders, and speak with very soft voices in order to give the impression that they are smaller than they actually are. The not terribly subtle message that women get is "Shut up, sit straight, and be a nice compliant feminine lady or you will get raped. You have no right to walk the streets without a [male] escort. Your only safety lies in neurotically limiting yourself." James, I fear, has bought into these cultural norms. Not his fault. It's one of those things which very few people notice much less question. Fortunately, attitudes are beginning to change in light of facts. First, let's address this "false sense of security". There has been a fair amount of research over the last 15-20 years on the effectiveness of physical resistance and self-defense for women. The take home message is that earnest resistance works. So do yelling, swearing, and running like hell. Struggling, pleading, reasoning, and token physical resistance don't work and may slightly raise the rate of completed crimes. In other words, women do a lot better if they allow themselves to act in ways which men take for granted. [Yes Marc. We've gone back and forth on the issue and the special cases. But I think we finally agreed on the general one. It's all a matter of how earnest your "earnest resistance" needs to be.] And before someone brings it up, women who use knives won't have them plucked from their hands and used against them. Using a bladed or projectile weapon lowers the completed rape rate, for instance, to just about zero. As Marc and others have pointed out crime is very seldom a random act which appears suddenly out of the blue. The bad guys don't want to work any harder for what they are after than they have to and generally assess their victims for anywhere from seconds to months. Who are they going to choose, someone who smiles, makes herself small, goes out of her way to appear non-threatening, and is willing to imprison herself in order not to be noticed by bad people or someone who acts confidently, assertively, takes up space, makes noise, and isn't afraid to cause trouble? Those interested in the subject should read Dr. Martha McCaughey's "Real Knockouts: The Physical Feminism of Self Defense" and Ellen Snortland's "Beauty Bites Beast". ------------------------------ From: AnimalMac@aol.com Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 11:52:12 EDT Subject: eskrima: Re: Inayan_Eskrima/FMA-Digest V6 #266 From Animal. First off I have been quiet lately for two reasons. One I have been busy dealing with an illness in the family. While not entirely resolved yet, we now know it isn't life threatening, which is good news. Secondly I have been slammed putting together a package for books on women's self-defense and general crime prevention. If these fly you will finally see my books in regular bookstores rather than speciality stores. There was lots of stuff on the list I wanted to put my two cents in, but time restraints kept me hitting the delete button. << Surely it would have been better to teach the woman to take that extra five minutes and go the long way round, past houses and under the street lights etc. The 'self-defence' course just instilled a false sense of security. >> Ohhhh am I going to have fun with this one. However, I would like to state right now that the following comment don't apply to every woman, but they do apply to a significant number To start with I am in 100% in total agreement as to James comment. However there is a cliche that immediately comes to mind "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." I teach a women's self-defense course and I am constantly amazed at some women's stubborn refusal to beleive that there are both men and situations out there that they cannot handle. Maybe intellectually they understand that there are people out there who they can't hope to win against, but in practice they regularly do things that I, a professional badass, would leave skid marks to avoid. Oddly enough the women who are the very worst are competent professional career women I once did a radio interview where the female DJ started arguing with me about turning around and getting out of the parking lot when you see wolf pack loitering there. Her point was that she refused to be inconvienenced (read intimidated) by such characters. Her next question, after walking into the lions jaws, was "what could she say to a mugger that would tell him how upset she was that he was robbing her?" I suggested that was a really bad idea to be thinking along these lines. She got insistent. As she doing this a former gangmember called up and said "Lady, he's right. If you had lipped off to me while I was robbing you, I would have shot you." She still didn't beleive us. Now that 'statistic waiting to happen' is an extreme case. However, I do see this sort of problem among women who regularly contest with men under more civilized conditions. What they fail to recognize is that while they are accustomed to heated debate in the Roman Senate, what we are talking about is Attila and his boys are coming to town. It is a level that few have experienced. This is raw naked male aggression and dealing with someone in a dark and lonely place who really doesn't care that she has an attitude. He's got one too and physical violence to back his up. Ready for a statement that will probably get me flamed? When it comes to dealing with dangerous individuals, I have seen more macho