Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Should women lift heavy?
Options
Replies
-
cwolfman13 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Need2BFitAgain wrote: »
And even then you're talking about spot on nutrition and very solid and specific programming...awesome genetics and years of work.
I know tons of women who lift and very few look like this even...
Good point. And if that's true, then indeed, why should women lift heavy if chances of looking like girl #2 & 3 are slim to none? Why risk disk degenerative disease, various injuries like busted shoulders and knees, and as I'm learning on this thread, uteruses falling out? Sounds like a lot of unnecessary risk.
IMO, people in general (men and women) should lift in a variety of rep ranges...specialization isn't optimal unless you're actually training for some specific event or whatever. As a matter of overall athleticism and fitness, a variety of rep ranges is optimal.
Also, the women in the pictures don't look like they're lifting "heavy"...as in low rep/high % of 1 RM...they look like physique competitors which would emphasize moderate to low weight/moderate to high rep and a premium on time under tension and quite a bit of volume.
There are two physique competitors at my gym and that's how they train...and they practically live there and they're the only two women I know personally who look like that...because they train to compete on stage...and they don't look like that all of the time, only when they're contest ready. Most of the year they have flat stomachs, but they don't walk around all year with visible abs...most of they year they just look like they're really fit, not shredded for the stage.
Good to know. Sounds much more appealing.
0 -
You saucy minx!diannethegeek wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »
Steady on.diannethegeek wrote: »Yes women should go ahead and lift heavy if they want to.
It's okay if they show their ankles, too.
5 -
Traveler120 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Need2BFitAgain wrote: »
And even then you're talking about spot on nutrition and very solid and specific programming...awesome genetics and years of work.
I know tons of women who lift and very few look like this even...
Good point. And if that's true, then indeed, why should women lift heavy if chances of looking like girl #2 & 3 are slim to none? Why risk disk degenerative disease, various injuries like busted shoulders and knees, and as I'm learning on this thread, uteruses falling out? Sounds like a lot of unnecessary risk.
IMO, people in general (men and women) should lift in a variety of rep ranges...specialization isn't optimal unless you're actually training for some specific event or whatever. As a matter of overall athleticism and fitness, a variety of rep ranges is optimal.
Also, the women in the pictures don't look like they're lifting "heavy"...as in low rep/high % of 1 RM...they look like physique competitors which would emphasize moderate to low weight/moderate to high rep and a premium on time under tension and quite a bit of volume.
There are two physique competitors at my gym and that's how they train...and they practically live there and they're the only two women I know personally who look like that...because they train to compete on stage...and they don't look like that all of the time, only when they're contest ready. Most of the year they have flat stomachs, but they don't walk around all year with visible abs...most of they year they just look like they're really fit, not shredded for the stage.
Good to know. Sounds much more appealing.
One of those women I was talking about recently trained for and competed in a power lifting meet...her first ever. She did train heavy for that because that's what "heavy" is for...maximal strength. She ran a power lifting routine I think for about 4 months...she took 2nd but broke the state squat record for her weight class which was even more impressive because she put on 10 Lbs when she could have just cut and competed in a lower weight class.
She's back to her usual thing now...but it's pretty cool to diversify.2 -
quiksylver296 wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Need2BFitAgain wrote: »
And even then you're talking about spot on nutrition and very solid and specific programming...awesome genetics and years of work.
I know tons of women who lift and very few look like this even...
Good point. And if that's true, then indeed, why should women lift heavy if chances of looking like girl #2 & 3 are slim to none? Why risk disk degenerative disease, various injuries like busted shoulders and knees, and as I'm learning on this thread, uteruses falling out? Sounds like a lot of unnecessary risk.
Because it's freaking fun to pull 330 pounds off the floor.
It might be, but it's not a goal everyone has nor that everyone can achieve.
I can't lift heavy, it triggers my migraines.
It's okay to do other forms of resistance training. I get that it's wonderful to lift heavy if it's something you want to do, but I think that for those of us who can't or don't want to, the other options open to us as viable alternatives for bone health and just overall physical fitness should be given equal time in these discussions.4 -
Today I saw a 72 year old lady leg press 185 lbs10
-
Are we still talking about what women should or should not do at this day and age?
16 -
0
-
Every human who wants to great strong should lift heavy.
Heavy is relative to the individual.But we should all try to reach our own potential.That's what being alive is all about.2 -
Everyone should lift as heavy as they can. That's the beauty of weight lifting. What may be heavy to me may be light to someone else. Looking good naked is a great reason to lift weights, but ADLs (activities of daily living) is the best reason. Functional fitness. As a nurse, I see so many people who aren't "old enough" to have lost the physical functions they've lost already.
https://youtu.be/vZRCkUzROr0 1 -
Traveler120 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Need2BFitAgain wrote: »
And even then you're talking about spot on nutrition and very solid and specific programming...awesome genetics and years of work.
I know tons of women who lift and very few look like this even...
Good point. And if that's true, then indeed, why should women lift heavy if chances of looking like girl #2 & 3 are slim to none? Why risk disk degenerative disease, various injuries like busted shoulders and knees, and as I'm learning on this thread, uteruses falling out? Sounds like a lot of unnecessary risk.
You pick and choose your risks. You may not look exactly like these women, but many find they look awesome in their own bodies and the risks are worth it. Not lifting carries the unnecessary risk of bone density issues, frailty, increased falls in the elderly, increased PCOS symptoms and insulin resistance, weak joints and ligaments...etc.
