Garry Smith – Page 26 – Conflict Manager

Resting – Garry Smith

As it is winter here in England with short days, dark mornings and evenings, I have been dog walker in chief in the Smith household. This is not a moan, far from it, I love being outside walking, absolutely love it and we have had some fantastic days this year, good hard frosts and crisp clear skies. I particularly like walking in the dark of early evening when there is virtually nobody else around, it is nice and quiet then and it is surprising how quickly your night vision kicks id once away from streetlight.

Now we are mid February and it is warming up more. Recent rain has made some of the paths we use very muddy and you spend a lot of your time looking where to put your feet rather than looking around at the beautiful surroundings. We live on the edge of the city and access to beautiful walks is easy, we could stick to the tarmac covered paths in parks but getting out on the crags and paths through the fields is much nicer.

Apparently the Old English name for February was Solmonath (mud month), sounds right to me, I think I will start using it. Other countries and cultures have different names for February and most relate to the conditions and temperature they experience. The emergence of the mud from the previously, well mostly, frozen earth (this depends on the variations we experience as a temperate clime), is a sign that we are moving towards spring.

Heading towards is not there yet. However, as the mornings and evenings lightening and the mud squelches underfoot we know that spring is around the corner. I never bother with new year resolutions and the flood of I will get fitter false promises people make and do not carry through on. I do though, around now, start thinking about getting out and about more and starting the build up my fitness levels. I can imagine little more depressing than heading to the confines of a gym to workout in artificial light in an artificial atmosphere surrounded by many, not all, artificial people. It is not my scene, (exceptions allowed when on holiday).

I like my weights, I like my exercise bike a bit less, I love walking and cycling. A motorcycle crash in early April screwed my training regime last year, it was followed by a problem with my right bicep followed by a series of coughs and chest infections that I thought would never end. Then just before Christmas it all, almost, lifted so I decided a period of rest was needed.

I am still in that period of rest, I did train in preparation for my 4^th dan in Ju Jitsu in November and sneaked the examination in between infections, I think the bruised ribs worsened the next chest infection though and I was close to pneumonia, but apart from that, I carried on teaching. I rested from the exercise not from being involved, how can I when I run the training?

Well a 2 week shut down lazing around in the sun, and wind, on Fuertaventura certainly recharged the batteries and on return I have kept on with the just teaching strategy with just a few dabbles here and there. Rest has done me good and I am now feeling ready to resume training, ready both physically and mentally. Many people do not, or worse still cannot rest, and this is very dangerous, in my opinion. The earth revolves and the seasons change, nature renews and restores itself. The human body needs periods of rest, each day we rise, engage in our waking lives and then retire to sleep again, we have 4 seasons in one day and our bodies need this. Regular sleep is good for us, our bodies repair the damage done throughout the day whilst we sleep. Poor sleep eventually wears you down as does a failure to take a break from our training.

Building in regular periods of relaxation into our training programme is good practice and a sign of dedication and not neglect. Whilst we may train twice or three times a week at the Dojo it is important, given all the other pressures of everyday life, to make sure we have a couple of nights a week set aside for relaxation. That does not mean that we must neglect our art completely on these nights, rather than push the body further we may take the opportunity to chill out but set aside a period for virtual training where as part of our relaxation we engage in imagining our kata and techniques.

Relaxation is the gateway to the renewal of both body and mind. By engaging in relaxation techniques one can quite quickly recover from the tiredness and stress of everyday life. Whilst there are many ways this can be done as there are ways to become tired and stressed it is important to find the method that suits you best. On the occasions I have to get up early I find I function better if I take a siesta in the afternoon. This leaves me refreshed and raring to go in the late afternoon and evening. For some a quiet period is enough or a period listening to whale songs. It does not matter what you do as long as it works for you and is relaxing.

Most evenings I indulge myself in a very hot bath with some nice bath oils to soak my muscles and completely switch off for a few minutes, often falling asleep. This has now become a ritual in my life and works for me, it is my retreat. I know some people who prefer a form of Spartan regime where rest is a sin, a sign of weakness and failure. Well each to their own it is not for me to judge. However, take a look around you, observe how things happen in nature, look at the process of how the earth regenerates itself and learn from it.

At the moment I am extending the length of time I walk and my stride. I am walking further and faster and the dog is a happy boy. As the weather improves this will continue and the mountain bike will come out too. Happy days ahead. The weights will come out to play and I will be joining in the training and not just teaching.

Right now I have a little dog to walk on an overcast Solmonath day, more fresh air and exercise and all for free. After that I have a little more admin work to do before teaching an early evening class, then there will be a nice hot soak and an early night, that is part of my training.

Strangers in a Strange Land Part I – Darren Friesen

As a Canadian having now lived in Costa Rica for 7+ years, I often get asked by expats on smooth(er) integration and immersion into a new culture. With some cultures having an innate dislike for foreigners relating to “stealing” jobs from nationals, losing unique elements of culture, cultural disconnects and the like, it can at times make one a target that stands out like the proverbial sore thumb. This article is the result, though not limited to the list itself as this is just the tip of the iceberg. Some conceptual ideas on survival and safety when living abroad as an expat:

