Dems are troglodytes about women and self-defense, and they’re selling this as a virtue for the next election

Colorado State Rep. Joe Salazar’s ham-handed, even troglodyte, advice for campus women worried about rape came as no surprise to me.  My experiences at UC Berkeley thirty-odd years ago left me fully prepared for this Leftist approach to females and true self-defense, an approach that hides both misogyny and an overriding fear for the men involved in a potentially dangerous situation.

Long-ago, when I attended Cal, my economic situation  — too poor to afford on-campus housing, too middle-class to get meaningful financial aid — meant that I lived at home and commuted.  This was not an ideal way to attend college.  I spent an awful lot of time in transit and I had a hard time maintaining a social life (something made harder by the fact that I worked my way through college).

A significant chunk of my transit time was devoted to finding all-day parking and then walking to and from that parking.  The closer one got to campus, the more limited the parking options were:  there was resident-only parking, 30-minute parking, 1-hour parking, 2-hour parking, etc.  Since my job and my classes kept me on campus all day, I usually ended up parking between a mile and a mile-and-a-half away from my classes.  The walk, although time-consuming was pleasant, although less so if I had a lot of books to carry or it was raining.

In my senior year, however, things changed, because there was a rash of rapes and assaults on women near campus.  I was less than thrilled when, during winter’s early, dark afternoons, I had to walk to my car alone.

Since many women around this same time were unhappy about walking to their dorms, apartments, and cars alone, the campus police instituted an “escort service.”  With this service in place, women could go to the campus police office and an authorized man (I don’t know if they were employees or volunteers), armed with a walkie-talkie, would walk them to their destinations.

I immediately availed myself of the service — only to discover that it wasn’t a service at all. The deal was that these escorts were not allowed to exceed a half-mile radius.  The reason given was that their walkie-talkies didn’t work outside of that radius, so it was unsafe for them to go further. You got that, right?  It was unsafe for the men to exceed a half-mile radius but presumably more safe for the women to continue on their own.

The nice escorts would stand at their little boundary to listen in case they heard your screaming.  Frankly, I really didn’t feel that this auditory aid amounted to much.  You see, the reality of this so-called “escort service” was that I was left on my own on Berkeley’s dark and unfriendly streets.

Given the program’s manifest inadequacies, I rather quickly abandoned the whole notion of applying to the campus police for aid in getting to my car.  Not only was it unhelpful, it actually increased my risk.  Since there were only a few escorts available at any given time, I had to hang around the office waiting and waiting, even as the skies grew darker and the streets scarier.

This experience at UC Berkeley was the first time I ran headlong into the Progressive’s devotion to lip service over actual service.  They made lots of noise, but they cared more about men than about women, and more about image than reality.

Those unpleasant evenings on campus, when I felt alone and defenseless, returned to me in living color when I heard about Colorado State Rep. Joe Salazar’s bizarre advice to women facing a scary campus environment:

It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles. Because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop around at somebody.

The gloss is that “he cares.”  The reality is that this ostensible “caring” is mere lip-service.  What Salazar carelessly let slip is the misogyny that underlies so much strident feminism (perfectly realized in this amalgam of this Koran and an anti-rape rally).  The Nanny state is built upon the elite’s belief that individuals cannot care for themselves, and nowhere is this more obvious than in the claim that women are incapable of recognizing danger or acting appropriate when they do recognize it.

Moreover, rather than worrying about high-risk women being hurt, Salazar is terribly worried that low-risk men will get hurt (“you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at”).  Here’s the deal Rep. Salazar:  the good guys, the men who don’t rape, don’t stalk women and they don’t interview women (“Hey, babe, can you tell me the time?  No?  Too bad.  You’re cute.  You know you’re cute, don’t you?”).  What they do is to keep a respectful distance and attitude.  Do that, and you won’t get “popped.”

In other words, Salazar is my UC experience all over again:  lip-service and misogyny, wrapped up in a package of making sure that the men are safe.

