Tapate50
Well-known member
I don't care what his testosterone is, he ought to be able to lift the bar with 135.
I wonder what its like to be totally useless when it comes to physical activity or necessity?
Real Talk - the 19th
- Thread starter sturg33
- Start date
I wonder what its like to be totally useless when it comes to physical activity or necessity?
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
135 isn't that easy of a bench fi you're not a lifter. I know a lot of people in good shape who struggle to hit that weight. Because their exercise is basically all running. Assuming he weighs around 160 lbs. And obviously doesn't lift, 135 is right around expected.
It's also important that ability to navigate politics, has never been dictated by your ability to lift weights.
Conversely as a person who never liked running, I never ran a complete mile because I hated it. But I can sit down on a bench and rep 150 even if I haven't been to the gym in years.
Tapate50
Well-known member
My son’s not far from benching 135 and he’s 13.
It’s embarrassing for a grown man not to be able to get the bar off the rack with 135.
That means he’s likely around 95 or less.
Not being able to run a miles pretty embarrassing as well. Ngl.
There are just some things a man should be able to do.
It’s embarrassing for a grown man not to be able to get the bar off the rack with 135.
That means he’s likely around 95 or less.
Not being able to run a miles pretty embarrassing as well. Ngl.
There are just some things a man should be able to do.
This seems like a weird and unnecessary standard for what’s embarrassing. I can do both of these things and if you’re living a healthy lifestyle it’s not super difficult, but there’s nothing embarrassing about someone not being able to do it, just as it’s not embarrassing if you can’t create a PowerPoint or write a story. Different people have different skillsets and that’s just completely fucking fine. It’s weird to place that sort of value on what someone can bench when they’re clearly otherwise healthy and active.
57Brave
Well-known member
I remember Kevin Durant, when he entered the NBA draft, being derided by some for not being able to bench 135.
17 seasons ago.
And countless others who could bench a Mercedes that couldn't play a lick to save their asses
An analytic, no more or less
Means something in context A but meaningless in context B
and where it is meaningful it can speak to an athletes desire and work ethic.
Much the same as a " meaningless " college degree can speak to a persons desire and work ethic.
17 seasons ago.
And countless others who could bench a Mercedes that couldn't play a lick to save their asses
An analytic, no more or less
Means something in context A but meaningless in context B
and where it is meaningful it can speak to an athletes desire and work ethic.
Much the same as a " meaningless " college degree can speak to a persons desire and work ethic.
Last edited:
Tapate50
Well-known member
It was 185
Not 95 or 135
There’s a defensible reason for not benching as a basketballer as it can make you tighter.
Not really a reason a silver spoon fella that’s never been employed can’t lift 95.
But I’m sure as a democratic socialist (there’s no such thing) he will find someone to do the heavy lifting for him.
Not 95 or 135
There’s a defensible reason for not benching as a basketballer as it can make you tighter.
Not really a reason a silver spoon fella that’s never been employed can’t lift 95.
But I’m sure as a democratic socialist (there’s no such thing) he will find someone to do the heavy lifting for him.
acesfull86
Well-known member
Not in the top 75 things wrong with him
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
I mean I guess it's cool your son is lifting. It doesn't make my point invalid. I'm guessing your son lifts more than basically ever.
If someone doesn't make strength training a priority, they will struggle to bench their close to theri body weight much less over their body weight. I think if my memory is correct from my strength coach they basically say someone with no clue will bench about half their weight, someone who is a regular lifter should lift around their weight, and a gym rat should be around 1.5 their body weight. I think you're probably not that far off because he doesn't regularly lift.
If I had to run a mile I would, but I"m not oging ot run regularly, when I have to cardio I'd rather bike, easier on the knees and joints. But for my work I regularly put in 15K plus steps so I don't really do cardio often.
I agree there are things a man should be able to do. Like how to pop a circuit without getting electrocuted. Easy way to find out what breaker something is on.
…she’s not wrong? That’s pretty much exactly what the Constitution is. We can all assign as much or as little value to the words contained in that document as we wish, but at the end of the day, that’s a valid interpretation of what the Constitution is (outside of the pieces of paper written later by non-slave holders to amend the original).
And honestly, that you would change the current form of our constitution to take away the rights provided to her by it suggests to me that you don’t disagree with her fundamental point. It might be an uncomfortable truth, but it’s pretty accurate.
Last edited:
This gets to the crux of my point though. This is exactly what you’re doing yourself with your discussion around the 19th Amendment. Your purported aim would be to change the Constitution to advance something that you think would be beneficial to society. You do not seek to understand why this woman holds a negative view of the Founders or why she believes restricting gun rights is a worthwhile endeavor. You don’t provide any explanation for why this one woman’s views should be taken as representative of all women despite being a view held by many men as well.
Understanding or seeking to understand the intent behind the 2nd Amendment is not any more important than doing so for the 19th. You saw a woman say something woke and decided we shouldn’t consider her voice important enough in society to vote, which is no different than her using the moral failings of the founders as a justification for deciding we shouldn’t consider their voice important in today’s society.
sturg33
I
On the contrary, i understand exactly why the 19th was created. Our society determined stupidly that everyone is the same and everyone should have a say
This idiot doesnt understand why the 2nd was created and her having as much legal power as I do is dangerous for society and invites tyranny and criminality
That’s not what I said you didn’t seek to understand. I said you didn’t seek to understand *her* perspective or why she holds that view. You saw a woman say something you disagreed with and decided she’s too stupid to vote.
Edited to add: my wording went sideways in the second paragraph above, so I get it, but my point isn’t that you don’t understand the intent. It’s that you reject it based on your disagreements with others much like she’s doing.
And I find this self-assured insistence upon your own viewpoint’s correctness to make you less worthy of a vote than the woman in that clip. To deny an entire gender the right to vote because you disagree with many of them politically is ironically the kind of dangerous authoritarian bullshit that we have the 2nd Amendment for in the first place.