Be aware. Situationally aware. Yes, it’s a broad general term but it simply means noticing things that stand out, that don’t seem right, that set off your intuition, that can be perceived to be a potential issue: strange people hovering in the neighbourhood, cars parked in areas for extended periods of time, items left in places you don’t recall leaving them. Smoke billowing around corners you have limited vision. Shadow reflections of oncoming unseen individuals. Mirrors to see people’s actions/body language/tells without them knowing. Movement inside a car you thought was uninhabited. Silhouettes in the dark. It can be as basic or as diverse as you want to make it.
Accept the fact that you’re a stranger in a strange land and act accordingly. Whether you fall into this category or not, you are perceived as being “American/North American”, having money and, oftentimes correctly, not being part of “their” world (meaning the criminal). The more you showcase this in public and draw attention, the more you’ll likely receive.
Fit in as much as is possible, even if it means learning a little Spanish and attempting to speak to the locals with it. Get to know your neighbors. Support local business. Talk to people. Be friendly.
Accept the fact that you, too, could be a victim and, yes, it COULD happen to you. Oftentimes people who live scared and pray that it couldn’t happen to them transmit this through body language in public. Be confident, act like a hard target and carry yourself like you know the territory and are comfortable in the culture.
You don’t need a pitbull or Rottweiler. Simply something that makes a lot of noise and draws attention is a) enough to make them go to another house, b) make your house a potentially harder mark than is worth their while and c) give you enough time to clear your head (if in the middle of the night) and take the appropriate steps. (eg. escape, call 911, get to your gun/weapon.) I like the dog idea as much as the alarm idea. This is a loyal friend/family member and if you treat them right they instinctively protect their owner in various ways. If your dog is barking at-length there may be a legitimate reason for it, don’t brush it off. Remember, everything is contextual. If it ends up being the neighborhood kids having a mahenga in front of your house, no harm no foul. It took 10 seconds to find this out.
Weapons are a great force multiplier and are far more effective than anything someone can do without one, which I realize is a moral issue for many…or the majority. That being said, to go heavily along with what Paul said at the meeting, if you have the intention of using one, get training. The last thing you need is a criminal taking it away from you and using it against you. Improvised weapons are everywhere around the house and it takes someone who can envision how to use them, how to handle them and what kind of damage they can do. (flexible, bladed, penetrating, projectile, impact, shielding, etc.) If you have the will to use a weapon, use it with intent. We have a catchphrase: “He who hesitates, meditates…horizontally.” Use it with commitment and visualize what you’re protecting. What’s important to you and what are you willing to fight for. Could you move on having lost them or they you. Be feral and vile if you need to survive. Mindset is far more important than physical skill (But, remember, training enhances this although I realize not everybody can or is able to partake in training nor has any inclination to fight.) Here’s a cold truth most people are not able to accept: the only way to defeat violence (when all other avenues are spent) is utilize greater violence. Be brutal. Self-defense implies that there are 4 elements present: ability, opportunity, intent and preclusion. Your first 3 have already been passed by context, the 4^th isn’t required. It is you or them if you decide to act with aggression. If you’re not able to come to terms with this…remember, for those who haven’t delved into this arena, it is not a walk-in-the-park – the pre-, during and post- parts are traumatic and life-changing. Another reason to get proper training on the whys/hows/whens.
Yes, some are expensive but they are a great deterrent and if they work only once they will have justified their cost. (You don’t want to find out AFTER you’ve made the decision that they’re TOO expensive that it was worth the investment. Too late.) That being said, pick someone reputable as there are many offering this service that will immediately in turn pass on the knowledge to their burglar friends of how to trip the alarm. I would recommend going through a reputable security company. Oftentimes, these companies actually monitor through remote CCTV, will let you see the footage and take their business seriously as it’s extremely competitive and losing a client is not something they want, nor the bad reputation that’ll come from taking the above route. (Independent companies may not often care, remember, you’re a Gringo to them and they predominantly work with and in their community)
Pretending to be asleep can sometimes work (as the adamant gentleman insisted at the meeting) and, like the story I mentioned, can save lives. But, remember, from this story, they were actually fully asleep and there were no physiological anomalies needed to be controlled. If the burglars want money (and think you have it), want to kidnap, be violent and take their resentment out on the homeowner for whatever reason, it can backfire. There is no one right solution and a catch-all response to every scenario. Home invasions are always contextual so plan accordingly. (And “pretending” to be asleep is often easier said than done with adrenal dump/tachypsychia-heart pumping 250 bpms, perpetual shaking, uncontrolled breathing, fearful wife or kids beside you, involuntary responses, etc.) Ever tried it with an angry wife/husband after a fight and they’re not quite finished? How’s that worked for you? (If it doesn’t work on her/him it just might not work on them)
Do a quick scope of the house upon return (and upon leaving). Don’t get caught off-guard. This goes for car safety as well. Before getting in your car, look underneath the car, backseat, vehicles beside/behind/in front of. Don’t stop too close to the car in front of you. Lock your doors while driving. Put your seatbelt on after you’ve locked the door and take it off before unlocking to get out. Pay attention to strange cars following you and don’t lead them to your home where you’re isolated. (A better idea is to lead them to the police station or a populated public place you’re familiar with. Act like you’re calling someone to report them WITHOUT getting out of the car. Never get out when challenged or pull over to a place of their terms. Everything regarding safety should always be made on your terms. It’s your life and only you are in control of it).
Check for escape routes and safe(r) hiding places if needed, both in the house, in the yard and through neighboring land. In a pinch this saves you decision-making time under the effects of adrenaline if the proverbial shit does hit the fan. (And remember, if you can get out of that exit, someone can also get in) The last thing you want is to make new decisions while under intense pressure for your life. Which leads me to my next point….

This will be in Part II next week.

