There are a couple points that you make that need to be considered more. To start with, 47 is hardly a number that will provide any statistical certainty. The second, and more important point, is the relationship between the perpetrator and their victim. What was the relationship between these perpetrator that were interviewed and the victims they were sizing up? I'm assuming they were strangers, unknown to each other. However, the majority of women are assaulted, physically and sexually, know the perpetrator, with many being past or current partners. That doesn't exactly make the situations comparable

One in five raped? Irena, maybe you should dial down the propaganda? What you will find if you check back on the stats with an open mind is that at worse the figure has been invented, at best it has an extremely broad definition of rape - being groped, say - come to think of it, you could get to one in five easily using that definition. But I think its always best to be honest about these things and note that its adopting a broad definition.

Of course domestic violence is a serious issue but it is always best not to repeated any figure, no mater how outlandish, without some qualification, simply to highlight your case.

Take out the Indigeneous, homosexual and muslim communities and the figures for dv and rape drop dramatically. Mind you with sickos wanting to sexualise kids and confuse them through 'safe'schools programs along with the porn industry rates are bound to increase.

Hard to argue with any of that given my Girls learnt both!

Even so, I'd be happier if they could of their own choosing carry a concealed handgun.

A little .22 or .25, with a fifteen round mag, would suffice, and carried on a holster on the inner thigh, not in the purse, given if attacked that would be the first thing ripped away.

Just as teaching kids to swim is a good idea, teaching them drown proofing is likely a better one.

A screaming gang leader clutching his testicles after having them damaged by a few well placed bullets, fired at very close range is likely to prevent others from following his lead?

You need other strategies as well, like when going for a run, take the dog.

And if going for night out, take a mate and make sure you drink only from bottles or premixed cans, you've opened.

As for proffered pills, if you don't know what's in them don't be fooled by the assurances of a complete stranger!

Better to go home in a taxi a little worse for wear, than wake up unable to move, with a dozen men taking turns to brutally violate your defenceless paralyzed body.

And even should you ever recover from that?

Possibly not from the STD's you might be infected with in the brutal rape!

The sooner we are given the right to protect ourselves with lethal force, the better, given reasonable cause.

It just takes seconds for home invaders to violate the safety of your inner sanctum or attack from behind and minutes for police to respond.

Armed cowards invariably pick the most vulnerable targets, drunk and or drugged girls or cripples! Hardly ever well built and rugged blokes.

They punch from behind or use iron bars and what have you.

And no matter how adept you are at martial arts, replete with stiletto heels, sometimes that's not enough!
Rhrosty.

I see your point Irena, but you are going too far.

No amount of martial arts training will turn a timid person into a lion heart. It just doesn't work that way.

Some people, regardless of gender will fight back, some will run away, but some will meekly submit. The training may make some confident enough to fight back, but most will simply be a meek person, who could fight back, but won't.

This doesn't mean I don't think it is worth doing, but don't expect it will work in more than a limited number of people.

All good comments so far, but I tend to favour the Rhosty solution.

A handgun is an equaliser, whereas a 90kg male (or several of them, maybe some bloated by steroids) attacking an unarmed 60kg female is going to end in only one result.

It is naïve in the extreme to think that "martial arts classes" are of any use whatsoever in defending against domestic violence or street violence, especially the latter. Yes, positive attitude and good posture are said to be deterrents, but it remains a bit of a gamble.

The attitudes required for self-defence and the willingness to do violence to an attacker are deeply related to personality. Not everybody has them and they can't be taught, though those with the right stuff can learn to be better.

Australia lacks the private training available in the US from ex marines, rangers and navy seals. Anything less is probably a waste of time.

On the other hand, a woman's chances of avoiding violence are improved exponentially by staying out of pubs, bars and nightclubs, not walking alone after dark and not going near, late at night, places likely to hide or obscure potential attackers, such as parks, alleys and underground car parks .