Sunday 30 January 2022

To quench a fire🧯: groin slap

Groin slap effectively 'quench the fire' in
case of unwanted sexual advances 

Since I started this blog, some of you might have got the impression I only advocate for the most brutal response to any type of attack. However, Linda’s course was not only about last resort self defense. She did teach us awareness and avoidance, as well as less violent methods of deterrence. These can be used in not overly dangerous or life-threatening situations for instance if your new date is too overzealous and pushes you to something you do not want, or your horny colleague is making unwanted sexual advances. Unlike for instance kneeing the testicles, there is little risk of a serious injury. Linda called these techniques ‘fire-quenchers’. Al Marrewa in his self defense book ‘The feminine warrior’ refers to them as ‘attention-getters’. 
He tells a very interesting story demonstrating their applicability in real-life scenarios:

Elizabeth was in a crowded elevator when a man standing behind groped her between the legs. She could have responded with verbal self defense but decided to use an attention-getter instead. With his body pressed against her, she knew exactly where he was. So without turning to look at him, Elizabeth reached behind her and slapped the man’s groin. He grabbed his crotch and actually fell to his knees (he was also humiliated in front of others). The doors opened moments later, and Elizabeth calmly left the elevator. Her aggressor was still on his knees, moaning in pain. 

Al Marrewa,  The feminine warrior: a woman’s guide to verbal, psychological, and physical empowerment. (1998) page 119-120

Common reaction to a groin slap

In this case, Elizabeth used one of the simplest yet very effective attention-getters—the groin slap. It was not missing in Linda’s portfolio of techniques either. She told us why it is so useful and should be in every girl’s arsenal. The woman’s hand is always in the same level and the proximity of the groin of an approached attacker. It can be used, as Elizabeth did when he is standing behind you as well. The groin slap should be done as a non-telegraphed, surprise attack, it is then very difficult to block or evade it. Once the attacker buckles reflexly, you can follow by striking him on his neck with your elbow and pushing him forward ideally to make him slump on the floor or into the wall. 

Slapping testicles is similar to scooping water 
Linda sought to explain the principle of the defensive moves by relating them to the things and activities we were already familiar with. In this case, she said: Do you remember when during summer you jumped into a lake or sea, and you got into a fight with someone by splashing water at each other? You firmly pressed the fingers together, so your hand formed a cup which you used in sharp and quick swinging motions to scoop as much water as possible towards your opponent? The groin slap is based on similar mechanics, but instead of water, you are scooping up the attacker’s testicles.

For a perfect execution, it is important to remember these points: The striking area is your fingers. The palm of your hand or the heel of your hand should not be preferred for this as the whole hand cannot penetrate easily between the thighs. A larger area also dissipates the force upon the impact. On the other hand, fingers pressed together form a sturdy spear-like structure. Sudden sharp contact with a pointy striking area makes it count. It is important to note that, unlike when kicking or kneeing which rely on an upward movement, the penis does provide relatively good protection against slapping. So you should avoid striking just the front of his groin or in a downward direction. The movement of your arm should be a fast pendulum-like motion with good swift momentum, so your fingers flick sharply to the bottom of the scrotum.

Linda demonstrated the proper execution of the groin slap on our kicking dummy with fastened silicone testicles. I remember how each slap produced a thud sound and the silicone testicles bounced erratically evidencing a spot-on hit. Linda then let us practice on the kicking dummy, and once she saw we got it right we step into training in pairs with Bob and Peter. We made two girls only and two mixed pairs, but we were supposed to rotate to give every girl a chance to practice with a boy. Linda told the girl ‘attackers’ to put two balls of crumpled paper in their gym shorts to simulate the testicles. We trained the groin slap alone first and then the whole sequence ‘slap-hit with the elbow-push forward’.

Because of the relative mildness of this move, it was actually the first time we could try out a technique on our darling attackers without them wearing any protection. However, we were supposed to 'deaccelerate' our hand right before hitting the target, which is of course not fully possible due to the gained momentum of our hand.

So the poor boys were occasionally hopping in pain, groaning and clutching their manhood, while the girls with paper balls were just giggling as it rather tickled their girly parts and felt a bit weird. Sometimes the surrealism of Linda’s course was indisputable...

I again allowed anonymous comments. I am happy to discuss anything and I accept constructive criticism, but please behave.

238 comments:

  1. 'However, we were supposed to 'deaccelerate' our hand right before hitting the target, which is of course not fully possible due to the gained momentum of our hand.'

    So, your PhD in Physical Education expert instructor tells the female students to practice this testicle slap on your two training dummies, knowing full well that it would not be possible to actually follow her instructions to decelerate the hand before actually slapping them in the groin. It isn't much of a stretch to conclude that Linda knew full well that the the two guys were going to suffer pain during that activity, is it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Evan, how are you? Yes, as I wrote we could test our skills for real given we do not go with full force. Obviously, it was expected the boys will 'suffer' a bit. The purpose to train with the boys was to see the effect. Wendy

      Delete
    2. I see, so contrary to your previous claims, the actual objective of practicing the various techniques on Bob and Peter that Linda taught was to confirm that they caused significant pain, and gauge the relative degree of pain that they caused, is that correct Wendy?

      Delete
    3. 'Obviously, it was expected the boys will 'suffer' a bit.'

      What's with the quotations Wendy? Are you suggesting that males who experience pain when being struck/kicked/whatever in the testicles doesn't mean they suffered?

      Delete
    4. Do you REALLY believe that Linda was that honest and candid with Bob and Peter when she 'interviewed' them and explained what they could expect in the course? Would she have actually told them that the primary objective of the practice sessions was to confirm that the techniques Linda taught caused significant pain to them, and to gauge the extent of that pain?

      Delete
    5. I don't see any contradiction. The purpose was to try out the techniques for real and to also see the 'result'. But the aim was not to permanently main our darling attackers. Also as we already discussed previously if some techniques were not gauged we could stop the training right away after the first hit and send the boys home or to a hospital.

      Delete
    6. 'suffer' evokes long-term serious pain or damage. This was not happening as I said on numerous occasions. But yes I admit they suffered momentarily during the training.

      Delete
    7. I was not present at that interview so I do not know. But given both boys stayed during the whole duration of the course and did not leave suggest that they were dully informed and gave consent.

      Delete
    8. If you're struggling to grasp the concept of 'momentarily' try blinking slowly a few times..

      You well know there is no such thing as 'momentary' pain in the testicles. You have researched male sexual anatomy for the sole purpose of maximizing pain, injury, and castration/permanent injuries, extensively. Your claim here is a great example of how truly dishonest and evasive both your posts and responses to accepted comments are...

      Delete
    9. It doesn't suggest they were duly informed..they were young guys, readily manipulated by an older woman. Hardly an example of ethical practice-as if that was a concern anyway...

      Delete
    10. Look up momentarily in a Dictionary.. you obviously have no idea what your talking about here.. it isn't the first time, as we both know..

      Delete
    11. In total, how many individual strikes to their testicles (knees, fists, feet, hands, etc.) Would you estimate Bob and Peter incurred over the entire course? If each female student attempted each technique at least twice, that must have been a fair number...

      Delete
    12. Perhaps 'dully' informed is a more accurate way of describing the vague nature of Linda's explanation of their role in the course...

      Delete
    13. That's a good question, saying 'a lot' would not be probably too off :) The problem was they were 2 guys for 6 girls. And there was a rotation so each boy 'served' at least 3 girls. Sometimes we could not get the technique right so we had to practice till Linda was fully satisfied. So yea it would be a staggering number. Poor boys.

      Delete
    14. Evan, OK you would be a good English teacher. I should have used 'temporally' instead.

      Delete
    15. You enjoy using that 'poor boys' phrase. For you, it's yet another way to convey a disparaging view of men, and the two guys in particular. Obviously you care not at all as to the risks they incurred from being struck in that part of their anatomy so many times - same for Linda. Those signed waivers were all she needed, after all..

      Delete
    16. Hello,
      I think that it is not possible to know what the long-term health effects of all those kicks those guys suffered will be. It could take years, but it certainly cannot be healthy to be struck so many times in the testicles. The two guys may suffer in the future for their decision to help with that course.

