Effectiveness – From a Different Perspective - XX motivations

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[Hilary]

I posted this elsewhere, and got a profoundly dismal response, 3 women one of them privately. Also, to be clear, what the blonde in the video does is not the point, rather if you were standing in her place during the attack is the question. Her actions, from the perspective of this question, are irrelevant.

-- original post

The effectiveness question is constantly raised here and elsewhere. It almost always is phrased in terms of ring fighting and what constitutes combat. While some women aikidoka chime in (you know who you are), on the effectiveness question, is really a sausage fest for the most part. The following is for our sisters in the art.

I believe (and am more than willing to be corrected on this as I lack a second X in my genome) that most female practitioners are concerned more about this sort of thing, than Lenny Sly talking them into a trance and shooting the leg. This attack occurred in San Diego couple of weeks ago.

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Video-Shows-Man-Punch-Woman-in-Face-in-Gaslamp-Quarter-506819331.html

1. How would this encounter have differed in outcome, if you were the one attacked?

2. Do you feel your training has prepared you for this encounter?

3. What, if anything, would you change to better prepare you for this sort of thing?

4. Do you care about this sort of encounter

A successful outcome does not require a lock and/or throw; not that there is anything wrong with that ;-). Hopefully just a better outcome, you get to define what that means. Guys (and by that, I mean the aikiweb 1%) let’s not cloud the issue immediately. I know it is impossible not to render an opinion in this case (I know I will) but let’s hear what that part of the tent thinks. It is a region of the effectiveness argument that could use further exploration.

[Mary Eastland]

I would not get so close. I would not yell at 2 people in a domestic situation. My training helps me everyday. I might phone for help and stay away. He is a big angry dude.

[Lyle Laizure]

Given the scenario, first I would call police, then I would monitor the situation. Until the man became violent toward the woman I keep my distance. If I am forced to interject myself, given the fellers stature I do not step in without a plan, which would likely involve a weapon and an exit plan. In domestic situations like this the abused is likely to turn on you as well. Distance is your friend.

[CorkyQ]

It seems that you wrote this to get feedback from females specifically, but I think aikido is aikido no matter the gender of the aikidoka.

Intention is of primary importance in aikido. Self defense intentions produce actions meant to defend, but intentions to resolve the conflict without anyone being injured are different.

People practicing aikido for defense make the mistake of being reactive. People practicing aikido to create a space where the idea of attacking can gain no footing will be in advance of the attack.

Connecting to the potential aggressor with the intention that all comes to conclusion without anyone losing gives an aikidoka the ability to move ahead of the attack. Osensei said that the attacker is off balance from the moment the idea of attack enters his or her mind. This allows the aikidoka aligned with the intention of safe resolution to move in connection with the physical manifestation of the attacking mind.

In the video, you see that the woman who was victimized never saw the attack coming. Because her intention was other than connecting with the person threatening her she moved right in with her fighting mind. Her first intention was to counter attack. She draws the attack to her by attacking the attacker. I'm not saying her intention to stop the harassment of the other woman was not justified, but that her way of becoming involved escalated the conflict. It is a good idea if one is going to utilize the principles of aikido effectively to start utilizing them right away. In fact, she was so busy attacking the attacker she never saw the punch start.

In embodying the principles of aikido, one becomes conscious of ma ai, and one will have connection. An authentic, conscious connection makes one aware of the attacker's range of effectiveness which gives us our sense of ma ai, and it also manifests in the harmonious engagement of the attack. Had the woman been aikidoka, been connected to the attacker in a meaningful way, the man drawing back to punch invited irimi. When he moved toward her with the strik, her ma ai would have her maintaining the safe space between them. You can see the imbalance in the attacker at the conclusion of the first punch. Aikidoka's connection would have supplied support to the center of the attacker at the extension of the punch and ikkyo would have been a natural conclusion. Likewise, tenkan could also lead to ikkyo ura, or if his initial punch retracted as it did, it could then lead to kotegaeshi.

Instead, the resistance the victim provided allowed the attack to land effectively and he was even able to re-balance for a second attack.

In more direct answer to your bullet point questions:

1. First it might end with no punch being thrown. As Lyle Sensei pointed out, without knowing the relationship of the individuals it is an intrusion to get involved. It is its own form of attack. That is not to say one can not engage. I unfortunately, have been in situations in which it became necessary to intercede in something that looked on track to become physically violent. To understand one way this engagement can take place without physical force is in Terry Dobson Sensei's "train story." It's often not difficult to draw the attack intention to oneself to get the victim off the hook.

