Enough of the ranting for a little while. My partner is beginning to worry about my health ( a concern met with another rant from me about pathologising angry women), and its not the only thing this blog is supposed to be about.
So big deep breaths, and on we go to something positive.
I work with a number of older/mature/menopausal/fabulous women. I am often surprised to find that many women, especially older women, feel that they should not be doing any weights or resistance training. Some fear injury, others feel it is unfeminine, many are concerned they will begin to 'look like men', and others are intimidated by the masculine-ness of the weights area.
This is a shame, as its so important for women to stay strong and capable, and I feel that the fears listed above are at least in part due to long-held societal beliefs about women's frailty. Unfortunately these beliefs keep women frail. (not to mention they lead to replicated role modelling for younger women, odd ideas about the inability of older women to look after themselves, keep women less capable of defending themselves, and make it even more impossible for women to match up to that other long-held societal pressure on women, the beauty standard.)
All women (and men) need to exercise their heart regularly to keep it in good shape, and need to challenge their muscles and bones to keep them strong. This is especially important for older women. As we age we lose bone density, which can lead to increased likelihood of fractures (ouch!). We may also lose muscle mass and strength, if we don't continue to exercise. This is a problem because our muscles help us move - lessening physical strength is what leads to difficulty getting out of chairs! - and they also fuel our metabolism. Declining muscle mass is one factor in declining metabolic rate among older people, which may lead to weight gain.
Strong women remain physically independent for longer, lessen their risk of heart disease and diabetes, have healthier bone mass (did I mention exercise can keep your bones healthy?), have less trouble regulating their weight, and benefit from increased happy hormones (not the official terminology).
Unfortunately many people, and older people in particular fear that they will either incur or worsen an injury, or that they are not fit enough to exercise or strong enough to do weights.
While the risk of incurring or exacerbating an injury is real, there are many safe and effective exercises that you can do in the comfort of your own home. I have put a few body weight exercises together below, to help you start off. Please note these exercises will be safe for the vast majority of people. However if you have specific concerns, feel free to visit your doctor to check what the right moves are for you.
You can do these exercises in 3 sets of 8-12 repetitions, 2-4 times per week, leaving a day off in between to let you muscles recover. i.e. 9 lunges, then rest, then another 9 lunges, then rest, then another 9 lunges, then rest then move on to push ups.
You can change the order, however if you find them very difficult, keep them in the order they are presented here (to ensure you don't lose focus for the more difficult moves). You can walk, swim or do other exercise on the days in between, but make sure you give your worked muscles some rest. I have noted the possible contraindications for each exercise, but let your body be your guide.
I've set these up to involve no extra equipment, however if you have them feel free to use weights or water bottles, and of course if you can afford the gym, be my guest!
I've not got any images of women doing these exercises that I can fairly use, so for now they come with instructions, and some links to the lovely people at exrx.net, who tend not to use images of women with fake boobs wearing bikinis, which suits me. Also, they know their stuff.
1. Lunges
Works: Legs, Bum
Not if: Don't do this exercise if you have knee pain - see your doctor for another exercise.
How: Start standing, Feet together, knees slightly bent, head up. Take a big step forward with your left leg. Slowly bend your right knee and come down just until your left thigh is parallel to the floor. Keeping your head up, rise again and bring you feet back together. Repeat on the other side. That is one repetition.
2. Push Ups
Works: Chest, arms, abs
Not if: avoid this exercise only if you have elbow or shoulder concerns. Check with a doctor if you do.
How: Start in the plank position, either on your knees or your toes, with your hands on the floor a little wider than shoulder width apart. Keep your body stiff and flat like a board. eyes down. Slowly bend your elbows to lower your upper body to the floor. Straighten them to come back up. That's one repetition.
If you can't do 5 from your knees, start instead on your toes, but with your hands on the side of the bed, or on a chair or bench. As you get stronger, you can make it more challenging by beginning lower, and eventually doing them on your toes on the floor. Move to the next level once you can do 12 at your starting level.
3. Squats
Works: Bum, legs
Not if: Squats are a relatively safe exercise for most people.
How: Start standing, with feet a little more than hip distance apart, toes facing forward. Keeping your head up, eyes forward and back straight, bend your knees to squat back. Imagine you are trying to sit on a chair, sending your bum back. Squeeze your bum and press your hips forward to come back up. That's one repetition. If this is easy, hold something a little heaving in front of your body, and do them slowly.
4. Dips
Works: Triceps, shoulders
Not if: again, if you have shoulder injuries check with a doctor.