It’s not just Salazar, of course.  Looking at this much-publicized advice from University of Colorado.  Apparently awed by the abilities its bulimic students have shown over the years, the university advises women who are threatened to vomit on demand (emphasis mine):

  1. Be realistic about your ability to protect yourself.
  2. Your instinct may be to scream, go ahead! It may startle your attacker and give you an opportunity to run away.
  3. Kick off your shoes if you have time and can’t run in them.
  4. Don’t take time to look back; just get away.
  5. If your life is in danger, passive resistance may be your best defense.
  6. Tell your attacker that you have a disease or are menstruating.
  7. Vomiting or urinating may also convince the attacker to leave you alone.
  8. Yelling, hitting or biting may give you a chance to escape, do it!
  9. Understand that some actions on your part might lead to more harm.
  10. Remember, every emergency situation is different. Only you can decide which action is most appropriate.

I especially like that first one:  “Be realistic about your ability to protect yourself.”  With that advice in mind, ask yourself this:  Am I more likely to protect myself against a power-hungry predator who may be hopped up on drugs by doing this?

Or by doing this?

By the way, don’t fall into the trap of thinking that Salazar’s going to be humiliated about this one.  Although the conservative blogosphere is pointing fingers, liberals who were outraged by Todd Akin’s stupid rape quote are perfectly fine with Salazar’s stupid and demeaning advice to women.

And why not?  They agree with it.  Moreover, their agreement matters because, just as the Dems used Akin and women to give Obama that last little push he needed to get into the White House, Dems are planning that same strategy with women and guns.  They’re already starting the “women who love their communities hate guns” trope, which we can expect to get worse with time.

Long-essays like mine are great at educating women about guns and warning conservatives about future gun attacks, right?  Oh, God no!  I wish.  In a short-attention span universe, I am a poison pill.  After the first paragraph, the average voter’s eyes are rolling back into her head, she’s reaching blindly for her TiVo clicker or her smart phone, and she’s totally tuned out.

The reality is that, in short-attention span America, we do not need long essays like mine.  I’m a pre-programmed essayist, though, and, sadly, I can’t seem to help myself.

What I’d love is to be more visual, so that I could create pithy posters or punchy videos that could easily be circulated on Twitter and Facebook, all of which drill home the same point:  guns make women safer, not less safe.

If you have photoshopped a poster that puts together gun statistics (such as these) in a clever, easy-to-see way, or you’ve created a video that does the same, let me know, and I’ll do my best to promote it.  Dems are already planning for the next election, so we need to as well.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Oldflyer

    Ruger makes a great rape prevention device, called the .380 RCP.  Guaranteed to fit in any purse, including an evening bag if there is such a thing any longer.  Deadly accurate within 5 feet, whether you are a shooter or not.  Holds 8 rounds,  just in case he is hard to discourage, or if there are more than one.
    Every girl–particularly young college or working women– should have one.  I think the incidence of rape would approach zero.
    Of course it is illegal to sell in California.
    In the USMC exchange I used to see a pepper spray pistol with a range of 50 ft.  It was in the camping/hunting section, presumably for bear protection;  but it could as well be in the self defense section.  Always thought it would be good for my daughters.   Probably not legal in California.

  • Jose

    Good post. In the short attention span universe, many people will have to learn through bitter experience.

    “A conservative is a liberal who’s been mugged.”

  • JKB

    Yet these same women who cannot handle using deadly force in self defense are expected to walk off these college campuses, put on a uniform and not only use automatic weapons for self defense, but also to lead men and women into combat and execute their orders in accordance with the rules of engagement.  Many, have done so before they arrived on campus.  
    Someone should tell this guy that the call boxes are to call someone to come and give the raped woman a ride to the abortion clinic so she’s not punished with a baby.  They’ll be far to late to stop the actual rape.  
    Who’s got photoshop skills.  I recommend a poster advertising a Liberal rape kit – an assault pen/pencil, a card showing to strike the eye, carotid artery location, femoral artery, etc. with advice to drive in then push the pen to the side and out to open the wound and tear the artery.  Oh, and don’t forget the wet wipes, it’s going to be bloody.

