Finding time to Exercise

NorthCascades wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

I'm just getting tired of us being hectored about how we do too have time to exercise and are lazy television addicts when no one in the thread said they did not have time to exercise at all.

If you didn't say you have no time to exercise then why do you feel included in whatever nebulous "us" it is that doesn't exercise? This all sounds like a strawman to me.

Um, I certainly did not say I have no time to exercise. I'm training for a marathon and do other things too. I posted upthread about how I have a commute I can use for exercise too, and that part of why I live in the city (not the only reason) is I dislike commuting by car and driving everywhere (not saying that people who live elsewhere cannot also minimize their car time if they want).

As I said, I just find it ridiculous that we are being self-righteously hectored about how Americans watch so much TV so we have time to exercise when no one said we did not. The implication of the "you do too have time to exercise" IS that someone was saying otherwise, or perhaps that they were being misunderstood as saying otherwise (instead of that 3 HOURS of daily exercise was hard to fit in).

lemurcat12 wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

I'm just getting tired of us being hectored about how we do too have time to exercise and are lazy television addicts when no one in the thread said they did not have time to exercise at all.

If you didn't say you have no time to exercise then why do you feel included in whatever nebulous "us" it is that doesn't exercise? This all sounds like a strawman to me.

Um, I certainly did not say I have no time to exercise. I'm training for a marathon and do other things too. I posted upthread about how I have a commute I can use for exercise too, and that part of why I live in the city (not the only reason) is I dislike commuting by car and driving everywhere (not saying that people who live elsewhere cannot also minimize their car time if they want).

As I said, I just find it ridiculous that we are being self-righteously hectored about how Americans watch so much TV so we have time to exercise when no one said we did not. The implication of the "you do too have time to exercise" IS that someone was saying otherwise, or perhaps that they were being misunderstood as saying otherwise (instead of that 3 HOURS of daily exercise was hard to fit in).

The 30 minutes came from a post that cited the CDC on screen time statistics and the number of Americans that don't meet the minimum exercise suggestion of 30 minutes. So while there wasn't a specific post saying "I don't exercise for 30 minutes." there was a post saying most people don't.

It seems a pretty valid and logical tangent, given the thread's title and subject matter. No one was accusing you or any other specific MFP member of not exercising for 30 min. But in general, we (the people) don't.

Need2Exerc1se wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

lemurcat12 wrote: »

I'm just getting tired of us being hectored about how we do too have time to exercise and are lazy television addicts when no one in the thread said they did not have time to exercise at all.

If you didn't say you have no time to exercise then why do you feel included in whatever nebulous "us" it is that doesn't exercise? This all sounds like a strawman to me.

Um, I certainly did not say I have no time to exercise. I'm training for a marathon and do other things too. I posted upthread about how I have a commute I can use for exercise too, and that part of why I live in the city (not the only reason) is I dislike commuting by car and driving everywhere (not saying that people who live elsewhere cannot also minimize their car time if they want).

As I said, I just find it ridiculous that we are being self-righteously hectored about how Americans watch so much TV so we have time to exercise when no one said we did not. The implication of the "you do too have time to exercise" IS that someone was saying otherwise, or perhaps that they were being misunderstood as saying otherwise (instead of that 3 HOURS of daily exercise was hard to fit in).

The 30 minutes came from a post that cited the CDC on screen time statistics and the number of Americans that don't meet the minimum exercise suggestion of 30 minutes. So while there wasn't a specific post saying "I don't exercise for 30 minutes." there was a post saying most people don't.

It seems a pretty valid and logical tangent, given the threads title and subject matter. No one was accusing you or any other specific MFP member of not exercising for 30 min. But in general, we (the people) don't.

Eh, I thought it was intentionally misleading for Packerjohn to respond to a discussion over whether it's unreasonable to expect 3 hours per day of exercise (which of course no one was saying -- the poster in question didn't claim to exercise 3 hours a day and merely said she had her TDEE at a good level for her size due to a good bit of daily activity in addition to regular exercise) by suggesting that people were arguing that 30 minutes per day was unreasonable or too hard.

