STEPHEN IPPOLITO writes in the discussion on exercise:

It’s a small point, but when Laura observes upon her “intuitive sense” that running or jogging “is not all that calming” and as such, when undertaken publicly, is likely beneath the dignity of of women generally, and of Catholic women in particular, I could not agree more.

I can confirm that the Australian Army, at least in relation to its officers’ training, (or at least when I went through it), supports the truth of what Laura intuits about running or jogging.

The very first statement delivered in the very first class on the very first day of my army direct commissioning course was the warning that “officers never run.” This may sound a strange thing for a military leadership course to lead off with , as it initially seemed to me then, but as it was explained to my cohort and I, running was frowned upon not simply because it may panic the troops but for the much more important reason that rapid, rushed, hectic action – or any behaviour for that matter that springs from or tends to suggest a lack of control by a leader – is undignified and beneath a person in authority and undermines the quality of dignity that a person in authority must at all times exhibit to earn and hold the respect and confidence of others.

Laura is right to pose as the litmus test whether a mother or any other matron of yesteryear could be imagined running or jogging up and down the local streets or laying on the footpath doing “ab crunches” or “jumping jacks”, or as I witnessed this morning, gathering in a herd of 20 or so beneath a banner titled “Yummy Mummies” to run whilst pushing their babies ahead of them in prams/strollers – and to answer “no.”

This is because people will not respect or follow a person without dignity and wives and mothers, at least until recent times, modelled and set the tone for their families’ behaviour domestically as well as beyond the home at a local level through maintaining their communities’ social and support networks. Laura speaks an essential, (but regrettably forbidden), truth when she observes that: “All of society hinges on the dignity of women.”

Of course, my cohort and I learned that there were also a good many other qualities a leader also had to possess, (or at least emulate), but I have not forgotten that the very first truth imparted to us was that modelling a quiet sense of calm, (no matter how one may actually feel at any given time or in any given circumstance), through poised unhurried movement; through moderate, measured and seemly speech; through upright bearing and through flawless dress is the key to commanding the respect of others.

How commendable it is that this particular site discussion honours those possessing the very special dignity of womanhood itself, as exemplified by Our Lady, the one human being, (other than Our Lord who whilst a man was also divine), granted the ultimate grace and supreme dignity of being born without original sin by exploring fitting forms of dress, action and bearing.

Keep up the great work, Laura.

PS. I apologise in advance for using the collective noun “herd” in respect of the above-named Yummy Mummies but I am unaware of the appropriate term for a rampaging group of jogging women and their babies. Perhaps “a gaggle” or “a flock”?

— Comments —

Tyro writes:

Contrary to what Stephen Ippolito says, officers most certainly do run, as they are held to strict standards of physical fitness.

Men and women who exercise are admired because maintaining a physical fitness regimen is a sign of self discipline. This is why schools have had full featured athletic programs before they were seen as professional supports pipelines: because they taught the idea that disciplining the body went hand-in-hand with disciplining the mind and spirit.

Running may not be your preferred form of exercise, but it is the modern norm, just as in the recent past everyone seemed to take up racquetball or aerobics, and as we see with the emerging interest in “spin” classes. All reflect participants’ interest in maintaining discipline of their time and discipline over their bodies, as well as the psychological benefits of stress relief staving off of depression.

Laura writes:

I think you misunderstood Mr. Ippolito.

He was referring to standards in the Australian Army when he was in it, and he brought those standards up to make a point about authority. He didn’t say, “Officers don’t run.”

Men and women who exercise are admired because maintaining a physical fitness regimen is a sign of self discipline.

No one in this discussion has denied the value of exercise and discipline. One of the first things I said to Mrs. W. was, “Exercise is important.”

Running may not be your preferred form of exercise, but it is the modern norm,

I’m sorry, but I don’t understand you. Neither Mr. Ippolito or I said running is categorically bad. So why are you lecturing us on the value of running? We were talking about mothers running in public in skimpy clothing. Okay? Besides, who cares whether something is “the modern norm?” Ugly art is the modern norm. That doesn’t make it good.

Sven writes:

Running can be fine exercise, but it has been knocked off its pedestal of being the cornerstone of a healthy life, much like the insidious “high fat diets are bad” myth.

It leaves people prone to injuries because of the impact it subjects joints to, and distance running doesn’t elevate your heart rate enough to be as good for your heart as you would think, and at the extreme ends will cause hormone imbalances. Interval running, or sprints, seem to be getting better results, and many elite soldiers have switched to those types of workouts in the last decade. Interestingly, although distance running is what the human body is designed for, we don’t seem to benefit from doing it too often. If you don’t believe me, consider that experts recommend first time marathoners train minimally with shorter runs.

Please follow and like us: