Do me a favor and take a look at these two magazine covers.
The lady on the left is Marisa Miller, a model who has appeared in Victoria's Secret and the Sports Illustrated Swimsuit Issue. The fella on the right is Owen McKibbin, a former professional beach volleyball player and - according to his website - a "fitness and lifestyle expert." You may be looking at each of them, depending on your respective gender, and saying to yourself, "Gee, I wish I had that flat stomach and those toned legs," or "Gee, I wish I had those ripped pecs and defined biceps."
Well, I'm here to tell you one thing; you probably can't.
Or, at least, it's highly unlikely. We, as a culture, have been force-fed the belief that physiques such as these represent the ideal model for what true fitness is. It's a goal that any of us can achieve, given the proper discipline, diet plan, and exercise regimen. And if we don't look exactly like these two models, we are fat, lazy sloths who are destined to die a horribly painful (and embarassing) death due to our inability or unwillingness to shape ourselves into this mold. New diets emerge on a seemingly daily basis and fancy exercise equipment with all sorts of intricate bells and whistles inundate us through television informercials and advertisements taken out in magazines such as Men's Health and Women's Health. We are told that, to get abdominals like McKibbin's, all we have to do is eat a healthy diet and exercise regularly. Most likely, it just ain't gonna happen.
What most people either fail to realize or refuse to acknowledge is that these folks are fitness models. They are paid handsomely to look the way they do and to maintain these amazing bodies (and this is totally ignoring the rampant photoshopping that takes place in the magazine industry) and it's very unreasonable to possess the expectation that we can achieve similar results. Sure, if you were to dedicate your life to a highly disciplined fitness regimen you may be able to have six-pack abs and ripped up arms. But ask anyone who is an ardent fitness fanatic and they'll tell you that a six-pack is incredibly hard to get and maintain.
A recent workout trend that is sweeping the nation (and, I'm sure, causing agnonizing pain) is P90X. I don't intend to disparage this regimen whatsoever. I've heard many people talk at length about the benefits they have gleaned from it, and that is great. But are you going to do this grueling workout for the rest of your life to maintain that body you've desired for so long? I believe many people go into routines such as these under the false impression that, once they achieve the physique they've been craving, they can pare down their workouts. Not a chance. If you have to workout at this intensity to acquire those gains, you are going to have to work equally hard to maintain them.
Genetics plays a substantial role in one's ability to achieve these results as well. I have a friend who was an avid mountain biker. He was the most fit person I have ever met and worked out like a mad man. He ate a near-perfect diet and lifted weights on a regular basis. And yet he still complained to me that he couldn't achieve visible abdominals. For many people, it's just not in the cards. We look at professional athletes and admire and envy them for their abilities and accomplishments and secretly wish we could do the mind-blowing superhuman feats they do. Totally ignoring the fact that professional athletes are essentially freaks of nature (and I mean that in a good way), we have to remember that these people, like Owen McKibbin and Marisa Miller, are paid to do what they do and look the way they look. They have professional trainers who spend hours a day working with them in state-of-the-art training facilities, as well as nutritionsists and dieticians who plan diets specific to that particular athelete's needs and goals.
Often, we look in fitness magazines, and even the slavering celebrity rag mags, and see articles telling us how to "get a butt like Beyonce's" or "a chiseled physique like Hugh Jackman's." As with the fitness models and professional athletes, these folks have personal trainers and diet planners. Money is no issue with them, so they are free to hire world-renowned experts to help them look the way they do. How many young men looked at pictures of Hugh Jackman as the super-mutant, Wolverine, and yearned to have a body like that?
It's impressive, no doubt, but if one studies the situation a little more closely, one can see the level of dedication required to look like this is far beyond what the average adult male is capable of. Jackman spent hours per day working out, as well as eating an extremely protein-rich diet. He had handlers constantly working with him to ensure that every muscle in his body was threatening to burst through his skin.
Men's Health recently featured an article (and this is a very common occurence in that particular magazine) about Australian actor, Chris Hemsworth who starred in the movie Thor. Hemsworth spoke at length in the article about what he did to create the body of the god of thunder. As usual, Men's Health put in its two cents at the end, leading the reader to believe that the workout they outlined in a separate section would, in essence, give you that same massive build. It's a load of malarkey. The plan they used was not the same one Hemsworth followed and you won't be able to sculpt that same physique using it. He had superior genetics, as well (and I don't mean to belabor this point) people pushing him to achieve what was required. I'm sure the multi-million dollar paycheck didn't hurt much, either.