      Delete
    17. Hello, you are right one cannot be certain for sure. The sperm count and testosterone levels are OK, though. They won't participate in the course forever, so there will be some time for their testicle to recover. One benefit is, their testicles will get conditioned as those of Kung Fu masters:) Anyway, I am grateful they took that risk. And as I said many times, some sports are also not risk-free. Wendy

      Delete
    18. Are you saying that Bob and Peter both participated in multiple deliveries of this same course? In other words, Linda ran this course five times, and the same two guys were in this same course more than once???

      If do, they were really putting their health at risk. That's just outrageous that they would even be allowed to participate more than even once.

      Clearly, Linda didnt give a crap about those two guys if this was what took place.

      Delete
  2. Why didn't you all follow-up with further strikes to their neck? was Linda being her usual really caring self? LOL.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Why would Linda bother to even suggest 'less violent methods of deterrence' -meaning methods that are less likely to result in testicular rupture? Since when does she care about males, and since when when does she care at all about the severity of injury inflicted on men by women? What a load of BS this post is...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She has been always very caring for both the girls and boys. That's you who just project her (and me) as some kind of evil. If you think she just advocates to castrate any attacker, in any situation at will, you are wrong. Wendy

      Delete
    2. Very caring for the girls, no doubt; that's a no-brainer...

      Delete
    3. Why haven't you discussed in details effective techniques to blind a male attacker on this blog yet? Other female self defense blogs do a bit, and it does seem a good strategy to use, especially when you don't or aren't able to rupture the guys testicles?

      Delete
    4. That sounds like a great theme song for this blog Wendy -'Some Kind Of Evil', written and performed by Wendy L.

      Delete
    5. ROFL, it is you who is all the time singing this song in the comments. But I do worry it is out-of-key.

      Delete
    6. I don't need to sing it Wendy- that theme is woven into every one if your posts, whether you're capable of realizing it or not..m

      Delete
    7. Don't worry too much. I wouldn't want you to suffer a massive MI..then again...-:)

      Delete
    8. Hmmm..perhaps you're right. I sing it in A flat..I got that key from one of your garments....-:)

      Delete
  4. 'So the poor boys were occasionally hopping in pain, groaning and clutching their manhood..'

    I bet you were having a good laugh at them when that happened Wendy! Were you one of the women that 'unfortunately' was unable to decelerate your hand just before striking their testicles, and in error, perhaps even accelerated it?

    Were you able to choke out a tepid apology, or did you just turn away and snicker?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I always deaccelerated my hand, I swear! I cannot speak for the other girls thou:) As I said it was part of the training, why should have we apologize? Sure there were some laughs. I know you hate it and make you upset but seeing a guy hit in the testicles and hopping in pain evokes humor. That's why they include such scenes in movies a lot. But to be honest, I felt a bit sorry and I told Bob, not tepidly but warmly! Wendy

      Delete
    2. How bizarre it is that you continue to make this ridiculous claim that you're neither axsadist nor a man-hater, yet clearly find humor when a man experiences pain when struck in the testicles. You're a sadist, no question.

      Delete
    3. You always decelerated your hand did you? Somehow, based on the entirety of your posts on this blog, that seems beyond difficult to believe... I cannot imagine why anyone might disbelieve you here...

      You felt a 'bit sorry' for Bob. Really, truly Wendy? Again, this is something of a stretch, putting it mildly...

      Delete
    4. I doubt you have the emotional make-up/capacity to feel even 'a bit sorry' for any male - even your own boyfriend.... Why don't you simply admit it Wendy?

      Delete
    5. Tell us Wendy, since Bob and Peter at some got were receiving 'pocket money' for risking their health, were they from that point required to provide their own ice?

      Delete
    6. Wow and now I am an 'axsadist', you mean I use an ax to torture men or something:) You are going overboard with your claims Evan.

      Delete
    7. Both the pocket money and the icepacks were paid from the faculty grant Linda received and got an OK from the dean. No we were not that cruel to have boys pay for their own icepacks :)

      Delete
    8. That's hard to believe. I would think there just might not be enough money left over after the pocket money is allocated to afford even one ice pack for your training dummies. After all, Linda had a signed waiver protecting her, so why not save the money??

      Delete
    9. Yes, you're that cruel. Must have been a financial oversight...

      Delete
    10. I cannot believe that the female dean would approve such a frivolous expenditure as ice packs for the benefit of two male training dummies that had signed away their legal rights. That is certainly out of character based on your description of her. Similarly for Linda. I suspect Bob and Peter had ice packs already as athletes, and simply brought them to the classes to give themselves some minor relief from the pain inflicted on them...

      Delete
    11. 'Wow and now I am an 'axsadist', you mean I use an ax to torture men or something:) You are going overboard with your claims Evan.'

      A typo... You're just a garden-variety sadist...

      Delete
    12. 'But to be honest, I felt a bit sorry and I told Bob, not tepidly but warmly! Wendy'

      Feeling 'sorry' is not an emotion you're capable of Wendy - other than feeling 'sorry' that you didn't cause a man more pain or permanent injuries. Honesty evades you once again...

      Delete
    13. Perhaps Linda simply amortized the cost of the two ice packs over the duration of the course, and deducted small amounts from the 'pocket money paychecks' they each received. That way, neither of them would likely notice, and since it appears they may not have known exactly what they were to be paid, would not have been able to notice anyway. Great strategy!

      Delete
    14. I wonder if Linda used those volunteer credits as sort of blackmail, refusing to provide the required documentation to the two training dummies unless they endured whatever she did in the course and until the course was all over..Hmmm. can't imagine that...

      Delete
    15. Why not? You said yourself that they knew they would experience testicular pain during the course, so apologies weren't necessary. Also, they both signed a waiver- one can only guess what rights they have up in doing that. Why do anything at all for them except cause them significant pain? You said yourself that the objective of having them in the course was to actually observe the effects of the techniques on a living make human being. So in effect, they were no more than lab rats for Linda to use as she pleased, correct Wendy???

      Delete
    16. Could be, I don't know. Well, they should have studied properly to get all the required credits. That way they could avoid being training dummies for our self-defense class ;) But we were glad they have not. Without them, it would not be that good.

      Delete
    17. It's amazing how no matter what the circumstances are, you'll always find a way to criticize a man in your post in some way. You really do hate males, don't you Wendy??

      Delete
    18. I doubt that ethics were a major concern for Linda- more of a minor annoyance that she regularly ignored..

      Delete
    19. Don't worry they were remunerated for their participation fairly. I think once or twice they had to fetch icepacks by themselves. But as I said the funding of the course was generous so I don't think the icepack expenses were deduced from their money. Linda was always fair.

      Delete
    20. Most rational people don't use the phrase 'pocket money' when they are referring to actual financial compensation paid to workers. That phrase is almost universally used to refer to small amounts of money (hence 'pocket' money) an adult might give a son or daughter.

      How do you determine what 'fair remuneration' might be for someone who has signed away their legal rights, is not told the exact nature of what they will experience, and are 'hired' with the express purpose of observing the extent of physical pain and other effects that kicking/etc. them in their testicles will have? No doubt that you place a lot lower financial value on a male risking their long-term sexual and reproductive health than most men would. This is expected, given the value you place on males. After all, they could seek no legal remedy if seriously injured, could they now?

      Delete
    21. Sorry, I used the expression 'pocket money' as they were not officially hired. You cannot always put a price tag on someone's exertion. Some things are free, some things expensive, some you cannot buy with money. So I think it is irrelevant how much they got paid, or how we call their compensation, as far as they were satisfied.

      Delete
    22. so, two young men are asked to 'participate' in a women's self-defense course that overwhelmingly involves them being struck in their testicles to observe the physical effects those actions have on the two guys and the efficacy of the self-defense techniques used. They sign a waiver, giving up any legal avenue should they be injured, and they suffer literally dozens of strikes to their testicles during the course, risking their sexual and reproductive health, and you actually think it is irrelevant how much they got paid? How classic of you to hold that view Wendy...

