Olympic marathon runner Molly Seidel
2y 10mon ago by lemmy.world/u/SomeoneElse in dontyouknowwhoiam
This feels very much like an /r/thathappened post
As a running enthusiast whose varied from running ~25 miles a week to having to restart from nothing, what the guy is talking about is extremely common. I've followed many different plans from many runners, sometimes their names are attached, sometimes not, and most of them I couldn't tell you what they look like. I will say Olympic runners are the most common. I've even come across hers. Nothing about this rings as implausible to someone remotely interested in the topic. I guess I could understand from a total outsider perspective, but from someone who looks into that topic often? Absolutely plausible. I see no reason not to believe them.
Edit: the amount of stories Tony Hawk posts like this and never gets questioned also just makes me wonder a bit about why multiple people have already commented the way you did.
Wouldn't a guy analyze a guy's training instead of a women's? I don't run but I'd imagine that training would be at least a little different for women than it is for men.
Not really. I'm sure elite performers, possibly. But training plans aren't generally gendered from anything I've come across.
I’ve never paid attention to the sex or gender identity of who writes training programs if the credentials check out
Male, female, non-binary, etc.
On the off chance this isn't troll bait: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex%E2%80%93gender_distinction
Or maybe he's an analyst.
Pretty sure the Tony Hawk thing is like a running joke, I’m not sure how many of those are legit at this point. I still laugh at them all.
I've never come across anyone that just pulls out a training schedule when I say "I run".
Usually there's some follow up questions about goals, training, whatever.
But just straight up grabbing your phone and pulling out a training schedule? THAT'S the implausible part, not that he was using her training schedule.
You have no idea what the conversation is. It was boiled down to "I run." Why are you going out of your way to assume a whole bunch of stuff that isn't mentioned?
That's what I read between the lines. She's having a stab at someone who did exactly that.
I don't see the need to tell a professional runner how to run? I also don't see why she would hid that fact if the conversation went any further?
I also don't see why she would hid that fact if the conversation went any further?
If she's leaving stuff out, it's probably because Twitter has a character limit, not because she's trying to hide something.
You find it unlikely that someone who runs at the Olympic level would be amongst people that are likely to nerd out about their training schedules?
This feels very much like a /r/nothingeverhappens comment.
Inside you there are two wolves.
God damn it Moon Moon.
One smokes crack, The other smokes crack.
You are addicted to crack.
It's a good day at the Furry convention.
Oh damn, so I'm not a lone wolf?
I mean, just consider how astronomically improbable the entire situation is for a second instead of falling for rage bait.
It's extremely possible. I came across her plan in researching running. She's popular. Not all runners publish stuff. She's one of the few names in running I recognize but I couldn't for the life of me even describe what she looks like let alone recognize her on my own.
And why is this rage bait? Who is angry? It's humorous. Why do you assume folks are supposed to be angry reading this?
To your last point I think it could be read as him"mansplaining" it to her. He could also just be passionate about the topic and excited to talk about it. If it happened in any case
I don't see topics covering "mansplaining" as rage bait. It does indeed happen and calling attention to it is fair game. My best guess is that he is clearly passionate about it (I mean, honestly, that should be a given) but I'm assuming he reached the point where it'd be embarrassing if she let him know he just tried to explain her own training to her.
Agreed but I think that's what they were referring to when talking about rage hair bait
The only people who seem to be raging are the ones trying to intimate that its a fake scenario, everyone else seems to be rolling their eyes or chuckling.
Exactly! That was my intention when creating this community - posts are meant to be entertaining, slightly humorous, maybe a little bit of schadenfreude. Not everything has to be super serious.
What at all is improbable about it?
You really believe that some rando just happened to sit next to the person he was pulling stats about?
for this specific marathon runner, maybe, but there are a lot of professional athletes
Please don’t make meta reference comments a thing here, I beg you
You're going to be very disappointed if you think a social media platform populated mostly by ex-redditors won't eventually take on the behaviors of reddit.
I already am
Feels a lot like /r/subredditdrama
/r/ reference comments are littered all over comments sections on sites like YouTube and TikTok despite not linking anywhere when outside of reddit. Do you really think there's any chance of it not catching on here?
also, r/imverysmart
That's because it is. We're supposed to expect that a random person had compiled detailed running stats on a person he just happened to sit next to on a plane.
This is just a story to manufacture outrage, like most of social media.
Where's the outrage? This is a funny story in the same vein as Tony Hawk's various "You look like Tony Hawk" moments. Its like everyone in this thread saw its a woman and assumed she's complaining instead of telling a fun story.
Edit as I realize half the comments trying to call this rage bait are literally just you instigating lol. Touch grass.
