9mmHP said:
The point being made is that there is no support for saying that this course doesn't make people bolder and more likely to resist attackers, resulting in an increase in the victim's injuries. Period.
Here's the deal, 9mm: the person who makes a claim should support that claim. That's how progress is made in discussions like this.
What just happened in this thread is that you (and others) made a claim. You claimed that a one or two day class is likely to cause a woman to become aggressive, overconfident, and get killed because she overestimates her own ability.
That was the claim you made.
Other posters came along and said, please support your claim. Is there a study or studies you can point to that support the claim that a one or two day class actually
increases the danger of a woman getting harmed by an attacker?
Now you want to turn it around and place the burden of proof on the people who asked you to support the claim you made.
They should have to find studies supporting a negative.
The problem with that is it leads to endless tail-chasing. It usually results in what just happened:
Person A makes a claim. Person B asks for data or evidence or personal experience to back that claim up. Rather than supporting the claim he made, Person A tells Person B to prove that what Person A said was wrong. Person B says "I won't do your homework." Person A says that proves Person B didn't have any evidence ... and on and on and on it goes. Pretty soon everyone is arguing about who should prove what and nobody is actually trying to prove anything anymore (except, maybe, who has the biggest and most impressive wedding tackle). And then finally the thread gets closed and no one learned anything.
Make a claim, support your claim. Don't waste everyone's energy trying to force the other guy to support
his claims. Support your own!
pax