      Delete
    23. Garbage. Linda and you (perhaps others as well) didn't give a crap about them. They were -in your OWN words, there to confirm by way of real-world demonstration that kicking, etc. a male in the testicles causes severe pain and is effective at impairing their ability to act further. I think it is highly likely Linda was evasive about providing the documentation they needed for those points they required, and in effect blackmailed them by compelling them to continue until the course ended. She threw some 'pocket money' at them- likely to satiate her own conscience.

      Delete
  5. 'Once the attacker buckles reflexly, you can follow by striking him on his neck with your elbow and pushing him forward ideally to make him slump on the floor or into the wall.'

    What, no eye gouge or throat strike? Do I sense a moment of weakness here?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no weakness Evan, as I wrote these are attention-getters for less serious attacks. The purpose is to make a point, to remind him he is doing something wrong. Gouging eyes in this case would be counterproductive.

      Delete
    2. Admit it, to you, there is no such thing as a 'less serious attack' - 'attack' being any physical action a man makes towards a woman that she does not like/want. Everything is a rape or rape/murder attempt, and therefore there are no limits on what a woman should do to the man, and what is of course justified.

      Just look back to some of your more bizarre claims in some of your recent posts for proof of it..

      Delete
    3. Didn't Linda teach proper eye-gouging/blinding techniques? It seems those would be a favorite follow-up to your testicular rupture techniques - especially when the guy leans over for a kiss, and his girlfriend would of course know he was going to force he to have sex with him. If ever there was a situation that warranted blinding a guy following castrating him, wouldn't this be it Wendy?

      Delete
    4. Come off it Wendy, when it comes to causing injury to a man (any injury of any severity) does it really matter how minor his perceived transgression is? Partially blinding him would serve as a lifelong reminder that he should have avoided women completely, as al men should.

      Delete
    5. Evan what should I say, you are again exaggerating. Yes, there are less- or more serious attacks and the response should be appropriate. I have never denied that.

      Delete
    6. Your comments regarding that movie video where the woman uses a taser device on the testicles of her apparent boyfriend, that while unwanted, appears in the video as wanting a kiss (you presume as always he intended to rape her, as all men always do when they move towards a woman) encapsulate a lot of who you are as a person, your values, and what actions you see as perfectly appropriate towards men.

      Your sadistic and vicious tendencies are woven in your comments throughout your blog. In your own words you find it humorous when a man is struck in the testicles for any reason -this view is extended to your two training dummies, who were paid pocket money to in effect confirm in real time that kicking a man in the testicles hurts a hell of a lot. You lied (and lie) to and manipulated your own boyfriend, and caused him pain for your own selfish reasons. You did not even have the decency to be honest with him and tell him what you did and why, but chose to remain silent. These views and behaviors are NOT consistent with those of a rational, sane, moral and caring person. Period.

      Delete
    7. OK, it is your judgment of me. You do not want to listen to my judgment of you, it would not be very satisfying.

      Delete
    8. Again, I do not host a blog that promotes hatred of men and justifies virtually any action a woman takes towards a man. Your posts are full of contradictions, hypocrisy and hatred of men. Those that aren't (and they are few and far between) almost always make some disparaging comment aimed at the male or males you refer to in your post - I have commented on this several time, but naturally you do not approve those comments.

      One of the few honest things you have ever said was your very recent comment that described most accurately what the real objective of having the two training dummies involved in your self-defense course, and that was to observe the physical effects (as in pain experienced and other physical effects) of striking, etc. those two guys in the testicles. It's beyond ludicrous to think that your pal Linda would have been honest with them and disclosed that fact during her so-called interview with the two guys...

      Delete
  6. you can also follow up a slap with a squeeze

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely, but in this post, I focused on a less serious defensive method. I will discuss how to combine a groin slap with other (sometimes more serious) techniques later. Wendy

      Delete
  7. 'Sometimes the surrealism of Linda’s course was indisputable...'

    More like, 'sometimes the lack of credibility in what Linda said we were to do was beyond dispute...'

    ReplyDelete
  8. 'Since I started this blog, some of you might have got the impression I only advocate for the most brutal response to any type of attack.'

    LOL.. NO, really? How could ANYONE ever form that opinion? It didn't fall from the sky - they formed it based on the countless posts of yours in this blog...Don't try to be what you decidedly are not Wendy - and that's rational..

    ReplyDelete
  9. 4 Basic Self-Defense Moves Absolutely Everyone Should Know
    https://www.realsimple.com/health/preventative-health/safety/4-essential-self-defense-moves-everyone-should-know

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the link. These are good techniques for a start but a woman should learn more and not only basics. Wendy

      Delete
  10. Nice technique!!
    I am interested in self defense even though I did not take any self defense class but and I have read about this technique somewhere in the internet, but I remember it was called "Ringing the bell", and it is one of the light but effective technique that can be used in less-violence situations, where the goal is just to prove a point to a male attacker like (you are not that strong) or to send a clear message to a male like ( look what a light slap could do ).
    And usually males understand these kind of messages very very well especially after a good rang to the bell.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comment. It is such a great metaphoric expression 'ringing the bell'! :) I have never heard of it. It has so many meanings like you ring his bell (scrotum) but also it saves you by the bell!. Yes, the purpose of these techniques is to send a strong and clear message. Back off! Look what can I do, it can be much worse if you continue! Women should not be ashamed to use it whenever possible even in public as Elizabeth did in the story. Thanks again and have a nice day. Wendy

      Delete
  11. Is this technique effective?
    what if the attacker has small testicles? doesn't the penis work as a protector in that case ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi, thank you for the question. Yes, it is highly effective for the purpose it is intended for, to cause significant pain and send a clear message: back off, it can get much worse if you continue! There are for sure more debilitating techniques involving testicles. Smaller testicles mean a smaller target, and obviously, the worse is the combination of a large penis and small testicles. If performed correctly the fingers should actually flick the bottom or the back of the testicles. In this case, there is no escape for them small or big :) Wendy

      Delete
  12. Hmmm, didnt you claim in another post that flicking the testicles doesnt hurt? I'm curious how you think you as a woman could know that, and given your statement above, itvappears you are lying, one way or the other, aren't you now???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do not recall saying that, sure some gentle flicking is not that painful as a full hit. Any contact with the testicles seems to have some effect, depending on the circumstances. In this post, I was referring to the more flicking motion of the fingers. And Yes, I know it is effective as I tried it on a guy during our course and saw the outcome. That's why we trained with non-padded 'attackers' and our self defense course was so great. It wasn't based on some hypothetical theory. Wendy

      Delete
    2. And I bet you enjoyed doing it too! You love causing men pain by striking them in the testicles, and in your own words, felt NO obligation to apologize - after all, it was funny to you watching them hop around in pain, and the pocket money they got paid was sufficient to compensate them for risking their sexual and reproductive health - with no legal remedy due to the waiver they signed. A perfect world for a man-hater like you.

      Delete
    3. Tell me Wendy, during the practice session using the testicle slap technique, did Bob and Peter just have to stand there while each of the six female students walked up to them (three women per guy I presume) and slap them in their testicles, basically one woman after the other?

      Delete
    4. Did Linda have a good laugh at the two training dummies as well while they were groaning in pain? There must have been a laughing riot during that class...

      Delete
    5. Wendy, did you slap Bob more than once in his testicles so you could master your technique? Were the guys allowed to take breaks to get ice, or was that against your rules?

      Delete
    6. No Bob and Peter did not just stand there waiting to be slapped in the groin. Their task was to play attackers. So we played out realistically different attack scenarios. They had to show their aggression so did we in a response. When a girl got it right, usually evidenced as their hopping around and clutching their groins, the next girl could step in. And yes I admit there were some good laughs but Linda wanted to keep it professional so we had to behave. Some occasional chuckles were unavoidable though. No frequent breaks, icepacks were used only when really necessary otherwise not all girls would get a chance to train with a boy. And yes I slapped Bob more than once, the purpose was to practice. Practice makes perfect. Wendy

      Delete
    7. Who decided when icepacks were 'really' necessary? Was it the person experiencing the pain after being struck in the testicles, or Linda or one of the female students? Was the use of an icepack ever denied to Bob or Peter based upon the inconvenience it caused to your class? After all, you said yourself, they were expected to suffer pain from being struck in the testicles - that's why they got paid all that money and signed those handy legal waivers, so why extend any consideration to them at all?

