Avoidance

[Stephenjudoka]

Surely to be aware and avoid potentially violent situations has got to be better than trying to fight your way out of problems.

I accept that if things go drastically wrong then there is a need to know how to defend yourself - However the clever operator avoids the need to fight by recognising the potential violent situation before it arises.

Government and Military operators are very skilled in this. The last thing they would want is a confrontation.

Perhaps more martial art practitioners should learn the reading of body language,communication models and the skill of recognising and avoidinging danger.

As I have always said "It is better to have avoided the situation than it is to appear in a criminal court later to justify your actions".

A complete martial art/defence system should include all skills.

Stephen Sweetlove

[TIM BURTON]

Hi Steve, welcome to the forum.
In essence what you say is perfectly correct, the ultimate state of a martial art should be fighting without fighting, being aware enough to avoid confrontation or able to defuse it without the need for physical intervention. However it is the nature of the beast in the martial arts that we first train for “when the talking stops”. It is only when we have progressed along the path somewhat that we are privy to the enlightenment that we don’t have to fight to win.
I think that in the modern combative systems utilised by official bodies, the correct use of communication is now being recognised and addressed. Also courses compiled and targeting self protection are ideal places to learn this type of skill. However if you are referring to martial arts in general then I do not think that communication skills are what the student has enrolled for, normally they want to experience the physical techniques of the system and master them. The only way I could see the integration of communication skills into a martial art would be by way of additional seminars.
Tim Burton UK

[Stephenjudoka]

Hi Tim,

Thanks for your reply.
I did not mean for the general public, I meant for government and military operators.
Of course close combat skills are very important and one should be proficient in them when they are needed but think back to the operators during the war. These people became very good at being the grey person, at reading body language and their awareness for danger was very good.

What I am trying to say is that we should not stop at the hard skills we should be able to use all tools at our disposal.

I agree with you that the general public want the physical side and I see no problem with that. I also agree with you that you have had to travel the path of enlightenment to realise that the art of fighting without fighting is the optimum of any art or defence.

The best self defence is not to be there in the first place.

Stephen Sweetlove

[Kolschey]

Good topic. Can you recommend any resources related to better understanding of language based conflict resolution?

Many thanks,

[TIM BURTON]

Again I agree with what you are saying, but the “grey person”, surely refers to covert agents. If one is an undercover officer or surveillance operative, then the ability to remain unnoticed is of paramount importance. Some of these skills such as communication, methods of dress, avoidance of hot spots etc could well be repackaged and taught to persons attending a self defence course. However if one is employed as a enforcer of rules then surely it all goes out of the window as the first priority is to be a visible figure of authority who acts as a deterrent.
Quote
“The best self defence is not to be there in the first place”.
Unfortunately once recognised as such we become ready targets for abuse, ridicule and assault. The major problem with any enforcement role is that at the end of the day you have to act and in most cases are expected to act, whether by duty, employers or bystanders. Here one can not be the grey person avoiding conflict, instead one must challenge another’s anti social actions and resolve the situation. The use of communication skills, attention to body language (yours and theirs) can be of great assistance, probably resolving 90% of conflicts encountered. But you know just as well as me, some people just won’t see reason.
TIM BURTON UK

[TIM BURTON]

Hi Krzysztof,
Here are a few items of reference regarding the subject of tactical communication.
PSYCHOLOGY FOR LIFE-ZIMBARDO.
EVERYONE CAN WIN-CORNELIUS & FAYRE
TACTICAL COMMUNICATIONS-FOO
THE TACTICAL EDGE-REMSBERG
VERBAL JUDO-THOMPSON
MANAGEMENT OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR-OUELLETTE
COMMUNICATION SKILLS-QUINLAN/ASHTON
BODY LANGUAGE-PEASE
TOTAL SURVIVAL-NOWICKI
UNDERSTANDING BODY LANGUAGE-LYLE
Tim Burton UK

[Kolschey]

Great! I look forward to reading more on this subject.

[TIM BURTON]

Hi Krzysztof,
Here is an article I dug up from my research material you may find it interesting as well.

