Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

So, why men won't lift weights?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by twa2w View Post
    Columbus did not force agriculture on anyone - agriculture was well established in the America's before Columbus arrived.

    Think Corn, Potatoes, Quinoa, Amaranth, Tomatoes, Chocolat etc etc - all gifts to the old world from the 'New World"

    The Irish didn't eat potatoes and the Italians didn't eat Tomatoes until they were brought back from the new world. So some agricultural and food traditions in Europe are not that old.
    You're right. Different forms of agriculture cropped up in several places we know about and probably more than as many other places we don't know about. Of course it was a different style of agriculture than the one we practice.

    What arrived here with Columbus was the idea that there was one and only one right way for people to live (he and his contemporaries basically saw the natives as subhuman life forms who didn't know how to bend the earth to their will the way the enlightened ones did in Europe), and the desire to put all the land to the plow and therefore turn all available biomass into human mass.

    By the time Columbus lived, people of his culture had no idea that they had once lived like the people they found in the far corners of the world. The Great Forgetting was old by Columbus's time. Couple that with the concept of putting the food under lock and key and forcing people to get it back, and the self-appointment of the Totalitarian Agriculturists as the world's cultural missionaries and you get

    We're way off topic here. Bottom line is the Abels of the world didn't want to take up agriculture. That's why the Cains had to water their field with the blood of his own brother. The fairy tale we grow up hearing, that 10,000 years ago, people the world over put down their spears and picked up plows is just that. A fairy tale.
    The Champagne of Beards

    Comment


    • Originally posted by twa2w View Post
      Columbus did not force agriculture on anyone - agriculture was well established in the America's before Columbus arrived.

      Think Corn, Potatoes, Quinoa, Amaranth, Tomatoes, Chocolat etc etc - all gifts to the old world from the 'New World"
      Indeed, and the Inka civilisation was in many ways ahead of the Europeans on agriculture at the end of the 15 century! So far there has never been a human civilsation that is not rooted in agriculture, whether that's a good or a bad thing is another issue....
      "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

      - Schopenhauer

      Comment


      • Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
        You're right. Different forms of agriculture cropped up in several places we know about and probably more than as many other places we don't know about. Of course it was a different style of agriculture than the one we practice.

        What arrived here with Columbus was the idea that there was one and only one right way for people to live (he and his contemporaries basically saw the natives as subhuman life forms who didn't know how to bend the earth to their will the way the enlightened ones did in Europe), and the desire to put all the land to the plow and therefore turn all available biomass into human mass.

        By the time Columbus lived, people of his culture had no idea that they had once lived like the people they found in the far corners of the world. The Great Forgetting was old by Columbus's time. Couple that with the concept of putting the food under lock and key and forcing people to get it back, and the self-appointment of the Totalitarian Agriculturists as the world's cultural missionaries and you get

        We're way off topic here. Bottom line is the Abels of the world didn't want to take up agriculture. That's why the Cains had to water their field with the blood of his own brother. The fairy tale we grow up hearing, that 10,000 years ago, people the world over put down their spears and picked up plows is just that. A fairy tale.
        Sometimes you make a lot of sense, other times not so much.
        Life is death. We all take turns. It's sacred to eat during our turn and be eaten when our turn is over. RichMahogany.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
          So far there has never been a human civilsation that is not rooted in agriculture
          patently false

          Comment


          • Originally posted by not on the rug View Post
            patently false
            Name ONE...
            "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

            - Schopenhauer

            Comment


            • Originally posted by 70in2012 View Post
              Indeed there is more than one way (some are more effective, some less)and each person in fact is free to choose the way they prefer.
              P.S.
              I think strength does not fade away entirely. So even if you ballooned in weight and have not deadlifted for thirty years, you would still reap the benefit of the work you did in your younger days.
              Oh, Puhleeze. Yes, I have benefited from a lifetime of being generally fit (Lots of surfing, swimming, hiking) and I continue to stay fit. I spent a grand total of three years being a musclehead. My point still stands. Fitness is an admirable goal but weightlifting is not the only way to get there.

              Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
              But only weight training would have made it possible for Brian Jones to shed his hardware and become a strong man again. It was the spinal loading and the CNS effects of lifting that caused his bones to harden and reject the hardware the surgeons told him he'd have in his legs for the rest of his life. No other physical activities would have had these effects.