  • lee

    it takes practice to be able to barf reliably. i am not, nor have ever been bulimic, but i had friends who were. and when there came a time when i really needed to toss some cookies, it took a lot of work, and finagling to get it to work. i ate something that i should not have. i made out fine, but thanks to the experience, i now know that yack-on-demand takes the sort of practice i was never willing to invest. and if you think it’s a matter of being sufficiently motivated–believe me, i was in an extreme panic mode when trying to induce emesis. pretty well motivated!

  • vinny

    Why must you dump on the caveman? What has a troglodyte ever done to you? Troglodytes are not stupid, you know, but these democrats are.

  • vinny

    BTW, did barf and bad hygiene stop the OWS rapists?

  • Libby

    I think items #2-4 on that list are based on watching too many horror movies. Really, scream, take off your shoes and don’t look back? Thanks for the tips! I’ll also try not to trip and twist my ankle, too.
    And there’s a whole lot left unsaid for #8: “Understand that some actions on your part might lead to more harm.” Like what? As we saw with the feminist outrage that spurred Slut Walks, it’s no longer politic to specify that, sadly, certain choices a woman makes can make them a better target for rapist, such as her choice in apparel and being really drunk (or otherwise incapacitated) while out in a sketchy part of town late at night. This doesn’t apply to all cases, such women who are attacked in their own homes or date rapes, but it’s common sense safety that can no longer be mentioned.

  • Danny Lemieux

    There are strong men and there are weak women. Sam Colt made them equal. 

  • Ron19

    Libby #7:
    Don’t blame the modestly dressed victim for being the victim.  It’s not their fault.  Really.
    However, the immodestly dressed non-victim, such as the slut walk types, or the models for the centerfold, or what you see on TV or at the mall or at your workplace are partially to blame but are never cited for exciting the perps every day of their lives, building up the internal pressures.

  • jj

    You take me back.  Boston University, a gigantic zoo at the best of times, owned – still owns – a lot of property on a little street called Bay State Road in Boston.  It’s pretty much in the midst of the BU campus – insofar as BU could be said to have a campus, it’s a city school.  Bay State was a residential street dating from older Boston, lined with brownstones, some of outstanding elegance.  (And down in the basements, which were once where the kitchens were located and the servants lived, some of them still had the old – and disconnected – annunciator boards, so the maids would know which room was ringing for service.)  The university made these brownstones into dorms.  In some cases they stood alone, in some cases they did some work, knocked walls down between them, and made two or three brownstones into one dorm housing forty or fifty people.
    They were all girls.  BU had/has a policy of freshmen, both sexes, living in dorms, and after that you were mostly on your own.  (There are about 25,000 undergrads at BU, the dorms are good for around 7,000.)  The goal of BU students was to get the hell out of the dorms and into an apartment somewhere, which worked fine from the university’s point of view, because they couldn’t house them if they wanted to.  So Bay State Road was a solid female enclave.
    And of course it was good for 75 or 100 rapes a year.  BU is spread out all overt the placer, and unless they had a police force of thousands the campus cops were almost as useless as the Boston cops at getting anywhere and doing anything.  So what the university did, and it was my undergrad senior year when they did it, was make one dorm of two brownstones thrown together.  Held about 50 people.  They just wanted to get a male presence walking around Bay State at all hours, just so it wasn’t all girls.  And they put in a phone line that was really a direct connection kind of thing: it didn’t go to the outside world, but did go to the union, dining halls, library, West Campus athletic complex, etc.  This phone was in the front hall by the stairs and if you were female, a resident of Bay State, and at the library at midnight and wanted an escort getting home, you picked up the library phone, dialed “845,” and if you were lucky somebody sober answered, and somebody met you on Commonwealth Avenue, and the boys in general knew you were there.  (I was told this feature was taken away later, because it was too much like deputizing untrained personnel and expecting them to shoulder some responsibility – all of which means the lawyers didn’t like it.  They figured somebody would get hurt, and some other lawyers would sue the school.  Probably right, too.)
    Anyway, I was a resident of an apartment in Brookline my senior year, but I knew a guy in the housing office, who gave me a call in about August to tell me this dorm was opening up.  OK – fine.  Then he went on to say that the university was having trouble getting upperclassmen in the building, and they didn’t want all freshmen, so they invented a little incentive.  The incentive was free board and free meals for the year, if you’d be willing to live in Bay State.  I said that worked, and (since I knew I was off to graduate school) sublet my apartment, and moved into a single room to become part of the male presence on Bay State Road.  There were fifty-some of us in that building, four of us were seniors – all in single rooms – and about half a dozen juniors – everybody else was a freshman.
    And we actually did sort of keep an eye out.  The number of incidents went right down, just because we were a presence.  You talking about the issue you had brought it back for me – something of which I haven’t thought in, probably, decades.  How I lived and ate free at BU for a year, as part of the rape prevention squad!  Weird!