I don't lift heavy because I don't like it and I'm very limited to what I'm allowed to do due to spinal issues. This doesn't mean I'm avoiding risk. I might have less risk of busting a shoulder but I'm at a higher risk for insulin resistance which is a real possibility given that I was prediabetic at one point. You judge for yourself and evaluate which route you are willing to walk, accepting the possibility of something unpleasant happening regardless of choice.2 -
diannethegeek wrote: »Yes women should go ahead and lift heavy if they want to.
It's okay if they show their ankles, too.
whoo...slow it down, next you'll think they should be allowed to vote.3 -
amusedmonkey wrote: »Traveler120 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Need2BFitAgain wrote: »
And even then you're talking about spot on nutrition and very solid and specific programming...awesome genetics and years of work.
I know tons of women who lift and very few look like this even...
Good point. And if that's true, then indeed, why should women lift heavy if chances of looking like girl #2 & 3 are slim to none? Why risk disk degenerative disease, various injuries like busted shoulders and knees, and as I'm learning on this thread, uteruses falling out? Sounds like a lot of unnecessary risk.
You pick and choose your risks. You may not look exactly like these women, but many find they look awesome in their own bodies and the risks are worth it. Not lifting carries the unnecessary risk of bone density issues, frailty, increased falls in the elderly, increased PCOS symptoms and insulin resistance, weak joints and ligaments...etc.
I don't lift heavy because I don't like it and I'm very limited to what I'm allowed to do due to spinal issues. This doesn't mean I'm avoiding risk. I might have less risk of busting a shoulder but I'm at a higher risk for insulin resistance which is a real possibility given that I was prediabetic at one point. You judge for yourself and evaluate which route you are willing to walk, accepting the possibility of something unpleasant happening regardless of choice.
We're talking about lifting "heavy", not resistance training in general. If the goal is overall fitness, strength, bone health and all the other things you listed, plus looking bloody good, then lifting heavy is just not necessary. You know, there is such a thing as moderation. There's a lot of space between the 2 extremes of either heavy lifting or doing nothing.
All those benefits can be accomplished with a more moderate approach like @cwolfman13 described - "low to moderate weights with moderate to high reps and focus on time under tension as well as high volume". And there are many forms of exercise that will achieve this, such as bodyweight training, which poses the lowest risk of injury compared to heavy barbell training. Some of the most amazing bodies have been achieved without the use of heavy barbells/heavy lifting.
1 -
Now I wonder what everyone's definition of "heavy" is. If I could lift 300 (not there yet) but lifted 200 is that heavy? Or is there a max weight you think people should stop at regardless of their ability and/or potential?
It has to do with what's challenging for a certain number of reps -- 3-5 or something like that -- with the idea that you keep progressing as necessary to keep it challenging. Plus the major compound lifts. A program like SL 5x5 would be lifting heavy, as well as many other things.
I think it's often used more broadly on MFP to just mean lifting weights that are challenging without it becoming basically cardio.0 -
For the record, I saw the question as akin to "should women (and not just men) run marathons." I'd have the same answer -- of course, if they want. Does that mean that it's always the best thing for your health to run marathons? No, it's not, and you should have some idea of what you are doing before just jumping into the training, probably, just like you should learn something about lifting and definitely form. But there's nothing about being a woman that means you should not do it.4
-
Traveler120 wrote: »cwolfman13 wrote: »Need2BFitAgain wrote: »
And even then you're talking about spot on nutrition and very solid and specific programming...awesome genetics and years of work.
I know tons of women who lift and very few look like this even...
Good point. And if that's true, then indeed, why should women lift heavy if chances of looking like girl #2 & 3 are slim to none? Why risk disk degenerative disease, various injuries like busted shoulders and knees, and as I'm learning on this thread, uteruses falling out? Sounds like a lot of unnecessary risk.
None of those things are terribly common. Many of the risks can be moderated further by good form, and thoughtful progression. Nothing is risk-free.
Yes, I noted your distinction elsewhere between "lifting heavy" and "resistance training". Other forms of resistance training also have risks. While lifting low-rep/high-weight may increase some risks vs. more moderate lifting, I'd guess it isn't a huge difference.
Personally, I'm too *green-vegetable* lazy to lift heavy or much at all, because I don't find lifting all that fun. Yet I have a decent amount of both strength and muscle, especially for my age, mainly from rowing a lot. People get hurt rowing: Broken ribs, knee issues, rotator cuff problems, all that jazz . . . even drowning. One poor soul in a single even got his pancreas skewered by a bow-ball in a collision with an eight! Love rowing, gonna do it anyway.
Statistically, I strongly suspect many, many more women suffer injury from doing no strength/resistance training, than suffer injury from lifting too heavy, too often. Even women get to make choices.6 -
Women should lift heavy, but you must treat the weights as if they were a basalisk - no direct eye contact, as that is what causes a woman to instantly supah-bulky. Always use mirrors or through lenses and you'll be safe, otherwise stick to the safe cardio zone, as the supah-bulky virus flees from that area.
I saw a woman contract the supah-bulky once, it wasn't pretty.
She transformed like a werewolf, it was horrifying.
Seriously though. A woman who wants to lift should lift as heavy as she can safely lift. No shame in starting on 5, 10, 15kgs and working from there.10 -
Poor fragile women should def not lift heavy. All sorts of strength & confidence might happen.8
-
Aqua_Sony2012 wrote: »Thoughts?
If they want to. It depends on personal preference and goals. Every woman should do some form of resistance training to preserve bone and muscle, but lifting heavy is not the only way to accomplish that.2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 390 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 922 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions