I think we are all in agreement, but with regard to the knife it isn't something generally carried by the opportunist. If it is then it's a different course to the one I was running. That said if you live in an area with high knife crime then it's maybe something you want to cover. For me in this particular workshop it wasn't something to worry myself with.
It's a general principle for me that anything unarmed should not be detrimental if your opponent is armed. You could call it a belt and braces approach.
Some stats to show that, while unlikely, weapon use is not an insignificant factor: Overview of violent crime and sexual offences - Office for National Statistics So while I agree that it is pointless to address weapons explicitly in a 2 or 3 hour introductory session, it is still entirely worth implicitly addressing them.
Fair enough, but I think it is too confusing to say "do abc if your attacker is unarmed, but do xyz if they have a weapon". It just makes sense to me to presume that either hand may be holding a weapon when teaching unarmed techniques, because it keeps you safer whether the attacker is armed or not.
I never said otherwise. What about a knife? What about multiple attackers? What if you are stranded in your car? What f you are left injured? What if you have small children with you? These are all valid questions, but not necessarily in a two hour slot. Deliver a good workshop to a school or university for example and maybe you'll get invited back to cover these questions. If you have a mother and daughter attending a seminar just the once then you need to deliver something that leaves them saying, "oh that's sensible advice and maybe we should apply those common sense approaches to our daily life.
Apologies then, as I thought that was what you were arguing. That's all I meant when I said that weapons should be implicitly acknowledged but not explicitly addressed: you don't explicitly mention them, but implicit in the techniques are an awareness of them. It should be in the DNA of the principles being expressed as technique, IMHO.
...and perhaps I should say that this is something very much on my mind at the moment, as it wasn't that long ago that a friend of someone close to me was sexually assaulted at weapon-point. Hopefully you'll understand if I don't give any more detail than that, in order to prevent giving any information that may identify them.
chatter box attended the workshop, so maybe she's better placed to say if it was as described, or reached expectation.
I found this to be a very worthwhile course, to be physically involved help's you to remember [plus it's better to be involved rather than listen to a lecture.] I can only highly recommend this course, to learn how to get out of undesirable situation should one occur. always good to learn new drills,and to take them away with you.
Any course like this is a difficult sell. Many don't see self defence/awareness as an issue and many other have pre-conceived ideas, often very wrong ideas. It's often the case even those that teach SD can't agree, so what chance does the average woman reading a poster have?
Consider the fact that i do tai chi in a park, our spot is on top of a hill,access is a footpath surrounded by trees and bushes. you never know who is lurking about! [we have had flashers in the past} anyone can be grabbed from behind . IF i can get out of an attempted abduction because i used a tool from the box or even my voice--then this course or any course could be a life saver. did this course reach my expectation? yes.
The lecture on awareness was of benefit, i do arrive early for a walm up before class, at least now i wait for someone rather than be alone in a remote area.