  • jj

    “…make one male dorm…” I meant to say there in paragraph 3.  Jeez – lousy typing night.

  • Pingback: Rape-free zones: They’re not just for Occupy Wall Street anymore « BornLib's Blog()

  • Earl

    Oldflyer: Is that the Ruger .380 LCP?  Can’t find an RCP…and the LCP is 6+1.  Any guidance?

  • Libby

    Ron19 – Didn’t mean to give the impression of blaming the victim; rape is an act of violence and power that can happen to any male or female, regardless of attire or behavior. There are predators who will attack in places and times when one should be safe. And this is exactly why women should have the option to carry a gun.
    However, just as one takes basic precautions to not be robbed or mugged, women have to be alert and aware of situations in which they are vulnerable. A sad (and extreme) example of this is Natalie Holloway, in a foreign country getting drunk and leaving a bar with strange men. The Slut Walk types can rail about how a woman at a bar, or walking down any street, should always be safe, but some men will take advantage of a woman in a situation like Natalie’s. Should not make one a misogynist or callous for pointing this out.

  • Ymarsakar

    To the Left, the concept of using force to get their way is a higher truth. What possible reason could they have for being against rape?

  • Ymarsakar

    This illustrates a concept I saw often in 1950s America and is still in vogue in Japan: the idea that men and women look out for each other because their fates are tied together militarily, economically, and socially. Thus the people who are most at risk, are also the ones most motivated to seek a solution, and the solution is readily available in the form of male manpower, with some males being capable of offering protection and others who can only fake it via cons. Cons are easily found out since courage is hard to fake in the battlefield.
    However, the Left sees the idea that their serfs are somehow protecting each other, to be a heretical notion and thus destroy it in favor of making people reliant on protection from Divinity: the Left themselves and their Deus Ex Machina. Which doesn’t exist and thus doesn’t work to save anybody.
    The Left is not against rape. They are against women being raped by non Leftists. They want that human resource for themselves.
    The old slave plantations routinely broke up families as well as male lovers from their female counter parts. It was a way to make the slaves reliant upon the Master. With no family of their own, the Master is their family and support and care. It certainly wasn’t to promote productivity, since it would have been easier to get the parents or the kids to work, by having their family there for collective punishments/reward.
    The Left is not bad due to foolishness or incompetence. They also aren’t bad because they ‘care’. They’re bad for humanity because they enslave humanity. The LEft are the enemies of humanity. Whether one wishes to call that evil or not is irrelevant to me, because I think evil should be destroyed and the Left should go with it.

