Yesterday was the 20th anniversary of my first half-marathon. Somehow I got it in my head that I ran it on 9 December 1991. But I dug out my shirt from that race and it said 8 December.
I remember that race, and the preparation leading up to it, like it was yesterday. I had run my first 10K race in June 1991 and my second two months later. Just before the first 10K race, I had started running with the San Diego Marathon Clinic (SDMC). Through SDMC, which met on Sunday mornings, I met a lot of runners who were experienced at running half-marathons and marathons. They gave me the motivation to go for a half-marathon. After finishing my second 10K, I got an application for the San Diego Half-Marathon, which was the companion race to the San Diego Marathon. I filled out the application and sent in my entry fee. Remember, this was in the days before online registration. From reading books on running, I figured that four months was plenty of time to go from the 10K to half-marathon level. My longest runs up to that point were about 8 miles (13 km), so it was a matter of adding those extra 5 miles/8 km.
Through the SDMC I met Bill, who became a friend, running partner, and coach/mentor. He had run a lot of marathons and just about all of the local races. Bill loved helping new runners train for races. I learned almost everything that I know about long distance running from Bill on those Sunday mornings. When I told Bill that I wanted to train for the SD Half-Marathon, we started running together starting with 8-milers. When I was ready to move up to doing 10-milers (about 16 km), I was convinced that I wouldn't be able to do it. But, thanks to Bill, I made it. After my first 10-miler, he told me, "I thought you said you couldn't run 10 miles." During the last 100-200 meters of our long training runs, Bill had me practice what he called the half-marathon finish. We would go into a full sprint, with him saying, "Are you going to let an old man beat you?" (He was 12 years older than me.) To this day, when I do my final sprint at the end of a long run, Bill's voice is in my head asking if I'm going to let an old man win. Bill and I did my first 12-miler (just under 20 km) together. He had an injury, so we walked a lot of it. I started having doubts about being able to do a half-marathon because of the walking breaks. But the next week Bill led a small group of women on a 12-miler. Most of us in the group were training for our first half-marathon and we got a lot of good advice. I felt like Bill was picking on me with a lot of, "Stop looking at your watch," "You think too much. Stop thinking and just run," "Relax your shoulders, you're breaking form," and "Bring your hands down." Bill didn't give any of the other women corrections. After 12 miles of being singled out for everything under the sun, I asked Bill why he was picking on me and not on the others in our little group. He told me that I was the most talented runner of the bunch and wanted to bring out my best.
Race day dawned cold and overcast. In other words, it was an ideal day for a long race. The race itself couldn't have gone any better. One of the SDMC women who ran with me during the second 12-miler was with me at the start. She took off and started to leave me in the dust. I told her, "Remember what Bill said about starting slowly." She told me that she felt so good and wanted to go out quickly. I ended up passing her at around the halfway point. I made it a point to start slowly for the first two miles (about 3 km) and picked up speed at each mile split. I had a time goal of 2 hours and as I kept going, I knew that I would easily meet it. When I hit the 8-mile marker, I told myself that I needed to imagine myself starting to run around Miramar Lake, which is exactly a 5-mile route, and then I would be finished. Somewhere between the 10 and 11-mile marks, I saw Bill. He was running the full marathon and was running on the opposite side of the road toward me. I told him that I was doing great and gave a thumbs-up. When I saw him the following Sunday at SDMC, he confessed that he was struggling with running the marathon and was tempted to jump in and run to the finish line with me. But he thought that it was better for me to have my "moment of glory" on my own. At the last water point, somewhere between 11 and 12 miles, a woman came up to me and started complaining about the course (too hilly) and the weather (too cold and damp). She said that she would never run this race again. I told her that this was my first half-marathon and I was enjoying every minute of it. Even though I wasn't planning to get a drink at that point, I pulled out at the water table and got a cup of water just to get away from her. I wasn't going to let someone's whining ruin my fantastic experience. The finish was a slight downhill. I got my finisher's medal and felt like I just won an Olympic medal. My time was 1 hour, 50 minutes, and 37 seconds. Needless to say, I was on Cloud Nine driving home.
My first half-marathon medal had a place of honor in a frame on the mantle in our house in San Diego. When I moved to Germany, it came with me.To paraphrase the triathlete Mark Allen, that medal didn't just symbolize that I finished a long race. It's really a symbol of the training and effort that I put in to earn it. Even though I'm now a veteran of 15 half-marathons, my first one will always be special.
Friday, December 9, 2011
Friday, November 4, 2011
German vs American Runners
Now that I've been running on the roads and trails in both Parsberg/Lupburg and Garmisch for almost 20 years, it's easy for me to look at a fellow runner and pick out whether he or she is German or American. It has nothing to do with running style. Germans and Americans are both fast or slow, look smooth or choppy, and do long or short runs. Like American runners, German runners come in all shapes and sizes. The main difference between German and American runners is their clothing.