      Delete
    8. Too bad Bob didn't get to slap you back - really hard. It would add some realism to your sessions, and it would be something truly worth chuckling about.. :-)

      Delete
    9. 'When a girl got it right, usually evidenced as their hopping around and clutching their groins, the next girl could step in.'

      So, you didn't even extend minimum decency to the guys so they could recover from the pain from being slapped by one girl before the next girl slapped them?

      Wow, what a bunch of vile bitches...

      Delete
    10. Simply icepacks were provided when needed. As I said the whole course could not be about having breaks, resting and 'icepacking' so the severity of the situation decided. It was a mutual understanding and assessment we cannot continue and they need some time to recover. Linda had the final word.

      Bob was to play an attacker, not an avenger. BTW, he would have to slap much much stronger than I did, to have any effect :)

      Delete
    11. An average male has 150% 9that is 2.5 times) the upper body strength of the average woman. Men that work out and do strength training can exceed that. I have no doubt you're immune to pain Wendy - or at least think you are...

      Delete
    12. So, regardless of how Bob or Peter felt, Linda got to decide if they had to continue and get slapped by the next girl. Wow, what a wonderful experience for Bob and Peter that must have been...those waivers DID come in handy, didn't they?

      Delete
    13. You have not read this blog carefully Evan. Regardless of a man's strength, could be a weightlifter, he has that convenient weakness called the testicles :) Just a slap, and his body strength is of no avail :)

      And yes the waivers have a purpose. You have never signed a waiver in your life?

      Delete
    14. Waivers transfer the risk entirely onto the other party, while innoculating the other party against any legal liability. In other words, Bob and Peter assumed all the risks associated with being harmed during the course, and forgave their legal rights to take action against any of the parties or organizations involved. And in exchange for doing so, got struck dozens of times in their testicles, suffered pretty significant pain, were demeaned and verbally abused - all girls pocket money..

      Sounds abusive to one gender, no matter how you look at it.

      Delete
    15. It's just bizarre that those two guys would put up with all that abuse and pain, risk their sexual and reproductive health, give up their legal rights, all for some pocket money. They were bloody fools.

      Delete
    16. They were not fools Evan. The pocket money was just one part of the compensation. The other was a good feeling that they supported a good cause, and helped us to learn self defense. They also got those required credits. It was a win-win situation for both parties. I know Evan for you it is difficult to accept that some men are so courageous to forgo their physical comfort for the benefit of women. I do not blame you for that, you follow your own ideology, and you are entitled to have it but do not condemn the others.

      Delete
    17. They risked much more than their 'physical comfort' didn't they now? You risk that helping a friend move a heavy piece furniture. They risked something that could have huge impact on their future, but since that risk was borne by them alone, with no substantive mechanism in place to compensate them for that, it's a no-brainer that the group that derived the primary benefit from them taking those risks was more than happy with that arrangement.

      Delete
    18. How typical of you to dismiss and trivialize what males risk but almost always imply the most sinister intentions when it comes to that same group. Calling what those guys risked 'physical comfort' is classic you. If either of them were seriously injured and those injuries had long-term impacts on their health, I doubt you would have changed your view. You'd say that they knowingly took the risks, signed a waiver, so tough luck for them. Your comments when interviewing Wendy are an example.

      Delete
    19. I don't have an 'ideology' Wendy- I DO have values and principles, and unlike you, I don't believe it is ethical to sacrifice the health on males for the sole benefit off females. and in doing so, deny them due process in law if something serious happens. What if Bob or Peter were seriously injured? They could not seek legal redress, al they could do was accept what happened to them and hopefully the one of them that wasn't injured would immediately conclude their involvement in the course. I am sure-just like the circumstances that prompted Linda to 'recruit' Bob and Peter, she would have shrugged her shoulders, accepted the inconvenience of having to recruit new victims as the cost of doing business (so to speak), and at some point two other young gullible men would find themselves on the receiving end of serious pain - all for pocket money and your presumed sense of contributing to women learning self-defense. I wonder how much that 'feel good' feeling mitigated the pain as Bob and Peter were doubled-over after being struck in the testicles for the nth time...

      -Evan

      Delete
    20. As for courage, I've been shot at many times, shot (twice), stabbed, and had shrapnel cut out (with a knife) of my thigh. I think I know what courage and personal sacrifice look and feel like. Please correct me if I'm wrong..

      -Evan

      Delete
    21. Dear Evan, you are a very courageous and good man, I have never denied that. Thank you for your service. I believe your experience in the military shapes your opinion on violence, but sometimes might be a bit biased. You dislike me which is fine, people do not need to love each other to show mutual respect. Despite your negative opinion of me, I do like you (only if you behave in the comments of course:). You risked your life, yet you would not allow Bob and Peter to risk an injury during our self defense course, think about it Evan. It always comes to the balance between purpose, risks, benefits... I thought we already discussed that. Have a nice day, Wendy

      Delete
    22. Here's a suggestion for you Wendy. I've no idea how your course ended - by that I mean if you had a brief wrap up at the end of the last class, which SHOULD have included a sincere (please look that word up if you need to) thank you from all the female students for the pain and abuse that both Bob and Peter incurred to help you with your training. A nice snog from each of the girls to each of the boys would not have been unwarranted either :-).

      If light snogging was a violation of Linda's rules (obviously it would have been), perhaps you could have raided the budget a little and had T-shirts made up for Bob and Peter that had a drawing of a certain part of their anatomy on the back (I will leave it to you to guess which), with the phrase "Freshly Squeezed" written below (or above, as the design dictated).

      Linda could present the shirts to each of them at the end of the last class - at arm's length...

      -Evan

      Delete
    23. Alternatively, your graphic could depict two eggs with cracked shells (like you used in one image on your blog), and the caption could read: Scrambled With Care...

      -Evan

      Delete
    24. Wendy, upon further reflection, I think the caption "Battered, not Broken" below the graphic of the two eggs with the cracked shells might be best for those T-shirts...

      - Evan

      Delete
    25. ROFL, You are very creative Evan, with extremely vivid fantasy. At some point, I might tell how the course ended. Do you really think Linda would be so cruel and would not allow us to give a proper farewell to Bob and Peter, even not to give them a snog? As I said we became almost intimate partners, we got familiar with their men's parts and they made a valuable sacrifice for us. We had to pay them respect and show our regards. But the T-shirts are a great idea I will suggest this to Linda when I see her next time :) You see, you found some humor in our self defense class what a change Evan. Wendy

      Delete
  13. You said: 'Evan what should I say, you are again exaggerating. Yes, there are less- or more serious attacks and the response should be appropriate. I have never denied that.'

    You also said:
    'You would be a terrible screen writer Evan. She left him in the desert to be chased by some giant mutated spiders in the following scene! BTW it was her right how she solved the situation once he disrespected her no.'

    So much for your most recent response. As always, you conveniently avoid including comment on the appropriateness of the woman's response, implying that whatever action she decides to take is therefore appropriate. How convenient, but also another example of your countless hypocrisies on this blog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are always triggered (sorry for using this word again) by some inappropriate response by a woman but not by the inappropriate behavior of a man. That simply shows your hypocrisy Evan. I think I made it clear that I would not use the route she took as her response but at the same time, I am not going to judge her or blame her for doing what she did.

      Delete
    2. How classic is this. What you always avoid doing is judging or criticizing a woman for any actions she takes against a man. This is expected - coming from you, since it reflects your view that ANY actions a woman takes is automatically justified. Even that Russian fellow that posted about his violent wife assaulting him, all you could choke out was a lame comment that violence shouldn't be used to solve marital problems. Of course, you're blog includes your comments about women physically striking their boyfriends (e.g, flicking the testicles for eating treats from Grandma), and similar comments that obviously reflect your support of such behaviours. You're a hypocrite Wendy, plan and simple.

      Delete
    3. Have you EVER even come close in this blog to criticizing a woman for doing anything to man - other than perhaps not taking more serious action against him than she did? Not ever. You DO find a way to criticize a guy - even when it's a guy that has volunteered to stand there and let female students kick him, etc. in the testicles. You're a cruel woman that hates men. Period.

