Shoot

I don't mean to imply that their not worth striking if available. It's better than say kicking someone in the shin. I just don't think it can be relied on like you commonly see in a self defense book where the middle aged martial arts guy in blue jeans, sneakers, and a white tee-shirt playing the attacker doubles over with his hands holding his groin making that "ooof ooof" face for the final knockout blow to the chin. Guys instinctively protect their groin very well, so it's not so easy to carry out. When guys posture for attack they instinctively put themselves in a staggered semi-athletic stance. Not many attackers are going to stand with their legs spread right in front of you. Also, the number one instinct to intercept an incoming foot to balls is to grab the offending foot and proceed to try and do something really mean in response.

I'll have to say this too about self defense programs and martial arts in general. I have always noted a tendancy to discount the fighting and athletic instincts that we are born with. Martial arts are a refinement of what occurs to us naturally. I don't need to study martial arts for 10 years to know that taking on an athletic stance in a fight is a good idea or to try to tackle and get on top of someone to beat the snot out of them. The "mount" is just a word for something men have been doing for thousands of years in combat with absolutely no training at all. Every person is born with fighting instincts and should not be underestimated.

I also agree that squeezing in close quarters is a compromise and judgment call. Squeezing means one or both of your hands are occupied and a severely violent reaction is predictible--e.g. eye gouging, fish hooking, ear ripping etc... Of course if a man is wearing pants during the squeeze it may be hard to even get to them.