              I'm not saying everyone has to lift weights. (although I think most people would benefit from doing so), I'm saying we need to stop glorifying weakness.
              And that's what this thread is about. Men don't lift weights today because they are actively pursuing weakness, androgyny, hipsterism, and skinny jeans. As so many have made clear in this thread, if you have any muscle on your body, it's assumed you're uncouth, unintelligent, and uncivilized. Well, in case I haven't made it clear, I'm against that. We can all strive to do better things for ourselves mentally, emotionally, and physically. And that includes keeping our minds occupied and challenged, eating appropriate foods, getting appropriate sun and sleep, and performing appropriate load-bearing exercise to strengthen our muscles, bones, connective tissue, AND brains.
              Um, there are a lot of weight bearing exercises other than weight lifting. I'm glad that worked out for Brian.

              Who exactly is glorifying weakness, pursuing androgyny and hipster jeans???? What reality does this come from? If you don't like younger mens' tastes in fashion, well, get in line behind your parents because they thought your long hair back in the day was being a "nancy boy". Every generation has the same gripe about those dang youngsters. It just makes you sound stodgy.

              Originally posted by Primalsaber View Post
              Why don't we all just.... abandon thread
              Yes, please.

              Originally posted by marcadav View Post
              You have no idea what limitations someone has. Just because one person can overcome an injury and get under the bar does NOT mean everyone can. Global assumptions like yours are not only beyond annoying, they show a lack of awareness for individual differences and abilities.
              And a lack of anything resembling empathy.

              RichM, in general I adore you and your posts but you really have acted like a braying jacka$$ on this thread.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Urban Forager View Post
                Sometimes you make a lot of sense, other times not so much.
                Sorry. Not to make excuses, but this is a function of complex subject matter, coupled with character limits and time constraints. Start here: Another Way of Knowing Daniel Quinn: The Great Forgetting if you want to try to get a better idea of where I'm coming from.
                The Champagne of Beards

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                  Who exactly is glorifying weakness, pursuing androgyny and hipster jeans???? What reality does this come from? If you don't like younger mens' tastes in fashion, well, get in line behind your parents because they thought your long hair back in the day was being a "nancy boy". Every generation has the same gripe about those dang youngsters. It just makes you sound stodgy
                  It's not really the fashion I object to. It's the idea that strength is sort of a dirty virtue. Plenty of examples in this very thread of people saying that emphasizing strength as a quality to aspire to makes a person dumb, uncouth, classless, caveman-like (an interesting pejorative considering the medium), etc... I'm not strong yet, but when get there, I certainly won't be ashamed of it.

                  Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                  RichM, in general I adore you and your posts but you really have acted like a braying jacka$$ on this thread.
                  It's quite possible that I have done just that. I respect you and your opinions, but I still think a lot of people who would benefit from strength training fail to do so out of laziness. Ignorance too. I just hope my alleged jackassery has caused some of them to reassess their positions on the matter.
                  The Champagne of Beards

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                    Name ONE...
                    Aside from the still-in-existence hunter-gatherer societies or the inuit? How about you get on your google machine and name some for us?

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
                      It's not really the fashion I object to. It's the idea that strength is sort of a dirty virtue. Plenty of examples in this very thread of people saying that emphasizing strength as a quality to aspire to makes a person dumb, uncouth, classless, caveman-like (an interesting pejorative considering the medium), etc... I'm not strong yet, but when get there, I certainly won't be ashamed of it.

                      It's quite possible that I have done just that. I respect you and your opinions, but I still think a lot of people who would benefit from strength training fail to do so out of laziness. Ignorance too. I just hope my alleged jackassery has caused some of them to reassess their positions on the matter.
                      Somehow the "skinny jeans" thing keeps coming up again and again as if it were the problem.

                      If you want to say that people being too lazy to get fit is the problem, cool, I'll be right there with you. If, on the other hand you say that any guy who doesn't lift heavy is a "pussy", I'm going to call you out for being a jackass. Especially when you accuse someone with a physical dissablity about which you know nothing of "making excuses".

                      Again, why does fitness have to be about "getting under the bar"? Al K. looks pretty darn fit to me and he never sets foot in a gym.

                      Comment


                      • I love men.
                        From head to toe.
                        Muscular or not.
                        Thank God for men!
                        Paleo since April 2013 for health reasons.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                          Somehow the "skinny jeans" thing keeps coming up again and again as if it were the problem.
                          It's the glorification of hyper-skinnyness and its co-pilot, weakness, that I'm speaking out against. If you can get your legs in those things, and you're a reasonably mobile homo sapien, you should be lifting something heavy using your legs.

                          Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                          If you want to say that people being too lazy to get fit is the problem, cool, I'll be right there with you. If, on the other hand you say that any guy who doesn't lift heavy is a "pussy", I'm going to call you out for being a jackass. Especially when you accuse someone with a physical dissablity about which you know nothing of "making excuses".
                          The human body can only respond to the stimuli it encounters. All but an extremely broken few people with back injuries, knee injuries, etc would benefit greatly from squatting and deadlifting. And many, many people are willfully ignorant of this fact and use it as an excuse not to do the hard work that would benefit them so much. I read stories all the time of people like Brian Jones who un-f*@k themselves with a barbell, just like I read stories here of people who un-f*@k themselves with primal diets. I own my zealotry and my words on both fronts.

