As far as I can see you didn’t make logical errors (being a philosophy-student I do know a thing or two about logic and should be able to detect them), your posts are generally well-constructed and the fact that you have hands-on, street-experience only lends more credibility to your statements.
That being said I must disagree about any MA being suited to women’s self-defense: MA that are very limited in scope (aikido), sports-orientated (most types of Japanese karate), overly complicated (taekwondo, a lot of wu-shu styles) or rely on strength (wrestling, MMA) are out as far as I’m concerned. Allow me to clarify this: meditative MA like aikido or tai-chi generally do not contain any offensive techniques or at least not very effective ones. Their aim is spiritual cultivation and a healthy body and mind, self-defense usually comes in second or even third. Besides that it’s a nice ideal to be able to win fights without resorting to serious violence (strikes, kicks) but in reality this is not possible or only for a very highly trained individual. For women it’s just not feasible to rely on techniques that require a very high degree of skill and in general effective striking and kicking should be the cornerstone of any successful defense. Sports-orientated styles do carry some benefits (experience in hitting a moving target, speed, dealing with stress) but since most tournaments aren’t full-contact you’ll never know if your strikes would have been successful in a real fight with a much bigger attacker who may or may not be high on drugs or drunk.
Also a lot of karate-styles have the annoying habit of not even making contact (at least not to the face) and breaking off as soon as a point has been scored. With all due respect to these arts but in my opinion this does breed bad habits (you should learn to hit through a target, not just graze it with your fist, only rarely will you be able to knock someone out with just one blow) and I do think it’s true the way you train is the way you fight (at least to a certain extent). That being said boxing, kickboxing and muay-thai are very effective styles (in the ring and outside): it’s well known good boxing form and training produces the hardest strikes and this combine with good kicks (virtually the same as those in karate, with the exception of the thai-roundhouse), hard knees and elbows (thaiboxing) and a no-nonsense approach to training pretty generally produces hard and above average fighters. Of course there are downsides too: since they’re still sports the most effective targets (eyes, knees, throat, groin) are not dealt with and hitting said targets is what’s going to give a woman the advantage over a stronger adversary and in my view will give her the best chances of escaping relatively unharmed. Another major downside (which I’ll cover in a little more depth later on) is that while even a few months spent learning these arts will give you the advantage in a stand-off type situation with only one opponent you’re still pretty much defenseless when it comes to grabbing types of attacks (especially chokeholds and attacks from the rear or in a ambush type of attack) and any type of weapon-attack. Now I do think most attacks on women are not going to consist of strikes or kicks but of grabs and holds: this makes sense since most men (even thugs) have an aversion to hitting women and since they know they’ll have the advantage of strength, mass and height on their side they’ll be more likely to attempt to control her by restricting her movement, weaken her (through strangulation-techniques or by simply letting her wear herself out in futile attempts at escape) and make her comply with whatever they have in mind.
With this in mind it would make sense to spend a substantial amount of training on escaping grappling-attacks (of course with follow-up strikes or kicks) as well as effective defenses against ground-situations. Since one of the biggest self-defense issues facing women today is rape and the act is usually conducted on the ground a woman has to learn how to reverse that situation. Naturally the best thing would be to avoid getting there in the first place but in training for self-defense one should always assume the worst will happen and start from there. If you get ambushed you don’t have time to prepare and chances are you will end up on the ground, especially if your attacker is bigger than you or has any experience in a grappling-art. If you do not know at least some grappling-techniques you’re pretty much done for, even if you are the best standup-fighter in the world.
With these considerations in mind (which of course are open to criticism, I’m not expounding dogma) there is a strong case to be made for modern, hybrid, self-defense orientated arts like krav-maga. Basically krav-maga consists of kickboxing, conditioning, escapes, basic ground-fighting and effective weapon-defenses (usually knife, stick and gun) taught in a semi-military format. This means training is geared exclusively to effectiveness and simplicity with little regard to considerations of artform, spirituality, religion or intricate maneuvers. In my mind it comes very close to what I’d consider ultimate self-defense: simple, highly effective techniques nearly everybody can do with a high percentage of success trained over and over again in circumstances approaching reality (uncooperative opponents, training in low-light or noisy conditions, after a heavy workout). They usually train full-contact (using focus-mits, pads or body-protection) with about 90% of the defenses following a similar pattern: evade, escape or parry followed by strikes, clinching with knees followed by elbow or hammerfist-strikes to the neck. This makes for a very fast learning-curve and since it’s a system taught and used by the Israeli military I’m pretty sure it works too.
That being said krav-maga is not the only form of successful self-defense and anything that does the job is great but I do like the concept (simplicity, realism, contact-training) and its ease of use: whenever possible it makes use of instinctive responses and since there isn’t a completely new respons or defense to every situation it means you don’t have to think very hard which shall only benefit your reaction-time. All these factors combined would make it a good candidate for any kind of self-defense course, especially for people who are physically weaker and who cannot afford to invest years into a traditional MA.
As far as your style goes: I don’t have any hands-on experience with it but since it’s self-defense orientated and mainly striking-based I’m sure it has its merits. I’ve done some research on the subject (youtube, websites, a general MA-book) and what I like about kenpo (at least what I’ve seen) is its rapid-fire striking (unlike pure okinawan or Japanese karate) and defenses against a wide variety of attacks (not just punches and kicks as in karate or kickboxing). It does seem to be a bit complicated though: why make combinations of 10 consecutive strikes which is not only hard to remember (especially if they vary in application) but which effect will be nullified when he blocks one or simply evades. As far as striking goes we teach basic striking techniques (usually on the heavy bag or focus-mits, that way you actually feel wether or not your strike was good or not) and a few basic combinations (mainly boxing). In defense-application it’s up to you to decide which combinations suit you or work best in any given situation. The ideal in self-defense or fighting in general is mushin or acting without thought and the more complicated a system is the more difficult it’ll be to get into that state-of-mind. Also, if you could explain to me the value of kata I would be much obliged. I’ve never done karate so I don’t want to judge but I do wonder how sequences in a kata could be used in a real fight. It seems to me like making intricate, complicated battle-plans which usually do not survive even first contact with the enemy isn’t a very good idea and a rather unnecessary diversion of training-time.
Basically any system can be made to work but the question is how long it takes to become effective with, how much risk and punishment you’re willing to take and how strong/agile/gifted you have to be get there. The effectiveness of a MA depends heavily on your goals: if your primary goal is self-defense I wouldn’t go for judo (it contains no defenses against striking, unless you count an antiquated kata which you’ll only learn at second dan), if you’re looking for hardcore fitness tai-chi would probably be a bad idea, if you’re into relaxation and spiritual growth boxing probably isn’t for you.
As to your point about initial movement: while I fully agree with the concept (action being faster than reaction your chances of winning are greatly increased if you throw the first punch) this is also a very offensive mindset. In itself it’s a great concept and basically the highest strategy in fighting (attack or intercept his intention, strike while he’s still debating or preparing) but it can be explained by bystanders as if you were the attacker (you iniated) and this could get you in trouble with the law and possibly convicted (depending on other factors and especially the amount of damage you inflicted). Of course it’s different for a small woman with limited training but for a trained martial-artist, especially when you’re male, this could backfire and it may be better to just keep your distance and let him attack first. At least that way there won’t be any confusion as to who’s the aggressor and who the ‘victim’. In most cases criminals actually have more rights than upstanding citizens and while the law or the cops are almost never there when there’s trouble (in a number of cases they are on the scene but actually wait to make arrests until after both parties wore themselves out) they do tie your hands so to speak and being a martial-artist actually puts you at a disadvantage judicially speaking. Ah well, different topic completely. Perhaps we can discuss this some other time.

