Why Women Should Not Run (as their only means to lose)

UsedToBeHusky

also, tired of men telling me what i should be doing.

I hope that's not truly your view. Ever consider this book?

It's written by this guy

I've read this AND it works! AND he recommends moderate cardio as opposed to excessive cardio like what is described in this article. Go figure!

bettepower

Some people are angry.

Some people don't like being told that they're doing things wrong.

Some women don't like men.

Some people read anything that differs from their own views as a personal attack.

This is the interwebs.

Some men don't like women. (I actually see a lot more of that here)

JoanB5

Cross Train.

That is all.

Azdak

Yeah that's what I thought. Like much of what's on the internet, this is a article that some doofus wrote months ago and is now being copied ad libitum.

New lipstick.

Same pig.

Azdak

And I'm actually getting kind of tired of these self-proclaimed "experts" herein dictating how they think other people should diet and/or train. Everybody is different and every BODY is different. And, let's face it, what works for a man won't work for a woman. And, no offense, I quite frankly know of no woman personally who thinks chiseled gym rats who are so "buff" they can't even hold their own arms naturally are attractive. LOL.

They just hatin cause us "buff" guys won't give them the time of day

Like these guys.

JeffseekingV

Yeah that's what I thought. Like much of what's on the internet, this is a article that some doofus wrote months ago and is now being copied ad libitum.

New lipstick.

Same pig.

Is there something specific that you don't agree with? I see alot of women here post that even though they eat XX calories and do XX cardio, their weight stagnates or goes up. For medical reasons. He cites one here. Or offers one at least.

richardheath

He's not anti-cardio. He's anti-excessive cardio. And there's no mention of a severe calorie deficit in the article. It might be a case where cardio is taking off muscle and the binging is putting on fat because there's no weight training involved.

Not anti-cardio? What was the title of the article again???

And maybe there is no mention of excessive deficit because he DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE STUDIES HE IS TALKING ABOUT.

I'm all for weight training. But send this link to 10 cardio bunny friends. How many will start weight training vs how many will just hang up their running shoes? I'd guess many more will do the latter.

Azdak

Yeah that's what I thought. Like much of what's on the internet, this is a article that some doofus wrote months ago and is now being copied ad libitum.

New lipstick.

Same pig.

Is there something specific that you don't agree with? I see alot of women here post that even though they eat XX calories and do XX cardio, their weight stagnates or goes up. For medical reasons. He cites one here. Or offers one at least.

People "see" what they want to see.

I commented on this extensively the last time it was posted here, which is why I do not care to do it again.

Suffice to say that this is a classic example of cherrypicking "micro" data to make unsupported "macro" generalizations, primarily to fit the ideological agenda of the author.

Can you really take someone seriously who says something like this:

Steady-state activities like this devastate the female metabolism.

with a straight face?

RonnieLodge

With a G cup bust, I know I was never built for running long or even medium distances. Really disliked trying to force myself to do it, too.

HIIT and lifting all the way!

MisterDerpington

And I'm actually getting kind of tired of these self-proclaimed "experts" herein dictating how they think other people should diet and/or train. Everybody is different and every BODY is different. And, let's face it, what works for a man won't work for a woman. And, no offense, I quite frankly know of no woman personally who thinks chiseled gym rats who are so "buff" they can't even hold their own arms naturally are attractive. LOL.

They just hatin cause us "buff" guys won't give them the time of day

Like these guys.

Yeah it's so gross how they can probably lift 10x+ more than you and me.

JeffseekingV

He's not anti-cardio. He's anti-excessive cardio. And there's no mention of a severe calorie deficit in the article. It might be a case where cardio is taking off muscle and the binging is putting on fat because there's no weight training involved.

Not anti-cardio? What was the title of the article again???

And maybe there is no mention of excessive deficit because he DOES NOT UNDERSTAND THE STUDIES HE IS TALKING ABOUT.

I'm all for weight training. But send this link to 10 cardio bunny friends. How many will start weight training vs how many will just hang up their running shoes? I'd guess many more will do the latter.

