Quote:
Originally Posted by
babygreenspots 
Yeah, all the statements about chemicals in the food, processed food, etc. seem true.
I blame the automobile culture as well. People drive everywhere. Others walk.
More controversially, I might implicate the drivenness of Americans. If you are working 12 hours a day, it's hard not to want some sort of reward in the form of a big steak and some high-calorie alcoholic drinks when the day ends.
Frankly, all of this working out bothers me. These ambitious young things eat a big meal, drive to a climate-controlled gym filled with expensive machines, and then head to the locker room to waste water in yet another shower - not to mention all of the power drinks. The solution to everything is "add more" and "consume more." It seems like spending even more of the precious, non-working, time on something that is not enjoyable? Why not walk to work? Or save on food by fasting?
You can't just blame the automobile culture. If I want to walk to the grocery store I simply can't because I'd have to walk about 7 miles total with no sidewalks. Just not feasible, and a little dangerous. I would gladly walk most places, but the organization of space where I live just doesn't support it.
I agree that Americans are overly driven by work and "bottom line," but this does not entail that a "reward" is necessary. There's also no problem with steak. Anyway, some people, myself included, actually enjoy the gym, though it depends what you're doing there. If I just sat on machines I'd hate it too. I'd rather be engaged in an athletic pursuit. Lifting heavy weights requires very little technology - just plates and the bar. Some of the most hardcore gyms are the least "comfortable" ones.
"Consuming more" implies that everything has a quantifiable price, and that we should minimize costs wherever possible. I can't really put a price on the enjoyment I get from weightlifting or the health benefits I accrue from it. This doesn't mean that I'd go spend all my money to support my hobby, but these kind of things don't translate exactly into quantities because they're subjectively valued. I like the old Roman aristocratic notion of leisure. Leisure is that time when you are not working or conducting business, and it should be used to better yourself. In their precious free time the Roman aristocrats would read philosophy, poetry, history, etc., or even write some themselves. They would also participate in athletic activities and take time to simply appreciate something beautiful, whether it be the ocean or a garden. The point is that leisure was not simply about "entertainment," although they had some of that too.
Didn't mean to rag on you... this just seemed like a good opportunity to be pedantic.