Why Gender Equality in Self-Defence Training Fails After International Women’s Day

International Women’s Day is beautiful. Genuinely. The speeches about equality are moving. The social media campaigns are well-produced. The panel discussions feature accomplished women sharing powerful stories. Companies make public commitments to fairness, inclusion, and breaking down barriers.

And then the celebrations end. The banners come down. Normal operations resume. And somewhere in the organisation, an email goes out to a training vendor: “For our upcoming women’s safety workshop, we require a female instructor.”

The person writing that email is not trying to discriminate. They are trying to be considerate. But the effect of their action is discrimination. It is the exclusion of a professional from a job based purely on gender. And it stands in direct contradiction to everything the company said on March 8th.

This is not about blame. It is about consistency. Equality is not a theme for one day. It is a standard for every day. And if that standard does not apply to how you choose your trainers, it has a gap that needs attention.

“You cannot stand on a stage on March 8th and talk about breaking barriers, and then sit in a meeting on March 9th and build one. Equality is either a principle or a performance. Your vendor procurement emails will tell you which one it is.”

– Specialist Franklin Joseph

The Hidden Gender Bias in Corporate Women’s Safety Training Procurement

Let me put this as plainly as I can.

If a company announced that it would only hire a male leadership trainer because “our male employees feel more comfortable learning from a man,” every HR professional, every DEI committee member, and every legal team in the country would flag it immediately. It would be called out as discrimination. It would be seen as regressive. It would be inconsistent with every modern workplace standard.

Now take that same scenario and change one word. Replace “male” with “female.” Replace “men” with “women.” The logic is identical. The legal issues are identical. The discrimination is identical. But somehow, nobody flags it. Nobody questions it. It is accepted as thoughtfulness.

Discrimination does not become acceptable because it targets a different gender. It does not become progressive because it is wrapped in the language of care. It is still discrimination. And it still has consequences, both for the professionals being excluded and for the employees receiving less effective training as a result.

Why Self-Defence for Women Is Not Just About Learning Physical Tricks

Most people assume that women’s self-defence is simply about learning a collection of physical techniques. A few strikes, a couple of escape manoeuvres, maybe a wrist release or two. The common belief is that if a woman memorises enough “tricks,” she will be equipped to handle a violent encounter. This assumption is dangerously incomplete, and it is one of the primary reasons why gender becomes a false measuring stick for instructor selection.

When companies insist on a female instructor under the assumption that “a woman will teach women better,” they are usually imagining a workshop built around reaction-based physical tactics. These are techniques designed to respond after a crime has already begun, after someone has already grabbed, cornered, or attacked. In that scenario, consider the unavoidable reality of size and strength differentials. The average male attacker will be significantly larger, heavier, and physically stronger than the average female victim. Attempting to match that force with force, using techniques practised in a calm, controlled classroom environment, is an extraordinarily difficult path to survival. Reaction-based tactics alone, regardless of who teaches them, place the woman at an immediate and severe disadvantage because the confrontation has already started on the attacker’s terms.

Crime is rarely spontaneous. It is mostly planned. A criminal selects an environment, chooses a method, may carry weapons, may work with accomplices, and carefully times the approach. There is an entire architecture to criminal behaviour that exists long before the physical act of violence. This means that an instructor’s knowledge of crime itself must extend far beyond martial arts techniques or self-defence tricks. The instructor must understand criminal psychology, pre-attack indicators, environmental threat assessment, the physiology of fear, decision-making under extreme stress, and how to train someone to operate within the reality of a violent encounter rather than the fantasy of a choreographed classroom drill.

So women’s self-defence is not just about learning tricks. Effective training is scientifically designed to focus on how to prevent crime before it develops, how to avoid dangerous situations through awareness and planning, how to diffuse a threatening encounter before it turns physical, and how to escape when all other options have been exhausted. The physical technique is only one layer in a much larger system that prioritises the brain over the body and strategy over strength.

This is precisely why the instructor’s tactical knowledge, their understanding of criminal behaviour, their ability to train the psychological dimensions of survival, matters infinitely more than their gender.

“If all you are teaching women is how to react after a crime has already started, you are asking them to win a fight where the attacker chose the time, the place, the method, and the rules. Effective self-defence begins long before the first physical contact. It begins in the mind.”