I always find it bizarre when someone starts arguing strenuously against a position that no one asserted -- I read it as based on a misunderstanding of what was actually being said, because why else argue when no one disagreed. I see it as rather similar to how some posters insist on reading people saying "eat what you want within your calories" as "ignore nutrition and satiety" and then jump in to insist (as if they were disagreeing with the majority) that you should too care about nutrition (I mean, duh). That's how I feel here -- obviously the vast majority of people can figure out how to get in 30 minutes per day if they want to, the reason people don't is, (a) they don't want to, or (b) maybe they are physically or mentally tired because of lives that beat them down and just end up feeling like they can't do anything but veg (or the screen time is when they are multitasking in some way), or (c) their own diverse reasons. I would actually say in the latter case they'd likely feel better if they went for a walk or something instead, but since no one was making that point it's not like I'd be talking to anyone in saying that.*

Anyway, it's the tone. Saying: isn't it weird that 80% of Americans (or whatever) say they don't have time to do any exercise would be one thing, but badgering posters who never said that with "time is NOT an excuse" as if Packerjohn is exercising and the rest of us need him to explain that it's important struck me as, well, unjustified by the prior discussion, as no one (again) had actually said that we didn't exercise.

It's like badgering us about the SAD. Yeah, the SAD as reported is a pretty lame way to eat, IMO, but the discussion here is with specific people who typically do not eat the SAD, and not with some stereotypical average American. So I don't get lecturing us as if we were such a person needing to hear the truth from Packerjohn. Rubs me the wrong way.

*Aside, there was a time in my life in my late 20s, when I probably would have said I did not have time to exercise. I did manage 30 minutes a day anyway, if walking counts, since I live in a city and almost have to walk that much daily, but I did not watch much TV or anything -- I worked all the time and was always super stressed about work. I think the mental exhaustion is why when I did have time to not work I'd tend to be sedentary or do unhealthy things (go out drinking, mostly). I later figured out that it was, of course, not true that I couldn't fit in exercise -- I looked at co-workers who managed better (and prioritized better, part of my problem was I really believed I wasn't allowed to put anything up there with work, everything else had to be second). I made small changes that helped me organized my time better and be more efficient, stuff like that. So I don't think "no time" is valid, it's largely about time management and priorities and so on, but I think it's more complicated often than "you are lying! you are just watching lots of TV." This could be an interesting discussion if people who actually had time issues and struggled to get in ANY exercise were involved, but just stereotyping people not here and then ranting again something no one actually said and probably would not say in the way being argued against strikes me as more about patting oneself on the back than any real discussion. But could just be me, certainly.

Agreed that most of the discussion was interesting and pleasant.

Yeah, it's kind of a meta discussion. I tend to assume that if someone is arguing a particular point they think others are arguing against them, and if no one made the point they are arguing against I suspect that they misread others to be making that point.

That's why I wanted to point out that no one actually said that they could not exercise 30 minutes a day. This conversation is not between those who are standing up for the value of exercise and others who are saying they'd rather just watch a lot of TV.

Now that that's established, whatever.

NorthCascades wrote: »

Ariberri9 wrote: »

Greetings, MFP community!

I need your help. I feel like I have no time to exercise.

I currently work full-time, Monday through Friday, from 8 AM until 4:30 PM. I'm also in school full-time getting my MBA. Every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, I have class from 6 PM until 9:30 PM. Between that, I own a home with my partner and have to take care of the house and our pets. And outside of class hours, whenever possible, I meet with classmates to work on group work.

By the time I get some downtime, I'm exhausted. If I'm not working, in class, meeting with classmates, or taking care of the house, I'm sleeping because I'm so tired. And unfortunately, I feel like I have no time to exercise.

Any advice, MFP? How can I get time to exercise?

http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10549481/too-busy-to-exercise

Um, if that's supposed to prove a point, I don't question that some people feel like they have no time to exercise -- although I think it's great this poster's response is to ask how she can find some time, so I hope the immediate response would not be to hector her about how she must just really be watching TV 24/7.

At the risk of repeating myself yet again, as I feel like I was misunderstood (and the view that posts in the thread were being misunderstood is why I pointed out that in the actual discussion that had gone on no one was saying they did not exercise), my point was that no one in this thread, involved in the discussion that was being had had said they did not have time to exercise, and yet, despite this, at least one poster was arguing as if that was a position that people in the thread were taking. That suggested to me that that poster was misunderstanding people and assuming (for whatever reason) that the other posters in the thread were claiming that we did not exercise. (I also found it odd, as why hector people who do exercise about how they do too have time to exercise?)

North Cascade's point? I think he was saying that people were claiming to have no time to exercise, due to the discussion recently here.