On Models – Erik Kondo and Rory Miller

Rory and I have a basic disagreement about models. I love them. He doesn’t. No. We are not talking about the beautiful models you see in print or on TV. That a whole different discussion. We are talking about educational models used for teaching.

Rory will explain why he doesn’t like them. But first I will explain why I do.

I see models as teaching tools that provide a framework for understanding. The world is a complex place. Trying to figure out how the world works is a difficult task. Therefore, I see models as a pathway to building a general understanding of a subject. The basic idea is to take a subject and break it down into it’s component parts. Then each part can be examined and discussed both separately and also in combination with the other parts.

Flexible models allow for understanding to grow and become more complex as the person’s understanding of the subject increases. Models provide the student with mental anchoring where he or she can “chunk” information together. As the person’s understanding increases, so does the connections and relationships between the “chunks” increase.

Therefore, I see models as problem solving tools. They are starting points on the journey of understanding.

“Essentially, all models are wrong, but some are useful.” — Box, George E. P.

But, I do agree that models also have their disadvantages. Models are only representations of reality. They are not reality. As famously stated by mathematician, George Box, they are also invariably wrong to a certain extent.

For example, Newtonian Physics is essentially a model that is wrong under certain conditions. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity is a model that is also incorrect under certain other conditions, but it solves some of the flaws of the Newtonian model. So why not skip Newton and go straight to Einstein? Because Einstein’s theory is very hard to understand and it requires a fair amount of prerequisite knowledge. And one practical prerequisite, is to understand the Newtonian model first.

I think that much of the practical problems of the Newtonian model can be mitigated by realizing that it is both an imperfect and limited model.

When it comes to models for conflict management, I think that people run into trouble when they assume that the Model will give them the correct answer to their specific problem. Instead of viewing the Model as a problem solving tool for them to use to come to their own solution, they see the Model as already having the solution.

In this case, blind faith in the Model causes them to be rigid and inflexible in their thinking. This is an example of not having a flexible or growth mindset. People without this type mindset tend to see models in this rigid fashion. As a result, learning a model actually could be detrimental for them.

These are the people who want a definite answer to the question of “If he does this, what should I do?”

This is a different question than “If he does this, what are some of my alternatives?”

Ultimately, I think models are useful for helping people who are willing to teach themselves. This type of person will benefit from a model as a starting point. Then he or she will discard the model in favor of his or her own personalized model or means of understanding.

But there is no telling how a person will use a model. Therefore, I think that if models come with full disclosure of their inherent flaws, then their advantages will out weigh their disadvantages. That is why I use them – a lot.

Here is Rory’s take on models.

Models have their place. In closed systems, models or formulas work very well. A closed system is one in which the conditions are known and there are right and wrong answers. Erik brought up physics. Newtonian physics (I don’t know enough about advanced physics to make the same assertion) is a closed system. There are a handful of known constants and laws and if you know the variables (length of lever, distance to both load and force from fulcrum, amount of force applied) you will a always get the same answer.

Most of what we learn in school are closed systems. Math. Geography. Writing is an interesting one, because the fundamentals of writing (grammar, spelling and even story structure) are taught as a closed system, but good writing can and does break all of the rules. Think of Faulkner. Effective writing is an open system, but we tend to teach it as a closed system.

Conflict management is a classic open system. It is broad and deep. There are many variables and the majority of those are outside of your control, unknown to you, or both. There is no single definition of a win and the exact same outcome in a situation can be interpreted as a loss or a win by two different people and each individual can even change their mind about whether it was a win over time.

Models are used for a lot of reasons. In closed systems, they make sense. Bureaucracies like measurability and open skills are not really measurable. But the nature of the beast is that surviving violence is predicated on adaptability. On changing the situation. On breaking social rules and taboos that try to keep a student on a socially acceptable script. Cheating, in other words. And you can’t make a model for breaking models.

But I think the most common reason people try to apply models to open systems is simply fear. If you can take this ugly, immense, complicated problem and give it nice neat labels and put it in a box, it looks less scary.

That’s classic fear management, not danger management. Willful blindness.

My take, as an instructor, is to normalize the chaos. Our world, life itself, is an open system. We evolved to deal with that level of complexity. Humans rock at dealing with unknowns, if they let themselves.

I do use models in my teaching. Partially because I went through the school system like everyone else and it’s a hard habit to break. But when I use them consciously, it’s never to give answers. Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs, for instance.

A prescriptive instructor would use Maslow to say, “An assailant working from the security level of the hierarchy will… and so you must…” Used properly (in other words, my way) the same level gives you, “If no one was going to help you and your children were starving, how would you get money for food?” Followed up, after the class has answered the question: “Get it? An addict doesn’t think differently than you, they just have a level of problem very few people in our culture have had to deal with…”

The purpose of models, when I use them well, is to add layers to the depth of understanding. Most models, however, are used to cut out variables and complexity that the instructor is unprepared to deal with.

There is one other reason to use models in an open system, and it hinges on the instructor’s assumptions and biases.

If you assume that your students are intelligent and adaptable, you give them tools and information and trust them to find their own best solutions by their own definitions with their own personal resources. This is the “gains maximization” strategy, looking for the best win.

If, however, you assume your students are stupid and will generally make things worse if left to their own judgment, in that case you will need to rely on models. You need to tell them what to do and be prescriptive. That’s the loss minimization strategy.

I personally reject that point of view. But that’s me.

Are We Hearing Voices? – Liam Jackson

In early February, 2017, an exchange of messages with Marc MacYoung led to a post I created on a social media site. The original post may be read below: (With very minor edits as to spare the delicate sensibilities of some genteel readers.)

