Supposedly well-meaning men have been throwing this myth around for centuries. It’s usually just an excuse to perpetuate sexism. For example, when the Olympics were restarted in 1896, the International Olympic Committee wrote “that the Olympic Games must be reserved for the solemn and periodic exaltation of male athleticism.” Although women were fighting to get equal racing opportunities, they were being warned about the “dangers” of running from the medical community.
In ancient times, Aristotle wrote that men have more teeth than women because it seemed logical to him; apparently, it never occurred to him to look in his wife’s mouth and count. In the same way, even as recently as 20 years ago, women runners were told that they were risking sagging breasts, fallen ovaries, and infertility, even though no evidence exists to support these claims.
Training affects women the same way that it does men—with more running, cardiovascular fitness improves, body fat decreases, and so on. Yes, on average, women will always be slower than men, owing to biological differences (some of which are related to childbirth) such as higher essential body fat stores. But stating that fact is different than saying that women are at risk from running.
Still think that women are too frail to run? Consider that it’s in ultramarathons (races of 30 miles and longer) that women’s performance comes closest to men’s. Why is that? The leading theory can’t be proved in a lab, but it sounds right to me: In these ultraendurance events, where a big part of the battle is mental, women are simply tougher than men.
In ancient times, Aristotle wrote that men have more teeth than women because it seemed logical to him; apparently, it never occurred to him to look in his wife’s mouth and count. In the same way, even as recently as 20 years ago, women runners were told that they were risking sagging breasts, fallen ovaries, and infertility, even though no evidence exists to support these claims.
Training affects women the same way that it does men—with more running, cardiovascular fitness improves, body fat decreases, and so on. Yes, on average, women will always be slower than men, owing to biological differences (some of which are related to childbirth) such as higher essential body fat stores. But stating that fact is different than saying that women are at risk from running.
Still think that women are too frail to run? Consider that it’s in ultramarathons (races of 30 miles and longer) that women’s performance comes closest to men’s. Why is that? The leading theory can’t be proved in a lab, but it sounds right to me: In these ultraendurance events, where a big part of the battle is mental, women are simply tougher than men.
No comments:
Post a Comment