                          Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                          Again, why does fitness have to be about "getting under the bar"? Al K. looks pretty darn fit to me and he never sets foot in a gym.
                          I believe Al got strong in a traditional gym setting and decided to focus on bodyweight stuff later. (If I'm wrong, apologies and hopefully he'll correct me)

                          But that's not really here nor there. One can get strong without the barbell, but as you know, it's extremely important to progressively overload the movements in order to get stronger. All the available non-barbell options are comparatively lacking in their abilities to be (or at least ease of being) incrementally loaded. But I'll concede that the barbell being the best option doesn't make it the only option.
                          The Champagne of Beards

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
                            It's the glorification of hyper-skinnyness and its co-pilot, weakness, that I'm speaking out against. If you can get your legs in those things, and you're a reasonably mobile homo sapien, you should be lifting something heavy using your legs.
                            [Again with the proscriptive verbiage. Sheesh. Does it ever occur to you that it is possible to be a very fit person without pushing any iron? You have such a narrow perspective here. If someone isn't doing it your way, they're doing it wrong. End of discussion.]

                            The human body can only respond to the stimuli it encounters. All but an extremely broken few people with back injuries, knee injuries, etc would benefit greatly from squatting and deadlifting. And many, many people are willfully ignorant of this fact and use it as an excuse not to do the hard work that would benefit them so much. I read stories all the time of people like Brian Jones who un-f*@k themselves with a barbell, just like I read stories here of people who un-f*@k themselves with primal diets. I own my zealotry and my words on both fronts.[Brian's case is one anecdote. You don't know about any other person's situation (not being privy to their xrays) but yet you feel justified in calling them "pussies" and saying that they are only making excuses and that they should man up and lift like you. Do you start to see why there is the perception of weight lifters as less than evolved homo sapiens? It is attitudes such as yours that make this stereotype. (I call it a stereotype because I am well aware that it is possible to be strong and smart. You just don't sound very smart when you are chest thumping like this.)]

                            I believe Al got strong in a traditional gym setting and decided to focus on bodyweight stuff later. (If I'm wrong, apologies and hopefully he'll correct me)[Yes, he did. So? That just shows that there are multiple ways to be fit. You going to call Al a pussy?]

                            But that's not really here nor there. One can get strong without the barbell, but as you know, it's extremely important to progressively overload the movements in order to get stronger. All the available non-barbell options are comparatively lacking in their abilities to be (or at least ease of being) incrementally loaded. But I'll concede that the barbell being the best option doesn't make it the only option.[Well hallelujah! But consider this as well. You call it the "best" and it may be that *for you*. Perhaps for someone else there is something else that is the best. And incremental loading is very possible with lots of methods other than barbells.]
                            Putting other people down for making different workout choices than yours and making their choices all about lack of real manliness (whatever that is supposed to mean) just makes you look like a narrow minded muscle head who hasn't finished evolving yet.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by quikky View Post
                              What's disgusting is saying weakness is a-okay.
                              Here's the thing. I'm about 6'2, 210 lb. I think of myself as strong. I can life all of my three children off the ground at the same time, and do pushups with either of the two youngers ones sitting on my shoulders.

                              But I don't lift weights. I don't go to the gym. Most of the 'pro lifting' arguements in this thread fly right by me, since they all seem to be targetted at straw men.

                              Am I saying it's great to be weak? no
                              Could I lift a person out of a burning house? yes
                              Can I climb up trees that are taller than our house? yes

                              Do I want to bulk up with what I consider to be vanity muscles? no
                              Do I need to stare at myself lovingly in a full length mirror? no

                              So I don't see a compelling reason for me to lift weights.

                              Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                              Putting other people down for making different workout choices than yours and making their choices all about lack of real manliness (whatever that is supposed to mean) just makes you look like a narrow minded muscle head who hasn't finished evolving yet.
                              +1
                              Last edited by magicmerl; 06-03-2013, 03:10 PM.
                              Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

                              Griff's cholesterol primer
                              5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
                              Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
                              TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
                              bloodorchid is always right

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by not on the rug View Post
                                Aside from the still-in-existence hunter-gatherer societies or the inuit? How about you get on your google machine and name some for us?
                                Maybe you should google what a "civilization" means, or better take a peep in some antrophology 101 textbooks?
                                Last edited by Gorbag; 06-03-2013, 03:40 PM.
                                "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                                - Schopenhauer

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X