The outrage is because the person who made the original post is a woman.
The vast majority of men really don't like it when women do things or talk about their experiences, especially if the women are good at or enjoy the things they do and/or talk about men behaving like men towards them.
(Watch how fast I get down voted and mansplained to about how wrong I am, lmao)
That's a Kafka trap, right?
I was going to downvote you, but I have decided to upvote you instead to make you look like a fool /s
What is touch grass?
I’m not sure why you assume the person was random. There’s no indication that she hops on planes randomly. Professional runners do a lot of traveling to and from events, and it makes sense that other people connected to the sport (and likely to have detailed running stats on runners) might also be on those same flights.
Its almost like they're some sort of community built around shared interest! I swear some of the people here really need to fuckin touch grass lol, especially who you're replying to.
What is touching grass?
It depends on the analysis. I've done plans and there are tools that just print out the analysis of how well you improved in different areas. It could have been an analysis of trying the plan. Once you're into long distance, you may try different plans to get past a plateau. I don't see how you could analyze the plan itself, so I just assumed it was an analysis of implementing the plan. Cause that's common.
Why not tell him? Who wouldn't love that?
Someone who makes assumptions about women and confidently tells them how they should be doing the things they are already doing.
Just sounds to me like he's passionate about something. I guess he could be an ass, but to jump to that conclusion from just "you should train high milage" and then providing analysis is really a bit much.
My dad would be that guy, but he's a running coach and was a marathon runner for like 50 years, so he loves talking about it.
There definitely wouldn't be any thought of, "you're a woman so you need advice," since he'd do the same thing to a man.
In fact, if we actually accept this completely unbelievable story, the fact that he's pulling stats from Women runners shows he's not being sexist.
Your dad sounds like an asshole and id avoid bringing up running. I'd enjoy talking about it. But I wouldn't want a teaching lesson from someone who has, as far as I know, no credentials or authority on the topic because, if we assume it's like the post, none were given. Plus I'd rather they find out my level of knowledge before they assume I know nothing. Basic respect. Your dad has none. And you don't either.
Edit: most running plans aren't gendered so he may not even know it's from a woman. Many plans get shared, gasp, through social media and credit can be lost. You're actually fucking awful at drawing logical conclusions. Take a college course in logic once you reach there as I can't imagine you're that old or experienced with your approach to communications.
Probably more along the lines of "I found this amazing program, check this out"
Not really. Unsolicited advice can be very condescending. You're telling them that info because you don't believe they know it. Just ask them how familiar they are on the topic if it's truly from a place of passion. Cause passionate or not, if they already know the info, it's annoying to listen to someone just spout about something you already know. And it's worse if they just assumed you didn't know.
Edit: also, I'd take her opinion on the situation over yours any day. She decided that it would have someone not gone over well for the guy, so I'd imagine she had a reason. You're the one assuming she acted without reason which is truly odd.
So, tell them about yourself. They're a stranger, they're going to get a lot of assumptions wrong, so what? Conversations can't begin without making some assumptions. It's only a problem when they start to ignore what you say.
She was under the impression he wouldn't take it well. Why would you know the situation better than her?
There may well be other context not communicated in the post that changes things. All I'm saying, is that based off this, it just sounds like he's passionate about something and maybe she missed out on a good conversation. Of course, I could be wrong and more context may change things.
You do have context. Hers. But for some reason you aren't taking her context into account. WEIRD
The context we have: "On my flight was talking to a guy next to me & it came up that I run. He starts telling me how I need to train high mileage & pulls up an analysis he'd made of a pro runner's training on his phone. The pro runner was me. It was my training."
I don't see how I haven't taken all that into account. No doubt context was left out of that post. I'm not taking that into account because I don't know it. If I did, my opinion would probably be different.
I don't see why I'm not allowed to think it would have been better for her to tell him.
BECAUSE MEN ARE BAD OF COURSE
You didn't take into account that she was there and chose how to respond. She has more context than you. But you still don't see that. I honestly don't know how else to spell it out. You're saying her perspective of an event that she was present for is incorrect and your perspective of an event that you weren't there for is more correct.
You're questioning her judgement when there's literally no reason to. And then you're defending that. So why should your judgement be above questioning but not hers?
My judgement isn't above question. I don't know why you think that I think it is.
You’re saying her perspective of an event that she was present for is incorrect and your perspective of an event that you weren’t there for is more correct.
I never said that. I don't believe that.
I think that, given the context provided, he was excited about a topic he was passionate about, nothing more. If there's more context, I may well be wrong. But we don't have that and in the absence of more information, my opinion is my opinion.