  • Oldflyer

    Earl.  My mistake.  It the the Ruger LCP.  I obviously don’t own one, living in California; but if I were still in Virginia I certainly would.  Had planned to get one to bring with me, but learned I could never go outside with it out here; and I have other options in the house.   I will defer to you on the 6+1 because my memory is clearly not as sharp as I thought it was.  But, I will go out on a limb and say I think I saw an ad awhile back  for a version of the Ruger in pink.  There are other makes in that size and caliber of course; I just know of the Ruger from personal reviews.
    I know a couple of fellows, who are fortunate enough to live in states that permit honest citizens to obtain concealed carry permits.   These are serious people who usually have heavier stuff at hand, but like the Ruger when they want to dress lighter and guaranteed inconspicuous. 
    Big news in southern California today is another multiple shooting in Orange County.  Law abiding, unarmed citizens gunned down for no reason except that they came within  range of an armed mad man.  This follows the slaughter by the ex-LAPD cop a week ago.  It is so comforting to live in a state with draconian gun control.

  • jj

    Smith has a nice little gun too, the Bodyguard .380.  Good for a woman: small, light, eminently concealable, and my wife’s came from the factory with a laser.  Six in hand, one up the spout.  Nice.

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Vacation Edition!! | askmarion()

  • Spartacus

    My Alaskan relatives like to tell stories about “Southerners,” i.e. those from the lower 48, who venture up into the 49th state.
    One story is of a gentleman who wanted to spend a few days camped out by a lake in the middle of nowhere.  Fishing, I think, and I don’t recall that there was anyone else in his party.  So he hired a floatplane to take him out to the aforementioned middle of nowhere.  After dropping him off on the shore of the lake and taking off again, the pilot gave one last look down at his customer and knew that something was terrribly wrong: the fellow was wildly rolling around on the ground.  Upon landing again to render assistance, he learned what had happened.  The fisherman, knowing that he was in bear country, had felt it would be prudent to put on his bear repellent sooner rather than later.
    Unfortunate misunderstanding!

  • JohnC

    Rep. Salazar: “Women with guns? Are you kidding? You broads can’t even drive and you want to carry a gun? What if you’re on your period or something? There’s no telling who you might shoot.”
    Create a society that considers adults to be children and you get a society of adult-sized children.
    Create a society that considers adults to be self-reliant and you get a society of responsible adults.
    Which do you think Rep. Salazar considers women to be?

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Vacation Edition!! » Virginia Right!()

  • Pingback: Watcher’s Council Nominations – Vacation Edition!! |

  • Pingback: This Week’s Watcher’s Council Nominations |

  • JKB

    So what’s this with Biden.  His recommendation to women on self defense is to commit gun crimes, endanger the public and disarm themselves all at the same time.  
    I said, ‘Jill, if there’s ever a problem, just walk out on the balcony here … walk out and put that double-barrel shotgun and fire two blasts outside the house.’ … You don’t need an AR-15 — it’s harder to aim, it’s harder to use, and in fact you don’t need 30 rounds to protect yourself. Buy a shotgun! Buy a shotgun!
    Discharging a firearm in the city limits is illegal most places and has been for about 100 years.  Plus, that shot or those slugs will be coming down somewhere unless fired into a backstop.  And if you fire two blasts from a double-barreled shotgun, you now have a fancy club.  
    Plus shotguns are in general heavier than AR-15 variants.  Not to mention, the scary “assault” features actually do assist the less physically endowed in using the AR-15.    In fact, adjustable stocks, pistol grips, etc. are features that help Americans with Disabilities enjoy their 2nd Amendment rights but Congress wants to discriminate against the handicapped.
    To be fair, in places like Chicago and NYC, a woman is far more likely to get a rapid police response to her gun crime than she is to her cry for help when being raped.  
    Old joke:
    Man calls the police to report someone breaking into his house.  The dispatchers says all officers are busy and it will take 30 minutes for an officer to arrive.  The man responds, “Okay, I’ll just shoot him”.  The police arrive lights and siren in 5 minutes.  The officer asks, “I thought you said you shot him?”  The man replies, “I thought it was going to take 30 minutes for you guys to get here.”