How: Start by sitting on a stable chair, bench, or low table. Place your hands on the surface, fingers facing the front. knees bent, slide your bum off the table, holding yourself up with your arms. Bend your elbows slowly and lower your body toward the floor. lower until your forearms are nearly parallel with the floor, then slowly come back up, keeping your bum off the bench. That's one rep. To make it harder, keep your legs straight, or put them up on another chair.
5. Bridges
Works: Bum, lower back, legs.
How: Lie on the floor, knees bent with feet on the floor, arms by your side, palms down. Breath out and recruit your tummy muscles. Slowly roll your back off the floor, vertebra by vertebra, until just your shoulders and feet are on the floor. arms remain down. Squeeze your bum, then roll down during a breath in. That's one rep.
6. Superpersons
Works: upper and lower back, bum.
Not if: don't try this if you're pregnant.
How: Lying on your stomach, stretch out so your arms are above your head, palms down, and your legs are straight out, top of feet flat on the floor. keeping your forehead on the floor, squeeze your bum. Then raise one arm and the opposite leg off the floor just a few inches. Hold, then bring back to the floor in a controlled movement. Repeats with the opposite arm leg combination. That's one repetition.
7. Toe taps
Works: abs
Not if: pregnant women may want to check with their doctor. Those with lower back problems, stick to the easy version of this move (first version) and don't continue if it causes you problems. It should help strengthen, but lets not do that at the expense of your back.
How: Lying on your back on the floor, arms at sides with palms down, raise both legs so knees
and hips are at 90 degree angles, knees together. breathe out, drawing your tummy muscles in. try to hold those muscles throughout the exercise, continuing to breathe (very important!). Gently lower one leg to the ground, maintaining the bent knee position, to tap the toe, return your leg up. Repeat on the other side. That's one rep.
When you can comfortable do 12 on each side without your lower back lifting off the floor, you can begin to lower your leg to straighten it out along the floor, then return to the bent position.
8. Plank
Works: abs
Not if: careful here if you have lower back problems. Begin in the bent knee position, only graduating to the toes position if you are comfortable.
How: This looks like a push up, but we hold it at the top. Start with your knees bent, body very straight, eyes down, and forearms on the floor. You can clasp your hands if its comfortable. Hold this position for as long as you can. To come out bend your knees and take your butt to your heels. Only complete this exercise three times in total, with a rest in between. If you hold this for 60 seconds, try it on your toes.
9. Body twists
Works: abs and obliques (side ab muscles)
How: Stand with your knees slightly bent, facing forward. Hold something (a book, a water bottle, the baby (kidding)) with straight arms out in front at about shoulder height. Breathe in and draw your tummy muscles toward your spine. Breathe out, holding tummy in, and twist your upper body to face your right side, continuing to hold the object out. Don't move your hips. Breathe here, then breathing out again, check your tummy muscles are till 'on' and turn back to the front. Repeat on the other side. That's one rep.
If you want to save time and work your heart more effectively, you can do one set of two exercises, then rest. i.e one set of lunges, then one set of push ups then rest. this is called a superset.
Some muscle tightness and soreness will be experience the day after you complete the exercises: this is the feeling of small tears in your muscles being repaired and making them stronger. If you stretch afterward you may alleviate this a little. You may also feel something like a burn during the exercise - this is normal. However please stop if you feel pain during the exercise that resembles stinging, tearing, or any other physical sensation that worries you.
Enjoy, and get to it!
March 26, 2010
Rant: Is exploitation creative? Is rape art?
Recently I have come across many articles covering the response to a number of t-shirts being sold at Roger David, a menswear store in Australia.
The shirts, which feature a woman with a gag in her mouth, and two semi naked women with a strip over their eyes, are a part of a clothing line that prints artwork on their t-shirts.
A backlash amongst the uneasy coalition of feminists and conservatives has erupted on Facebook and elsewhere, designating the t-shirts as exploitative, and claiming they mock rape.
In a written response to the backlash, a spokeswoman for the brand said, ''Art is meant to inspire and educate, and the meaning and interpretation is left in the hands of the viewer.'' In an article at TheAge.com she is also said to have suggested they would spark debate.
Argh. What are we suppose to be debating, exactly? Whether exploitation is cool? Who the female body belongs to? What are these images supposed to inspire? I'm only getting anger. I thought we'd had the rape debate out already, and came to the only sane conclusion: rape is not ok, exploitation of women wrong.
