It’s good to see martial-knowledge put to good use like that, although I do question the quality of this particular course (and many others like it): kicking with the hands low is not such a bright idea (it maybe allowed in the first stages of training but still it’s breeding bad habits) and practicing punch-defenses against punches that will never connect is not what I would call effective training. Don’t get me wrong: teaching these young girls is a great idea and John’s right in that only a few moves are pretty much all you’ll ever need but nonetheless these moves should be taught and practiced properly and under qualified supervision. If self-defense techniques are taught improperly they will be inefficient and this (together with the unwarranted belief in non-existent abilities) could actually land you in a worse position than before. In self-defense it’s quite simple: either you demolish or incapacitate him (taking away his ability or will to fight) or you create enough of a distraction so that you can escape safely (not always a possibility unfortunately). If you fail to do either of those two things and your defense was ineffective chances are he’ll get mad and use more violence that he originally intended or (even worse) produce a weapon which may very well cost you your life. ‘Bad strategy is the cause of a lot of grief” (Musashi) and a lot of instructors these days jump on the bandwagon of women’s self-defense (easy money) without being qualified and teaching techniques or strategies that are either a bad idea to begin with or only become effective after a relatively long period of practice (months or even years). The second class was far better but then again these children were obviously regular karate-students with probably years of training behind their belts. Joining a good MA-school is always better than a quick self-defense course although I do recognize this is not for everybody and certainly better than doing nothing.

I think this attitude is typical in modern society and a source of a lot of unnecessary grief. Of course you should not resort to violence at the first opportunity or out of pride or gain (this would make you a bully yourself) but the adage ‘violence is never the answer’ is plain false. Some people just cannot be reasoned with and the answer to violence (be it psychological or physical) is counter-violence or at least a credible threat (back off or you will get hurt), to me this is pure common-sense and a basic human-right (the right to exist and to live free from oppression or bodily harm) but apparently nowadays this is all rather absurd and politically incorrect or what not. Might as well claim there’s no need for an army or a police-force, after all why would we need it when all people are decent and reasonable and this world some sort of paradise? This is clearly absurd yet it seems to be the general opinion (among guidance-counselors, teachers, psychologists and an increasing number of parents) and official policy in our school-system today. At least in my country, I’m not exactly sure how it goes in the States. Over here children are actually penalized for defending themselves (which is called ‘fighting’: this is absurd in those cases where the child did not initiate the violence but merely reacted to it), in most cases together with the bully but sometimes the bully walks while the victim gets detention or worse.