behavior among women then men. By this I mean a man will calmly walk wide of someone he doesn't like the looks of faster than a woman. If you don't beleive me, go out and watch people walking past a bum. A man will just swing wide and think nothing of it. While a great number of women who walks wide will usually do so fearfully. HOWEVER...many women will pretend to ignore the slimepuppy and walk right into striking distance. Now I have heard a wide variety of reasons for this. Ranging from "I don't want to hurt his feelings", "I don't to show him I'm afraid" to "I' can take care of myself" The bottom line is however that few women have ever experienced serious physical violence and therefore don't believe it can happen to them, they therefore regularly and unwittingly put themselves into danger. I have a saying when I teach that goes "There is no man on this planet who hasn't faced the raw reality of swallow pride or swallow blood." Is there any man here who did not have the sickening realization in the school locker room that if he didn't shut up and back down, he would get his butt kicked? That is something few women have experienced. Rare is the man who argues with another without the inherient understanding that it could go physical. As politically incorrect as this next statement is, if you look at it, how much of macho male behavior is actually dedicated to avoiding a fight while allowing both parties to save face? Think about it. Woof woof woof...let's not fight. However, there isn't a woman on this planet who doesn't have the experience of arguing with a man and winning. This tends to reflect in their choice of actions when dealing with potentially dangerous people. Under civilized conditions, they CAN take care of themselves! Unfortunately they tend to assume that it extends into uncivilized conditions. This confidence disolves faster than a vampire in a tanning booth when they are actually confronted on the base level. Now the really bad news, a woman who has had this confidence ripped away from her by suffering a physical attack, will often become paranoid because she now sees the potential in all men. Guess what though, the potential was always there, she just never recognized it before. The even worse news is that confidence that was ripped away was an intergal part of who she was. Can we say Post Traumatic Event Disorder? Someone who has actually experienced violence has far less reservations about doing whatever is necessary about avoiding being on the receiving end of it than someone who hasn't. The person who hasn't often considers it a matter of pride not to be intimidated. These also tend to be the women who take a half-baked, vanilla self-defense class at a local dojo and then proceed under the false assumption that they can take care of themselves and do stuff like walk through dark parking lots. As teachers of self-defense we have to recognize this assumed confidence about dealing with men and address it. Women do regularly contest with men and win under circumstances where phyiscal violence is never used. We have to take into account that while there are "mice" in this world, there are just as many, if not more women who don't hesitate to go head to head with men. However, that doesn't extend to handling a rapist coming out of the bushes. Furthermore, as males we have to recognize that we have an assumed understanding about this swallow pride/blood issue that is not common among women. If we are to teach women we have to understand the difference between the intellectual "I'm a woman, I've lived with the fact that I could be raped" vs the actual experience of being physically picked up and slammed against the wall. Big difference, and the only people who don't know it are the ones it hasn't happened to. ------------------------------ From: "Todd D. Ellner" Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 09:02:25 -0700 Subject: eskrima: Re: Women's knife video Bill, I completely understand your dilemma. You need to get the information out there, but you don't want to raise up a class of better trained rapist. Your fears are not groundless. At the last AWSDA conference a couple of cops in the violent crimes business said that when they bring in serial rapists a majority has women's self defense or police defensive tactics training material in their homes. Also, as you say, there is more to being a teacher than selling a product, particularly when you are teaching deadly force stuff like knife technique. The marketing ideas are good. Selling through feminist organizations and well-established WSD outlets isn't a bad idea if you are set on doing the project. I wouldn't put what I was doing down on video at all. You won't reach as many if you only show stuff in person, but at least you'll have some control over whom you are instructing. Shameless plug: I notice that your ISP is in NY state. This August you will have an excellent opportunity to trade ideas with people who have been in this business a long time and who have gone over the questions you have. This year's AWSDA convention will be on Long Island (www.awsda.org). ------------------------------ From: Reisya@aol.com Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 12:25:09 EDT Subject: eskrima: (no subject) I would like to reply to this; >This sounds a bit dodgy to me - surely the best 'self-defence' would be to teach people (women??) how not to put themselves in situations where these