In the Poles analogy, Pinker uses the North pole as an example of the “far-anything.” (My term, not Pinker’s) Anything south of absolute North is “different” and, possibly, not to be trusted by Absolute North. And following along that train of thought, anything or anyone not standing on our own compass points are also suspect. In reality, we all know someone who is a few degrees left or right of us but, humanity being what it is, we’re awful quick to look at the extremes rather than the commonalities. The word “moderate” has become an obscenity to those standing on the poles.

It’s self-defeating and polarizing, folks. Fecal matter is perilously close to hitting the oscillating device. It ain’t gonna’ be pretty when it happens, regardless of how well we all think we’re prepared.

Though this post may be interpreted as “political” in nature, it’s actually a sociological observation. Jus’ so ya’ know

“In a recent exchange of messages with Marc MacYoung. I asked him if his hate mail had increased lately. Marc is a “violence professional” recognized by several legal jurisdictions as a subject matter expert. In truth, Marc is actually more of a “conflict resolution” specialist. He’s often a voice of reason when others are quick to yell, “Punch ’em” or some other such emotional prattle. And that alone can make someone a target for Far-lefts, Far-rights and the “Far-anythings.”

In reply, he asked me if I knew of Steven Pinker’s analogy regarding the “Poles.” (Pinker is a Johnstone Family Professor in the Department of Psychology at Harvard University. He conducts research on language and cognition, writes for publications such as the New York Times, Time and The Atlantic.)

I knew of Pinker and his remarks. In the “Poles” analogy, Pinker uses the North Pole as an example of the most extreme compass point. This is the spot on which the “far-anythings” reside. (My term, not Pinker’s) Anything south of absolute North is “different” and, possibly, not to be trusted by Absolute North, and likewise with Absolute South. Following along that train of thought, anything or anyone not standing directly on our own personal compass points are also suspect. In reality, we all know someone who is a few degrees left or right of us but, humanity being what it is, we’re damned quick to look at the extremes rather than the commonalities. The word “moderate” has become an obscenity to those standing on the poles. It’s my humble opinion that it’s the very lack of Moderate Voice that we find ourselves in this current state of unrest.

Fecal matter is perilously close to hitting the oscillating device in the U.S. It won’t be pretty when it happens, regardless of how well we all think we’re prepared.

The post spurred some discussion among other “violence pros” and within hours, I found myself tempted to write a treatise on the State of the Union. I refrained and for that, most of you are no doubt eternally grateful. I did, however, post an additional comment or two that further spurred further comments, e-mails, and personal contacts. Below, you’ll find one of those comments, in part:

Here is the skinny. Plain English. Take it for what you will. Most of you who know me personally know that due to my body of work, I have SME status (subject matter expert) with several federal agencies. (Domestic and global terrorism among other “specialties”) I have an aptitude and skill set that lends to “aggressive violence mitigation.” I’m considered highly capable by my superiors. However, of the several hundred (thousands) of people whom I know who or worked in the same field(s), I barely register. Despite my level of training, experience and credentials, I’m a tiny blip on the radar screen. On both the left and right of the socio-political spectrum, there are machines walking among us. And there are far more of these boogey men than you know. Thank God most have the self-restraint and cognitive ability to refrain from open engagement at this time. And yes, there are other elements that factor into that restraint such as “the bad guys aren’t on my local radar yet” or “the pay-off isn’t right…yet.”

For those of you erudite warriors sitting safely behind machine gun keyboards, thumping chests out on the sidewalks, or playing dress up and exacting violent revolt upon another’s person or property, I’m telling you…You have no idea what you’re asking for or inviting. None.”

Many of my social media acquaintances have backgrounds similar to mine, but there are some whom I have met after my retirement and only know me via the lecture circuit, community involvement, or through various martial arts-related functions. It was from this group that I received the most private contacts. Via these contacts, the most common questions regarding my post and subsequent comments were: 1. Who are these “boogey men,” and 2. “Despite the bluster, what has stopped the increasingly verbose “other side” from countering recent violent demonstrations?”

The full answers to these questions would require another treatise. However, I’ll attempt to provide very short answers to both.

First, the aforementioned machines come in many flavors. Some of them are professionally trained, highly experienced and capable… and well-armed. Some are isolationists while others prefer close-knit, like-minded packs. Regardless, they share a commonality. They understand the mindset necessary to commit violence on another human being. We only need look at the number of troops who have served in combat theaters from 1964-2017 to understand the number. And this doesn’t take into account the additional numbers of personnel who’ve worked in the clandestine services. Of course, this doesn’t mean that every combat-qualified person has the mindset of the aforementioned boogey man. The last thing most combat vets want to see is open armed conflict in Hometown, USA. It does, however, mean that the resource pool is huge. Huge. Again, keep in mind that those “machines,” aka the boogey man, exist on both sides of the political spectrum. (We haven’t even touched on the “professional” and “amateur” opportunists,” yet.)

Then you have the Weekenders who have worked diligently to prepare themselves for open, armed conflict. There are flavors of the boogey man within this group who operate more from an emotional mindset and thus are potentially far more volatile.

This brings us to the second question: “Why haven’t they acted, yet?” There is no single reason. A belief in the Rule of Law versus violent civil disobedience, a thus far lack of “personal stake,” the right catalyst is absent, etc. But there is one particular reason that stands out, especially with regard to the Weekenders. Much of the recent politic-related violent protests have been encouraged via a core leadership that has managed to find a national Voice. Structure and organization exists on a significant scale. The Weekenders aren’t so nearly well organized and lack a central, national Voice. Broad-brush organization, central leadership, and “command and control” are MIA. For the moment.