As for the other thread, I think it's fabulous to give that OP constructive ideas, and think it's good she asked for them.

NorthCascades wrote: »

@lemurcat12 I don't understand your weird obsessions on restricting what we're talking about to only people who have posted in this thread and only if they've said the magic number 30. You said you felt insulted because you imagine that people are talking about you, but we're not. There are millions of people in this country who don't get enough exercise, and many people who have said as much.

It seems like you'd prefer us not too talk about this because you're choosing to take it personally even though it's not directed at you.

I don't think they are talking about me. I thought Packerjohn was arguing a point that no one was arguing against, pointed out that no one was in case he had misunderstood, and he basically dismissed me and claimed that there were 6 pages, he didn't know what was said, so (basically) was assuming that people were saying they didn't want to exercise. I found that odd. I still don't understand why someone would argue a point no one was arguing against if you didn't misunderstand and think others were arguing the other side, and that's why I wanted to clarify. (Again, similar to when people start arguing--not just saying, but arguing--that you should not ignore nutrition when no one claimed otherwise.)

I note that neither you nor he (and it was Packerjohn I was talking to specifically, although you seem to have thought my comments were aimed at you) said "hey, I get that, but I just think it's an important point to make." You seemed to want to hold on to the idea that someone was arguing the other side and saying that exercise was not important or they were too busy to do it. If I am wrong about your reason for adding the link -- maybe you were encouraging people here to post there? -- I apologize, but it sure looked like you were saying "see, someone somewhere is claiming to be too busy to exercise."

lemurcat12 wrote: »

Ugh, because I cannot stop clarifying:

I think the topic "Americans don't exercise much, why is that, how might that change" is interesting.

I mentioned how I used to think I did not have time to exercise and what I did to change that (years ago), and I found others talking about that to be extremely interesting and inspiring.

I DON'T think "Americans are lazy slugs who obviously have lots of extra time but refuse to exercise" is interesting or fair, as it isn't reaching anyone or really getting at why they don't, IMO, but I wouldn't object to that being discussed (because people can discuss whatever they want). I only objected to the perception that people in the discussion were arguing that they could not exercise, because it seemed Packerjohn was ignoring/misunderstanding what people were actually saying.

My initial post in this tread was a reply to a poster that said finding time to exercise depended on one's priorities. I agreed, and mentioned the amount of screen time the average American gets and said that some of that time could reasonably be used for exercise. Not quite sure how that is ignoring/misunderstanding anything that was said. Any other posts by me were additional discussion on that post. Seams like a reasonable response based on the title of the thread.

Sorry to crash your discussion on a public forum. I'm done with this *kitten*, have a great weekend.

French_Peasant wrote: »

NorthCascades wrote: »

@lemurcat12 I don't understand your weird obsessions on restricting what we're talking about to only people who have posted in this thread and only if they've said the magic number 30. You said you felt insulted because you imagine that people are talking about you, but we're not. There are millions of people in this country who don't get enough exercise, and many people who have said as much.

It seems like you'd prefer us not too talk about this because you're choosing to take it personally even though it's not directed at you.

I have just been following not participating, but if I might presume to arbitrate a moment:

The discussion on this thread was about people with more advanced fitness goals finding time to exercise, with frustrations and sensitivities about their limitations; threads about schlubs sitting on the couch and watching TV are a dime a dozen. I don't think heiliskrimsli needs to be told to get off her kitten, turn off the TV and exercise for half an hour a day because she is already rocking it when she can. The discussion was on another level.

So to use an analogy, it's like a group of people in a class entitled "Reading Comprehension" discussing, say, Faulkner's The Sound and The Fury and someone bustled into the class thumping his cane and saying all the damn kids should learn to read these day, and back in my day, we all know our alphabet. Well, yeah, that's true--but it's Faulkner comprehension being discussed, not remedial high school reading. Most people probably just ignore it, but others, being very orderly, logical, and (dare I say) lawyerly thinkers, tend to get annoyed by it, and say "WTF that's not what we are discussing here."

Perhaps the thread should have been titled "Finding Time to Exercise 401" so the CDC discussion could be had in "Finding Time to Exercise 101."

That doesn't really seem a fair comparison. A class titled "Reading Comprehension" would imply that people in the class know how to read, so starting a tangent that people should learn to read would be more off topic than sharing statistics on how many people don't exercise in a thread titled "Finding time to Exercise".