Some have suggested that as the word "hollywood" is written across the gag it should be considered an artwork commenting on the influence of film and the media. Assuming one was to look hard enough at the shirt to realise the word was there, this point may be somewhat valid. Although, given artists (and the rest of us) have been decrying white American cultural hegemony since the 80s, its hardly a point that is creative, original, or likely to start debate.
There has also been suggestion that as the prints are based on original artworks, they should be uncensored. I am all for the rights of artists to free expression as long as they don't cause harm. The image, within the elective space of a gallery, or an art magazine or website, would be able to "educate and inspire" whomever chose to see it. However the same image, on the street, has a very different audience, and it causes harm.
How do we measure the harm done when this image is viewed by young boys and girls, who get the message that exploitation and violence are cool? Or that its okay to look at women, so long as they don't look back? Or the damage done to rape survivors who are forced to recall their won experience? Or other women, who are once again made to feel objectified, less equal in a public space?
Roger David have removed the t-shirts from their website, but not from their shelves. You can contact Roger David at their website, and tell them exactly what you think. I have done so, and will publish the reply, should I receive one.
You can also contact Blood is the New Black, the brand that printed the t-shirts, at press@bloodisthenewblack.com.
The shirts, which feature a woman with a gag in her mouth, and two semi naked women with a strip over their eyes, are a part of a clothing line that prints artwork on their t-shirts.
A backlash amongst the uneasy coalition of feminists and conservatives has erupted on Facebook and elsewhere, designating the t-shirts as exploitative, and claiming they mock rape.
In a written response to the backlash, a spokeswoman for the brand said, ''Art is meant to inspire and educate, and the meaning and interpretation is left in the hands of the viewer.'' In an article at TheAge.com she is also said to have suggested they would spark debate.
Argh. What are we suppose to be debating, exactly? Whether exploitation is cool? Who the female body belongs to? What are these images supposed to inspire? I'm only getting anger. I thought we'd had the rape debate out already, and came to the only sane conclusion: rape is not ok, exploitation of women wrong.
Some have suggested that as the word "hollywood" is written across the gag it should be considered an artwork commenting on the influence of film and the media. Assuming one was to look hard enough at the shirt to realise the word was there, this point may be somewhat valid. Although, given artists (and the rest of us) have been decrying white American cultural hegemony since the 80s, its hardly a point that is creative, original, or likely to start debate.
There has also been suggestion that as the prints are based on original artworks, they should be uncensored. I am all for the rights of artists to free expression as long as they don't cause harm. The image, within the elective space of a gallery, or an art magazine or website, would be able to "educate and inspire" whomever chose to see it. However the same image, on the street, has a very different audience, and it causes harm.
How do we measure the harm done when this image is viewed by young boys and girls, who get the message that exploitation and violence are cool? Or that its okay to look at women, so long as they don't look back? Or the damage done to rape survivors who are forced to recall their won experience? Or other women, who are once again made to feel objectified, less equal in a public space?
Roger David have removed the t-shirts from their website, but not from their shelves. You can contact Roger David at their website, and tell them exactly what you think. I have done so, and will publish the reply, should I receive one.
You can also contact Blood is the New Black, the brand that printed the t-shirts, at press@bloodisthenewblack.com.
March 15, 2010
Dear Ultra Fit Magazine, you suck.
Dear UltraFit Magazine,
You suck.
I'm sorry to have to put it so bluntly, but after reading your latest issue, I'm at a loss for words. I am yet again dissapointed. Last month I was going to write about how annoyed I was that the women in your magazine were wearing stripper pants (animal print, with slits down the side), but forgot. This month I had more time.
I love fitness magazine, usually, and am relatively hardened against the ongoing attacks on women's body image that tends to come from the advertising in said magazines, but this months issue of UltraFit just got under my skin.
Why did I find it so offensive? Let me list my reasons.
1. Once again, most of the women pictures in your workout articles had "enhanced" breasts, baring their mid-sections, and were wearing far too much make up considering they are supposed to be sweating it out at the gym.
2. None of the men pictured were wearing make up, or wearing tight clothing. So don't tell me the women were made-up or scantily clad for any purpose other than gender stereotped notions of display. Page 55 is the prime example, showing a woman with full make up, fussy hair-do, and pushed-up breasts, next to a man wearing loose black clothing which made it difficult to even see the movement performed.
