I said 'when faced' not 'seek out'. I certainly don't advocate looking for trouble. Unfortunately sometimes good people happen across bad situations.
They do, but I'm not sure how we train for them. I think effective self-defense is based on realistic scenarios, which is to say, scenarios that might reasonably be expected to affect you. If you're a LEO, your realistic scenarios are different than if you're a middle-class non-LEO non-military individual, living and working in a reasonably sedate area of town. Your realistic scenarios are different if you're a woman than if you're a man. And one problem is that not many people want to look at the realistic scenarios, because of what it says about their situation. Women are more likely to be attacked by their partners or dates, and children are more likely to be attacked by trusted adults or authority figures, than either one is to be attacked by the stereotypical stranger. People don't want to confront that. So we keep on seeing the same "street-lethal" training for people who are unlikely to ever be attacked on the "street". We train for the "bad situations" we might "happen across", as you say, and to ignore the likely threats. Does this make sense?