:

Interesting post. I think the best and most effective approach to women’s self-defense is a combination of awareness-training and MA/self-defense training. Ideally this should be done in school and from an early age. Girls should be taught what is acceptable, normal male behavior and what is not (a guy showing sexual interest in a girl is normal, him pushing the issue when she made it clear she’s not interested isn’t). Mostly this will revolve around simple guidelines: do not get overly drunk in public, make sure you’re in a group when going out, do not accept drinks from strangers, don’t frequent dark alleys or dubious neighbourhoods. Most of all you should trust your gut-feeling: if you feel someone might be dangerous he probably is. Millennia of evolution do not lie.

The second part of the solution is actual combat-training. In my mind this should consist of more than just a basic self-defense course: in my opinion it’s almost impossible to teach someone how to properly defend themselves in only a few hours. Yes you can teach only a few very basic and highly effective techniques in a few hours but not automatic reaction, tactical considerations, controlled aggression and timing and this is what determines success in a real fight. Simply put: if you haven’t ingrained those techniques and their application into your mind and your body then most likely they will not come out when needed. To learn how to hit properly takes at least weeks to learn, not days and certainly not hours and this is only one part of successful self-defense training. How to get out of grabs, strangulations and holds is yet another matter: in general it’s very easy in a dojo with a friendly partner but in a highly stressful street-situations with an aggressive, strong attacker it’s a completely different ballgame. Your first reaction is crucial: if you do not manage to escape a choke or other types of holding-techniques immediately you’ll be in serious trouble very quickly (losing consciousness, getting thrown, getting hit). In my opinion this cannot be learned in just a few hours and if you do it incorrectly you’ll not only be ineffective but on top of that you might actually make things worse for yourself. For example: if someone takes you in a bearhug from behind and you turn and straighten your arms but fail to control one of his arms most likely he’ll transition into a carotid choke which is a) more dangerous and b) he’ll know you have some skill. Basically you warned him and he’ll try to finish the job as fast and as violently as possible. Now he knows he’s not just attacking a hapless victim but he’s fighting for his safety too. As Musashi said bad strategy is the source of much grief.

