High Heels: WTF, Ladies?

image: maxpixel

By Crabby McSlacker

There are some ways in which I definitely have a girl brain, not a boy brain. But in other ways, I am a dude. I sometimes find my own gender to be an alien species, incomprehensible in its motivations and reasoning and habits. 

(For a more complete elucidation of my cluelessness about female behavior, I wrote a much longer post years ago about Women and the Quest for Beauty. Like so many ancient Cranky Fitness posts, it lingers undisturbed in the archives, gathering dust and long forgotten, yet it's better than the stuff I write now. Which makes me a little sad. Though not sad enough, apparently, to devote more time to current blog efforts). 

Anyway, this is just a brief and pissy rant on a small subject of the topic: high heeled shoes. And since so many of you wear them, either grudgingly or enthusiastically, I'd love to hear your vocal defense of your choices in the comments. 

But let me get you good and riled first!

Women and "Beauty"-- I Just Don't Get It

Surprise: This Is Not Crabby McSlacker!
Image: Vogue Magazine

How To Lose Friends and Alienate Readers

So this is one of those ill-advised posts that I will probably regret soon after I hit "Publish." But as a female health blogger, there is a nagging question that comes up for me all the time: why do women seem to be so obsessed with physical appearance?

This is not just a rhetorical question. For those of you who do care a whole heck of lot about your appearance, and the appearance of other women, I really am curious about why that is.

I know it's weird to question something so ubiquitous in our culture. But it seems to me that is still often considered the most important thing about a woman, or at least one of the most important things: how does she look?

Lurking behind nearly every mainstream media women's "health" magazine or website is a not-so-secret agenda: tell women what they need to do to lose weight and become more attractive. "Health" in the conventional sense is almost kind of a side note: oh yeah, and here's how not to end up with diabetes or die of cancer.

(That's why I especially like fitness bloggers who focus on health and empowerment, rather than pant size, like Kelly at Fitness Fixation or the inimitable MizFit).


So What's With All This "You" Stuff?

So here's part of the reason for my confusion, and part of the reason this post may seem really irritating: I may be a woman, but I think more like a guy when it comes to this beauty stuff.

Sure, I'd rather be attractive than unattractive, but it's not something I'm willing to spend a whole lot of time or thought on. Like with a car: it might be fun some days to drive around in a gleaming vintage Jaguar convertible instead of a dented station wagon.

(Bringing More Boys to The Yard
Than Milkshakes Since 1935)
Photo: Jigmi

But who has the time, money, and patience for a Jag? That dented station wagon gets me to the grocery store just fine, even if it doesn't turn any heads along the way. And I don't have to throw a bunch of time, money, and emotional energy into maintaining it. And as long as it runs great I'm happy!

It really does seem to me that the average woman spends a LOT of time, money and energy maintaining that Jaguar. Is there a cost associated with that? Are there other things that are being sacrificed in life to keep those heads turning when you drive by? Or are the benefits so totally worth it it's not even a question?

What's Wrong With Crabby?

I just don't think like a normal woman! I see a typical shoe store display full of designer stiletto shoes and I wonder: Why do these even exist? Why would a woman put these on her feet when sneakers are so much easier to get around in?

My pragmatic stance on such matters is certainly not because I've pondered the issue and meditated over it and sought spiritual guidance and decided there are more important things in life than how I look.

It's just that truly I don't care that much! I seem to be missing the normal girly genes that make fashion, hairstyles, footwear, skinny jeans, makeup, etc, etc, etc, subjects of so much interest. I don't even find highly "feminine" styles attractive--I like a more androgynous look, on both men and women. I just seem to have been born with a different set of operating instructions than most females.

(So I realize that while plenty of straight women can probably relate, and plenty of lesbians are totally feminine, girly, and devoted to their physical appearance... I don't think it's entirely a coincidence that so many of us with female partners instead of male ones started of as "tomboys." It wouldn't surprise me at all if there were something genetic that goes into gender role development as well as sexual orientation, and that's why I think more like a guy on all this).


Help! I Really Do Want To Know!

So, girly girls, can you help me understand? I have several questions, and I'd really like to know what you think. Just consider me like a clueless alien from another planet, or perhaps, a guy.