– Specialist Franklin Joseph

How the Power to Women Workshop Merges Krav Maga with Crime Psychology

The Power to Women Corporate Self-Defence Workshop was not assembled from a single discipline. It was designed by merging two critical domains that are rarely combined in conventional women’s safety training. The first is Israeli military Krav Maga self-defence, a combat system developed for real-world threat environments where rules do not exist and survival is the only objective. The second is a comprehensive framework of psychological skills specifically engineered for how the human mind and body function under the extreme stress of criminal violence.

This merger is what separates a tactical, science-based self-defence programme from a collection of physical tricks taught in a weekend workshop. The physical techniques drawn from Krav Maga are stripped of sport and competition elements and rebuilt around the specific threat scenarios women face. But the physical layer is only half the system. The other half addresses the psychological battlefield, because in a real criminal encounter, the mind fails before the body does.

The psychological skills integrated into the Power to Women framework include:

• Pro-Active Combat Science: Training women to seize control of the encounter rather than waiting for the threat to dictate outcomes.
• Guerrilla Hit and Run Deception: Using the same tactics that predators rely on but reversing them to create confusion, disruption, and escape opportunities.
• Neuro-Behavioural Crisis Management: Conditioning the brain to process threat information rapidly instead of freezing when danger appears.
• Warrior Mindset: Building the internal psychological architecture that separates those who act from those who are acted upon.
• Fear Counterinsurgency: Transforming the raw energy of panic into focused, usable tactical response.
• Pro-Failure Conversion Technique: Reprogramming how the brain processes mistakes so that every failed attempt becomes immediate learning fuel.
• Critical Decision Life Safety Skills: Training the ability to select the correct response when a single second of indecision could mean the difference between safety and harm.
• Psychological Anti-Stress Conditioning: Developing the capacity to remain composed under extreme pressure through repeated, structured exposure.
• Dynamic Scenario Analysis Strategy: Learning to process rapidly changing threat environments and adjust tactics in real time.
• Pre-Conflict Situational Awareness: Identifying danger signals in the environment long before a threat becomes physical.
• Threat Perception: Recognising predatory behaviour patterns and hostile intent before any weapon is visible or any word is spoken.
• Post-Battle Quick Response: Understanding that the immediate moments after a violent encounter are critical for medical, psychological, and legal survival.
• Stealth and Evasive Tactics: Mastering the skill of avoiding confrontation entirely so that the most dangerous fight is the one that never happens.
• Active Warfare Emotional Balance: Sustaining rational thought and tactical clarity even when adrenaline is flooding the system.
• Verbal Modulation Instructions: Deploying tone, volume, and language as a calibrated tool to control a situation without physical contact.
• Violence De-Escalation Techniques: Neutralising a developing threat through psychological and verbal intervention before any physical engagement occurs.
• Crime Radar Deterrence Manoeuvre: Projecting body language and behavioural signals that cause predators to deselect you as a target entirely.
• Criminal Profiling and Crime Psychology: Mapping the decision-making process of a criminal to predict, disrupt, and outmanoeuvre their strategy.
• Pain Compliance and Pressure Methodology: Using precise anatomical knowledge to control or disable a larger, stronger attacker without relying on brute force.
• Emergency Risk Analysis and Management: Making life-critical decisions under time pressure when incomplete information is all that is available.
• Decrypting Pre-Crime Sequence: Identifying the brief, often overlooked warning signals that precede an attack and using that window to act first.

These are not abstract theories. They are trainable, measurable psychological competencies that have been integrated into the Power to Women programme alongside the physical combat skills drawn from Krav Maga. Together, they create a system that does not depend on the trainee being stronger, faster, or bigger than the attacker. It depends on her being smarter, more prepared, and more psychologically conditioned than the attacker expects.

This is why instructor selection must be based on mastery of this complete system, not on gender. The depth of tactical and psychological knowledge required to deliver this training is the qualification that matters.

“Physical tricks without psychological preparation is like handing someone a weapon they have never been trained to fire. In the moment of crisis, it is the mind that pulls the trigger, not the hand. Train the mind first.”