He's not anti cardio. As per the article's contents. No mention of deficit because he mentions those particlar ladies pigging out.

You have cardio bunny friends? You mean many will take the article's advice and stop cardio all the time? That might be beneifical. As least in the deficit terms you are referring to

JeffseekingV

Yeah that's what I thought. Like much of what's on the internet, this is a article that some doofus wrote months ago and is now being copied ad libitum.

New lipstick.

Same pig.

Is there something specific that you don't agree with? I see alot of women here post that even though they eat XX calories and do XX cardio, their weight stagnates or goes up. For medical reasons. He cites one here. Or offers one at least.

People "see" what they want to see.

I commented on this extensively the last time it was posted here, which is why I do not care to do it again.

Suffice to say that this is a classic example of cherrypicking "micro" data to make unsupported "macro" generalizations, primarily to fit the ideological agenda of the author.

Can you really take someone seriously who says something like this:

Steady-state activities like this devastate the female metabolism.

with a straight face?

The agenda of the author is to get women to lift more and not so much cardio. In order to try to maintain or gain muscle mass for improved body composition. That's what I take from it.

Azdak

Yeah that's what I thought. Like much of what's on the internet, this is a article that some doofus wrote months ago and is now being copied ad libitum.

New lipstick.

Same pig.

Is there something specific that you don't agree with? I see alot of women here post that even though they eat XX calories and do XX cardio, their weight stagnates or goes up. For medical reasons. He cites one here. Or offers one at least.

People "see" what they want to see.

I commented on this extensively the last time it was posted here, which is why I do not care to do it again.

Suffice to say that this is a classic example of cherrypicking "micro" data to make unsupported "macro" generalizations, primarily to fit the ideological agenda of the author.

Can you really take someone seriously who says something like this:

Steady-state activities like this devastate the female metabolism.

with a straight face?

The agenda of the author is to get women to lift more and not so much cardio. In order to try to maintain or gain muscle mass for improved body composition. That's what I take from it.

I'm sure that women all over the world are reassured that there is another dopey guy out there telling them what they must do with their bodies.

JeffseekingV

Yeah that's what I thought. Like much of what's on the internet, this is a article that some doofus wrote months ago and is now being copied ad libitum.

New lipstick.

Same pig.

Is there something specific that you don't agree with? I see alot of women here post that even though they eat XX calories and do XX cardio, their weight stagnates or goes up. For medical reasons. He cites one here. Or offers one at least.

People "see" what they want to see.

I commented on this extensively the last time it was posted here, which is why I do not care to do it again.

Suffice to say that this is a classic example of cherrypicking "micro" data to make unsupported "macro" generalizations, primarily to fit the ideological agenda of the author.

Can you really take someone seriously who says something like this:

Steady-state activities like this devastate the female metabolism.

with a straight face?

The agenda of the author is to get women to lift more and not so much cardio. In order to try to maintain or gain muscle mass for improved body composition. That's what I take from it.

I'm sure that women all over the world are reassured that there is another dopey guy out there telling them what they must do with their bodies.

I guess the New Rules for Lifting for Women is a complete waste of time because it was written by a male

Azdak

Yeah that's what I thought. Like much of what's on the internet, this is a article that some doofus wrote months ago and is now being copied ad libitum.

New lipstick.

Same pig.

Is there something specific that you don't agree with? I see alot of women here post that even though they eat XX calories and do XX cardio, their weight stagnates or goes up. For medical reasons. He cites one here. Or offers one at least.

People "see" what they want to see.

I commented on this extensively the last time it was posted here, which is why I do not care to do it again.

Suffice to say that this is a classic example of cherrypicking "micro" data to make unsupported "macro" generalizations, primarily to fit the ideological agenda of the author.

Can you really take someone seriously who says something like this:

Steady-state activities like this devastate the female metabolism.

with a straight face?

The agenda of the author is to get women to lift more and not so much cardio. In order to try to maintain or gain muscle mass for improved body composition. That's what I take from it.