1. Do You Want to be Pretty Mostly For Yourself Or Because That's What Men Demand?

In my younger days, I used to think it was all men's fault that so often, women were judged solely on their appearance. (And back then, I think there was a lot more societal pressure on women to just "shut up and look pretty"). But now, I can't help noticing that women themselves seem to drive a lot of this focus. I don't think it's men who are clamoring to know where Michelle Obama buys her sweaters or how many pounds Valerie Bertinelli has lost and kept off. Would the editors of women's magazines keep putting waifs on their covers and promising miracle beauty solutions if that wasn't what women wanted?

So I'm starting to wonder if this focus on women's physical appearance is actually driven more by women's interest and their standards, not men's? But I actually have no idea.


2. Is the quest for physical attractiveness pragmatic, recreational, or is it a major source of self-esteem for you?

I'm guessing that women who look like beauty pageant contestants are treated differently than women who do not. They probably have an easier time getting promoted and catching a cab at rush hour and finding husbands. But I sense there's something more than practical and financial benefits at stake behind the quest for the perfect shade of eyeshadow or the skinniest rear end. What does being beautiful mean to you?

3. Does your fear of not looking slim or attractive enough ever cause you stress?

The nice thing about driving an old dented station wagon is that when the runaway shopping cart slams into your passenger side door? Meh, not such a big deal. Not quite the same thing if you're driving a Jag? Or are you pretty content with your appearance regardless of how close it is to fashion model standards?

4. Does this whole blog post make you extremely irritated with me? If so, that's cool, feel free to share your annoyance in the comments!

Boyfriends and Husbands: Health Hazards?

However Can A Gal Resist?
Photo: Plan59

Talk about a subject I know very little about.

But has my complete ignorance ever stopped my from blogging about a topic before? Of course not!

As I have a same-sex spouse, I'd been only vaguely aware of the impact that having a boyfriend or husband could have on a woman's efforts to meet her health and fitness goals.

However, I recently got a chance to peruse a book by Jenna Bergen, called: "Your Big Fat Boyfriend: How to Stay Thin When Dating a Diet Disaster." It's a cute little volume, sort of gifty-sized, combining humor with practical tips for how to stick to your own goals while dating a guy with a terrible diet. (And if you click on the link above, it comes complete with a blog.)

How clueless am I? It never occurred to me that heterosexual dating and relationships could pose such a health hazard! Or at least, according to the book, a dieting hazard. But I tend to mentally translate words like "diet" or "weight loss" into my own goals: "eating healthy" and "getting exercise," since they involve similar challenges.

So while I have a few general thoughts, I thought I'd take the issue to the smart readers of Cranky Fitness, many of whom are real live heterosexuals with actual experience in these matters. Are guys a Help or a Hazard when it comes to women's health and fitness goals?

But first, who is Jenna Bergen? Well, she's a fitness fiend and a writer whose articles have appeared in lots of great magazines. Including an article in Women's Health that mentioned Cranky Fitness--so we like Jenna 'round these parts.

She's got lots of practical tips for dealing with the phenomena that many women apparently experience: they fall for guys who are "diet disasters." (Her boyfriend, for example, went blithely through his adult life thinking that number of recommended calories a day was 20,000.) One of the fundamental messages of the book: if you are a woman, "you can't eat like a man and still fit in your pants."

Having any kind of romantic partner, male or female, can be a strong influence on behavior. (I bet there are studies, and I could look 'em up, but really, does anyone dispute this?)

This influence can be quite positive! I went from a cheeseburger-scarfing meat hog to a near-vegetarian in my early twenties, because my girlfriend at the time was a vegetarian. I learned to enjoy tofu and bean sprouts and kefir and all kinds of "exotic" (for back then) food that I never would have even tried if I'd been with someone more like myself.

And, even now, I can't stand not working out if the Lobster is heading off to the gym, even if I'd already given myself the day off. It just doesn't feel right to be slothful while someone else is sweating. So that's good, right?

But, on the negative side, I also find it extremely difficult to pass up an ice cream cone if the Lobster is having one. Suddenly, I feel entitled to that cone, even if ice cream had been the furthest thing from my mind. (Note: this is just an expression! There is never a time when Delicious Food is the furthest thing from my mind. What about quantum physics, or pre-cambrian flying insects, or Scandinavian love poetry? There is always something further from my mind than food.)

Ever fritter away some time people-watching at an airport or a mall, and notice how frequently couples end up roughly the same size? Do people choose partners who look like them, or do they influence each other into gaining or not gaining weight together? A bit of both, I suspect.