      Delete
    4. Evan, have you ever criticized a man on this blog? Only women who want to learn self defense effectively and apply it when necessary.

      Delete
  14. 'As I said it was part of the training, why should have we apologize? Sure there were some laughs. I know you hate it and make you upset but seeing a guy hit in the testicles and hopping in pain evokes humor.'

    What was that claim again - you don't hate men? Hard to impossible to draw that conclusion from this paragraph alone..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Evan, I guess you avoid watching any American comedy, you might see a scene with a guy hit in the balls in a humorous context and it would just make you cry and upset and consider everybody who shot the movie to be a manhater. Isn't it like that?

      Delete
  15. Hi Wendy,
    This sounds like a great 'warning shot' technique that any woman can use at her pleasure (or displeasure:). Would it be even more effective if we kept our nails moderate in length? I am wondering if perhaps when flicking his testicles with the fingernails, they might contact his balls in a sharp enough manner to maybe cause internal bleeding of the balls and infection? That would add insult to injury, and maybe cause him to lose one or at least visit a hospital.

    Thanks,
    Glenda M.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Glenda, for the purpose of a groin slap the length of nails is not important. However, having nails with a moderate length could be of advantage for other techniques I will describe later. Wendy

      Delete
  16. No, it isn't like that dummy. What it is 'like', is that YOU take pleasure in inflicting pain on men, and enjoy ANY depiction of men being struck in the testicles, whether it's real-life or in the movies. Naturally - for people like you, it's humorous when a man experiences pain from being struck in their testicles. Taking pleasure in others experiencing pain is a characteristic of persons that have sadistic tendencies... Know anyone like that Wendy?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's you who is now pivoting. I mentioned that there are many movies involving a humorous scene where a man gets struck in the testicles, yet it is only me who is a sadist and manhater.

      Delete
    2. 'It's you who is now pivoting. I mentioned that there are many movies involving a humorous scene where a man gets struck in the testicles, yet it is only me who is a sadist and manhater.'

      Reread your post and see if you can recognize how nonsensical it is...

      Delete
    3. It is no-nonsense, you do not blame directors and screenwriters of those movies you just blame me.

      Delete
  17. I bet that with the exception of tolerating watching the occasional movie that your boyfriend prefers (grudgingly of course), your absolute favorites would be watching castration videos on your own computer when he isn't there.... I imagine you project yourself into those scenes, trading places with the woman doing the cutting...

    ReplyDelete
  18. 'Also as we already discussed previously if some techniques were not gauged we could stop the training right away after the first hit and send the boys home or to a hospital.'

    I guess that on the way to the hospital, the training dummy could simply remind themselves of all that pocket money they had earned, and it would all have been worth it - no matter what the medical outcome was...

    Of course, their departure would have been a major inconvenience for Linda and the students; perhaps the remaining training dummy could simply hope for the best, as they would now be on the receiving end of double the number of kicks. Thank God for that signed waiver, right Wendy??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sure the purpose of having Bob and Peter was to have them for our training not to send them all the time to a hospital and have a disruption in our training. And as I said on numerous occasions we had concerns for their reproductive health and well-being. So there has to be a balance.

      Delete
  19. 'Balance' tends to be interpreted in the favor of the group doing the interpreting. With those signed waivers in her back pocket, and a female dean who obviously didn't give a crap about how Linda ran her course, it stretches credulity to believe that those 'concerns' were for more than giving the illusion that those two guys were anything more then expendable training dummies, as Linda was so fond of calling them -the two guys she 'cared' so much about....

    ReplyDelete
  20. Waivers setting aside an individual's legal rights tend to have notable influence in how 'balance' is determined, particularly when the balancer has a substantial self-interest in tipping the scales in their own favor, as certainly was the case with Linda and her course.

    It also appears that your 'concern' for their well-being centered around providing ice packs, unqualified 'assessments' of a need for professional medical care (the bias here is salient), and highly subjective guidance to 'not use full force' (how much less exactly?). If the other female students had values anything like yours, the only persons that had any authentic concern for Bob and Peter's well-being were Bob and Peter...

    ReplyDelete
  21. I greatly enjoy each of your entries, Wendy. Especially because of the language you use and the method of analysis you use.
    I especially liked this type of technique. Well, unknown of its existence or effectiveness as a resource until I've read you.
    I really liked the use of the fingers, and not the palm, as a mode of attack. Producing a line of attack without the width of the palm hindering the path. And also avoiding the obstacle posed by the penis due to the angle used.
    In a sense I couldn't help but relate it to a laser guided missile attack.
    A well-aimed and guided attack that, while not as devastating as a knee or kick, can still render an attacker useless for valuable action time.
    It is fascinating how an analysis of the opponent, a well chosen angle, and a good method of attack can make a woman victorious.
    It's like a heavy tank in urban combat. Despite its armor, power, and capabilities; Before an enemy that knows the weak points, and knows when and how to take advantage of them, you are easy prey.
    In this case by the oscillating orbs that characterize us.

    As always, a pleasure to read you, Wendy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Vil, I am happy you like this post and the description of the groin slap technique. Yes, the good knowledge of the weak points and the right technique (if well-analyzed) can be the key to victory! I really like your metaphors of a tank in urban combat and the laser-guided missile attack and oscillating orbs as the testicles. I enjoy reading you too Vil! Have a nice day, Wendy

      Delete
  22. Well, I'll say this (again) to you Wendy, as much as I intensely dislike you, I admire and respect you for helping women learn to defend themselves against an assault. I don't grope, touch, assault women in any way, shape or form, but I obviously am aware some men do.

    We'll likely continue our mutual dislike, but always remember that I do understand why you do what you do.

    Evan.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know Evan, and I do understand your intense dislike for me. I dislike you only when you go overboard with your comments:) I also understand and respect your fight for men's rights and especially the right not to be kicked in the testicles :) But it is sometimes more like the fight of Don Quixote. Wendy
      P.S. I thought you already revoked all the compliments for me :)

      Delete
    2. I try to give credit where it's due Wendy. You really piss me off sometimes, but believe it or not, that doesn't mean I don't respect you for the time, effort and commitment you have invested in helping women learn how to defend themselves.

      If I trusted you more, I might share a story with you that may help you understand where I am coming from.

      One day perhaps.

      -Evan

      Delete
    3. Evan, it is nice to hear such words from you. You can keep your secrets if you want, as you already know I am fine if people have their secrets ;) Wendy

      Delete
  23. Simply put, you take a perverse pleasure in promoting pain and permanent injury (i.e. maiming) of men by women, and find humor in men suffering pain when struck in the testicles. You refer to Bob and Peter alternatively and training dummies and 'darling' attackers, yet at the same time laugh at the pain inflicted on them, and take care to point out you had no obligation to feel sorry for or apologize to them in their suffering. You go on to say that more men should volunteer to participate in these types of courses, and I'm confident you are fine with retaining the legal waiver Linda used. So, as always, the men would incur all of the risks, verbal abuse, taunting, and providing a source of humor for the female students to laugh at. All for the princely sum of pocket money and a sense of helping women learn self-defense. If these classes continue, it is almost inevitable that at some point one of the future training dummies will actually suffer a serious/permanent injury. Then what? With the female dean still there, I presume...nothing. No different than wearing out a consumable tool I imagine, you just go get another one... Do you think the guy should think to himself that the cost he incurred was worth it? he would be almost immediately forgotten by Linda and the female students, I have no doubt.

    -Evan

    ReplyDelete
  24. Dear Evan, I am really sorry for the bad news. I wish you all the best. You can contact me anytime via the contact form https://femaleselfdefense.sport.blog/ I understand your views and I respect your opinions. I was sometimes unnecessarily antagonistic and yes the methods I describe here are brutal and must be used only when really necessary. I'll try to convey it more clearly. Best wishes, Wendy

    ReplyDelete
  25. "An average male has 150% (that is 2.5 times) the upper body strength of the average woman. Men that work out and do strength training can exceed that"

    I don't know how strength could be measured, but I assume that there are many studies that supports that quotation and I agree with it.
    But what comes to my mind is why all these studies and surveys works in favor of males?
    why there isn't a study that measure the decreasing of strength in males after being hit in the testicles? ( I am pretty sure it in not goa be 150% )
    I think a study like that would be very helpful in self defense classes, It would be an amazing method to empower women in self defense.