  • JKB

    Oh, I forgot to mention, discharging a firearm is illegal, endangering the public is illegal unless you can justify it as lawful self defense.  Self defense being using deadly force (using a firearm) to stop an imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.  It’s hard to argue justifiable self defense if you purposely fire into the air.  

  • Ron19

    An interesting(!) gender-free discussion got started with this article in the SO CAL Orange County Register website:
    Some of the commenters even used the same discussion style as our favorite car salesman.

  • Pingback: The Colossus of Rhodey()

  • lee

    “Discharging a firearm in the city limits is illegal most places…” brought back a fond memory of living in the San Francisco area. We were running a sailboat race from the race deck of one of the yacht clubs located in the City. In general, you use a shot-gun to start the race. (Fire one shot at five minutes, a second shot at four minutes, and another shot at the start; you do this for each class.) Well, apparently a neighbor in the area called the police, and SFPD’s finest turned out–several cars, body armor, lots of weaponary… Not like this club hadn’t been running OODLES of regattas from its race deck–along with several other clubs they would generously let use their race deck.
    The first time I was asked to fire the shot gun for race starts, I was not overly excited–I had fired a shotgun with a REAL load (I forget what) and I found it difficult to control, and hard to hit the broadside of a barn. And it was the broadside of a barn at which I was aiming. (Actually, a piece of paper on the broad side of the barn. A friend worked special effects in film, and was collecting shot patterns to develop squibs.) What the hell is Joey B. talking about? I can’t imagine how an AR-15 would be MORE difficult…(Firing the shotgun for a regatta is E-Z–it’s a blank load and you aren’t aiming at anything, except up in the air, in the general direction of the starting line.)
    On this subject, I think TWO of the problems about the gun thing have to do with the fact that the people who want to limit the Second Amendment: A) Do NOT know what the “AR” in AR-15 stands for; and B) Think “semi-automatic” refers to the burst mode. Oh, heck, let’s throw in: C) Use “assault weapon” and “assault rifle” interchangably.  

  • JKB

    It is true, you can put more .22 size pieces of lead in an area faster with a shotgun.  But it also means you have no control over the area covered in the same general direction.  Plus, an .223 round actually has less of a wall penetration profile than your standard handgun (.40, 9mm) ammunition or shotgun rounds, especially slugs.  The .223 is designed to tumble and break up on impact thus reducing the changes of traveling through to inside your neighbor’s house compared to hollow-point handgun ammunition, not mention full metal jacket rounds.
    .223 Drywall Penetration: Conclusion

  • Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog » Watcher’s Council Nominations – Vacation Edition!!()

  • Jose

    Biden’s stupid shotgun remark shows his ignorance and misogynistic view of women.

    If AR-15s/M-16s are too much for women to handle, why do the military and police keep issuing them?

  • Jose

    Are the women who enter the new military combat jobs going to be issued shotguns instead of M-16s?

    Talk about your War on Women!

  • Danny Lemieux

    JKB, for in-house work with a shotgun, go with #7 or #9 shot, as it shouldn’t penetrate drywall…too much. It is also lethal at short range.

  • Caped Crusader

    Over a 65 year period of owning and firing many handguns guns from 22 short to 44 magnum the best advice I can give you is the following, that someone long forgotten advised me, and I have never forgotten for it is sterling advice.
    “The best gun is the one you have in your pocket or purse when you need it, because a .22 in the pocket is far superior to a bazooka locked in the trunk.”
    The new 10-17 ounce .380 and small 9mm auto-loaders such as the Ruger LC9, LCP, LC380 are excellent short range personal defense weapons and something you will actually carry. I have large frame 9mm handguns weighing around 3 pounds and the average person is not going to carry these heavy bulky weapons. No matter what you choose being proficient, familiar, accurate, and comfortable firing this weapon is essential. A .22 fired into the face, neck, or groin areas (nearly always unprotected) will lay a world of hurt, and after that try a center mass round or two. A smaller caliber weapon has less recoil and allows you to easily put several rounds where you want them in rapid succession. For this reason many intelligence services use similar weapons for assassinations; less noise, recoil, etc. Of course if you are Marshall Dillon and can stride into the street and place one .44 magnum through the heart every time, that can’t be beat; but how many can do that? Hornady’s new Critical Defense round is excellent with a .380 or 9mm.