Fitness or Vanity?
I feel that our celebrity- and media-based culture has pushed us into a mindset that favors exercising and dieting for the sake of vanity, rather than striving for the improvement of our health and well-being. While it's true that building an "attractive" body that one is proud of can do wonders for one's confidence and self-esteem, the most dignified goal one should be seeking would be one of prolonging one's life and insuring that that lifetime is spent in the most healthful and productive manner possible. Instead, we have reached a point to where gaining the acceptance of others through fitting into someone else's perceived archetype of what beauty truly is. We begin each new year resolving to lose weight so that we can look good in a bikini when we go on summer vacation or so we can wash the car shirtless without feeling like the world is chuckling at our paunches.
Don't Put That In Your Mouth!
Many times we make ourselves miserable by following unrealistic goals that require seemingly unnatural eating and exercising habits that ultimately make us feel worse about ourselves. We're told to only buy organic fruits and vegetables, to only eat farm-raised fish and grass-fed beef. Advocates of these diet mantras completely ignore the fact that, a.) it's hard for many of us to find farm-raised fish and grass-fed beef, and b.) it's expensive.
If you really think about it, most diet plans are concocted by people who are already fairly wealthy and don't have to worry about buying these pricey food products for a family of four. David Zinczenko, editor-in-chief of Men's Health, wrote a book called The Abs Diet. This book is chockful of completely useless information that is totally unreasonable and irrational for most individuals, especially those who have families and work nine-to-five jobs. But Zinczenko pontificates at length about how his diet is so easy to follow and appeals to even the most harried members of society. Well, not only does the food cost a fortune (You seriously think I'm going to buy organic chocolate milk? I'm going to buy a gallon of Wal-Mart-brand milk and a bottle of Wal-Mart-brand chocolate syrup if I want chocolate milk). We're not even considering the fact that my children would likely (definitely) never eat any of these things. Am I supposed to buy food just for myself and buy everyone else completely different food? Am I supposed to purchase fifteen different types of cooking oils to accomodate different dishes? If I had that kind of money, I think I could find something better to spend it on.
Part of the problem we, as a nation, are so overweight (I hate this term. I'll explain why later) is because we have grown so incredibly lazy, not only in our exercise habits, but in our eating habits. Taking a few minutes to fix a simple dinner (and some of them are really simple, believe me) is definitely worth the benefits. One thing that Men's Health does advocate that I agree wholeheartedly with, is that we need to eat our foods as close to their natural state as we can. I believe it goes without saying that we ingest entirely too much heavily processed food in this country, and that is certainly having a detrimental impact on our health.
The emergence of the fast food industry has certainly played a part in the so-called "obesity epidemic" in our country, but the health "experts" out there now believe that we are so incredibly stupid that we can't recognize what is good for us and what will turn our hearts into cholesterol-ridden slag heaps. We have the Yahoo! Health pundits and the Men's Health gestapo admonishing us for EVER eating a cheeseburger or a few slices of greasy pizza. They bombard us incessantly with the number of calories and grams of fat in each dish at our favorite restaurants or fast food joints. In a recent article on Yahoo! Health entitled "The Best and Worst Burgers," the author finishes the list with the "Burger So Bad It Should Be Illegal." She states that this oozing mound of dead cow has 2,290 calories and 139 grams of fat, which, she says, is "211% of the proper daily intake." First of all, "proper daily intake" depends entirely on who is eating it (though this burger would most definitely exceed anyone's daily intake). Second of all, are we so ignorant that we can't look at this monstrous slab of meat and realize that it's not healthy without having some bobble-headed numbskull telling us each and every factoid about its chemical composition?
I recently watched a documentary called Fat Head in which comedian (and former health writer) Tom Naughton tackles many of the issues and misconceptions covered in Morgan Spurlock's unctuous film Supersize Me. In Fat Head, Naughton subsists on fast food for one month, but makes smarter choices about what he orders, and also walks several miles a week. At the end of his month of fast food subsistence, he actually lost weight.
