- Share This Post
- submit
- 4
-
Sparkle (0)
In 1998, my New Year’s resolution was to lose weight. I was 167 pounds, which at under 5’2â€, was a major problem. I couldn’t fit into any clothes, and I felt like crap, psychologically and physically. Although I hated exercise, I forced myself to join a gym and began slowly, by walking on a treadmill or riding a bike. After a few months, I wanted to try jogging. I hadn’t attempted to run at all (other than when I was missing a bus or otherwise late somewhere) for years. As a child, I almost died from an asthma attack after I finished in third place in the 880 (?) yard dash during gym class. When I started jogging, I loved it. I knew I’d never be a champion runner, but I loved how I felt when I ran. And I was proud of myself. So it’s a good thing that I didn’t see this fine piece of work, WHY (MOST) WOMEN SHOULDN'T RUN by Michael Boyle, at the time.
Mr. Boyle uses some inane analogies to discourage women from running. Not just trying to win a marathon, mind you, but running at all.
I'm not sure most women should run… Here's a riddle for you.
Q- What do most female runners look like?
A- Male runners….
The problem with most women and running comes down to something they call Q angle in sportsmedicine. I won't bore you with the details, but it boils down to this. Wider hips make for narrow knees. This angle of hip to knee creates problems.
OK, I'm insulted, but still listening:
So what happens when a "normal" woman begins to run?... She becomes a physical-therapy client as she tries to shovel you-know-what against the tide. Her wider knees cause her to develop foot problems or most likely knee problems. Her greater body weight causes greater ground reaction forces. Greater ground reaction forces stress muscle tissue and breast tissue. Get my drift yet? The end result is likely to be hurt and saggy instead of the cute and little.
I must interrupt here: hurt and saggy vs. cute and little?!?!? What the fuck is this man’s problem? Is there nothing in the middle? Like running moderately for health reasons, mental health reasons (nothing clears my head like a good run), or just because we want to? Not all women run so that they can be “cute and little.†OK, back to letting himself dig his own hole:
The bottom line: Running is not good for most females. If you want higher-intensity exercise, ride a stationary bike. Take a spin class, use a stairclimber, and don't run.
Angry Feminist Running Rants snarkily replies:
I am not going to accept the idea that women should take a spinning class or use the Stairmaster because they're better for us poor little women than running. If you're going to suggest alternative activities, asshole, please try biking or hiking or kayaking. You know, something in the outfuckingdoors. Where most people run… We little women shouldn't be allowed outdoors anyway. Too much fresh air might make us more hysterical when people tell us we can't do things.
Right on, Angry Feminist Runner! There are far more appropriate ways to encourage women to exercise in a way that respects their bodies. I was not “cute and little†when I began running. I was still 20 pounds overweight. I never have needed phsycial therapy despite my "saggy" condition. I don't hurt. When I do, I stop. It's called "common sense." I highly recommend it.
Running did help me lose more even more weight over the next year and keep it off, while at the same time it helped me gain other things, like self-respect for doing something I feared and hated, admiration for my body that it could do things I never thought possible, and a newfound enjoyable hobby.
Sorry, Br. Boyle, but I think your recommendations tripped on their own feet at the starting point and were disqualified from the race. With that, I think I am going to take my "fat" knees and go for a nice run.
Suzanne blogs about the “limitations†of women at Campaign for Unshaved Snatch (CUSS) & Other Rants and is part of a group blog on nutty gym culture at People Under the Stairmasters