Read Franklin Joseph Corporate Women Empowerment / Self Defense ArticlesCall 9886769281 for Corporate Workshops

– Specialist Franklin Joseph

Legal Violations When Companies Specify Instructor Gender for Self-Defence Training

Let me lay out, clearly and without exaggeration, what is potentially being violated when a company makes a gender-based trainer specification.

How Article 14, 15, and 16 of the Indian Constitution Apply to Trainer Selection

Article 14 guarantees equality before law. Article 15(1) prohibits discrimination on grounds of sex. Article 16 guarantees equal opportunity in employment and explicitly bars sex-based discrimination. These are not aspirational statements. They are constitutional rights.

Employment Laws That Prohibit Gender-Based Discrimination in Vendor Procurement

Section 5 of the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976 prohibits discrimination in recruitment for the same or similar work. Section 3 of the Code on Wages, 2019 reinforces this prohibition. Both apply in spirit to service engagement and procurement, not just permanent employment.

What the POSH Act Actually Says About Self-Defence Trainer Gender Requirements

The Act requires awareness and safety training. It does not specify the gender of the trainer. The Act’s entire purpose is to eliminate gender-based bias and stereotyping. Requiring a female-only trainer runs counter to that purpose.

Why BFOQ Does Not Apply to Women’s Self-Defence Instruction

Gender may be specified as a requirement only when it is genuinely essential to the job. Self-defense instruction is based on knowledge, communication, and expertise. Gender is not essential to performing it. The BFOQ exception does not apply here.

How Gender-Based Trainer Mandates Contradict Corporate DEI Policies

Most major corporations have DEI policies that explicitly state: we do not discriminate based on gender in hiring or vendor engagement. A “female instructor only” requirement directly contradicts this stated policy.

SEBI Guidelines and Companies Act on Non-Discriminatory Procurement Practices

The Companies Act, 2013 and SEBI corporate governance guidelines expect fairness, transparency, and non-discrimination in all business operations, including procurement.

International Laws and ESG Frameworks That Apply to Gender Discrimination in Training

• ILO Convention No. 111 (Discrimination in Employment and Occupation): Prohibits any distinction based on sex that impairs equality. Ratified by India.
• CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women): Specifically targets gender stereotyping. Requiring a female trainer based on comfort assumptions is a textbook example. Ratified by India.
• UN Sustainable Development Goal 5: Calls for gender equality and ending all forms of discrimination.
• UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights: Expects businesses to respect the right to non-discrimination in all operations.
• ESG Reporting Standards: The Social component assesses non-discrimination and equal opportunity in procurement and business practices.
• Title VII of the U.S. Civil Rights Act, 1964: For companies with U.S. operations or clients, prohibits gender-based employment discrimination with only very narrow BFOQ exceptions that do not include training and instruction.

This is a substantial list. And it is not theoretical. These are enforceable frameworks that govern how businesses operate. A well-intentioned email asking for a female instructor touches all of them.

Why Women’s Self-Defence Keeps Failing: The Three Phases of Getting the Focus Wrong

I keep coming back to this because I think it captures the problem perfectly.

For years, the women’s safety conversation has been going through phases, each one focusing on the wrong thing.

Phase one focused on the victim. Her clothes, her behaviour, her choices. As if she caused the crime.

Phase two focused on martial arts. Karate, kickboxing, Krav Maga. As if learning to fight in a controlled gym would prepare someone for an uncontrolled street attack.

Phase three focuses on the instructor’s gender. As if the most important thing about the person teaching you to survive a crime is what gender they happen to be.

At no point in any of these phases has the primary focus been on the crime itself. On how criminals think. On how fear operates. On what actually happens during an attack and what determines whether someone survives it.

That is the conversation we need to be having. And it is the conversation I have been trying to start for decades.

“We have managed to make the women’s self-defense conversation about everything except the one thing it should be about: the crime. The victim’s clothes do not matter. The martial arts style does not matter. The instructor’s gender does not matter. The crime matters. And until we focus on that, we are not protecting anyone.”

– Specialist Franklin Joseph

What Competency-Based Self-Defence Trainer Selection Looks Like in Practice

If your company genuinely believes in the equality it celebrates on International Women’s Day, here is what that looks like when applied to self-defense training.

It looks like evaluating every instructor on the same criteria: expertise in tactical and psychological self-defence methodology, depth of knowledge in criminal behaviour and crime psychology, track record of delivering measurable outcomes, and relevance to real-world crime scenarios that women actually face.