However, I do wonder whether the whole boy/girl thing does complicate matters for women.

I can kind of see how it might be a challenge dating or marrying one of those XY types who can eat an entire extra large pizza in one sitting. Or who can, if motivated, can get slim and buffed in a fraction of the time it takes an XX due to the wonders of testosterone. Or who, if not motivated, doesn't really give a damn what he looks like in a bathing suit.

And is it just a stereotype that women are generally more interested in preventive health than men? It sure seems like one gender is more likely to scrutinize food labels and make appointments for checkups than the other.

My own intuitive guess is that I'd have a harder time sticking to my healthy-eating goals if I were with a guy than with a gal. If he could have a double cheeseburger, I'd want one too.

But wait! Here's a curious fact: Compared to straight women, lesbians are more than twice as likely to be obese. So while being with a guy may seem like a challenge to healthy eating, maybe his guyness is not really the issue?

This brings up the question: why do lesbians get fat? This study said for the same reasons straight women do, which wasn't much help.

Personally, I think on average, lesbians care far less about looking like the current cultural and media ideal--ultra feminine and super skinny. (In the age of The L-Word, I know it may be shocking to hear that many of us gay gals are still old-school and have entirely different standards of attractiveness than straight folks do!) But in rejecting these images as irrelevant, many lesbians also lose the powerful weight-loss motivation that comes with appearance-based goals.

So now I'm more confused than ever. It sure seems like being with a guy could present some healthy-eating challenges--what do you folks find? And if you have one of those exotic opposite-sex partners, what accommodations do you make to stay healthy?

Gender, Lifestyle, Money, and Weird Web Statistics

Lies, damned lies, and statistics

I found a new statistical resource recently--and longtime readers know I've always been easily distracted by shiny statistical toys. This new thingy not only purports to measure the number of visitors to a website, but also tries to tell you who those visitors are. (Plus it's public, allowing readers to snoop around and see most of the stats without passwords or permissions or anything).

It's called Quantcast and it gives you demographic information for many popular websites. Last I looked, it said, for example that: nfl.com skews male (surprise!) and that npr.org skews well-educated (what a shock!). But it also says that bargain-hunting sites like Nextag.com and Overstock.com attract an affluent readership (really)? And according to their numbers, HuffingtonPost.com gets more men visiting than women, while Netflix gets more women than men. (If I were to guess, I might have reversed those two).

Note: I have no idea how Quantcast gets this information. Nor do I know how accurate it is. Be especially careful when look at a site that hasn't been directly measured or "Quantified," because their guesses on readership can be way off.

Of course I don't really care much about all those other sites--the most interesting statistics to me are all about Cranky Fitness readers! And while you're mostly who I thought you were... there were some surprises.

So, Who The Heck Are You People?

According to the Cranky Fitness quantcast profile, last time I checked you folks reading this were mostly:

Female;
Over 35 years old;
Caucasian;
Childless;
Middle income;
and Incredibly, Ridiculously Well-Educated.

Seriously, the education stats were off the scale compared to the average website. (And no, I have no idea whether the folks who end up here googling "big bouncy breasts" or "big fat ass" are included. If so, then these statistics are even more impressive).

You Are People, Not Numbers

A quick glance at the comments section of our posts or the profiles of our friendly "followers" reveals that there are plenty of you that don't fit this description at all. We get men, and parents, and people just starting off in college, and folks of many colors. Incomes range from Almost Nothing to Very Well Off. So these are just averages. The numbers are also based in large part on lurkers and googlers and folks you never get to meet down in the comments section.

But Two Statistics Surprised Me

The first surprise: I thought a lot more of you had kids! Are moms just more sociable and more likely to comment on posts? Because last I looked at the Quantcast numbers, only about a quarter of you were parents. I would have thought it was way higher.

The other thing that struck me as odd: the income numbers. Given that Cranky Fitness readers are older (than average websites), childless, and extremely well educated... one might predict higher income. Instead, readers are slightly underrepresented among the higher income ranges, not overrepresented.

Generally, it's my impression that over-35, well-educated childless folks often have slightly higher incomes than less educated, younger, child-full folks.

So what's the deal?

Well... the education/affluence link is a generalization from average populations. You folks aren't "average"--you're mostly women! And I can't help but wonder if there's a connection.

Why the Income/Education Disparity?

