The term reality based self-defense (RSBD) is probably one of the most over-used terms in the martial arts world. When it first came into use it was less of a badge of honor and more of a differentiating term that separated what Krav Maga instructors (like myself) were teaching from that of more traditional martial arts, such as Karate, Kung Fu, Tae Kwon Do etc. It wasn’t used as a critique of these styles and systems or to try and suggest their techniques don’t work but to identify that our approach to handling/solving real world violence was very different to what these other systems were dealing with.
Rather than being technique lead “reality based” systems such as Krav Maga are governed by Situational components such as your state of preparedness, your location, your relationship with your aggressor etc and work on the basis of what you will do, rather than what you would like to do e.g. freezing under stress, flinching at movements etc. This is what is meant by “Reality”.
In this morning’s class we started to discuss the “assailant’s motive” and the decision making process that needs to be performed in order to apply/make an effective solution. We took the scenario of a knife threat and demonstrated two potential solutions: one where we used the assailant’s knife against them and another where we performed a control/armlock followed by a disarm. Both are effective techniques and I personally know someone who has performed the latter under duress in a real-life situation. However these different techniques are used to solve different problems/situations. In a traditional martial art setting or combat sport there is only ever one setting and really only ever one objective: it is a completely predictable and controlled environment – when I competed in Judo and Hisardut tournaments/competitions I always knew what my fellow competitor’s singular objective was.
When somebody pulls a knife on you they may or may not have a plan in mind: a sexual predator may want to abduct you and will use the knife to force your compliance, a mugger will use it to scare you into handing over your wallet, whilst a drunken person in a bar who you’ve bumped into may have no end game in site – they’ve reacted to the situation and haven’t thought about what it is they may want to achieve. In all these situations they may never even envisage having to use their weapon, the threat of use is enough.
Today we considered two threat types: abduction and mugging/robbery. In a mugging scenario the assailant wants your possessions whilst an abduction signifies that they want you. My possessions, I may choose to give up, myself never. The risk to my personal safety is much higher when somebody tries to move me from one location to another i.e. what they want to do to me can’t be performed in that particular place or time. This is why my response is much more immediate, dramatic and conclusive: I look to take them completely out of the game – it’s them or me.
Reality Based Self Defense considers these things: the reality of the situation not just the physical nature of the assault.