Self Defence — a Perspective
When most of us think of self defense we think of a fight situation, attacks, defenses, kicks punches, blocks, multiple attackers etc However, it has to be said that by the time we get round to using our techniques most of our self defense has failed. It has failed because we have allowed a situation to develop to the point where violence is the only alternative left to us. So, let’s step back a bit and consider self defense in a wider context.
It is of primary importance to avoid violence for some very practical, as well as moral, reasons. The major practical reason is simply the fact that the aggressor always determines the place and time. Briefly, if someone picks a fight with you it is because they expect to win, and, more often than not, their evaluation of the outcome will be correct. This is because they will probably be in control of the situation and a number of factors will operate in their favour; perhaps they are drunk, drugged or mentally unstable and relatively immune to pain (and legal consequences); perhaps they intend to strike first with the element of surprise; perhaps they have friends to back them up; perhaps they are bigger and stronger than you; perhaps they have a weapon. So, what it boils down to is changing the mind of a potential attacker.
The motivation for violence is generally either ego, theft or sexual. In an ideal world we should not have to modify our dress or behaviour in order to avoid violence. Women should be able to dress attractively without the threat of sexual assault. Men should be able to wear an expensive suit and walk the street without fear of muggers, and just looking at someone in a pub or nightclub should not be an invitation to a fight. But our society is far from ideal and not getting better. So, a defensive mentality requires that we modify our own behaviour to some extent in order to minimise ‘provocation’ to violence. How far we go depends on individual fears and capabilities coupled with past experience.
A major aspect to consider is the denial of opportunity for the criminal. A number of examples spring to mind… If you are walking to your car in a dark car park, have your keys ready by the time you arrive. That way you minimise the amount of time when your focus shifts from the surroundings to the act of opening the door. And a handful of keys is a good weapon… Don’t take the short route down Cuthroat Lane at night (an actual road in Bedford, named for some obscure reason)… Walk wide around corners… Don’t use a a headset in public, it removes one of your senses… Don’t have your hands in your pockets in locations or situations where violence is possible… Wear clothes that do not hamper your movement, especially your ability to run… The same goes for shoes, but one could also add that they should be well laced (it’s no good kicking if your shoe flies off)… Do not argue with someone nose to nose (beware headbutts) — keep your distance.
A friend of mine once did a study of violent offenders in prison, and their motives for choosing a particular victim. As expected, there were many disparate reasons, but the largest single reason that stood out from the statistics was the way the victim walked. Or, more generally, body language. Another aspect of denying the perpetrator a target is by reducing the perceived opportunity for a successful attack. Now, a large part of this is sending out the correct ‘vibes’. The wrong ones are easy to spot; hesitation, uncertainty, fear, appeasement, in fact, all the signals that shout ‘please don’t hurt me I’ll do anything…’
The correct signals are confidence but not arrogance, clarity, decisiveness and a neutral attitude neither inappropriately friendly nor hostile. You want your body to say ‘I’m no threat to you in any way, but I will fight. If you fight and lose you’ll go to hospital; if you fight and win we’ll both go to hospital. I am not a pushover, look for an easier target.’
Try role playing in your own head when you are amongst a group of people. Pretend you are a criminal looking for a victim in the crowd. Who do you pick, and why? Who would you avoid, and why? You may find aspects of these ‘vibes’ labelled ‘Ki no Sen’ in the Fukudokuhon, the Pink Book.
This type of role-playing should be extended into ‘situation awareness’. When you first enter a location look around (unobtrusively). Where is trouble most likely to come from? Is anyone drunk? Are there conspicuous groups? What is the age distribution? What’s the atmosphere like? Does loud music or other noise make communication difficult? Do you stand or sit? Who is your back towards, if not the wall? If you are well practiced in self-defence all this should be second nature.
If you talk about martial arts to ordinary people… sorry, I mean, young males… you will often encounter the story about a ‘black belt’ that they know of who got totally thrashed by a ‘streetfighter’. Of course, in reality what happened (if anything did) was that the latter walked up to the former and laid into him with little or no warning; which highlights a deficiency in mental training. The problem the ‘black belt’ faced was that he did not know when the fight had started until he woke up in hospital, or he did not ‘switch on’ one hundred percent because he was not sure. He held back for a crucial second or two. At the point at which the transition to violence begins we need something that the military call ‘Rules of Engagement’.
We need to decide beforehand when the fight has started. Is it when someone says they’re going to kill you, when they reach into their pocket, when they pull a knife, when they try to cut you, or when they actually cut you? If you’re walking down the street at night and someone grabs you from behind, do you immediately assume it’s an attack, or consider the possibility of a friend playing a joke? Get it wrong and you are in big trouble.
I decided years ago that under such circumstances as the first case, they would never get their hand out of their pocket, and in the second I would hit first and see who it was afterwards.
Simply put, if you assume it is not a threat and you are wrong you have made a serious mistake. If you assume it is an attack and it’s really not… they have made a serious mistake.
They key, though, is to sort it out beforehand, not during the actual event. Pretty much like sorting out the physical response (techniques) in the dojo. The way that you train for this is simply to run through ‘what if’s’ in your mind. What if this person coming towards me touches me? What if this guy in front of me just lashes out? When is a touch a grab? Or, what if someone was to jump out from this alley… or what if someone began to follow me? There is a saying that sums this up very succinctly, it’s called the six ‘P’s. ‘Prior Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance.’ You cannot do in real life what you do not practice for, both mentally and physically.
Finally, don’t get paranoid. A few years ago I was waiting on an almost deserted London Underground platform late at night when I noticed a very muscular man and his friend staring at me. They were not smiling. He walked over and stood in front of me. The thoughts going through my head were of the ‘Oh Shit…’ variety. So I looked him in the eye and said ‘Yes? Can I help you?’ ‘Hey, Dirk, don’t you remember me? I used to do Shorinji Kempo.’
Finally, something to bear in mind for another article. Self defence for men and self defence for women concern responses to different attacks. Men are more likely to encounter immediate, full-on violence (goho) than women. Women are more likely to be grabbed and threatened (juho) as a preliminary.