Maybe it's not a sexist conspiracy that on average, you're making less money than similarly well-educated readers of Macho Meaty-Man Fitness.Com. There could be plenty of innocent explanations for this that have nothing to do with gender discrimination.

Among the possibilities:

1. Quantcast has its pointy head up it's ass and the statistics are just plain wrong;

2. My assumptions about more education leading to higher income are fundamentally screwed up; or

3. People willing to read posts by an author named "Crabby McSlacker" may be less career-oriented than the general web surfing population.

Gender Wage Gap, or Healthy Balanced Lifestyle?

Unfortunately, there is still a stubborn wage gap between men and women. And women, when they do have kids, are more likely to cut back on working hours and stay home with them, whereas men tend to keep on earning.

But I'm kinda hoping it's something else.

I read the comments here, and I read many of your blogs, and I have at least an illusion that I have a sense of who some of you are. Here's my optimistic hypothesis:

It seems to me that many of you strive for a balanced approach between work and life; between time and material possessions; between human values and financial ones. I sense a tendency to choose careers that involve helping people or creating things versus more lucrative pursuits. You folks also seem more likely to take time off to take care of a family member, or work for the Peace Corps, or go back to school to pursue a whole new endeavor.

Sure, with all those advanced degrees some of you could be pulling in bigger paychecks if you were working 80 hour weeks at law firms, or short-selling stock or performing liposuction on movie stars. And perhaps some of you are doing just that. But for most of you who are apparently not raking in big paychecks: I'm hoping you are choosing to use your education in ways that are more important to you than earning larger salaries.

But I'm just an over-educated under-earner named Crabby McSlacker, what the hell do I know?

Do These Statistics Mean Anything at All?

There's a good chance that these statistics were based on such a small sample that they don't mean bupkus. Maybe next week they'll be totally different. But it did make me realize that the question of who comes here is very intriguing! And I'm always curious about the whole "equal rights for women" issue that we were supposed to have solved decades ago--how is actually playing out in real life?

So if any of you feel liking checking in:

Do you fall within any of these "typical Cranky Fitness" demographics yourself?

Are you a highly-educated person who is not earning the Big Bucks, and if so, was that a choice?

If you're a gal, do you think your options or choices or paycheck would have been different had you been male? Or vice versa if you're a guy?

Do you care at all/believe in demographic statistics?

Random Friday: Beverages, Blow-ups and Bar Graphs

[Posted by Crabby]

Hmm, Which One is Crabby?

Yes, it's been a while since a Random Friday, but don't worry--it's still just as dopey as ever. Merry is taking some well-deserved time off, thereby lowering the standards of the blog. Pray for her speedy return!

Let's start with a little bit of science, shall we?

Gay Brains:
A brain scan study of gay and hetero brains found surprising differences--with gay men and straight women sharing some characteristics that differed from straight men and lesbians. These were "in the area of the brain responsible for emotion, mood and anxiety." The brains of straight guys and lesbians "were slightly asymmetric with the right hemisphere slightly larger than the left," while gay male and straight female brains were not. And the amygdala (the "fight-or-flight" area) was wired in a similar fashion in gay men/heterosexual women vs gay gals/straight men.

(Note to self: learn better bar-fighting skills and how best to avoid crying at sad movies. Or at least find out why I was apparently issued the wrong model of brain at birth. Consider visiting Healthbolt to take the "what sex is your brain" test).


More Good News on the Beverage Front:
At least if you enjoy coffee and/or red wine.

For java junkies, especially the gals: A new coffee study found that women who drank two to three cups of coffee a day had an 18% reduction in death from all causes compared to non-coffee-drinkers. But what about 4-5 cups a day, that can't be good, right? Well ha ha ha! The women who drank that much had a 26% reduction in risk. (However, the risk reduction in men was small enough it could have been due to chance).

And as for the health benefits of red wine? Well, as you may recall, previous research had shown that an ingredient in red wine, resveratrol, extended longevity in mice. But these studies were done with high doses, which is a problematic if you're trying to generalize to humans, given the obvious inadvisability of guzzling several cases of merlot every night. However, this new research was done with much lower doses, implying that even modest amounts of resveratrol can "can elicit many of the same benefits as a reduced-calorie diet," including "a robust intervention in the retardation of cardiac aging."

Cheers!