  • Pingback: You Best Betta |()

  • shirleyelizabeth

    I attended four years at ASU (cheap, no loans). Guns are not allowed on campus (of course) but they’ve got lots of those emergency call boxes around. I did not live on campus, and as I didn’t have the money for a laptop and internet service, I had many many late/early morning walks from the 24-hour computing commons to Lot 59. Aside from choosing that time to walk alone (I worked during the day), I did my best to be smart about, but when it came to it, the thing that saved me when it mattered was a cab driver, and thank goodness for that, too, because I really didn’t have any other legal option.

  • Ymarsakar

    “In fact, adjustable stocks, pistol grips, etc. are features that help Americans with Disabilities enjoy their 2nd Amendment rights but Congress wants to discriminate against the handicapped.”
    From the Left’s point of view, it’s bad enough that the slaves are speaking back to their masters, but crippled slaves thinking they can determine the Master’s choices? No way. They cannot abide by such.
    Old Joe the VP can fire into the air and everyone cowers. That is because he is part of the Divine Rulership. The rest of you peons, of course, shouldn’t expect the same treatment.

  • Karl

    Years ago, I heard Laura Schlessinger talking about self defense.  She mentioned that even though she had earned a black belt in a martial art, she still needed training to enable her to prevail in a street fight.  She had to ask (demand!!! — they didn’t want to hit a girl) that people with experience put her through what would happen in a real street fight.
    I’ve read comments elsewhere about how women might want to learn hand-to-hand combat, but this tells me that’s in no way guaranteed to be effective, even if the will to fight is present. (All too often, it’s not.) Guns have been shown to work with even a short training time. Sport forms of martial arts, even with many years of training, may still be horribly inadequate.