skills could be needed. I beleive it is important to teach this, but the fact ot the matter is sometimes it can not be avoided. I was attached in broad daylight, handed over my backpack without question that wasn't what he wanted. I did not put myself in this position and it is wrong to beleive that all situations can be avoided. So, being prepared is the best of all worlds. Personally I love knives (my husband doesn't like the fact that I like knives - but oh well) Peace Yvonne ------------------------------ From: "Branwen Thomas" Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 13:52:50 -0230 Subject: eskrima: Women, knives, self-defense etc. a comment on how to keep knife videos out of "bad guys" hands >>Make it available only trough feminist organizations, and allow them only >>to sell your tapes to women! If you really mean what you are saying, this response is >>obvious, only that you will not sell nearly as much tapes as if you sell them through >>normal mail order. Sorry, that's too simplistic an answer - there are bad women out there as well as men, or women who might lend/give copies to men they know, or re-sell them, and since a large majority of rapes are committed by men known to the woman...knowledge is power, and although reasonable/sensible care must be taken as to whom we allow access to the knowledge, I don't think it is possible to narrow it down completely - not until we devise a way to see into people's minds and be SURE that they're "good guys" ;) Presumably, also, most legit instructors aren't just looking to make a fast buck by selling one trillion copies of a video... Jim Farthing said: >Surely it would have been better to teach the woman to take that extra five >minutes and go the long way round, past houses and under the street lights >etc. The 'self-defence' course just instilled a false sense of security. NO. Sorry. I refuse to be made afraid to walk a particular route, or be told that I should take a longer/safer/brighter path when walking alone. It IS good to teach women to be aware and alert, as well as how to defend themselves. No matter where you walk, especially in large cities or rough neighborhoods, you are at risk. Being told we should be more afraid simply because we are women is not helpful. If the woman who took the self-defence course felt more confident, then she WAS. She was obviously also aware enough of her surroundings, and the risk she was taking in walking across the park, to realize that she needed some sort of extra security. Women are raped on university campuses where there are hired security guards, bright lights, and fairly active evening life. These things do not guarantee safety. Sitting in your own house with all the lights on does not guarantee safety. Learning ways to defend yourself, even if it only involves ways to give yourself two extra minutes to run or scream, is better than saying "Don't walk alone at night". I have trained long enough, and I know enough now to know that I NEVER want to have to use what I know in a real attack situation. However, I also know enough that IF it ever occurs, I will (probably) not freeze in panic - my body is trained to react, and I am more confident and aware of possible situations. My body language reflects the fact that I will refuse to be a victim. Instructors should teach their female students to be aware of their surroundings and to be mentally aware etc., but should also train them so that IF THEY CHOOSE to walk somewhere less safe, or of necessity must do so, they are able to take care of themselves. Men generally take it for granted that they may walk where they choose - it is accepted that they understand the risks involved. Women should be able to do so also. We do not want to be attacked, any more than a man does; but neither, I think, do women generally want to be made to feel that they shouldn't or can't go certain places simply because they are women. graciously awaiting return strikes ;) Jocelyne Roaring Girl * Purveyor Of Fine Books * Beater Of Bodhrans * Smiter Of The Wicked * * Owned By Angus, Most Elegant And Pleasing Of Cats * ------------------------------ From: RBalicki@aol.com Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 12:36:39 EDT Subject: eskrima: Knife To Bill McGath, I am extremely touched and want to thank you for the kind words. I look forward with anticipation to seeing any new material you put out on the Filipino martial arts. I think that anything dealing with defense can be used for good or bad. For that reason I tried to make my video's as defense orientated as possible. Respects Ron Balicki ------------------------------ From: "Tim Kashino" Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 10:01:13 -0700 Subject: eskrima: Instructor's Liability/ Attack of the Lawyers >From: "Marc Denny" >Date: Tue, 22 Jun 1999 16:22:12 -0700 >Subject: eskrima: Attack of the lawyers > OK, the proposition would seem to be: The manufacturer of car/gun/knife >is not morally responsible for the end use, but the person who teaches the >user to use the implement in question more skillfully is? Question: Is >the teacher legally liable? To what standard? Absolute liability? Strict >Liability? Recklessness? Negligence? Is a showing of no felony convictions >a safe harbor? Does anyone (Mary Lou?) have any concrete knowledge of the >law of any jurisdiction in this regard? How do the teachers out there feel >about the idea of being held legally