And perhaps most important of all: Violent protests simply haven’t reached the “wrong community” …yet. When conditions are ripe, prairie fires only require a single spark.

The most important puissant Voice missing from this equation is that of the Middle Ground. It’s out there somewhere, but it has remained silent thus far. But there’s always hope.

‘Mindset –Updated Edition: Changing the Way You think to Fulfil Potential’, by Dr Carol Dweck.

This work was drawn to my attention by Erik Kondo when we were discussing the open and closed nature of some groups attitude to learning. I see groups and tribes who interact with other groups and tribes and are prepared to grow from some of the things they learn from these interactions. Our ancient ancestors created vast trading networks in this way, their core cultures were changed by varying degrees by exposure to outside influences, it is how societies were formed and grown.

I had recently been reading Sapiens (see earlier review, as well as The Righteous Mind and when I got hold of Mindset it seemed to offer me a chance of finding the missing link in my thinking, pun intended. You see I am interested in how people think, how they act as well as the me they present compared to the I inside. I am a nailed on growth mindset person. I knew that, the excerpt of Dr Dweck’s book that Erik sent me confirmed it, I try new things, I have fun learning, I am not phased if the learning is hard, learning is itself a reward.

Thing is when I look around I see many people who did not get this, who’s mindsets were fixed, as members of a different and difficult to understand tribe. How could we have evolved as rapidly as a species unless we were a growth mindset species?

Of course I was well aware of the attitudinal differences and how this manifests itself in everyday life, lack of social mobility being one of the major ones. In 1988 was a window cleaner, I enrolled on an adult education course, my life has been a roller coaster ride ever since yet many of my peers from that date have not moved on at all. They were where they were because they were, a self fulfilling prophecy of going nowhere. The question of why we are of similar stock, similar background but see the world so differently has always been a puzzle, the old answers offered only partial answers. Dweck offered more.

In Mindset Dweck teases out the very subtle forces that influence how we see the world and our place within it, she looks at all different aspects of life and the pattern is there to see. Building on a lifetime of study and research this book, although repetitive at times, allows those with the will to learn, and even to change, to delve into the subtleties of human interaction and its consequences.

I really enjoyed it although not a fan of the style, I like my footnotes or references annotated so that I can go find them when I want them, not lumped together at the end of each chapter. It is a comprehensively researched book and well worth a read.

What It Really Takes to Live with Violence, and Forgive it Part I – Heidi MacDonald

What do you do when your worst fears are realized? When a scenario that you work on in your self defense training, actually comes to life? If you survive it, how do you process, get over it?

I wish that I could give you a simple, easy answer that could be of immediate benefit. I wish that somebody had been able to guide me, give me those answers…But it was kind of one of those things where you had to discover the answers for yourself, without anyone’s assistance.

Learn the Hard Way, 101.

I am the daughter of two insufferably, messed up human beings. My father had run-ins with the law and drugs, that resulted in a felony conviction with hard time to serve. My mother was a physically abusive person who also had issues with alcohol and drugs, that were never concealed very well. Long story short, I bore the brunt of her wicked short fuse for a good part of my life.

The end result was that I grew up and made choices in my romantic relationships, that were not always healthy or positive.

I chose one person who was emotionally unavailable with a heavy drinking problem, to boot. I stayed long past this particular relationship’s expiration date, because I thought I should prove myself worthy enough to love. I put this person on an incredibly high pedestal, and myself at the base, basically.

After exiting that, I then chose another person who caused a spectacular level of damage to my life, that I never thought was possible. He was charming and charismatic, but exhibited dangerous traits of narcissism and psychopathy. I didn’t quite understand until it was too late. Instead, I ignored it, and made excuses for his behavior, even as I was self-destructing under the weight of his demands. The end of the relationship was sexually violent and left me suicidal, cut off from friends and family.

Why? Well, for one simple reason: I did not believe in my own worth as a person, as a woman, and in the face of doubt, I put myself through an endless cycle trying to please everyone.

See me, look at me. Tell me that I deserve to be loved

I hadn’t yet learned that I should not have to grovel for love and acceptance, and most certainly not from darkly flawed human beings who had nothing to offer but psychological mind screws and violence.

Do you find me weak so far reading this?

I am not a weak, simpering female. Once upon a time, I may have thought that of myself. But now? Far from it. Don’t fool yourself if you’re a male self-defense/martial arts instructor reading this, and think that what I discuss here, does not apply to you your teaching, or your life.

Quite the opposite. I am one of you.

I am a black belt, and a women’s self defense instructor. I’ve been on the path exploring how to prevent physical violence to myself and others for about 15 years.

I am roughly 120 pounds, and pride myself on being a scrappy groundfighter, despite my five feet, 4 inch height & size. The problem in my case, was that despite all of my training learning preventive techniques against violent action, I simply did not learn or understand how to defend myself against psychological games. How to spot predators of the intimate kind. And equally as important, if not more so – how to have confidence and value in who I am, as a person.

Do me a favor, and try not to immediately scoff & think,

“Pfff, this crap would never happen to me. I can spot psychos from a mile away. How stupid is she, an MA practitioner of all things, to get involved with someone like that?”

Because..he was one of us. A member of our world of Self Defense, Martial Arts practitioners.

The details of what happened, I don’t think are really important anymore. I’ve lived it, and re-lived it a million times in my head, spent time on both the shrink’s couch and did the pop psychology reading. Going back and recounting it, can sometimes put me in a dark place, that I’d rather not go back to.