At one point, he goes out on the street with a plateful of McDonald's food and carrots and asks people to point out which food items they felt were the most unhealthy. As expected, every single individual questioned pointed to the McDonald's food. This probably seems incredibly obvious, but we still frequent websites such as Yahoo! Health to see how bad the foods we eat are. Is it really necessary, though, that we identify the caloric value and fat content of every single piece of food we put in our mouths? Men's Health frequently points out "if you eat 'x' number of calories every day, you will gain 'x' number of pounds each year and you'll have to do 'x' amount of exercise to burn it off." I'm not a believer in counting every calorie you consume. I suppose if you are training for some type of athletic event, or if you want a physique like the two models at the top of the page, counting calories might be a worthwhile pursuit. Lance Armstrong used to famously weigh everything he ate. Once again, he's a professional athlete; we're not. But for the average person who desires a "normal" body, such obsession is a waste of time. If one looks at a plate of greasy fried chicken and mashed potatoes smothered in gravy, one can honestly say to one's self "this is probably not healthy so maybe I should limit myself a bit or, at least, not eat it on a daily basis."
Body Image
Why is it we know more than ever about what constitutes a healthy diet and an adequate exercise regimen, but we're fatter than we've ever been? Surely, given the limitless information at our fingertips, we should all look like Owen McKibbin and Marisa Miller, right? Besides the obvious (poor eating habits and lack of exercise), I believe the main reason we are overweight is due to the fact that we are constantly made to feel inadequate. We see beautiful models and celebrities gracing magazine covers and walking around in nearly non-existent bikinis on television and we become disheartened because we feel that, though we desperately want to, deep down we know that we'll never have the self-discipline or the time to look the way they do. So we eat . . . and we sit . . . and we take the elevator up two flights of steps . . .and we sit and wait for someone to load their groceries in their trunk, return their shopping cart, and drive away so we can nab their parking space (completely ignoring the fact that we could've already parked farther away and already been inside the store shopping). I blame much of our sedentery behavior on modern technology, but I'll tackle that issue in another blog.
But some people take it to another extreme, as evidenced by the number of young women (and some men) suffering from eating disorders like anorexia nervosa and bulimia (though I doubt it's reached the epidemic proportions the media would lead you to believe). This false sense that beauty is only reflected in your body fat percentage has given rise to a whole generation who believe that those who are "overweight" are useless burdens on society whose very existence threatens all the resplendent folks they idolize. As I stated above, our belief on this subject is purely a matter of vanity instead of what is best for our overall health.
Fifty years ago, Marilyn Monroe was (and still is) the penultimate sex symbol. She would likely be considered fat by today's standards. Christina Hendricks from the television show Mad Men is often discussed because of her weight. Here she is compared to Megan Fox, who possesses a more "modern" body type.
Personally, I find the body type on the left much more attractive. The bony, emaciated frame of Megan Fox simply does not look feminine in my mind. However, the ball has been set rolling by television and media, and someone who possesses a figure like Christina Hendricks is seen as the outcast.
I mentioned earlier that I dislike the term "overweight" because it implies that weight is a meaningful measure of one's health and fitness. It's not. Most studies being done now confirm the fact that a person who is "overweight" and exercises on a regular basis is considerably more fit than a skinny person who leads a sedentery lifestyle. Plus, one's weight does not reflect the muscle mass that person possesses. Arnold Schwarzenegger, at the height of his bodybuilding career, weighed in at 250 pounds and was 6'2". His body-fat percentage was estimated at approximately 8%. According to most modern ideal weight charts, this put him at about seventy pounds overweight. So weight, obviously, cannot be used to judge a person's health or fitness level because there are far too many other factors to consider that don't incorporate the simple weight of one's body.
Conclusion
I'm no expert on this subject. I could certainly make many lifestyle changes of my own to make myself more fit, so I don't want to sound preachy. My main concern is that we've abandoned our common sense about a very sensitive subject that deserves to be reexamined so that others don't sink into the false notion that we can achieve results like those whose very livelihood depends on being a living representation of Michelangelo's David.
Clearly our country has a health problem that needs to be addressed, but it's up to each individual to make those decisions for themselves without the constant barrage of misinformation and misleading statistics that cloud our judgement and render us helpless to improve our lives. We have to let go of the idea that our weight and the presence of a six-pack somehow determines our worth as human beings, and instead focus on improving our health, whether that means having bulging biceps or not.
And just for good measure, here's a better picture of Christina Hendricks...
At least, I think it's better.
1 comment:
Post a Comment