Or even against other men. They’re always going on about how men suffer the most violence–why don’t they just knock it off?

The other thing that’s missing is just how bitter is the prohibition against women defending themselves. If your attacker is the guy next door, you’re going to face people afterward who are going to ask you, “Why did you have to hurt him? Why didn’t you just leave? What were you wearing?”

Fact is, it’s stil considered uppity in a lot of places for a woman to defend herself.

She must have asked for it, after all.

Eradicate that belief first.

Most important thing I have to say is, if you decide to defend yourself, do so 100%. DON’T half-ass it. If you punch someone, aim for a vulnerable spot and hit as hard as you can. Do it fast, do it hard, and don’t bother with fighting fair. Mean it. Aim your hits as though you are going to punch through the person. Don’t aim for anything bony.

Regarding mace, make the first shot count. It doesn’t go through glasses. If he has glasses, it would be a good strategy to grab them and throw them away; then his vision will be blurred and he may decide that finding them is a better priority. This works even if you don’t have mace.

If you have a weapon, you have the responsibility to make yourself capable of using it properly (I mean both know how and have enough confidence), and to keep it out of your attacker’s hands. If there’s one thing I hate, it’s hearing how Americans are so helpless that even arming ourselves gives the enemy an advantage. It helps to use it, rather than brandish it, if you are close enough to them that they can reach it. Better if they don’t see it coming.

Another thing to think about is what sort of self-defense tools work best for you. Guns are off-limits in many places, and due to logistical concerns (if a gun is not allowed someplace, you must leave it in your car) they are also unavailable between those places and your vehicle. Not to mention common sense dictates that you keep them locked up, away from curious children, which makes them inexpedient in emergencies. While I support gun rights (if you want to know why, pick up an American Hunter magazine and read the column called “The Armed Citizen”), I think the best and most useful self-defense tool is martial arts proficiency.

You know what else I hate? That “duty to retreat” bullshit and related theories. Someone tries to hurt me, and it’s my duty to run away? Someone threatens me, I’m supposed to act threatened? They do something wrong, and it’s my duty to let them continue on their way (possibly to the next victim) without inconveniencing them with my interference?

Thank you, no. Somewhere in the Declaration of Independence, something was said about people having the right and the duty to correct injustices. And the law of my faith is “An’ it harm none, do what ye will.” For me to let an attacker continue unchallenged, would cause harm to the next person he attacks; to allow him to walk away unharmed would enable him to attack someone else as soon as he wishes. It is my duty to interfere. And why should I go out of my way to avoid some criminal? He’s the one who deserves the inconvenience! And, should someone try to attack me, they are the one who deserves to suffer the consequences—not me, by running away or losing my money, but him, by getting his ass kicked and getting dragged off in handcuffs.

If crime did not pay, there would be very few criminals. If every attack was met by an ass-kicking from the intended victim, there would be fewer still.

PS: martial arts skills can’t be stolen and used against you.

The question is…. was this murder of self-defense in accordance with california law?
I look forward to reading reviews..
Sean

I started Tae Kwon Do when I was 15, and made it all the way to blue belt before money issues made me quit. The reason I was paying for this class? My father said that he didn’t want me to take self-defense, because then I’d get “overconfident and not take enough precautions for a young lady”. He said that it didn’t matter how much I learned, a guy would always be able to beat me up, and that was just the fact of the matter. When I was in my class, for the longest time the other guys would hold back when sparring with me because “you don’t hit a girl” which was to my detriment and theirs.

I realize my dad’s a sexist fuck (and I mean that in the nicest way possible, he is my dad after all), but these attitudes still exsist, and they prevent women from going into self-defense courses, and prevent them from thinking that you CAN be strong. And those boys in my class, their idea of “protecting” women contributes to a learned-helplessness envirnment. So, self-defense is kinda a catch-22 in some areas: it is said we need to learn to defend ourselves but then we’re discouraged from learning to defend ourselves.

As a matter of fact, twice I have fought off attackers, and once I had a can of mace! I don’t know if it worked or not, but the guy ran off. He was following me home from work in college and I was aware of him for a few blocks ( thank you self defense class) so tried to keep him in front of me until he finally tried to knock me down. I can only guess that he didn’t want a difficult victim, because he ran off when I resisted.

Later ( again in S America) I ran down a thief who ripped off my necklace. I caught him from behind and with the crowd’s help, I got my necklace back and then watched as he was beaten up by the crowd and then police. That was disturbing, if you want to know. And perhaps I shouldn’t have tried to get my necklace back but instinct kicked in. My mother in law also ran off a male intruder in her home with a frying pan not long ago.