What is important, is the process that came after.

Two years ago, I found myself at a very personal Ground Zero. I was pretty much broken in every way you can think of: emotionally, psychologically, physically, financially. And yes, there was a dance around the edge of suicide, too. Believe me when I tell you, that is a damn scary place to find yourself on.

Nobody ever thinks they could go that low, that dark, that far, until it actually happens.

At a point that is that void of hope, that desolate, one of two things can happen: You will either die, or you will rebuild. I like to think that the foundation of all my years of dojo training kept the will to live in me burning, because I chose the latter, to rebuild.

The Three Main Parts Of Your Brain – Dr. Russ Harris

Back To Life, Back To Reality Part II – Dave Wignall

Recap from Part I, Well, the reality is that you have been negligent in your considerations. You have not realised the stark differences between the environment in which you train and the environment outside. You finish training, pleased that you have just learnt a certain technique, strike, weapons defence, lock, choke, takedown, whatever it is, but then open the door and walk back onto the street to make your way home. Back to life and back to reality. Your Dojo is a cocoon of like-minded people who don’t want to hurt you (well, not too much) and will aid you, unknowingly most of the time, in helping you succeed. That is a great and wonderful thing of course, and something to be welcomed. I am proud of all of my students, the mutual respect they show for each other, the understanding, the stories, the insights, the questioning, the laughs, the fun – mostly the fun – but we never lose sight of the fact of why we train like we do and why we train at all.

So how can we identify flaws? Well here is something I work to that follows a basic scientific process of analysis and test.

1. Ask questions
2. Do your background research
3. Construct a hypothesis
4. Test (slow then fast under pressure, preferably not with someone who just yields because you are the Chief Instructor) and analyse your data
5. Draw your conclusions
6. Present your results

During my classes I am already at point 6. It is then open for my students to ask questions, do their own research and so on. If the defence technique works when performed slowly, then falls apart when practised fast, then you have identified a weakness and have something to work on.

I’ve found that much of what is taught, across the many disciplines I have either been involved in or studied and analysed, is not based on or even remotely looks like reality, rarely takes into account how people actually react, and is generally far too assumptive. Real fighting is messy, ugly, unrehearsed, aggressive, violent, usually bloody and let’s face it, quite abominable. Real fighting is all this and more. The flaw in all of our training is that none of it is real, but we can at least introduce some semblance of reality. Even in MMA, Boxing or Muay Thai, where an opponent can be struck with full force, there are still huge issues with those disciplines. For example, there are rules, a referee, time limits, people sitting at your corner waiting to help you recover each round, a towel can be thrown in the ring to stop the fight, doctors are on hand, plus as you enter the ring, you should already have an idea of what you are letting yourself in for. In addition, there is only one opponent not multiple, no weapons are carried nor are any laying around to be used. Biting, gouging, strikes to the throat or groin are not allowed. No hair pulling, no scratching, no kicks to the head are allowed when your opponent is on the floor etc etc. The list is quite long. Even during the 1920’s in the days of bare knuckle Vale Tudo (Portuguese for ‘anything goes’), you could kick and stomp to the head while standing above your opponent, but there was still the absence of weapons and multiple attackers. As harsh, hard, aggressive and violent as it was, it still had flaws in that it wasn’t ‘real’ in the context of this article. The thing is, it didn’t profess to be something it wasn’t and there is, of course, nothing wrong with that.

You can see, however, that the more you take steps to train without rules, the more effective your defence can become. Why do we not have kicks to the head on a grounded opponent in UFC? Why doesn’t MMA contain strikes like ploughing a knee square into the face of an opponent kneeling on the canvas? The answers are obvious, I would hope, but you can do that in real life if the threat is such that the level of force is proportionate and justified. I have personally trained with some very proficient Brazilian Ju-Jitsu and Mixed Martial Arts fighters and although they were more experienced in their field than me, I stopped my partners in their tracks when I applied an eye gouge, struck to the groin or applied some pressure on the windpipe with my elbow. This of course did not make me any better than them – far from it; these guys were very able in their art. It’s just that I was responding without the consideration of rules. I did what my survival default told me to do. If you apply rules, it isn’t reality training because there are no rules in a real fight. If your responses require fine motor skill applications, it isn’t reality training because things happen too fast for you to apply them; if you only ever train against one person, it isn’t reality training; if your training does not involve any form of pressure testing that is unscripted and non-choreographed, it isn’t reality training. There are many other aspects but you get the idea.

During my 18 years training and teaching Shotokan Karate, whenever I taught anything that remotely resembled a real attack, the defence fell apart. Students were lost when their practised defence failed. There was no contingency and no real mention of what happens if your first line of defence or counter strike fails. I understand that of course because again, it is a traditional Martial Art that is structured, generally follows a strict syllabus and is full of techniques that don’t work. It’s too scripted, too ‘clean’, too convoluted, and far too assumptive. Real fighting is none of those.

In 2006 I was invited to Japan to attend a Ju-Jitsu World Congress. Over 200 Students from around the world and a good number of very qualified instructors were all teaching their thing. What was noticeably constant was that for all demonstrations, opponents were compliant and it was all pretty much choreographed. Again I understand that. What was being taught was a traditional Martial Art. Yes, there were techniques that were applied with a certain level of force and yes, there were indeed some responses that could work. However, not once did I see anything that resembled a real attack. Students moved and responded in a certain way that would aid the defence response.

