In the time we live, with high levels of violence and a general sense of insecurity on the part of the people, it is not uncommon to see schools and Karate instructors promoting courses and lectures on self-defense. And really, having the tools to defend yourself and escape from dangerous situations is something that is necessary and advisable for anyone. But do these courses, for the most part, fulfill their purpose of approaching self-defense effectively? Do we, martial artists, fully understand the concept and complexity of what is self-defense, to the point of objectively and effectively transmitting it? My impression is that a very serious reflection still needs to be made on the subject and that the instructors themselves should make a self-criticism about what they are conveying under the label of self-defense.
Although traditional martial arts were originally created for military application or even civilian self-defense, the expansion and systematization of their teaching and the introduction of sports modalities in many cases diluted the more practical side of defense, giving more emphasis to philosophical and physical aspects, with less “dangerous” approaches that provide a kind of training in a context that has nothing to do with defense for real situations. And these situations alone require more than the already compromised technique.
Self-defense is practically a separate study and requires a lot of critical sense to be taught realistically. I venture to say that the vast majority of dojos use the term inappropriately and even irresponsibly if they consider that regular training of kihon, kata and kumite sport alone provides the broader requirements of self-defense, which is much more than the physical aspect, than knowing how to punch, involving psychological and contextual factors.
Among the points that we can raise when we speak of self-defense, it is worth mentioning:
> Ability to identify and avoid dangerous situations;
> Ability to verbally disengage from dangerous situations;
> Mental ability to act under pressure in situations of risk;
> In danger, understand the dynamics of a non-consensual confrontation, which is very different from the sparring with a fellow karateka;
> To study statistics of the most common habits of physical violence, to be able to develop training and exercises according to the most probable aggressions (I have the impression that seiken chudan-zuki in zenkutsu dachi is not one of them);
> Understand that situations of actual aggression are chaotic, difficult to predict, and involve variables often not considered in training, such as a weapon the perpetrator may have hidden, having to defend another person, or dealing with multiple aggressors;
> Legal aspects and consequences of any physical confrontation. It is not because you acted in self-defense that you are free of legal and criminal implications, ranging from witnesses to the way you dealt with or how you reacted to the situation.
So how do you consider these few factors above, which are just a few, when you sell your classes as self-defense? Or do you not consider it at all? If you consider, how do you approach these topics to develop skills and discernment skills in your students? To me at least, it does not seem like the kind of thing one learns on a Sunday morning or walking up and down the dojo punching the air. You have to go much further.
Don’t get me wrong: Karate is an art that can be very effective in self-defense, but first we must understand the purpose and different approaches of training. In a regular Karate sessions, we develop balance, body awareness, concentration, reflexes, strength and resilience, and we can train combat techniques in a controlled and safe environment. For all of this to move toward self-defense, it seems fundamental to be critical and develop classes accordingly, building on the foundations that Karate provides and staggering the concepts covered until the subject of self-defense can be approached consistently. This taking into consideration that the instructor understands the true nature of Karate and the mechanics and concepts conveyed, which go far beyond punches and kicks.
Essentially, karate and techniques coded in kata deal with a very specific field of self-defense, which is the physical aspect, when there is no other option than confrontation to defend one’s life. It’s okay to follow the training focused on this. But it is necessary to be aware and make clear that this is only a portion within something broader. The student can not leave with the impression that self-defense comes down to “fighting” as this can lead to misjudgments.
Another point is that in order to understand real physical violence, it is necessary to have some solid reference in this regard. If the only reference you have are action movies and martial arts competitions, which have rules and restrictions, you can not say that you have any baseline or reality for your self-defense practice. This is not the kind of thing that can only be supposed. Of course, this does not mean that karateka should go out looking for trouble on the street to gain experience, but it seems reasonable to hear who goes through this type of situation (police officers, security professionals and the like), read about it, analyze data on crimes and aggressions, watch videos and use the means available to better understand the theme with a real standpoint.
Reality is not always pretty, but needs to be viewed objectively. When we speak of self-defense, we speak of being prepared to avoid or deal with potentially life-or-death situations. Therefore, the way we guide students or train ourselves for this kind of situation is something that needs to be addressed with maximum responsibility, care and criteria. Otherwise, something incorrectly transmitted can cause a false perception and cost someone’s life. It is worth remembering that the general idea is to reduce this risk.
Having clear and objective purposes in training helps to undo false perceptions and build proper context mentality of what is being practiced. Different trainings may be predominantly to, among other things, develop fundamentals and mechanics; for conditioning and physical health; to develop skills for points competitions; to deal with consensual full contact combat, such as MMA; and to deal with situations of non-consensual physical confrontation (aggression). All approaches are valid and serve specific purposes.
This is not to say that a Karate athlete, who does not train with a focus on personal defense, but sports performance, can not successfully defend himself from a dangerous situation or that a single training can not provide useful skills in more than one context. Martial arts athletes and graduates certainly have a skill and technical repertoire above those who do not practice any kind of fighting. But there is a limit to how much a specific workout for one purpose can be transposed to another scenario.
To better visualize the above, imagine putting an athlete who only trained point sparring to fight in an octagon, without any previous preparation for that situation, against a fighter experienced in that environment. It is not difficult to imagine what would happen, because the approaches and purposes of the preparation that both have experienced are completely different. Neither better nor worse, simply with different goals and functions.
With all this, I do not mean that I have expertise above the others or demean the sensei who have been cultivating our noble art for years. I just believe that there is a reflection that can not be avoided so that we can progress with sincerity, exploiting all the efficiency that Karate can offer us. And this is a discussion that has been done before and has been made today by people much more capable than me. It is an exercise that I myself try to do and that I know will be long term. But I invite all who are open-minded and cherish for the uplifting and study of Karate so that they also reflect and participate in this conversation, for ourselves and for our students.
About the subject and related, some recommended material follows:
Andreas Quast – The Invention of Karate (article)
Iain Abernethy – Reinventing Violence (podcast)
Iain Abernethy – Multiple Assailants: An Inconvenient Truth (video)
Iain Abernethy – Consensual Violence (Fighting) vs. Non-Consensual Violence (Self-Defense) (video)
Rory Miller – Meditations on Violence: A Comparison of Martial Arts Training & Real World Violence (book)
Samir Berardo – The origins, the confusion and the revolution of karate (article)