It looks like selecting the instructor who will give your employees the best possible preparation for real danger, based on that instructor’s mastery of both the physical combat system and the psychological survival framework, not based on any other factor.

It looks like trusting your women employees to learn from the most qualified professional available, because you believe in their strength and their ability to engage with anyone who has something valuable to teach them.

It looks like challenging your employees to grow, not shielding them from growth opportunities.

It looks like making sure that the principles in your IWD speech are the same principles in your vendor procurement email.

Read Franklin Joseph Corporate Women Empowerment / Self Defense ArticlesCall 9886769281 for Corporate Workshops

“Equality in the training room means one thing: the best person teaches. That is it. No gender filters. No comfort-based assumptions. No double standards. Just competence. If you can do that, you are practising what you preach. If you cannot, the speech on March 8th was just a speech.”

– Specialist Franklin Joseph

Why Specialist Franklin Joseph’s TEDx Talk Is Essential Viewing Before Any Corporate Self-Defense Workshop

Specialist Franklin Joseph is a TEDx Speaker whose presentation on crime psychology and personal safety puts into public language what most self-defense training quietly ignores. He does not offer reassurance in that talk. He offers clarity, explaining precisely why the conventional approach to personal safety is built backwards and what needs to change for training to produce genuine preparedness rather than manufactured confidence.

The Power to Women Corporate Self-Defense Workshop is the applied version of that argument. Where the TEDx talk makes the intellectual case, the workshop delivers the practical training. Both are anchored in the same core belief: that safety begins with understanding crime, not just practicing responses to it.

Watch the TEDx talk here: Specialist Franklin Joseph | TEDx Talk on Personal Safety and Crime Psychology

Real Women’s Empowerment Through Tactical and Psychological Self-Defence Training

I want to end with this, because I think it gets to the heart of everything I have been saying.

Empowering women is not about removing challenges from their path. It is about building their capacity to handle those challenges. It is not about curating comfortable environments. It is about developing the inner strength to function effectively in uncomfortable ones.

When we assume that a woman cannot learn from the most tactically and psychologically qualified instructor available, we are not empowering her. We are limiting her. We are drawing a boundary around what we think she can handle, and that boundary is based on assumptions rather than her actual ability.

Real empowerment says: you are strong enough to learn from anyone. Real empowerment says: your ability to grow is not limited by who your teacher is. Real empowerment says: we trust you to handle this, and we are going to give you the best training available, because you deserve nothing less.

Real empowerment also means giving women access to the complete system of preparation, one that trains them to take initiative before a threat materialises rather than scrambling to respond after it has begun, that teaches them to turn an aggressor’s own strategy into a disadvantage, that conditions their nervous system to process danger with clarity rather than collapse into paralysis, that builds the inner resolve which determines who survives and who does not, that converts the raw flood of fear into focused purposeful action, that trains them to choose decisively in the fraction of a second where hesitation could cause irreversible harm, that teaches them to remain composed under extreme pressure because composure in crisis is a skill that can be built through deliberate practice, that equips them to read a shifting dangerous environment and adapt their response as the situation changes, that sharpens their ability to detect danger long before it takes shape, that develops their capacity to sense hostile intent when no visible threat has yet appeared, that prepares them for the critical moments immediately following a violent event when survival depends on the next few decisions, that gives them the ability to avoid confrontation entirely so that the battles they never fight become their greatest victories, that teaches them to maintain rational thought even when their body is flooded with stress hormones, that trains their voice as a precision instrument for controlling a situation, that equips them to shut down a developing threat before any physical contact is made, that makes them invisible to those scanning for easy targets, that gives them insight into how a criminal selects and approaches a victim, that teaches them to use anatomical knowledge to overcome a physically stronger attacker, that trains them to make life-saving decisions with incomplete information under extreme time pressure, and that teaches them to recognise the brief almost invisible signals that precede an attack so they can act before the attacker does.

That is the message your women employees need to hear. On International Women’s Day. And on every other day of the year.

“Empowering women means believing in their strength, not organising the world around their assumed fragility. The moment you stop underestimating a woman is the moment you start empowering her. And that is a moment that has nothing to do with a calendar date.”

– Specialist Franklin Joseph