Now it is true not many people (least of all women) like martial-arts and will take up one even though they may be aware it will make them much safer in the long run. There are quite a lot of women who take at least one self-defense course and this in itself is a good thing (at the very least they’ll be more aware, that is if the instructor is worth his salt) but I think we can agree this is hardly ideal and will not deter determined and knowledgeable attackers. One possible solution would be to include regular self-defense training in the physical-education package in school, either compulsory or as an elective. This is killing two birds with one stone: MA-training can be quite strenuous physical exercise (it works the entire body, if you throw in some push-ups and sit-ups it’s strength-training and it improves general endurance and flexibility) and you’ll have the time to implement a decent self-defense course. In my view this should not consist of judo, karate or another traditional MA since they are rather one-sided and take way too much time to learn. Rather take a reality-based, hybrid self-defense system like krav-maga with simple, easy to learn techniques and drill them as much as possible against a wide variety of attacks. This is much easier to teach and learn than a traditional MA (takes years to learn and even longer to be able to properly apply techniques in reality): basic krav-maga can be taught in about 3 to 4 months and it will offer at least a decent chance of survival in violent situations. 1 or 2 hours a week for a semester is not too much and it’ll leave enough space for other sports. If needed or desired it can be expanded in later years to include more advanced techniques and defenses or it can be repeated so as to increase the student’s proficiency and confidence. At the very least it should count as an elective: while not everyone will be keen some will be and while children should do at least some sports when growing up it’s equally important not to force it on them and at least give them a say in the matter. If you detest football but it still is compulsory it’ll just be highly annoying and you will not benefit much from it.

In my opinion this would greatly increase students safety (while still in school and later on) and if implemented nationwide decrease crime-rates. For women especially this would be very effective and empowering since knowledge and skill in basic self-defense will give them confidence (in conflict and in general) and prevent trauma/injury. Every rape or violent action against a woman is one too many and while sadly it’s quite impossible to completely prevent it (if an attacker presses a knife against your throat it would be wise to just cooperate, however painful and degrading it might be) at the very least it’ll give women a fighting chance when they do get into trouble.

Sincerely,

Zara

PS: I do think karate is not ideal for self-defense purposes (most styles anyway) since it usually doesn’t teach or include defenses against grappling (standing and on the ground) and most schools do not teach going for the vitals. If they do usually they’ll stop before contact (this is called pulling your punches) or to automatically disengage when contact has been made (point-sparring). This is contrary to self-defense logic: in self-defense your goal is not score points but to do as much damage as fast as possible in order to ensure your safety and escape as quickly as possible. It’s very rare to disable someone with just one technique (especially if the guy’s much stronger and bigger than you, which he will be in reality): either he’ll block it or he’ll just take it. If you are trained to stop after just one attack there’ll be a lull in your momentum and he’ll take over and gain the tactical advantage of attacking (action being faster than reaction). Basically your reaction should be to employ proper footwork and defensive techniques (blocking, parrying, moving your head out of the way) and counterattacking as violently and as early as possible. When you do so go for his most vulnerable body-parts (eyes, groin, knees, temples… depending on the gravity of the situation of course) and keep hitting until he’s down or otherwise disabled. Try to vary your attacks (both in type and height) and move inward. This is used both to negate his weapons and to employ yours as effectively as possible: the strongest weapons on the human body are knees and elbows (they generate enormous force and are nearly indestructible) but of course you must get close enough to be able to use them. This is why I say it’s best to move inward and keep driving him back. This is how you win fights but unfortunately this is not what is taught in most MA-schools. It’s a fact some MA or systems are better for self-defense and will yield better results with the same amount of training. This does not mean they’re necessarily bad or unworthy of respect, it just means people should know what they’re getting into and always keep the purpose of training in mind. If you take aikido with the expectation you’ll be able to defend yourself in just 6 months you’re in for a very rude surprise. Is this the fault of the trainer or the system? Of course not, that is unless they were claiming they’d teach you effective self-defense in a relatively short period of time. Will this type of training benefit you in other ways? Certainly: you’ll become much fitter and more nimble than you were before, you’ll most likely meet some very interesting people, you’ll get to know your own body much better and most likely you’ll be more at ease and happier. This is all very valuable and that is why I say aikido and other types of more internal or intricate martial-arts deserve respect in spite of the fact they’re not very useful self-defense wise. This does not mean they’re completely ineffective either but it’s not because the sensei or a blackbelt can defend himself with it you (as a beginner or intermediate student) will too.