I have offered an alternative that believe is more compelling. I might be wrong, but given the information provided, I think my reasons are good.
She had more context, and she might be right. But that hasn't been provided to us, so I can't respond to any of that.
Ugh. Dude. Are you literally programmed to ignore women as a source of information? You have more context. She implied he'd be upset if she told him that was her plan. Why do you disbelieve that? You're literally creating extra information that isn't there to question her narrative that she's given you zero reason to not believe. Why is your default to simply not believe her?
And buddy, if your judgement isn't above questioning, you're trying really hard to argue that it's more legitimate than hers.
Edit: so to summarize your point. Given a bunch of made up information, you disbelieve her, for no reason, other than the hypothetical you made up in your head. Got it. Totally normal way to respond to this. Not at all toxic or unhealthy in any way. You're totally a positive influence on society.
Ehhh, her last sentence kinda sounds like she didn't want to make him sad by telling him she already knew all of this because he was so happy about sharing.
Honestly, I like that interpretation much much more. Just makes me realize how much seeing others take it so negatively even made me see it more negatively.
None of that accurately describes my position. Please reread my posts. I have doubts you are giving a good faith effort.
I'm starting to doubt that you have actual capacity for comprehensive reasoning. That is absolutely a direct inference of your position. Just saying "no it's not" doesn't just make it so. All of that is true if one holds your position.
I mean, if the recommendations were prompted, sure. But if he just starts telling her what she should be doing without prompting, its that whole "mansplaining" thing I heard about.
Admittedly we only have her context, he could have just been passionately recounting his own routines and she may have misinterpreted it, or exaggerated for effect and humor.
I mean, the story is bullshit, but from the account it just sounds like a running enthusiast geeking out about a topic they enjoy.
Your interpretation is bullshit. Like your opinions on this post.
I take it you're not a woman or afab presenting then? Go ask a woman you trust to tell you what it means when a man starts explaining her hobbies to her as if she doesn't understand them.
Man, guys do this to everyone because they care about what they do. I've had guys do it to me and I love it because we can have a passionate conversation then.
Look, if after she revealed who she was he dismissed her, then yeah, he's an ass and the conversation is a waste of time. But, I know a lot of guys who would do exactly this and then be really excited to talk to her and learn about her experiences, myself included.
Yup, my dad would have a blast talking running with anyone who will let him, and he'd do the same thing as this guy. There wouldn't be an bit of condescension about it.
No, you ask them if they're familiar with the concept. You don't give them a intro course to it. One treats them as a peer. The other treats them as unknowledgeable. It's disrespectful to assume someone has no knowledge in the topic they admit to be interested in. Going on a long spiel isn't a passionate dialogue. It's a long monologue trying to teach someone something because you assume you're the teacher and they're the student in the situation.
No, there are guys who absolutely talk to women as if they know nothing about the topic no matter what the woman stated before hand. I've seen guys do that to my coworker who's been a developer for years and if they have to tell her some sort of critique on her code, they'll explain from like a intro comp sci point and detail everything and then finally just mention their critique at the end. All that was needed was the criticism itself, not the full history of programming. When I get a critique, it's just "hey, try XYZ because of ABC."
Happens at the gym too. Hell, I've literally been next to a woman who brings up a topic they like that the other guy likes and then they just start talking to me and I didn't even mention I enjoy the topic.
Just because you don't do it, don't pretend it doesn't happen. Women react the ways they do because of experience. Also, I highly doubt you've seen guys talk to someone interested in the same topic in the same way as if the other person knows nothing. It's disrespectful regardless of gender.
I've seen it happen.
Edit: let's keep in mind, this whole time you're correcting a woman on a topic that you've yet to show any experience in, plus weren't even present for and all you have is her perspective, and you still said it's wrong.
Of course it happens. I never said it doesn't. I said it sounds to me like he's just passionate about something in this case. I even said if he ignores her expertise after he finds out who she is, then he's an ass and ignore him.
let’s keep in mind, this whole time you’re correcting a woman on a topic that you’ve yet to show any experience in, plus weren’t even present for and all you have is her perspective, and you still said it’s wrong.
Dude, it's a conversation with a stranger. Why do you act like I've never had any experience talking with a stranger?
You're doubling down on correcting her and saying her interpretation is worse than yours. And I need to point out again, you weren't there and she was. Yet you still are committed to saying your interpretation is better. Wow. Just wow, buddy.
So, we aren't ever allowed to suggest that another course of action was better if we weren't there? Really?
No, you can do so. But have a better fucking reason than making up entirely different scenarios. When the situation actually contains enough info to know they're wrong, then sure. But when there is no reason or evidence to question them, why do it?