liable? > >Woof, >Crafty Interesting questions, Marc. I too would like to learn more about this subject. The very idea of holding an instructor liable for the actions of a student is ridiculous. But unfortunately it seems to be a reality in today's world of law suit-happy "victims" and greedy (and often seedy) legal professionals. Here's my question to add to the fray: If a MA instructor can be held accountable for the actions of a student, then what about driving instructors or college professors that teach medical students their trade? Perhaps I am building a box around the subject, but the principle is the same. It's a trainload of bullshit that's driven by money. Later folks, I gotta go... Tim Kashino Angelfire for your free web-based e-mail. http://www.angelfire.com ------------------------------ From: Drew Zimba Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 10:20:53 -0700 (PDT) Subject: eskrima: good fighters = long fights??? Arlan said: >If both fighters are good, it could be a long fight >until someone prevails, if at all. Interesting. Crafty related to the list that Tuhon Gaje mentioned "if anyone lasts more thatn a few seconds with me, he is very good." Others on the list can relate similar statements from reputable sources concerning fighters such as Cacoy Canete, Angel Cabelas, Dizon, Bacon, etc. Their fights are over in seconds. What's the difference?? Drew _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Drew Zimba Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 10:25:59 -0700 (PDT) Subject: eskrima: good fighters = long fights??? Arlan said: >If both fighters are good, it could be a long fight >until someone prevails, if at all. Interesting. Crafty related to the list that Tuhon Gaje mentioned "if anyone lasts more thatn a few seconds with me, he is very good." Others on the list can relate similar statements from reputable sources concerning fighters such as Cacoy Canete, Angel Cabelas, Dizon, Bacon, Villabraille, etc. Their fights are over in seconds. What's the difference?? Drew _________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ From: Ray Terry Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 11:30:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: eskrima: good fighters = long fights??? > Arlan said: [snip] Drew, only one msg per post, please... Ray Terry raymail@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com ------------------------------ From: "Marc Denny" Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 11:50:55 -0700 Subject: eskrima: me too A Howl etc: Bill wrote: > Many thanks to all of you who have written in on this subject. You have all > raised some good points. Marc, I plead guilty to being subject to a bit of > schizophrenia in my logic on the subject but I think everyone's posts have > helped me clarify my reasoning a bit. I most certainly include myself in the schizophrenia and I'm still working on it. The logic I have applied to guns, cars, alcohol, I haven't applied to knives. I think all my conclusions are right, but I'm trying to figure out the seeming inconsistency. > I think my reluctance to the idea of selling knife videos is because I view > a martial arts teacher's role as more than just selling a product. I believe > we should be teaching our students not only how to fight, but when and why > to fight. I grew up in an environment in which I was treated not like a > customer but like a family member, so I guess I feel that when a student > "goes bad" it is not so much like a customer misusing your product, but like > a son bringing shame on the family name. Good point. This resonates with me-- indeed it may be the key to my (our?) seeming inconsistency. Thus, to try to summarize, can we say that: 1) No legal liability for manufacturers, yes legal liability for the actual doers 2) No moral responsibility for manufacturers. 3) Yes moral responsibility for reckless teachers, (guns, knives) but with empathy for the impossibility of seeing into the heart of another. 4) No legal liability for teachers or 5) No legal liability for teachers who make a good faith effort to screen for bad apples- a formulation which would exclude sellers of videos teaching attacking techniques. Agree? Disagree? Question: Is there something about using the knife that is qualitatively different than using a gun? That is, are there people who can pull the trigger yet not be able to apply the blade for psychological reasons? Thus, does teaching people the knife change them in the direction of being more psychologically capable of killing? I have absolutely no experience, hence no opinion, in this regard. The question is just that: a question. Woof, Crafty ------------------------------ From: Ray Terry Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 15:32:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: eskrima: . ------------------------------ End of Inayan_Eskrima/FMA-Digest V6 #267 **************************************** To unsubscribe from this digest, eskrima-digest, send the command: unsubscribe eskrima-digest -or- unsubscribe eskrima-digest your.old@address in the BODY of email (top line, left justified) addressed to majordomo@hpwsrt.cup.hp.com. Old digest issues are available via ftp://ftp.martialartsresource.com, directory pub/eskrima/digests. All digest files have the suffix '.txt' Copyright 1994-99: Ray Terry, Inayan System of Eskrima, Martial Arts Resource Standard disclaimers apply.