3. You have predominantly pictured men performing exercises in sports and advanced training articles, such as your articles on trekking (pg.90 onwards, one woman pictured, 5 men pictured, 2 interviewed), on pre-exhaustion (pg 66), and on stress and recovery (pg 49). Women get predominantly pictured in an article about training for your body composition. (targeting problem areas, by another name).
4. You ran an article called training women, pg 85, by Michelle Drielsma. I could write a whole letter about the many problems with this one article. To begin, it (vaguely) suggests women should do more weights, less cardio. True enough, but you have then illustrated the article with one woman holding tiny weights (the kind used for cardio) sitting on the floor in her undies.
The author then uses the article to assert pseudo-science concepts ("determine how internally challenged your body is"), and advertise CHEK Holistic Lifestyle Coaching (without announcing any affiliation, or even explaining the concepts).
To add to this, the article doesn't appear to have been edited at all. I'm no literary giant (case in point my fondness for parentheses, and generally problematic grammar), but this article contains sentences that make no sense, and jumps to many conclusions (such as most female body builders take steroids), and it begins as an article aimed at trainers, and ends targetting women who are beginning to train.
5. The only women contributors pictured were one cook and one nutritionist. I'm not knocking these women or their professions, but they are professions heavily identified with women, whereas there was not one woman contributor pictured from the training, exercise science or sports fields.
6. Lastly, the copy you sent me had half the pages cut off down the middle. Not that it seems i would have missed much, but its just shoddy.
And that's my rant. I'm heading off now to put the copy back in recycling, from whence I fished it to write this rant.
If anyone else actually saw this magazine (its gets sent to me after I studied with a partner of theirs, but I think you can buy it in shops) feel free to agree, disagree, and/or write your thoughts to UltraFit. You can reach them at editor@ultrafit.com.au.
You suck.
I'm sorry to have to put it so bluntly, but after reading your latest issue, I'm at a loss for words. I am yet again dissapointed. Last month I was going to write about how annoyed I was that the women in your magazine were wearing stripper pants (animal print, with slits down the side), but forgot. This month I had more time.
I love fitness magazine, usually, and am relatively hardened against the ongoing attacks on women's body image that tends to come from the advertising in said magazines, but this months issue of UltraFit just got under my skin.
Why did I find it so offensive? Let me list my reasons.
1. Once again, most of the women pictures in your workout articles had "enhanced" breasts, baring their mid-sections, and were wearing far too much make up considering they are supposed to be sweating it out at the gym.
2. None of the men pictured were wearing make up, or wearing tight clothing. So don't tell me the women were made-up or scantily clad for any purpose other than gender stereotped notions of display. Page 55 is the prime example, showing a woman with full make up, fussy hair-do, and pushed-up breasts, next to a man wearing loose black clothing which made it difficult to even see the movement performed.
3. You have predominantly pictured men performing exercises in sports and advanced training articles, such as your articles on trekking (pg.90 onwards, one woman pictured, 5 men pictured, 2 interviewed), on pre-exhaustion (pg 66), and on stress and recovery (pg 49). Women get predominantly pictured in an article about training for your body composition. (targeting problem areas, by another name).
4. You ran an article called training women, pg 85, by Michelle Drielsma. I could write a whole letter about the many problems with this one article. To begin, it (vaguely) suggests women should do more weights, less cardio. True enough, but you have then illustrated the article with one woman holding tiny weights (the kind used for cardio) sitting on the floor in her undies.
The author then uses the article to assert pseudo-science concepts ("determine how internally challenged your body is"), and advertise CHEK Holistic Lifestyle Coaching (without announcing any affiliation, or even explaining the concepts).
To add to this, the article doesn't appear to have been edited at all. I'm no literary giant (case in point my fondness for parentheses, and generally problematic grammar), but this article contains sentences that make no sense, and jumps to many conclusions (such as most female body builders take steroids), and it begins as an article aimed at trainers, and ends targetting women who are beginning to train.
5. The only women contributors pictured were one cook and one nutritionist. I'm not knocking these women or their professions, but they are professions heavily identified with women, whereas there was not one woman contributor pictured from the training, exercise science or sports fields.
6. Lastly, the copy you sent me had half the pages cut off down the middle. Not that it seems i would have missed much, but its just shoddy.
And that's my rant. I'm heading off now to put the copy back in recycling, from whence I fished it to write this rant.
If anyone else actually saw this magazine (its gets sent to me after I studied with a partner of theirs, but I think you can buy it in shops) feel free to agree, disagree, and/or write your thoughts to UltraFit. You can reach them at editor@ultrafit.com.au.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)