-5

I recently read a comment where the author said he did Tae Kwon Do for self defence and to protect his loved ones. How does Tae Kwon Do, do this?

The World Health Organization estimates a third of women in relationships are beaten. According to the US Justice Department, two-thirds of violent attacks against women are committed by a man they know. The FBI says 2 million men beat their partners every year. The greatest danger to 'loved ones' comes from inside the home.

In the online magazine 'Bloody Elbow' an article appeared which contained interesting information: "Christy Mack held back tears as she voiced those harrowing words on HBO's critically acclaimed ‘Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel.' She recounted the disturbing tale of her ex-boyfriend, former UFC and Bellator fighter Jon Koppenhaver, as he allegedly brutally beat her to the point of convulsions. Using public records as their main resource, Real Sports determined that the national rate of domestic violence arrests is around 360 per 100,000 men. On the same chart, they contrasted that against NFL players, which found 210 arrests per 100,000, while MMA saw a staggering rise to 750." https://www.bloodyelbow.com/.../hbo-segment-domestic-violence-ufc-mma-christy-m...

Considering the practitioner wants to protect loved and statistically he poses the greatest danger: Does Tae Kwon Do teach practitioners not to beat up their partners? How? The same question would also be applicable to Wing Chun, Kung Fu, Karate, Aikido, Jiu-Jitsu, Judo etc.

NOTE: Although my solution has been to stop teaching adults as they all land up fighting or doing competitions, I believe there is a more generally applicable answer to the question. Long ago, after I had invited him to join Kyokushin, a mercenary told me he prefers doing Shotokan katas to calm down between 'missions'. I cannot speak for Shotokan but it might be some practical solution like that.

gideon marx
  • 75
  • 5
  • 5
    First, I think there is a good question in there. However, as it currently stands it reads as a rant (mixing actual unreferenced data and anecdotes) and is utterly unfocused. Are we talking about one martial art or all of them? Is this about partners defending themselves against abusers (note no gender implied here) or is it about martial arts teachers' perceived (rightly or wrongly) duty to not teach potential abusers? What concrete problem are you trying to solve? – Sardathrion - against SE abuse Sep 21 '17 at 08:04
  • I think it is rather an ethical and juridical question. This is what I understood: If a martial artist abuses her/his capabilities to harm other people, what is the responsibilty of the teacher or the martial art organisation? What are they doing to prevent such incidents and what should be done? – Endery Sep 21 '17 at 09:20
  • If you're a bad person that attacks people, no feel good lesson in a martial arts class is going to stop that. It's not the responsibility of martial arts instructors to dole out life lessons. – coinbird Sep 21 '17 at 18:51
  • 3
    Right now this is a jumble. Here's possible, more focused questions - 1) What do martial arts teach to prevent practitioners from becoming abusers? 2) What can martial arts teach people to do to better survive/escape domestic violence, especially in face of social/legal problems that support domestic violence? I often say self defense is like having a fire extinguisher - it's good but if you're in a town full of arsonists, you have a different problem altogether that requires a larger society-wide solution. – Bankuei Sep 21 '17 at 21:12
  • 2
    @gideon_marx: What concrete problem are you trying to solve by asking this question? – Sardathrion - against SE abuse Sep 22 '17 at 06:53
  • This question seems to be targeted at the comment I made on your answer here. If it is, then I'd be glad to discuss my personal experience learning taekwondo in chat :) – as4s4hetic Sep 22 '17 at 09:10
  • And even if it isn't, I'd still be happy to chat about this topic. As a female who practices taekwondo, I have been to many self defence classes for women which specifically adress domestic violence. – as4s4hetic Sep 22 '17 at 09:22
  • @Sardathrion Each and every 'martial way' has to decide if it is going to incorporate the principle of 'Firstly, do no harm'. Every teacher has to decide if they are going to teach this principle. The greatest danger a martial artist pose is to his 'loved ones'. This has been an ongoing debate for some time. But we can talk and talk. Swear to our gods and buddhas. Words don't work. I believe there might be an answer within the training. The physical movements. Possibly in kata. No understanding or answers in this forum. Which is an answer. Don't teach adults. – gideon marx Sep 23 '17 at 12:33
  • @as4s4hetic Your comment was actually one of the triggers. But it is of no importance except to alert me to the lack of discussion or even understanding of the problem in this forum. It is a topic we have been struggling with since the first UFC. I have made up my mind. I no longer teach adults. So there is nothing to chat about. All I ask is, don't do steroids and don't hurt your children in any way - no matter what. – gideon marx Sep 23 '17 at 12:50

1 Answers1

0

There are two very distinct answers to your question.

One answer can be found in Gen Choi's Encyclopedia of Taekwondo. There are many references to building character and integrity, but to sum it up with a specific answer, I quote p16, Vol 1, under the chapter "Charter of Taekwondo":

"A beginning constitutes a significant part of the whole endeavor. Therefore, students of Taekwondo should not fail to take action whenever to do so might benefit the society. If he behaves thus ["improve health", "nourish intellect; enlarge spiritual realm"; be "humble, merciful, and selfless"; and "demonstrate equality and brotherhood of man"] he himself will benefit most."

So there you have it: a knight in shining armor.

Except that there's a second answer, and equally poignant.

The style doesn't do the teaching - an instructor does that. That means, what one learns depends on what is taught by the instructor. People do not go to Taekwondo classes in order to calibrate their moral compass; they go to learn to fight (sport) or to get out of a fight (self-defense).

Turning aside from your question to your other points, the 750 per 100,000 statistic you point to to say that "Clearly 'martial artists' are a great danger to their partners than unknown attackers and it seems the 'art' is more often used to beat up wives than 'bad guys'."

Nothing could be further from the truth. You have come to a conclusion post hoc ergo propter hoc: a logical fallacy. You could just as easily have postulated that "all men are a great danger to their partners". You have shown no study that proved that completely honorable men were suddenly influenced into abusing their partners simply by studying martial arts, or MMA. For myself, I have not found any studies that found men who were pre-disposed to being abusers also take up MMA and join the UFC, and so can't make that postulation, either - although that is what I suspect is the case, due to the culture of the UFC, use of steroids, and the type of media coverage it gets.

All I can do is say: you have drawn a dangerous conclusion.

And now you have this preposterous solution, which is to stop all adults from learning (or continuing to learn...) a method to help them when someone - who may not be a martial artist - tries to do them harm. Sorry, that is not going to fly. That is akin to the slogan "if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns".

Your link is broken. But the url suggests your beef is with UFC - and not martial arts. Your misunderstand the differences between what martial arts, Taekwondo, MMA, and UFC.

Neither Taekwondo as commonly taught today, nor MMA, nor UFC are martial arts. These are all fighting sports (the UFC is just an organization which uses the fighting sport of MMA). They are not martial arts, and they are not used for self-defense.

Andrew Jay
  • 4,057
  • 12
  • 21