MEN BAD MEN BAD MAN BAD MAN BAG
This doesn't sound like a mansplain scenario to me, I think the guy was just happy to talk running (and also might not exist). So if a woman says they run I should say "well I'm sure you know everything there is to know about that. No need for further discussion." ? Sounds fucking dull.
This thread is full of mountains of projection trying to explain why it’s fine and probably great that the guy in the OP did this.
But of course only one person involved in the whole post was actually there: the woman who made the tweet. Do you think that tweet is coming from someone who had to deal with a friendly-but-passionate dude explaining training techniques?
Could be, but the language of her tweet suggests annoyance.
Also your suggested response is equally obnoxious. It’s pretty simple: if she says she runs you ask more about it—“oh what kind of running do you do?”
What you definitely do not say is “you should be doing X” without asking what kind of training they already do. Seems obvious.
Talk about mountains of projection …
You can ask about experiences before launching into a 3-year training regimen, you know.
Or, you could just accept the fact that people like talking about their hobbies and stop looking for a reason to be upset over an obviously ficticious story meant to manufacture outrage.
No, going on a long spiel is not discussing your hobbies. It's dominating the conversation and taking it from something that apparently she brought up, to about how he could help her with his knowledge. That's not a conversation. A conversation would be asking her about it before assuming she literally knows nothing. Have a back and forth about it. Have her talk about her experience. He can talk about his. You know. Like two normal humans instead of a non-stop running lesson no one asked for.
MAN BAD
I am a man. I do not think that's the message of any of this. Only a simple mind would come to such a conclusion. Do better.
You said the thing! Yes, I must must must must DO BETTER... the shame!
Running plans are not gendered for the most part. It's possible some exist, but they are not common, especially amongst enthusiasts as opposed to elite athletes.
Any person unsure about their safety sitting next to a stranger with no options for escape. I wouldn't feel particularly comfortable in such a situation.
UPDATE: I don't understand the downvotes. I have read many comments saying similar things in response to the story: give this man the benefit of the doubt, not every behavior is mansplaining, you're all judgmental and jumping to harsh conclusions, and so on.
I used to be in that chorus until my wife explained to me one thing: when the cost of failure is high enough, constant vigilance and suspicion is necessary for protection and maybe even survival. And I could either accept that or not.
It felt grim and I felt disappointed by the whole conundrum, but I had to accept it as it is. From there, my view of these kinds of situations changed.
Because it isn't true. It's pretty much statistically impossible.
Statistically improbable
I find this hard to believe...if the guy's doing analysis, he'd surely know who she was. He'd be a big enough "fan" of running to even start doing analysis. Man, the internet is just full of BS.
Anyway, I'll pretend this was real and it's kinda funny.
Absolutely not. I've followed plans and couldn't tell you what the person looks like. It's usually not about knowing a lot about the person but the popularity of the plan. And I've come across hers so at least in my opinion, it's a common one. I find this no different than the countless stories Tony Hawk says that border the same concept. He just gets believed a lot more easily for whatever reason.
Idk, I’d believe it. I’ve been involved in a few sports to the point that I’m doing deep diving into elites trainings out of curiousity. For some athletes, the only picture I would see is a small thumbnail profile pic that was basically indecipherable, or they would be in athletic gear with hats and such. I definitely wouldn’t recognize them on the street, and it would be a crap shoot if I’d recognize them on an airplane. The only ones that I’d have a shot at are Alex Honnold, Tommy Caldwell and Andrew Skurka.
I'm pretty sure the venn diagram of people who give unsolicited workout advice and people who don't pay attention to the by line is just a circle.
The expression should be “I had too much heart to tell him.” A person lacking heart would have told them, gleefully.
No, "didn't have the heart" doesn't mean you don't have heart, just means you have a different kind of heart, so it works fine.
I had too many hearts to tell him. My blood pressure is through the roof.
Or your a time lord
I didn't have any heart to tell him. I was dead.
Ahh I see.. It should be DON'T don't have a heart.
Thanks for clearing that up!
A person lacking heart would have told them, gleefully.
TIL I'm lacking heart.
This happens a lot in the firearms community. I get told about x, y, z guns and how they function. But I have all those guns and have trained on the less accessible. I own full auto legally but every other day I'm told I can't own one. People be dumb.
I am really having trouble believing it went down like that. Analyzing one specific runners routine is more like stalking than anything. Especially given that there is a wealth of material on high mileage plans (Pfiitzinger anyone?).
...Being inspired by a professional's methods is not stalker behavior. If he was a stalker, you'd think he'd know what the runner looked like, yeah?