In the Ann Cahill’s piece she mentions
feminist self-defense classes and that brought me to wonder what exactly a
feminist self-defense class would entail. Would the instructor be reading
MacKinnon and Lorde while you learn how to throw a devastating punch? Or would
it be more like postfeminist empowerment of your body? Cahill goes on to
describe what feminist self-defense classes would entail explaining that the
classes would offer a “different way of living one’s body” (367), a way to
contradict rape myths that say “the feminine body, in contrast to the masculine
body, is inherently rapable; that women are justifiably required to manage the
treat that their bodies call upon them; that rape is just out there, part of
the natural order of things” (369), and a way to “to denaturalize the threat of
sexual violence, to describe it as deeply pervasive but deeply unnecessary
element of many women’s experience” (370).
In general, feminist self-defense classes seek to change what rape means.
I did a quick Google search for feminist
self-defense classes in Edmonton and found a few that not only taught hands-on
defense training but also awareness, prevention, risk reduction, and avoidance.
[I also found an article from A Voice for Men about a men’s self-defense
program that was under the “Feminist Corruption” category]. However, I was
bothered by the inclusion of risk reduction and avoidance in these programs. I
am, in general, skeptical about self-defense classes because they place the
onus on the individuals attending the classes to stop any attacks and risk
reduction and avoidance only adds to my skepticism.
Cahill’s description of feminist self-defense classes seemed to be lacking a good structure of what they would really look like. It seemed more so like what these classes would look like in theory. Cahill does bring up the idea of collective resistance targeting sexual violence which I am whole-heartedly in support of: “the possibility of both individual and collective resistance, the total effect is to render sexual violence as, in a word, targetable” (371). While bits and pieces of Cahill’s feminist self-defense are good, I am unconvinced of the utility of self-defense classes.
Cahill’s description of feminist self-defense classes seemed to be lacking a good structure of what they would really look like. It seemed more so like what these classes would look like in theory. Cahill does bring up the idea of collective resistance targeting sexual violence which I am whole-heartedly in support of: “the possibility of both individual and collective resistance, the total effect is to render sexual violence as, in a word, targetable” (371). While bits and pieces of Cahill’s feminist self-defense are good, I am unconvinced of the utility of self-defense classes.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteChloe25 October 2015 at 15:55
I feel as though your troubling of self defense classes mirror a lot of the things I'm also uncomfortable with regarding them. My perspective is that it's astounding and ridiculous that there's a men's rights self defense class. Can you expand more on it? What's the website for this group. Am I correct in understanding that they are trying to protect themselves from the techniques for women that are taught in regular mainstream self defense classes (like defending yourself with a comb? or your keys?) Or are they taught to juxtapose women who are trying to reach bodily equality and breach oppression from being told to be physically smaller?
Sorry I know it's a lot of questions to throw your way, I'd be happy to also research them. It made me really mad though especially if I'm reading into it correctly.
Thank you for your post,
Chloe
Don't be sorry about questions! I'll include the post that I found but it's was mainly someone in the group complaining about a program that was intended for men's self defense, I think. I honestly did not read it all because it was annoying. I did not look much into the website because I knew it would make me mad as they are touting a "humanist counter-theory."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/feminist-corruption/rad-was-never-for-men/
I, also, am a bit hesitant to throw my weight behind a feminist self-defence course, much like I am virtually any "female" training course, if for no other reason than there are a lot of self-defence courses that are pretty terrible. I absolutely respect that it can be very difficult for women to enter into more "traditional" self-defence style courses, where genders are mixed (and generally much more male heavy on the spectrum.) But I also think there are benefits to engaging with different body types and balance points when learning how to defend ones-self (as well as differing types of fighting styles.) At the same time, it takes a very long time to learn how to adequately defend yourself from attack, and there's no guarantee those classes will actually help in any given circumstance.
ReplyDeleteI applaud the attempt to "interrupt the script" as it were, and there's definitely something to be said for feeling strong and safe in your own body. Self defence courses can help raise awareness of your body in a space, and that's always a good thing as well. And if you can help people feel comfortable in their body and raise awareness of the pervasiveness of rape culture, all the better I suppose. But I'm just not sold on the concept as it stands. I would like to see more in depth examination of the components of the program (what type of physical combat is taught? How many times a week does the class meet? How much time is spent on "theory" and how much on "practice"? etc.) and see a measure of including survivors rather than making a space to just heighten fears and paranoia around sexual assault.