You know, NYMOM, most men aren’t violent at all, but maybe sports and a general awareness that they are expected to protect themselves as best they can serves them in situations like the ones that I experienced. Maybe being clever and wily when outgunned serves women. But wouldn’t a real life strategy be to learn both? Think of that poor twelve year old girl last year in Florida who was on tape as being led away without resisting at all by her murderer. Given how easliy human beings are physically intimidated, how can a good self defense class and sports help?

Another point- Brian Nichols had a gun, and he had the advantage over everyone he encountered, even other men. There’s nothing really gender specific about needing to figure out how to talk down a violent armed criminal.

My encounter was a real-life experience that shows you the limits of conventional self-defense ideas for women…

I absolutely agree. Which is why women and girls need to be taught feminist self-defence which starts from the (factual) position that women are far more likely to be needing to defend themselves against someone they know - and more likely than not, trust.

Meanwhile, 86% of women escape attempted assault by resisting and fighting back. Much better odds than cooperating with one’s attacker. Yes, Virginia, the average woman can successfully fight back against her male attacker. She just (in most cases) has to use different techniques than the average man would.

Yes, of course, make a joke about a real-life experience…instead let’s rely on statistics, movies and antedotes from people who probably never had a real hands-on encounter with a serious adversary since they were in grade school…

AND an encounter with a man who is a total stranger to you and has NOTHING invested in keeping you alive is very different from one where you know your attacker, such as maybe you’re his wife, you might have children together, some distant good memories, etc., My encounter was a real-life experience that shows you the limits of conventional self-defense ideas for women…AS WAS the encounter of the woman in Atlantic against Brian Nichols…

BTW, have you ever fought off a totally strange man with a can of mace that didn’t work OR convinced one that had just shot and killed four people to surrender…If not, then I don’t think you’re in the position to make fun of others who might have some insight to offer to other women…

The average woman CANNOT beat the average man in any encounter…she can barely hold her own with special forces training…This was already made clear after the Gulf War and is the reason that Les Aspin made the exclusionary rule that kept women off the front lines although this is even being subverted now due to the influence of feminists and spiteful MRAs…

My point being that women must build upon our own strengths, not a lesser version of what men do to protect themselves. As men and women are different in spite of your antedotes about women being able to lift cars with their bare hands… I would have LOVED to start flying through the air like Charlie’s Angels did in all their movies when I was being mugged, unfortunately we must play the hand we are dealt, not the one the media encourages all women to unrealistically aspire to…

Once I watched four indigenous women farmers in Ecuador pull our car out of a muddy ditch, after me and four men in my husband’s family couldn’t budge it. Their husbands undoubtedly were stronger than they, but they were much stronger than me and four sports playing white men who didn’t work the fields ten hours a day. If sports are said to substitute men’s primal need for physical activity and accomplishment, what about ours? Plus, to get back on topic, that added confidence and strength might come in handy when our womanly wiles fail to protect us.

Oh, and girls who play sports can lower their future risk of breast cancer by up to 60%. I also forgot to mention a greatly lowered risk of osteoporosis.

I know that I participate in martial arts in order to meet twelve-year old boys. Wooh, baby.

Anyway, I too am wary of the “women should carry guns” solution. It puts the burden of a problem of male behavior on women. The behavior of abusive males is wrong, and to adamantly suggest women packing as a solution can lead to blaming the victim. “She didn’t carry a gun, so she was asking for it.”

However, I do believe that women should be encouraged to participate in martial arts. I think that learning to defend oneself and to react to violence could help women avoid being victimized - women who have self confidence are more likely to tell a guy with “abuser warning signs” to fuck off.

Girls are just not taught to react to violence as children; I never realized I could fight back until I started in the martial arts. Now, though, I reflexively block a punch if someone tries to hit me, and I would have some real options if someone grabbed me on the street.

They are no healthier then anyone else, actually many look far less healthy…

I find that college campus intellectuals, who never saw the inside of a sports arena, look far healthier then the average sports fan…

Americans, both men and women, are unhealthy because we overeat, not because we don’t participate in team sports…

How about a more efficent cardiovascular system, stronger and more supple muscles, better reflexes, greater endurance capacity, increased coordination, greater range of motion and flexibility, better management of blood sugar, the natural high of endorphins, reduction of stress, a healthy outlet for aggression, comraderie, teamwork, and just sheer joy?

Not to mention the fact that girls who participate in sports grow up to have a much better body image than girls who don’t, because they learn early on to focus on what their body can do as opposed to just what it looks like.

For fuck’s sake, why oh why everytime we talk about violence against women (on a feminist message board/blog), someone (the general and the poster) needs to turn it around and talk about the equivalent about men.

Errrrrm, because that way we can shut down discussion on a topic that affects all of society by a) derailing it onto another topic b) riling up feminists and getting them on the defensive and c) minimising the extent of males’ abuse of females by creating a false impression about patterns of abuse along gender lines?