Losing Your Cool:
Do you have kids on sports teams? Does it ever drive you crazy to go to their games and watch obnoxious parents behave like complete assh*les and spoil everything? Well, you may want to visit Juicebox Mom at Just Here for the Snacks and print off some copies of her handy and humorous guide: Parents--How to Behave on the Sidelines.

And speaking of Complete Obnoxiousness, this awesome video has been around the net for a while (and there is now a musical version). But for those who haven't seen the vintage Bill O'Reilly meltdown, it is worth watching a World-Class Prick Professional performing at the peak of his powers.



(And O'Reilly has plenty of company, if you want to see a compilation of similar on-camera temper tantrums).

How Much is Too Much?
Here at Cranky Fitness we can't really be accused of "overdoing it" when it comes to rigorous exercise. Nor are we overzealous when it comes to nutrition or personal development or anything else that requires sustained effort. However, some of you out there are quite dedicated and motivated! You may sometimes run into the problem of Doing Too Much.

Are you overdoing it on your exercise routine? Charlotte over at The Great Fitness Experiment has an insightful post on over-training, (and a great follow-up too) that could be a valuable intervention for anyone easily seduced by a "More is Better" approach to fitness. Sometimes more is NOT better.

And similarly, Semi-Charmed Wife asks a lot of good questions about the constant quest for self-improvement and whether it's always healthy. (She doesn't presume to have the answers, either, which is refreshing).

Random Internet Wanderings:

Did you know that the Lolcat people have spawned yet another user-generated humor site that can assist you in avoiding work for hours? Well, it's true, damn it. It's especially suited for people obsessed with popular song lyrics and charts and graphs and such.



plenty more at the graphjam site.


And another cool thing? There are cartoons on the web! Who knew?

Comic courtesy of xkcd

Have a great Friday, folks!

Memory: Girl Brains and Boy Brains Differ

[By Crabby]

I'm always fascinated by gender differences. While I've personally never fit all that comfortably into the "feminine" world (the subject of an upcoming post, I think), there are still many ways in which I feel distinctly a girl, not a boy. Even if you'd have to threaten me with a lethal weapon to get me to wear false eyelashes or a pair of stiletto heels.

And while exceptions are everywhere, men and women do seem, in many ways, kinda different.

How much of that is how we're wired, and how much of that is because each gender is taught to behave and think differently? The question used to seem really threatening, because any hint of innate difference was seen as a reason to discriminate against women.

Feminism still has a LONG way to go, but we now have at least a little more freedom to wonder about this stuff. I think the main thing that's changed is that it's not as common anymore to assume that the "boy" way of thinking is always better, and the "girl" way is always worse. (People do, however, tend assume that the "boy" way is normal, and the "girl" way is different, even though we are half the freakin' population.)

(There is a book I've been meaning to read called "The Female Brain," which I think explores this subject more thoroughly. Anyone read it yet?).

Anyway, so there's a new study out that suggests women and men remember things differently. In short, "women excelled in verbal episodic memory tasks, such as remembering words, objects, pictures or everyday events, and men outperformed women in remembering symbolic, non-linguistic information, known as visuospatial processing." The example cited is that "a man would be more likely to remember his way out of the woods."

As someone who can barely find my way out of my own bedroom, I've decided to embrace my deficient visuospatial abilities as one of the few ways in which I'm apparently quite feminine. I can always compensate by using my verbal abilities to get someone else to tell me how to get myself where I need to be. Or better yet, I can talk my way out of even having to go anywhere in the first place!

Note: I think individual differences are always more important than overall generalizations, and I know tons of women who can totally kick any guys ass when it comes to finding her way out of the woods. And lets be realistic--which gender usually gets itself lost in the woods in the first place?

So the study also said there were "sex differences favoring women on tasks such as remembering the location of car keys, which requires both verbal and visuospatial processing," and that "women are better than men at remembering faces, especially of females." Overall, they believed "females currently hold the advantage in episodic memory."

It's interesting, then, how often in movies we see women being all flighty and spacey and it's the guys who always remember things. They always get to save the day because they can recognize the terrorist in disguise or remember where the gun was stashed or recall the secret password. Whereas it looks like in real life, it would be the gal who would be more likely to remember that stuff.

There are tons of other ways in which men and women, overall, appear to perhaps function a bit differently; this is just one tiny example. What do you guys think, are these differences significant? Or pretty much imaginary? And if you do see differences, do you think it's mostly because we're born differently or because we're treated differently?