    I think Linda should be aware of that, maybe she could do these kind of studies ( assuming she has not done it, maybe she did )
    what is you thought Wendy?
    and thank you so much for this amazing blog.

    Sarah

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Sarah, thanks a lot for your comment. It is indeed a very interesting thought. You are absolutely right, nobody can really deny that men have, on average a higher body strength than women. They naturally grow more muscles. However, it would be false to assume that because of that they are undefeatable and female self defense does not work. The body strength is not a static thing but can get dramatically changed in favor of a weaker female opponent. Bob and Peter were both very fit and strong, yet a relatively mild hit to their testicles caused an immediate loss of this advantage over me. At one moment they could lift me up with no effort and in the next moment, they had difficulty keeping their own body straight.

      It is indeed a highly empowering experience, and I am thankful to Linda for enabling this. Linda did research on the effectiveness of different techniques targeting testicles and how it affects a male. I am not sure whether she directly measured the strength. But I can find out. I am planning to pay another visit to her department and I will also do an interview with Tina, her PhD student doing research in this area. It will be a very interesting read. Have a nice day, Wendy

      Delete
  26. Hi Wendy, was there ever an occurrence during the class when Peter or Bob took a truly hard strike to the testicles-- either inadvertently or intentionally-- and if so can you make a post about it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi, Yes there were a few occasions Peter and Bob experienced (unfortunately) a full blow to their testicles. I once kneed Bob full force when I did not realize he is not wearing a cup. The knee was a part of the fast sequence of techniques. He luckily did not sustain any damage but was out of business for some time. I will write a post about it. Wendy

      Delete
    2. Hey Wendy,
      When this did happen - Bob or Peter taking a full-force blow to their testicles when not wearing protection - all 'accidentally', of course, did Linda have a copy of the waiver they signed with her? She could have shown it to them to remind them while they were on the ground in pain that they had no legal recourse if they were permanently injured. No harm in reminding them that they surrendered their legal rights when they agreed to participate in this course, don't you agree?

      Delete
    3. Wendy,
      Did you gouge Bob's eyes right after you kneed him in his testicles, to give him something to take his mind off the severe pain in his testicles? It would also have showed what a mean bitch you are, which to you I'm sure is useful...

      Delete
    4. No, she just knew the legal document by heart, she could just recite it as does the police during an arrest :) Just kidding.

      Delete
    5. Were you able to find the energy to choke out a lame, unauthentic apology while you watched him suffer, or were you too busy trying not to laugh at him?

      Delete
  27. Did you laugh when you realized he wasn't wearing a cup and he felt severe pain? After all, you did say that it is funny when men get struck in their testicles, didn't you? Also, did Linda 'allow' him to seek professional medical attention immediately afterwards, and was did he receive his pocket money for that class and any subsequent classes he may have missed? After you stopped laughing, were you able to muster enough decency to get an ice pack for him, or did he have to get it himself? And finally, if both of the training dummies were actually struck full force in their testicles with no protection on 'a few occasions', why the hell didn't they both quit and tell Linda to shove her course up her backside?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I did not laugh. We had some laughs in some less serious situations sure. But this accident was serious and indeed it could lead to some lasting damage. So I would say I was in a similar state of shock as was Bob. I did everything that I could to mitigate the situation and ease his suffering. Of course, I fetched an icepack by myself. Linda assessed the situation and no professional medical assistance was luckily needed. He took some mild painkillers and had to leave early that class. The 'pocket money' was for their participation in the class. Linda wasn't that cruel to deduce any sum from that pocket money. It would be his fault if it was his decision not to wear a cup. But this was a particularly realistic training session with no pads, no cups. It applied to girls as well. So yeah these 'accidents' inevitably happened. This cannot be absolutely avoided like painful falls during figure skating. And why did not they quit? That's a question for them. Maybe they saw a purpose and good cause in their continuing participation which was worth the suffering. Those ECTS credits and pocket money were maybe a good motivation as well. Wendy

      Delete
    2. The same person who had them sign a waiver surrendering their legal rights, the person that dropped out of medical school ' assessed' that he didn't require professional medical attention, did she?

      So, his well-being wasn't even worth a visit to a real medical professional? What a bitch that woman was/is...

      Delete
    3. So, after kneeing a guy full-force I his testicles by 'accident', which undoubtedly caused him severe pain,you were in a 'similar state of shock' as he was, is that correct? What an incredibly stupid and dishonest claim to make.

      Delete
    4. It days a lot about you when you claim that them risking permanent physical damage to their reproductive organs would be worth it to help women learn self defense. They were as males, just disposable objects to you and that Linda woman, weren't they??

      Delete
    5. With that legal waiver in place, why didn't Linda just threaten not to pay him or confirm those credits, and try to force him to continue? After all, she said that shots to the testicles were part of the course - more like the ENTIRE course,and it's obvious she didnt give a crap about either one if them, admit it...

      Delete
    6. The truth of the matter here is that Linda - who was protected against legal liability as Bob was equally prevented from pursuing legal action, and who is NOT a qualified medical professional, but rather a medical school dropout, decided that Bob's injury (as far as it can be competently evaluated on site without equipment, education, and knowledge of how to use that equipment) did not warrant (as in, he was not worthy of) being seen by a real medical professional. He got an ice pack and some over the counter pain killers (were those deducted from his pocket money?). What an ABSOLUTE BITCH Linda was/is!!!!

      Delete
    7. I have not doubt that as soon as you could do so without anyone seeing you, you had a really good chuckle at what you did to Bob. A classic thrill for a man-hating sadist...

      Delete
    8. There was a difference between my state of shock and his, of course. I got really scared I seriously injured him. I just felt how those two squishy organs got crushed between my knee and his pelvic floor.
      Bob and Peter were not just disposable objects equipment. They were our training buddies, 'darling attackers' risking their testicles for us. Why should we have dismissed them? Why are you simply obsessed with the idea that we hated them and they were supposed to leave?

      Delete
    9. 'There was a difference between my state of shock and his, of course.'
      Good to see that after being criticized for your completely idiotic comment, you are capable of acknowledging the obvious...

      Those volunteer credits that apparently needed to graduate I am sure could have been earned doing something that didn't risk their reproductive and sexual health. As you state yourself, the 'purpose' - or at least a primary one of this course was to be able to strike a male in his testicles and to 'see the effect' -do you remember posting that??

      So, you fulfilled a main purpose of the course when you kneed Bob full-force in his testicles didn't you? Did you collapse right away? Did he cry? Did he vomit? Did you take voluminous notes of your observations so you could discuss that experience over drinks at the bar with your girlfriends at a later date?

      Delete
    10. 'Bob and Peter were not "just" disposable objects equipment.' Well, that statement pretty much captures your views of them. They were not 'just' disposable objects, they were ALSO there to get their testicles struck and feel serious pain, so you and the other bitches could observe the effects of your strikes. You said it yourself -if you conveniently forget, go re-read your own damn post....

      Delete
    11. 'Linda assessed the situation'.. you mean a medical school dropout that had both Bob and Peter sign a waiver surrendering any claim to legal process if they were injured 'assessed the situation', isn't that correct Wendy?? Hmm. isn't this the same woman whose course would be impacted by the departure of one of those two training dummies? Nobody would ever identify an obvious conflict of interest there....

      Delete
    12. 'They were our training buddies..' They were? Hmmm.. I wonder why it is that both you and your pal Linda called them training 'dummies' then? Sounds like something of a contradiction, does it not? How do you think Bob or Peter would feel if they read this blog to see how you and Linda actually felt about them?

      Delete
    13. So what if you did seriously injure him? Sadists (like you) are incapable of feeling remorse or sympathy - don't tell me you are not aware that you cannot feel those emotions?

      You could not be sued by Bob, nor could Linda, the university, etc. All that would happen is that Linda would be inconvenienced in having to lie to yet one or two more guys to convince them to participate in the course. Hopefully, Peter would have had the good sense to tell Linda to shove the course up her ass if Bob was seriously injured, and leave, so two more victims - I mean training dummies, would be on the receiving end of all your 'accidental' strikes...