  • Ymarsakar

    There is no guarantee of victory, ever. The best people can hope for in training is that it gets them a 50% chance of survival. The Japanese considered it a victory, though, when two swordsmen killed each other. If you can’t kill the enemy without losing a drop of blood, at least take them down with you. That is the kind of mentality that gives you the other 49% of the survival gamble. 50/50 odds from training. Those that want 99% or 100%, better get the other 49% on their own, while they ascend to transcendental enlightenment (1%).
    Martial arts are nice for testing out certain things, as it allows a user to put theory into action and practice, but it in itself is not a life and death match. It is no deathmatch, and as such, does not instruct one how to handle deathmatches. The rules put in place are to ensure fairness. Fairness in war and on the battlefield is when one guy stabs the enemy in the back without the enemy even being aware he was on a battlefield. That is fairness in war. Sports value fairness as a way to allow people to test, playfully, things without getting mangled all the time and spending 99% of their training time recovering in a hospital tent.
    I’m not quite sure when I took up TFT, I think it was a year or two after 2001 when I first heard about it from an exercise instructor and businessman. But I wasn’t all that comfortable with the philosophy and concepts in it until years afterwards, not because of a physical deficiency but a mental one.
    Guns are merely tools to deliver force that most humans cannot generate on their own. Penetration, rotation, produces injury. Injury shuts down the threat, which is the enemy’s CPU. No threat, no problem. Shooting the gun, attacking the knife, disarming the “arm” of the enemy, does nothing absolute, because the enemy is still there. He can get another weapon, he can kill you even with one “arm”. Using your own body you were born in, you can exert lethal force on fragile human bodies, irregardless of how fast you are, how big you are, how strong you. And that takes into account the difference between sexes as well. Most people cannot though, since martial movement is not the movement people use in their daily lives. It’s different. Just as learning how to walk and run, doesn’t allow you to automatically become an Olympic speed or stamina swimmer. Martial arts, as originally conceived by the ancients, was a way to get people to move while fighting as naturally and gracefully, as efficiently and as effortlessly, as someone takes a step while walking. When delivering lethal force with the hands, legs, or body, the movement is effortless and automatic, only stopped when the CPU over rides the body and says “stop the killing blow, he is no longer a threat”.
    When people are more concerned about getting that “stop” signal out before they kill someone, and less worried about whether they will get ‘killed” while “fighting”, that is when they are getting to the next level, called proficiency or competency.
    One or two TFT instructors mentioned that the women got it. They got it much faster mentally speaking than the men. While the males were still desk jockeying to see who was “tougher”, the women were already in the survival mentality of kill or be killed. That accelerated their training beyond the beyond. It also helped to punch out the notion in the males that they were going to go easy on the females because the females look weaker. By removing speed and strength from the equation, it ensured that stronger males could NOT go easy on the females. Also, rotating the males around so that each female always pairs up against a male, not a female to a female, helps. Many instructors, whether martial or civilian or military, have difficulties figuring out how to train women or females in general. They don’t get it. Their old methods of strength, speed, toughness, and other masculine training tools, don’t work. So they default to telling girls, that to be strong, they need to copy the techniques that use speed and strength, and they will get faster and stronger.
    A gun does not require you to be faster or even stronger. It just requires you to do a few steps correctly and make an accurate aim.
    TFT, essentially teaches people how to use lethal force from a gun, except attached now to their body. Getting someone to use speed and strength in life and death killing, is hard. It takes a decade or two. Same for professional soldiers and swordsmen. A decade or 3 to get really good. At least competitive with the other killers out there.
    Modern martial arts is diluted to the point of either stupidity or foolishness. It takes some excellent research and knowledge to tell the good from the bad. But if you could tell the good from the bad, you’re aren’t one of those people who need that knowledge the most.
    It takes 10,000 man hours to truly bridge the gap between proficient and mastery. A black belt, these days, takes 360 days, of perhaps 2-10 hours of training per week. You can do the math yourselves at what level the “black belt” is at, considered shodan (first degree out of many) in Japan. Here’s a hint, they aren’t even at the “proficient” level most of the time. And it’s not because one is American and one is in Japan either. The same is true of either.
    There are plenty of Reality Based Self Defense systems that cater to the demand for more applicable SD skills. Of course. But not all are of equal qualities. Some are better than others, while others are just cons. Again, the people that can tell the difference, aren’t the ones in the most danger.
    The ideal progression is relatively simple. Go around unarmed, except with your arms, and do regular civilian peaceful things. When someone threatens you with a weapon or the all mighty gone, destroy them and then take the gun. Now that weapon is yours, free. Use that weapon on the next guy who is pointing an assault rifle at you, kill him, take his rifle and ammo. Split yourself off from enemies, break them apart by forcing them to chase you or ambush them of your own accord, and mow down a lot slew of them at once. Conduct raids on convoys and bases to get heavier weapons. Utilize heavy weapons to get nukes. Once you have nukes, deploy nukes and kill the enemy leadership. Mission accomplished. But it was accomplished by the human brain, not “weapons”.

  • Pingback: Bookworm Room » Watcher’s Council submissions for February 21, 2013()

  • Pingback: GayPatriot » Watcher of Weasels Nominations — 02.21.13 Edition()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results » Virginia Right!()

  • Pingback: The Council Hath Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results |

  • Pingback: Trevor Loudon's New Zeal Blog » The Council Has Spoken!! This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results – 02/22/13()

  • Pingback: The Colossus of Rhodey()

  • Pingback: The Council Has Spoken!! Watcher’s Council Results Week of 02.22.13 | askmarion()

  • Pingback: Totally Cool Watcher of Weasel Winners! | Independent Sentinel()

  • Pingback: Rhymes With Right()

  • Pingback: Un Peu de Ça |()