If the attack were to escalate, not because I was introducing resistance, but because the deeper need of the attacker is beyond his or her control, aikido could manifest in a multitude of ways depending on how the attack is issued and the akidoka's consideration of everyone's safety (including that of the attacker). A couple of them I mentioned above but there are no specific techniques that can be relied on unless arising from the combination of attack intention energy and the energy that manifests out of the intention that all concludes without harm or injury. From there one will be able to appreciate the form the aikido took after the resolution. It will never effectively happen as a result of putting a plan for a specific attack unless the attack is perfectly in alignment with the technique.

2. My first 20 years of practice actually did prepare me for real world attacks, although not the way I had anticipated. I feel a lot more prepared now that I have moved away from technique proficiency training and have now practiced for the last 15 years for aikido to manifest spontaneously out of the intention that my attack gain some benefit from our interaction.

3. I believe that my further progress is determined by how well I will, in the moment of truth, be able to transcend my "self", that is the part of me that puts me into defense, in order to come from a place in which my intention allows takemusu aiki to manifest. There is no predictor of this. The moment of truth is always a moment of truth and it depends on whether one can be true in that moment.

4. I do care about this kind of encounter, because it is the seed of further aggression, destruction and pain. When one encounters an attacker or would-be attacker and the outcome is one in which the desire to attack has completely disappeared out of that person, aikido has achieved the purpose I believe it was meant to serve.

[Hilary]

Corkey, too much to unpack right this moment. but in short.

"aikido is aikido no matter the gender of the aikidoka" I have some heartburn with this. Aikido is not aikido from practitioner to practitioner let alone across the sexes and differeinf body types. In my experience women do it differently than men, and to be clear I am not saying better or worse just different.

The aikiverse has been hijacked by the effectiveness trolls who attempt (often successfully) to define the effectiveness metric as ring combat. When this clip just showed up in the local news, it seemed a good starting point to assess what is effective and to whom. The silence of women has been deafening, only Mary here and one publicly and one privately over on reddit. Of the 20 or so female martial artist I have known, most originally got into it to learn to protect themselves. Often their motivations change over time. I believe (and I reiterate believe) that women are concerned more with casual attacks like the one shown.

What I had hoped to hear was
1. "holey crap that is a big guy"
2. I think I could have ducked the first and moved away before the second.
While those punches are a gift to anyone with the skills, I would not expect most women to try to throw or lock him (nor do they have to).

Elsewhere is was opined that this was a sucker punch, it is not. They were not good punches, they were not particularity fast. They were thrown without a moment of hesitation, I think that adds to the perceived surprise, and is mistaken for speed or stealth.

[Mary Eastland]

This is an argument between 2 adults. The woman is not trapped. She is standing there arguing. The woman who got punched got involved in something that was not her deal.
Aikido training helps me focus on what I change: Me.

I have given much thought about what I would enter a physical conflict over and that situation as I see it would not be one of the times.

[dps]

Even if she knew one of both persons she should not have gotten so close to them. Either one of them could of turned violent. She should of gotten on the other side of the door, called 911 and recorded as much as she could on her phone. This should be done by anyone regardless of gender.

dps

[jonreading]

Aikiweb said its been a while since I posted...

Domestic incidents are one of the most dangerous situations to which police respond. This is not a time for "Aikido". There are people who have the experience and skills to manage a situation like the confrontation shown in this video and also train in aikido. For most of us, inserting yourself into something like this escalates the situation and puts yourself in danger, also. I have many police friends who have been injured responding to this type of call.

I have some frustration here because we spend a lot of time hypothesizing about real-life scenarios. Think you can slip a punch? Visit a boxing gym and put on some gloves and go a few rounds. Maybe you can, maybe you can't; get the experience to make an informed decision. Think you can keep your cool when some intimidating person is yelling at you and making every intimation of violence you can think of? Maybe, maybe not.

Mostly, I take issue with the claim that aikido prepares people to step in and save the day. "Welcome to aikido, here's your gi and a red cape for those occasions when a PCP rage-monster maliciously attacks someone." Or, "'What qualifies you to talk to this dangerous person?' 'Well, I play fight 2 times a week and sometimes Saturday mornings.'" I am being overly dramatic because I want the humor to mask just how close to the truth we are.

Be a good samaritan. Inform the couple of your discomfort and call the police if necessary. If you are trained to deal with this type of situation in your profession, be safe and apply your skills. For the record, you also cannot tell if the man was carrying any weapons; only that he did not employ one.

