Hi:

Taekwondo is a korean martial art.

I have been to taekwondo and see the gender-bias treatment of kids. I notice male instructors tend to treat girls better than boys. Why do they do this? It upsets me. Boys are treated like crap while girls are spoiled-rotten like princesses.

If a boy cries or expresses pain, the man instructor will beat him, shout at him, and tell him to be a man. If a girl does same, the man instructor will show her sympathy.

Girls in taekwondo seem to cold-heartedly exploit this sexism.

These are reasons why I feel taekwondo is sexist against males.


Best,

Anti-Taekwondo.

It sounds as though you have been dishonourably treated, my boy.

I suggest you look to the wild west, rather than the east for the solution.

When a cowboy's honour was impuned by a most likely better gunslinger he would wait until dark then creep up behing his insulting enemy with a piece of 4 x 2 and whack him over the head with it.

That usually put a stop to the bugger.

Hello Anti-Taekwondo. Doesn't this depend on the teacher and not necessarily ingrained in the martial art. What about other martial arts, dojos and their practices?

You will find that most male instructors will treat little girls better than little boys. Female instructors, OTOH, tend to treat kids equally.

BTW, how do I make a "come back" against this guy named SPORTfighter? He is being a total jerk and advocates brutalizing little boys while spoiling little girls.

"SPORTfighter" and "Greendistantstar" don't understand that boy-abuse can harm a girl. - soc.culture.korean | Google Groups

Google Groups

SPORTfighter sounds like an immature simpleton.

Tell him he holds double standards in favor of girls and ask him if he likes to be treated worse too and give women extra points during matches which is in-line with his unequal treatment ideas and not sportsmanship at all.

Above and beyond any issue of "misandry" tae-kwon-do itself really is not much of a martial art. It was invented in 1950 by a Shotokan fourth dan who blended in some Chinese kickboxing. It has been noted ever since for the poor standards of technique, form and strategy. Even senior prctitioners admit hat they would never actually attempt to defend themselves in a real situation with the techniques that tae kwon do is most noted for.

I studied and taught martial arts for 25 years. The arrival of feminists and male chivalrist pigs had a lot to do with me refusing to teach anymore.

(A bit off topic, but a correction)

Taekwondo was formally organized into a federation in the 1950's, but it's foundations in Korean martial arts, (particularly Tang Soo Do and Korean Karate techniques developed in conjunction with those in Japan) have been artound for hundreds of years, at least since the warring staets period in Japan.

It's ancient forms (there were several different "DO" techniques used by the different fiefdoms of Korea) were developed as armed and un armed techniques for the armies of the day. The emphasis on kicks can mostly be attributed to the fact that the hands were expected to be holding a weapon (usually a spear). I can'tremember the specific ruler of the day, but much like swords and Karate in feudal japan, the Do arts were made illegal by the rulers of Korea until about a hundred years before the founding of the World Taekwondo Federation and it's Korean counterpart.

As for self defense applications, MAUS is about right. This is not due to a fault in the art so much as the unpreparedness of the practitioners. Sport Taekwondo does not allow punches to the face, and is usually very light contact. Most practitioners become accustomed to this, and cannot adjust to make their training effective in high stress situations.

Male chivalrist pigs!! Great term, MAUS.

By the way, the original claims in this thread seem a specious to me.