Reasons for Violence

People become aggressive for a variety of reasons, sometimes simply because they don’t have any positive outlets for that aggression (such as sport, exercise or healthy argument/discussion) and so certain situations give them the excuse/outlet they are looking for, but more oftentimes due to a perceived lack (or loss) of status and esteem, where the person in question sees no alternative methods or ways but violence to rectify this. If an individual believes that they are not being recognized or acknowledged by others, to be seen as they see themselves they may feel forced to demonstrate their significance using violence.

If you knock a drink over somebody in a bar/pub, and this occurs in front of their friends, they will probably feel a myriad of emotions including: humiliation, shame, loss of status etc. If not given a way to subdue these feelings and save face in the situation they may feel/believe that the only way to rectify the way they see themselves being perceived  is to become aggressive and violent i.e. dominate the situation this way. In their mind there is no other alternative.

We are social creatures and social status is extremely important to us. How we are seen by others matters. It is difficult for somebody to back away from what could be perceived as social slight, whether it is real or not. If a person sees no alternatives to solving a problem i.e. regaining their position in the pecking order/social spectrum, other than by using violence they will become violent. If a person hasn’t developed other methods of resolutions, such as by discussion and negotiation etc and they are already “pent up” through having no natural releases for their “natural aggression” (and aggression is an innate part of our behavioral make up), they are more likely to gravitate towards using violence. Often we make the mistake of believing that people act after going through the same decision-making process as ourselves, and by seeing the situation as we see it. Both are false premises to work from.

The same situation can be viewed entirely differently by different players in it. The person who spills a drink over someone understands how the accident happened e.g. they moved to avoid someone and their elbow knocked against a glass on a table. The person who the drink has spilt over, realizes they are wet, their clothes stained and everyone is waiting to see how they act to this injustice. It matters little whether the event was seen as an accident, the audience is waiting to see how everything plays out. In a wolf pack, it matters little if a particular wolf curls up to sleep where another dog normally sleeps by accident etc, they have made a challenge that needs to be answered. Humans are no different – we rise to such challenges.

Whether a person chooses to become violent in such a situation is normally dependent on their belief in their ability to handle themselves in the situation – people become violent because they can. If the person knocking the drink over is 6ft 5 and weighs 320 lbs of pure muscle and the person who has had the drink spilt over them, weighs little more than a photocopy of themselves they are less likely to see physical violence as an option, than if the roles were reversed. Unless, that is, they have something that could equalize such physical inequalities such as a knife or gone. People become violent because they can.

When trying to diffuse potentially violent situations you need to do the following things:

  1. Allow the person to regain their social status
  2. Show them an alternative to physical violence
  3. Demonstrate that they don’t have the ability or means to become violent

This is the beauty of Krav Maga Yashir’s “De-escalation” or “Interview Stance”. Firstly it is non-confrontational. Although an action or behavior could be misinterpreted as challenging e.g. knocking a drink over someone, the body posture adopted immediately afterwards with the hands up in a non-confrontational  manner, demonstrates that this isn’t the case. De-escalation stance is the only stance that you will ever have time to adopt, as it is used in the pre-conflict phase of violence. If you are suddenly assaulted without warning there is no time to adopt any stance.

By creating distance and putting up a “non-confrontational guard” to protect you, you give a potentially violent person the time to question whether they are able to attack you. This moment of hesitation is what allows you the time to show/demonstrate alternatives to violence e.g. offer to buy another drink, pay for dry cleaning etc. Never deny responsibility as it is to reaffirm that what has actually happened is/was a deliberate challenge. Even if what has happened, hasn’t happened e.g. if someone makes the challenge “are you looking at me?” the correct answer is “yes”, qualified by a reason, such as, “I’m sorry I was just spacing out I had a hell of a day at work and I was just lost in my thoughts of whether I’d be fired or not.” You don’t deny the situation but you demonstrate you are anything but a threat. In fact you’re somebody that your aggressor should feel sorry for and if they do start to become aggressive you can always demonstrate your non-victim status by adding, “,which is why I’m in this foul mood and I feel like I’ve nothing else to lose, in fact I just want to kill somebody…” (I’m just kidding on this last part).

The key things in de-escalation spontaneously violent situations are not to deny what has happened, demonstrate and show alternatives to violence, to show you are not a threat whilst at the same time making the person understand that while you accept all of the above you, yourself are not a victim. All this should be done from your de-escalation/interview stance.