[earnest aikidoka]

I posted this elsewhere, and got a profoundly dismal response, 3 women one of them privately. Also, to be clear, what the blonde in the video does is not the point, rather if you were standing in her place during the attack is the question. Her actions, from the perspective of this question, are irrelevant.

-- original post

The effectiveness question is constantly raised here and elsewhere. It almost always is phrased in terms of ring fighting and what constitutes combat. While some women aikidoka chime in (you know who you are), on the effectiveness question, is really a sausage fest for the most part. The following is for our sisters in the art.

I believe (and am more than willing to be corrected on this as I lack a second X in my genome) that most female practitioners are concerned more about this sort of thing, than Lenny Sly talking them into a trance and shooting the leg. This attack occurred in San Diego couple of weeks ago.

https://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Video-Shows-Man-Punch-Woman-in-Face-in-Gaslamp-Quarter-506819331.html

1. How would this encounter have differed in outcome, if you were the one attacked?

2. Do you feel your training has prepared you for this encounter?

3. What, if anything, would you change to better prepare you for this sort of thing?

4. Do you care about this sort of encounter

A successful outcome does not require a lock and/or throw; not that there is anything wrong with that ;-). Hopefully just a better outcome, you get to define what that means. Guys (and by that, I mean the aikiweb 1%) let's not cloud the issue immediately. I know it is impossible not to render an opinion in this case (I know I will) but let's hear what that part of the tent thinks. It is a region of the effectiveness argument that could use further exploration.

1. - I would be covering up and recovering my balance, regain the initiative first and prepare to engage -

2. - yes, but my view of Aikido is different from many aikidokas so make of that what you will -

3. - Have to learn to take a punch, have to learn how to deal with getting hit, and train one's reflexes to roll with punches or blows -

4. Damn straight. Aikido is a martial art, it is meant to kill. If you can't do that, what's the point of learning Aikido?

Most importantly, Aikido is not a grappling art, it is a striking/weapon art - work from that point of view and see if your ideas about Aikido change and your instincts towards the situation become any different.

[MRoh]

1. How would this encounter have differed in outcome, if you were the one attacked?



Nobody can say that.
Many people say what they would do, if you do this I would do that, and such things.
In reality everything is different from theory.
Of course everybody who studied some martial art could say something about ducking and fighting back, or doing taisabaki and kotegeashi.
Nobody knows the story what happened before.
For some people its enough how you look at them, or you exceed the distance in which they feel attacked, and they get violent.
To have a feeling for the people is sometimes much more important.
To engage in disputes and lose control is a good way to get into a fight.
If one searches for fights ore disputes, one should know what can happen and how to deal with it.
I don't mean we should keep away from everything or close our eyes, but we should know what we can do and where our limits are.
Being beside oneself is not a good condition to deal with sudden attacks.

[CorkyQ]

Corkey, too much to unpack right this moment. but in short.

"aikido is aikido no matter the gender of the aikidoka" I have some heartburn with this. Aikido is not aikido from practitioner to practitioner let alone across the sexes and differeinf body types. In my experience women do it differently than men, and to be clear I am not saying better or worse just different.

Aikido is principle and is the same no matter what the gender, size, body type, the same way swimming as an activity is the same in principle no matter who is doing it. The differences come in the forms and shapes that may be preferential to individuals, but the essence must be the essence or the thing is not the thing.

Had the woman who attacked the belligerent man been a man instead, the outcome would have been the same if the belligerent man not held the distinction. Aikido would have been aikido had the person engaging the belligerent man embodied aikido principles regardless of gender or other variables, although the path of the trajectory to the ground could be any in a number of paths. Osensei said repeatedly that aikido was not determined by external physical characteristics. This by nature includes gender.

[Erik Calderon]

Wow, pretty graphic video. I'm a guy and I would have never gotten so close and confronted them in that manner.

I don't think that lady every expected that punch....

[MrIggy]

1. How would this encounter have differed in outcome, if you were the one attacked?

2. Do you feel your training has prepared you for this encounter?

3. What, if anything, would you change to better prepare you for this sort of thing?

4. Do you care about this sort of encounter


1. I would punched him back and defended myself and stopped him from attacking again.
2. For the most part yes.
3. More sparring and Aikido movement drills.
4. And here we go with the quasipsychological crap. It doesn't matter if you "care" about it. The point is if it ever happens what are you going to do about it. This attack is probably the most real and common type that could happen anywhere and it's still pretty mild compared to others that can be found on the net. Also it doesn't take a lifetime to teach somebody to at least cover themselves up and try to escape for instance. The point here would be whether or not you think it's necessary to actually teach somebody to protect themselves or try to protect themselves for that matter.