RIGHT BETWEEN THE EYES By Roland W. Ouellette

It is often said: “The eyes are the win-dows to the soul.” That may be true, but as far as aggressive behavior is con-cerned, the eyes are ONE of our indicators of aggressive behavior.
Non-verbal and verbal signals are the most widely used forms of communication yet training in both has not been a high pri-ority until recently. Research has shown that non-verbal and verbal skills are neces-sary to prevent most encounters where force is used. Some experts think physical presence and communications skills alone could handle up to 98 % of the incidents potentially requiring force (U.S. News & World Report, May 11, 1992, 20.) If you learn how to correctly interpret what you see, you can arm yourself with a powerful tool that can increase your chances for a successful outcome.
Proper use of eye contact is an impor-tant non-verbal communications skill that you can use to show your concern, support, confidence, and authority to others. Each of us receives important messages/signals from others by observing their eye move-ment while communicating. These include whether a person is submissive, angry, deranged; whether a person is looking for an escape route or weapon; or that an attack is imminent and where that person might strike you.
Constant eye contact by officers as they speak can be interpreted as trying to domi-nate the other person, and is seen as an aggressive act which usually raises the sub-jects anxiety. Reducing eye contact reduces the power role and increases the helper role which helps to reduce the subject’s anxiety.
Exercise No. 1
Line up officers in two ranks facing each other at a distance of four feet. One rank will be the officers and the other rank the subjects. Have the officers talk to the subjects for a period of 30 seconds main-taining direct, uninterrupted eye contact. At your signal, have the officers look at the subject’s chin then return to direct eye con-tact. The break of eye contact can be as quick as a 40th of a second. What did the subjects feel? Relief? Repeat the exercise by having the officers be the subjects and the subjects be the officers. Officers will begin to realise how aggressive they can be per-ceived by using direct, uninterrupted eye contact.
When assault is imminent and the offi-cer is using positive and extending commands (i.e. “STOP! - DROP THE CHAIR! -DO IT NOW!”), direct eye contact should be used. Direct eye contact along with other body language signals and defensive tools can be used to sufficiently intimidate the aggressor to back off with-out a fight.
Officers have been trained to watch the subjects hands, because hands kill. However, officers may want to reconsider this.
What else can eyes tell the officer? A lot. The subjects eyes are the opening to the mind and tell us what the hands will do before the hands do it. After assessing the hands for hidden weapons, the officer’s primary vision should be on the eyes and the secondary vision should be on the hands. Secondary vision can view the hands as officers will experience in exercise No.2.
More than 85% of the information relayed to the brain comes via the eyes, 9% via the ears, and 4% via the other senses.
The officer’s eyes are 1000 times more effective than the ears in sweeping infor-mation
Exercise No. 2
Line up officers in two ranks facing each other at a distance of four feet. One rank will be the officers and the other rank the subjects. Have the subjects simulate a punch to the chin, kick to the groin, or stab to the stomach. Officers will maintain eye contact with the subjects. What did the subjects do with their eyes before the attack?
Repeat the exercise by having the offi-cers be the subjects and the subjects be the officers. Officers will realise they have time to move out of the attack zone at the pause between the target glance and the actual assault. Was secondary vision able to detect the assault without the officer break-ing eye contact?.
Exercise No. 3
Line up officers in two ranks facing each other at a distance of four feet. One rank will be the officers and the other rank the subjects. Have the subjects simulate yelling at the officers then break eye contact by looking down or away and they bunch the fist. A simulated punch to the chin should follow. Officers will maintain eye contact with the subjects. When the aggres-sor breaks eye contact have the officers move laterally (to the attack side prefer-ably) into a good defensive position. Did the officers have time to evade the attack? Repeat the exercise by having the officers be the subjects and the subjects be the offi-cers. Officers will realise how they are able to move out of the attack zone between the point in which direct eye contact is broken and the attempted assault.


LOOK OUT!
Each of us know someone who angers people just by their mere presence. Why is that? Probably because of the way they communi-cate verbally and/or non-verbally.
As we look at different parts of the body and what different signals mean, we should remember that we cannot rely on one signal alone. It is important to look at the cluster of signals to determine which messages we send to them and which messages they send to us.
Let’s look at an upset or anxious person and some of their non-verbal signals; the face twitching, appearance of veins in the face and neck, head down, no eye contact, sighs, pac-ing, hands opening and closing, wiping the face and neck with the hand, sweating, clean-ing clean eye glasses.
How we confront the person is impor-tant in preventing escalation to high levels at aggression. In confronting a potentially aggressive person, the way in which you pre-sent yourself is very important.
When approaching the person or indi-vidual, stop at least four feet away, turn your body at a 45 degree angle, put your weight equally on both feet, knees slightly bent. Feet should be shoulder width apart. Head slightly forward showing respect. Face and eyes show concern. Shoulders are slightly for-ward, palms up at waist level thus indicating “I’m concerned” or “let’s talk.” Leaning the body slightly forward (3 to 10 degrees) also shows our concern. This position sends a supportive signal to the person but it is also a defensive position in the event of an attempt-ed assault.

POLICE • The Voice of the Service . September l997

[Kolschey]

This is very good material. I am told that practioners of Neurolinguistic Programming use similar cues as accessories to conversation, or indicators of mental states. Do you know if this is indeed part of their curriculum?

[Stephenjudoka]

Hi Krys,

Take a look at intermundo.com under the heading of Non Verbal Communication.
This site will give you an insight into NVC's and how powerful they can be.

Stephen Sweetlove

[Rhomyn Escalante]

Originally posted by Stephenjudoka

Government and Military operators are very skilled in this. The last thing they would want is a confrontation.

I couldn 't quite figure out what was wrong with your post/question when you first proposed it last week. But after rereading the complete thread I realized that your threw me off by using the term 'operator'. I know that this word has become the 'buzz' word in selling 'fast' solutions, but this forum has very few people who even know an operator. Operators will not say one word. Not one. Period. There are no LE operators at this forum. There is even less military operators. Non verbal communication, in their world, is a 'can'. They are who they are because there 'is a confrontation', they will not be there if there wasn't. Sincerely.

[Stephenjudoka]

Hi Rhomyn,

Thanks for your reply. Yes I agree with you that operators would only be where there is a confrontation, but what I am trying to say is, reading danger signs, knowing your adversories customs and communication processes leads to you knowing when a confrontation may take place. (As in an attack on oneself).

If you can identify this early you can get out of there or if needs must use a pre- emptive strike and then get out of there.
Stephen Sweetlove

[Rhomyn Escalante]

Yes of course. My post was in regards to the use of the term 'operator' as a catch-all for a physical engagement. Your post is interesting and valid, it just went serious when you used that term. It through off the context. And I erred when I answered you by using the term 'confrontation'. To be precise, when an operator is in the arena, your situation is well past confrontation. It is solutioncentric.

[Stephenjudoka]

Rhomyn,

Yes I understand what you are saying.

Thanks for the reply.

Stephen Sweetlove

[Kolschey]

Originally posted by Stephenjudoka
Hi Krys,

Take a look at intermundo.com under the heading of Non Verbal Communication.
This site will give you an insight into NVC's and how powerful they can be.

Stephen Sweetlove

If this http://www.proyeccionweb.com/Intermundo1/
is indeed the site you are referring to, I fear that my foriegn language skills are rather mediocre. Is there an english version available?