I’m aware that you are unable to attack 100% with full force. There are a finite number of students and your club would not last too long, but with padding and body protection the pressure could’ve been increased to get close to something a little more realistic. Fighting is far too dynamic and contains far too many variables to have the time to apply fine motor skills, flamboyant and over-technical responses, and, against a committed attacker, even a padded up one, it should highlight just how impractical a lot of these traditional defences are.

Hick’s law, named after British psychologist William Edmund Hick, describes the time it takes for a person to make a decision as a result of the possible choices he or she has: increasing the number of choices will increase the decision time logarithmically. So from a Self Protection angle, the more complicated the technique, the more choice we have in the syllabus, the longer it will take to process, and therefore the longer it will take to apply. During an attack, time is not on our side.

So, as I mentioned earlier, we have to understand and be clear on what we are learning. If we are being taught something that we are told is Self Protection and yet when put under pressure, the defence falls at the first hurdle, then it must be addressed. A student should be made aware from the outset if what they are learning, for example, is based on a traditional system. By that I mean they need to be aware if it has been handed down through the years and as a result would very likely have been changed and adapted, would usually contain certain techniques that may well have worked in feudal Japan, but is neither practical or workable for your average non-warrior in the street arena of today. It is important that the student is under no illusion.

Another way to identify flaws is to introduce elements of reality. It’s a simple task to get a well-trained student to perform a series of set techniques against an opponent who is attacking in a particular way. It will work fine. Transfer that same scenario to the street, mix it with a cocktail of adrenaline, non-adrenaline and endorphins, include a level of fear which you have never experienced or comprehended before that makes your legs turn to jelly, makes you want to vomit and empty your bowels and renders you incapable to talk or think straight, and you will discover that they are worlds apart. All of that without yet being hit, without seeing your own blood in your hands, without trying to make sense of what is going on, all without a real knife at your throat, or a firearm pointed at your head. A bit different, huh?

It would of course be ridiculous for me to suggest that I could even try to mirror this full-on street scenario during my classes, for obvious reasons, but what I can do is educate, analyse and develop. We can make our training honest and open to the fact that we can fail and mess up. If we don’t understand or even acknowledge where the weaknesses are in what we do, how can we possibly grow and progress in the right way? Nothing is set in stone and nor should it be.

I teach Krav Maga (Hebrew for Contact Combat), an Israeli system that, before its military links were established, was developed to help civilians defend themselves, irrespective of size or gender. By maintaining that ideal, it enables me to stress tactical and strategical implementation over technique. Whatever the defence is, it has to be able to work for anyone, and if what is being taught is based purely on technique alone, the result will be that it will work for some and not for others or may even fail completely. This is a major consideration when students are supposed to be learning something that should be protecting themselves, yet find they are one of the students the technique doesn’t work for!

So what can we do to overcome a technique only based system? I teach a three part strategy: disrupt the thought process of your attacker; unbalance your attacker; inflict damage/cause pain to your attacker. How you implement this strategy however, is not that important, but success in application will increase your chances of survival. The individual has to adapt to what he/she is presented with and, with so little time available to respond, the response should undoubtedly be quick, efficient, and take little thought process. When a technique fails, where do you go from there? If you have a plan and that fails, do you have a plan B or C? Do you have a contingency? If the strategy fails at any point, you can pick it up, overlap, and begin the strategy again, and again, and again. Implement an applicable strategical process and you will be able to continuously adapt to the stimulus.

It is important to remember that if something is principally sound and taught to students in their thousands, it does not by any means make it flawless, honest or real. Indeed the automatic acceptance of something that is taught that way because “just look at the pedigree, it must be correct” is rarely if at all questioned. It is also important to be aware that there are many that look to feed the money machine, fill the pockets of those at the top, exploit the naive and uneducated, and serve to set the pedestal of the untouchable instructor even higher.

Whatever it is we are learning or teaching, we must operate within the realms of reality and seek the truth. With something that is as important as surviving a life threatening attack, the analytical breakdown and defence responses should be commensurate. What we should be left with is something that is honest, practical and workable. Reality and life should not be different because they are one and the same. Life is our reality, and if what we are learning does not reflect this, then we need to question ourselves and what we do before it’s too late.

Training realistically? Are you thorough? – Ashtad Rustomji

When most people, especially instructors are asked whether they train realistically, their answer is usually ‘yes’. But when you see them do their “realistic” “stuff”, it seems pretty far and out of touch from reality. It seems that their concept of reality is different from the actuality of it.

Recently, I asked an individual a simple question, “How, would you say, a real violence training should look?” The individual replied in a very cliched way and went on about how the opponent should come at you aggressively, yelling and stuff, etc. I asked him in return, “Would you see it coming?” He didn’t have a proper answer, but yet tried to say something and ended up saying just “Yes”.

Now, here’s the first problem of things with this. Most tend to see these things from a purely physical perspective. Not many seem to focus on the pre-violence situation. No verbal cues, no physiological changes, etc. etc. In fact, most don’t even acknowledge it even exists. Which kinda poses a problem when we are “training for violence”, doesn’t it? I mean if you don’t train to see it coming, what are you preparing for? To get out barely alive and half dead?

So, realistic training? What does that entail? Well, if you ask me, the drills should focus more on the pre-violence cues than anything really, physical aspect of it should not be choreographed, no matter how “aggressive” the other guy is, (let’s be honest here, he‘s really not truly angry or aggressive in most cases). Superficial aggression is utterly useless, you don‘t have to kill them, but all of the pseudo aggressive and “hard” movements are nothing but taps in actuality, are you really gonna learn how it feels to get hit by being tapped on your chest?. For real? No. No no… Just no.