      Delete
    14. Wendy,
      Did you feel powerful when you saw him crumble from your 'accidentally on purpose' full force blow to his testicles? Did you look down on him as a useless training dummy, and feel further empowered by the fact that he could take no legal action against you? Did you have a good chuckle to yourself as you sauntered over to the refrigerator to reluctantly grab an ice pack for him?

      Did you taunt him while he lay crumpled over, and tell him you hoped that you castrated him, true to the sadistic man-hater that you are?

      Delete
    15. Perhaps if you weren't such a stupid, vicious, sadistic cunt you may have bothered to confirm whether Bob WAS wearing protection BEFORE you kneed him full force in his testicles. That would be indicative of a human that actually cared about the so-called 'darling attackers', rather than being the hateful, lying, sadistic bitch that you were then and are now. Are you capable of seeing the difference in that approach and the one you took, dumbass????

      Delete
    16. Hi Evan, how are you? I hope you are doing well. I had some concerns. I allowed anonymous comments again but please behave. Wendy

      Delete
    17. So, you claim you 'did everything you could' to mitigate the pain he suffered. Seriously, other than get an ice pack and offer it to Bob, and perhaps a glass of water and two OTC pain killers, what else? You're hardly a medical professional are you now?

      Did you apologize to him by the way? It isn't as if that would have mattered at all in the circumstances, but at least I might elevate you just above the dregs of humanity...

      Delete
    18. Concerns about what? Not about any consequences for what you did to Bob. Even if he was seriously injured-and he certainly could have been, you were protected from any liability, so you could have slept soundly that night. He likely didn't feel great for some time. It absolutely amazes me why he didn't stop participating in that course immediately after that incident. Pocket money and some claimed (by you) good feeling won't come close to making the risk he faced with it. Peter should have realized the same thing could have happened to him, left that course and never gone back.

      Delete
    19. I bet you did laugh at what you did to Bob. Given what you have said on this blog and the personal values those comments reflect, I seriously doubt that if you had actually castrated Bob when you kneed him full force you would have lost any sleep at all over it.

      Delete
    20. Do you think the majority of your female posters bokd the same visceral hatred for men as you do? It is somewhat curious that there's literally not one comment posted from someone who presents themselves as being female that is in any way critical of you. It's not likely a coincidence...

      Delete
    21. Do you think Bob was reflecting on that 'good feeling' you claimed was likely one reason why the two guys agreed to participate in the course while he was hunched over or on the floor, likely feeling like he was going to vomit and in severe pain?

      Delete
    22. If Bob or Peter had suffered a permanent injury as a result of that course, who would be looking after their interests, given their inability to seek legal redress?

      Also, would the female dean likely just brush the incident off and Linda would simply go about recruiting more make training dummies, just as she did when she recruited Bob and Peter to replace the guy that did get seriously injured and was hospitalized??

      Delete
    23. Whatever 'concerns' you had, they weren't about making sure whether Bob was wearing s Conor not before you struck him, were they? Seriously, given the obvious risk to the guy, whh the hell didnt you? Was Linda angry at you for what you did to him, or was she as expected primarily concerned about the possible disruption to her course if Bob either was seriously injured and/or elected to quit??

      Delete
    24. I am really sorry Evan. I hope you get well soon. No, I won't misuse the situation. But to me, the rate of your writing remained constant ;) Wendy

      Delete
    25. Believe it or not, I had some disagreement with Linda about whether Bob should continue or should be relieved from the class that evening. But of course, Linda ruled. Linda wasn't really angry as these accidents can happen, but of course, she had responsibility for the guys at the same time she tried to avoid disruptions in the schedule as much as possible.

      Delete
    26. Are you saying that even after Bob was kneed full force by you, Linda required that he continue to participate in that specific class? As in, he was subject to further strikes to his testicles even after what you did to him???

      Delete
    27. What real responsibility did she have Wendy? She controlled whether they got paid or not, and whether they got the required documentation or whatever for those education credits they needed to graduate. She was immune from legal action from the two guys as well.

      What actual 'responsiblity'did she have towards them, other than to make they suffered enough even struck to show the girls her techniques worked??

      As you said, the female dean didnt give a dsmn about men, and let Linda run her course as she saw fit.

      Get real here.

      Delete
    28. 'But of course, Linda ruled. Linda wasn't really angry as these accidents can happen, but of course, she had responsibility for the guys at the same time she tried to avoid disruptions in the schedule as much as possible.'

      See any conflict of interest here? Linda's predominant interest was her course and its continuation. I've no doubt that Bob being struck full force by you was a potential inconvenience to her, and if she held any anger towards you at all, it would be for that, and nothing whatsoever to do with the possibility that Bob may have been seriously injured. Of course, Linda being 'qualified' (NOT) to make a competent medical assessment whether Bob needed professional medical care is not seen by you as what is obvious to any rational thinking individual as a no-brainer conflict of interest. You have not been clear on this, but your comments suggest that Linda required Bob to stay for at least some period of time for that class, even though you state he left early that night. To me, that says a lot about Linda. It seemed that she needed him to act as a testicular punching/kicking bag for other female students after you kneed him full force. What was it you said about Linda 'caring' for Bob and Peter? Whatever she cared about, it wasn't for their health, that's for damn certain.

      Delete
    29. 'Believe it or not, I had some disagreement with Linda about whether Bob should continue or should be relieved from the class that evening.'

      LOL, I somehow doubt you gave a second thought to his well-being. You likely felt that getting him an ice pack was above and beyond the call of duty, and after that, you had no interest at all in him. I'm sure you felt that he should not even be allowed to take the time to go to the washroom to check his own genitals.

      As much as you try to hide it, your true nature comes through every time.

      Delete
  28. When you 'accidentally' kneed Bob in his testicles with full force, and he presumably buckled from the intense pain, did he also vomit, which as you well know is not uncommon from hard strikes to a man's testicles? If he did, did Linda demand that he clean up his emesis himself? After all, and as you have stated, they were told that taking shots to the testicles was part of the training, and why they were getting paid all that pocket money. It therefore stands to reason that they could have presumed they may become physically ill from some of the hard strikes, and having to 'clean up after themselves' so to speak would be expected...If they refused to clean it up, did Linda hire a biohazardous waste contractor to clean it up, and deduct the cost from their pocket money?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, luckily he did not vomit. He just retched and convulse a bit. If he did I would be ready to help him to clean it up, no problem.

      Delete
    2. Help HIM clean it up? Really? So, you knee him full force in his testicles, he collapses and nearly vomits, and you state that IF he did vomit, you would help 'him' clean it up? Do you see anything wrong with your statement here???

      If he had that type of reaction, he should bloody well have been taken to a hospital. What a piece of trash Linda was for not doing that right away.

      Delete
    3. Was that fun to watch him do that Wendy? Did you feel good, powerful, etc.? Another male put where he belongs at your hands (well, knee). Must have been the highlight of your week, if not the entire month...

      Delete
  29. So, it appears that you fashioned your blog nom de plume after Wendy L. Rouse I see...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, do you think Wendy is a rare feminine first name? as is a family name starting with L?

      Delete
    2. I think it stretches credulity to think that it's just coincidence that you chose 'Wendy L.' when there's an American Academic (Wendy L. Rouse) who has authored books on women's empowerment and self-defense. Try another fictional storyline...

      Delete
    3. That's a pure coincidence. Or maybe women named Wendy have a higher tendency to be interested in self-defense? :)

      Delete
  30. In non-native English speaking countries Wendy isn't a common given name at all...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not at all. But it is a nice one, isn't it :) But you can call me whatever name you prefer. (But don't be rude!)