I'm sure that women all over the world are reassured that there is another dopey guy out there telling them what they must do with their bodies.

I guess the New Rules for Lifting for Women is a complete waste of time because it was written by a male

If you don't know the difference between dog poop and a Hershey bar--you shouldn't be the one to go out and buy the Halloween candy.

JeffseekingV

Yeah that's what I thought. Like much of what's on the internet, this is a article that some doofus wrote months ago and is now being copied ad libitum.

New lipstick.

Same pig.

Is there something specific that you don't agree with? I see alot of women here post that even though they eat XX calories and do XX cardio, their weight stagnates or goes up. For medical reasons. He cites one here. Or offers one at least.

People "see" what they want to see.

I commented on this extensively the last time it was posted here, which is why I do not care to do it again.

Suffice to say that this is a classic example of cherrypicking "micro" data to make unsupported "macro" generalizations, primarily to fit the ideological agenda of the author.

Can you really take someone seriously who says something like this:

Steady-state activities like this devastate the female metabolism.

with a straight face?

The agenda of the author is to get women to lift more and not so much cardio. In order to try to maintain or gain muscle mass for improved body composition. That's what I take from it.

I'm sure that women all over the world are reassured that there is another dopey guy out there telling them what they must do with their bodies.

I guess the New Rules for Lifting for Women is a complete waste of time because it was written by a male

If you don't know the difference between dog poop and a Hershey bar--you shouldn't be the one to go out and buy the Halloween candy.

I think I do. I asked you to quantify vs just throwing out flaming accusations. Besides, you said you're done with this thread. Contradiction #1.

You're main contention is that this is a guy telling women what to do with their bodies.

Azdak

I know you posted the article, and obviously like the theme and I understand you might take some umbrage at my dismissive reaction. And it's probably not fair to keep going back and forth after I already said I didn't feel like taking time to detail my objections any more than I did.

I will close by saying that I have seen this argument written numerous times -- it is the current "fad du jour" for anyone trying to make a name for themselves. As someone with experience in this field, I can spot the intellectual dishonesty of the author's arguments. I find the tone of this article particularly repugnant and misongynistic. If the author truly wanted to make the case that women "need to lift more weights" -- like that's something the world desperately needs, because, god knows, that subject has NEVER been covered before--there are ways to present that information that are informative and accurate. This article does neither and thus IMO it deserves to be treated with both scorn and derision--which I have tried my best to do.

andiechick

Agree, I'm wanting to start lifting as I've found cardio hasn't worked and I want a better shape and definition to my body which I know will come with lifting

Alex_is_Hawks

Unless the "better results" they're looking for are running longer and faster :bigsmile:

This....or they just like the elliptical...

who knows...who cares...

don't get me wrong...i lift...and i'm on the lifting bandwagon...i totally love it...

i just see both sides of the fence and I don't presume to "exercise shame" other peoples preferences and enjoyments...

when you first start working out after not working out for a long time...you're told to find something you love doing...

maybe just maybe that is what they love doing and nothing else will keep them in the habit of staying healthy...

who knows...

JeffseekingV

I know you posted the article, and obviously like the theme and I understand you might take some umbrage at my dismissive reaction. And it's probably not fair to keep going back and forth after I already said I didn't feel like taking time to detail my objections any more than I did.

I will close by saying that I have seen this argument written numerous times -- it is the current "fad du jour" for anyone trying to make a name for themselves. As someone with experience in this field, I can spot the intellectual dishonesty of the author's arguments. I find the tone of this article particularly repugnant and misongynistic. If the author truly wanted to make the case that women "need to lift more weights" -- like that's something the world desperately needs, because, god knows, that subject has NEVER been covered before--there are ways to present that information that are informative and accurate. This article does neither and thus IMO it deserves to be treated with both scorn and derision--which I have tried my best to do.

From that last 3-4 replies, it seems you don't like HOW he presented the message vs what the message was. You should have lead with that vs just displaying your displeasure and trying to descredit the author