Let’s take a situation here, if I am in a big fancy Martial Arts studio, and I’ve been told to rush and charge this guy in order to demonstrate “the harsh reality of violence”, and I charge at him, but the guy knows I‘m coming, ‘cause, you know, He Told Me To! He‘s READY for his “moves”, there is no sudden jolt to his nervous system, no emotional stress, and I didn’t try to get a rise out of him by calling his mom an individual who asks money for pleasure, not to mention, I‘m not gonna actually make contact here, it‘s gonna be an acting show, a choreography with taps that look “hard”.

So my questions are, “Is that really reality?” and “Are we really showing the actuality of it or are we just showing what we think and we want people to think is reality?” I mean in a real assault or an attack, very rarely people do see it coming, and even when they do, they’re still overwhelmed by the sheer aggression, it’s sudden, our hands are shaking, our legs feel weak, our stomachs are churning and we’re basically too busy crying and asking ourselves questions like, “What the hell is happening?” and “Why the fuck is this happening to me?”

I’m pretty sure, that most who just train for their kind of “reality”, where the guy they know is coming, charging at them without any purpose, without thinking about any of the events leading up to the escalation of the situation and violence, that kind of individual will not only, not see the threat coming, but they will crumble under pressure due to the aggressive nature of the actuality and suddenness of violence, as they won‘t see it coming like they did in their fancy studio. Not to mention, fail miserably to deescalate the violence in the first place due to lack of verbal skills necessary to not provoke the guy even further by challenging or insulting him.

So, my opinion here is that, the best training is something that encompasses every subject related to violence, which includes not only physical, but verbal, psychological, emotional, biological, societal, moral, consequential, tactical and a very important aspect; Legal.

As far as the physical training goes, scenario training is great, but without purpose, it loses it’s purpose, which is to mold your brain to handle and resolve or combat threats if/when you come across them by utilizing our brain’s neuroplasticity. Blindly creating aggressive scenarios without any situational context and escalation, is just inviting more trouble and is not training for the actual thing, it’s just training for more senseless violence. So please, Train smarts and common sense, rather than senseless violence.

Finally, my question to you, the reader; What are you gonna train for? ‘The reality of violence?’ or ‘The actuality of it?’.

Conflict Management and Practical Karate Part IV – John Titchen

PERSONAL PSYCHOLOGY

This element of de-escalation tactics is perhaps the most important and most neglected area of personal discipline.

To successfully de-escalate a situation you usually

want to achieve a peaceful resolution,
need to have the self confidence to believe that avoiding an unnecessary violent or aggressive event is indicative of mental strength not weakness.

For many people the ego is the Achilles heel of successful conflict avoidance. It is not unusual to find individuals who have either set false standards of behaviour for themselves, inappropriate goals, or believe (often incorrectly) that others expect certain types of behaviour from them. Many have a needless value that they put on the (temporary) perception of themselves by others.

Conflict de-escalation is still a form of conflict. In simple terms to prevent force or greater aggression from being used the other party needs to feel that they have either won, or at the very least that they have not lost. In many instances this is about saving face (in front of their peers) and to do this you may need to be seen by them (and perhaps by some bystanders) as having given in. The paradigm shift that a lot of people need to get their heads round is that this does not mean that you have lost, rather you need to understand and appreciate that your victory is in achieving a different aim (lack of violence, criminal damage, injury or prosecution) and one that may not be immediately apparent to the other person.

Do not think that you have to win, think rather that you do not have to lose.

Gichin Funakoshi

If you have good trouble avoidance protocols then the likelihood or frequency of your being involved in a de-escalation event with potentially serious consequences while surrounded or observed by people that know you well should be low. In such instances, acquaintances whose judgement you value should not view you harshly for taking action that avoided any escalation in aggression or violence, even if that means ‘giving way’ or apologising for something that was not your fault.

If a similar instance occurs when you are surrounded by strangers who you are unlikely to ever see again, should you care what they think? If you are in a venue where even saving face for the other person carries a high risk of being attacked for being weak then you are in the wrong place. A location where a level of aggression that risks or inevitably results in physical conflict is the only acceptable response is not one any sensible person should frequent.

Whether strangers or acquaintances, people whose judgement you value should recognise the value of taking steps that avoid risking injury (and property damage) and further repercussions to both yourself or another person.

Pride in your combative skill-set can be a dangerous side effect of martial arts training, one that brings for some a subconscious fantasy promoted by films where the subject uses their skills to beat or humble another person. It doesn’t help that this is the mental picture and expectation that most non-martial artists have of their martial art practicing friends.

You do not need to let your pride go, you just need to change its focus.

For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.

Sun Tzu

Afterword

This four part series has been described as a brief introduction to de-escalation. That is all it is, no more than a starting point. Each of the four umbrella headings that I’ve chosen are arbitrary, and represent summations and generalisations of a vast topic. Since I have generalised while writing this not everything that I have said will be right or applicable all the time.

I do encourage you all to do your own research and training on this topic, but caveat emptor. There are a number of writers and training providers out there who may make you mistakenly feel ignorant or inexperienced because they use ‘specialist’ terminology to refer to most elements of what they are teaching. In my experience this is marketing dross rather than a useful educational tool and it simply creates a false divide between those ‘in the club’ and those outside. In the majority of cases the specialist terminology employed has no basis in the fields of psychology, psychiatry, criminology, medicine or policing – it’s simply an in-house teaching tool.