      Delete
  31. Hi Wendy
    I have a question, why would we use the fingers instead of using the palm ? Doesn't the palm cover more area therefore it could cause more pain?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi! Thank you for this question. There are several reasons for this. The palm of a hand is a relatively large surface area. So the impact force would dissipate to a larger area and fail to produce the desired effect- sharp pain. When a man is clothed, the testicles are relatively packed and partially located between the thighs. The wide palm would have difficulty penetrating deep between the legs accessing the desired target effectively. Fingers on the other hand can gain a very good momentum and represent a small striking area with high penetrating ability. The principle of the groin slap is rather a sharp whacking rather than pushing the testicles up. However, the palm can be used in some instances, I will write about it later. Have a nice day Wendy

      Delete
  32. Interesting how none of your female readers ever have expressed even one instance of concern for Bob or Peter, or criticized you for all hate and lies you have spewed, isnt it? Perhaps they are all sadistic bitches like you???

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What this person says is true. I've looked at this blog on and off for a while and there are no posts made by a female person that say anything against some of the very mean things you had done or that that Linda woman did to those guys or anything.

      Delete
    2. Maybe the female readers have no problem with Linda's self defense course and the content of my blog. They simply understand and agree with my points. More and more women start to realize how self defense is important for their lives. Constant lamenting, as you do, over Bob and Peter's participation won't help them in any way.

      Delete
  33. Them having 'no problem' with your views has no bearing whatsoever on whether they are justified or justifiable. Bias is rampart here. For example, not one woman called you out on how you treated your boyfriend over that fake cancer check, or criticized Linda for promoting that practice. There are countless other examples to point out. It is more likely that they 'agree with your points' because they have they same hostility towards men as you do, and therefore pretty much anything done to a man for any reason is just fine with them.
    e

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe they did similar testicular cancer checks on their boyfriends/husbands :) How concerns and care of men's testicular health can be seen as hostility towards men? Here I promote groin guards, cancer checks yet I am a vile woman. I smell misogyny.

      Delete
    2. You promote FAKE cancer checks as a means for women to locate and experience how sensitive to pain the epididymis is on a man's testicles. Don't be such a bloody liar. You don't promote groin guards, you use that narrative to mediate your more vile comments and present yourself as someone less vile than you really are. Get real, again... You smell your own bullshit Wendy..

      Delete
  34. What would have helped Bob and Peter most is if they had realized they were being manipulated by Linda and not agreed to participate in that course. Those credits could have been earned other ways no doubt, and the 'pocket money' was not worth the risk, which they alone assumed.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Why would they, given what your promote? Female students had the opportunity to strike males full force in their testicles and other parts of their anatomy, without being struck back, and being protected legally for any harm they inflicted on the two guys. A perfect world-at least for Linda, the female dean, and the female students.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Don't be concerned Wendy, Bob and Peter were basically punching bags with testicles, and they're well-being was really only a concern or themselves. As you stated, they both knew the risks, both signed the legal waiver, and both had access to medical care if they arranged it for themselves. Strike away! What would have even better conveyed the success of the techniques Linda taught would be if Bob or Peter (unfortunately, of course!), actually suffered a ruptured testicle. Your female readers of this blog could have a good snicker, thinking that it likely 'served him right' for agreeing to volunteer, and felt more empowered to kick the next guy that says something to them that they don't like. You're becoming the type of influencer you once could only dream about...

    ReplyDelete
  37. 'I did everything that I could to mitigate the situation and ease his suffering. Of course, I fetched an icepack by myself.'

    So, what else did 'everything' include, other than the minimal effort associated with getting an ice pack for him? Perhaps get him water and acetaminophen? Beyond that, you lacked the expertise (if you presume that retrieving an ice pack and a glass of water and pain killers requires 'expertise') to do anything else, so I imagine you just stood there, watching him writhe in pain on the floor. Much more your style, anyway...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What else I could do for him? I do not have a magic spell to quench the pain immediately. I did everything that I could. I did apologize and pet him but there is a limit to what I could do.

      Delete
    2. I bet Linda was really happy she had that signed waiver when she saw what happened to Bob. If he did suffer a permanent injury (as in the loss of a testicle), do you think Linda would 'allow' Bob and Peter to stop their participation in the course, or would that only occur if and when Peter also suffered the same outcome?

      Delete
    3. Perhaps the female dean would attempt to have Bob and Peter (as applicable) prosecuted for breach of employment contract if they couldn't finish the course...

      Delete
    4. I recall that you stated that after kicking (I think it was) one of the training dummies in his testicles, you went with him to a bathroom? or someplace in the gym/whatever and sat with him, asking him about his pain and rubbing his abdomen. Is this physical contact after causing serious pain to a man something that women like yourself that have sadistic tendencies do as some sort of ritual, like being able to fake giving relief to your victim when it is really a form of mocking them?

      Delete
    5. Evan, I will write a post about that training session, when I have more time. I am very busy at the moment. I can assure you I did everything I could to mitigate the situation. He was given good care. If Bob requested professional medical care I am sure Linda would do it. Yes, I caused him pain but why do you think I should have just backed off and not touched him or talk to him? It is a normal instinct you want to caress or pet someone you did something to somebody unintentionally to show affection etc.

      Delete
    6. He was not a 'pet' and it is not normal given the circumstances, the nature of your course, and what you did to the guy to approach him and 'caress' him (he was NOT your boyfriend, partner, or anything like that, was he?). That is just creepy behaviour.

      Further, Bob could not have know whether or not he was seriously (as in possibly permanently) injured. I've seen soldiers brush off getting wounds treated that ended up costing them a limb or their life. What 'good care' could he have received in a dojo or school gymnasium? An ice pack and two acetaminophen pills are about the extent of what could be done for him on site. For the 20th time, Linda was/is NOT a medical professional, she was just a medical school dropout.

      Your claim of 'affection' would have been much better channeled towards being responsible to make sure that he WAS wearing a cup before you kneed him full force in his testicles. Even doing that to a guy who wears a cup isn't a fun experience for the guy.

      Delete
    7. In your own words, you got him an ice pack. I presume he got the acetaminophen and glass of water himself - when he was able to move. The 'caressing' you apparently did was just creepy as hell. Think of it - he is crouched over and/or on the floor, in severe pain, retching and convulsing, likely close to being physically ill, and you approach the guy - you being the individual responsible for causing him what could be an injury that may have life-long consequences for him, and touch him. You actually think that act was welcomed and soothing for him?

      You still scratch your head as to why I think you're a sadist and man-hater Wendy???

      Delete
    8. 'If Bob requested professional medical care I am sure Linda would do it'

      ??? Am I correct in stating that IF Bob wanted to see a medical professional and Linda objected (given her biases and interest in keeping the course on schedule), in your country she could actually prevent him from seeing a medical professional after you kneed him?

      That will get you in serious, serious trouble over here...

      Delete
    9. You gave the guy a fucking ice pack - after you stood over him I am sure, gloating over the success of your 'accidental' full force knee strike.

      What an absolute piece of crap you are Wendy!

      Delete
    10. No Linda is not a medical professional sure. But she has knowledge about male testicles like nobody else :) Simply if Bob needed professional medical assistance he would not be denied it. period. To me that caressing was not creepy at all, as was not for Bob I think.

      Delete
    11. The person who decides if he 'needs' it is the same person that is negatively affected by making the decision that he should get medical treatment. Linda's knowledge about male testicles has everything to do with damaging them, and nothing else, who the hell are you kidding?

      Delete
    12. No doubt Bob really appreciated being touched by the same woman that caused him to experience severe pain, retch, convulse, and be close to vomiting, I am sure. Perfectly rational and logical, using your standard of acceptable behaviour...

      Delete
  38. You 'pet him'? Christ, the very least you could have done is stay the hell away from him. You couldn't even extend him that minimal amount of respect. He gets kneed full force by you and an apology is all he gets in return. I am sure that meant a lot to him as well.

    Good God, you're quite a piece of work Wendy.

    ReplyDelete
  39. It's beyond belief that you would actually think that you touching a man you just intentionally kneed full force in his testicles would be something he would find comforting in any way. You should have stayed the hell away from him, and Linda should not have let you approach him either.

    That is just nauseating that you did that Wendy.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Even after performing a technique that is intended to cause serious or permanent injury to a man, Linda did not even have the decency to have Bob taken to a real medical facility to get checked by a real medical professional. Keeping him there for the benefit of the others after what he suffered really says a great deal about her. This is sickening behaviour.

    ReplyDelete