The easiest way to differentiate between American and German runners is their socks. One look at a runner's socks, and you know right away if he or she is German or American. We American runners like white, or off-white, socks. My mother used to tell me that you're supposed to wear white socks when doing any sort of athletic endeavor. Wearing colored socks would lead to stinky feet, stained feet from the socks' dye mixing with sweat, foot fungus, or even gangrene. Geman runners obviously have different mothers because 99% of them wear dark (usually black) socks. Maybe the cold German climate prevents the growth of foot fungus, or black German socks are made with special fibers that prevent odor or gangrene. Hmmmm....if that's true, maybe I should start running in dark socks instead of my off-white Thor-Los.
When the weather starts cooling off, Americans and Germans differ in which part of the body gets more coverage. Americans will wear shorts with a long-sleeved shirt. Germans wear short sleeves and long tights or running pants. When I was a new runner, I was told that it was more important to keep the upper body warm. Germans must be told to keep their legs warm and not worry so much about their upper bodies. I've run in shorts and long sleeves for so long, I don't know if I would feel comfortable with long pants and short sleeves.
Another way to figure out if a runner is American or German is to see if his or her clothing matches. Many experienced American runners just don't care if their shorts and tops match. They go out in whichever shorts and shirts are at the top of the stack in the closet. One of the criteria for being a real runner is that it doesn't matter if your clothing matches. I've been known to wear such combinations as purple shorts with an orange shirt. German runners seem to be more fashion-conscious. Tops and bottoms always match. German runners in Parsberg were partial to long running pants and matching jackets, even when it was fairly warm. Here in Garmisch runners wear shorts, capris, or tights with shirts that have the same color scheme. Even their shoes have the same colors as the rest of their clothing. German running clothing is expensive compared to its American counterpart. Maybe a German runner feels that if he's spending a lot of money for his clothing, he wants to look good on the trail.
One of the games that I like to play with myself while out running is guessing the nationality of the other runners that I see. This mental game would be a lot more challenging if only the Germans would start wearing white socks. Until that time comes, it will be easy picking out the Americans and Germans on the trail.
The easiest way to differentiate between American and German runners is their socks. One look at a runner's socks, and you know right away if he or she is German or American. We American runners like white, or off-white, socks. My mother used to tell me that you're supposed to wear white socks when doing any sort of athletic endeavor. Wearing colored socks would lead to stinky feet, stained feet from the socks' dye mixing with sweat, foot fungus, or even gangrene. Geman runners obviously have different mothers because 99% of them wear dark (usually black) socks. Maybe the cold German climate prevents the growth of foot fungus, or black German socks are made with special fibers that prevent odor or gangrene. Hmmmm....if that's true, maybe I should start running in dark socks instead of my off-white Thor-Los.
When the weather starts cooling off, Americans and Germans differ in which part of the body gets more coverage. Americans will wear shorts with a long-sleeved shirt. Germans wear short sleeves and long tights or running pants. When I was a new runner, I was told that it was more important to keep the upper body warm. Germans must be told to keep their legs warm and not worry so much about their upper bodies. I've run in shorts and long sleeves for so long, I don't know if I would feel comfortable with long pants and short sleeves.
Another way to figure out if a runner is American or German is to see if his or her clothing matches. Many experienced American runners just don't care if their shorts and tops match. They go out in whichever shorts and shirts are at the top of the stack in the closet. One of the criteria for being a real runner is that it doesn't matter if your clothing matches. I've been known to wear such combinations as purple shorts with an orange shirt. German runners seem to be more fashion-conscious. Tops and bottoms always match. German runners in Parsberg were partial to long running pants and matching jackets, even when it was fairly warm. Here in Garmisch runners wear shorts, capris, or tights with shirts that have the same color scheme. Even their shoes have the same colors as the rest of their clothing. German running clothing is expensive compared to its American counterpart. Maybe a German runner feels that if he's spending a lot of money for his clothing, he wants to look good on the trail.
One of the games that I like to play with myself while out running is guessing the nationality of the other runners that I see. This mental game would be a lot more challenging if only the Germans would start wearing white socks. Until that time comes, it will be easy picking out the Americans and Germans on the trail.
Saturday, October 22, 2011
Cool Runnings
This past week my running has been great. I think the main factor is the weather. When I get out in the mornings, it's nice and cool. In fact, I've had to bring out the winter running gear! The mercury has been at or around the freezing mark in the mornings. There's something about running in the cold that's invigorating. One of my oldest friends would tell me that I'm a masochist for running in the cold. But as the title of a Chris Rea song goes, "I don't know what it is, but I love it."
I remember my first "cold weather" run back in 1990. My husband was working in England and I joined him. On one of my first days there I set out for a run. Being from San Diego at the time, England felt so cold and damp! In San Diego I would wear tights and long sleeves when it was between 10 and 15 C (50 to 59 F), just like all of the others in my running group. That January morning in England it was about 6 C (43 F) and I piled on the layers. I had (from the bottom up): tights (with stirrups no less!) with sweatpants over them, a t-shirt, long-sleeved shirt, sweatshirt, lightweight jacket, gloves, and a hat. Partway through my run I stripped off most of the layers and ended up carrying a lot of clothing back to the guesthouse where I was staying. I quickly learned that "less is more" when it comes to cold-weather running. A couple of good high-tech layers are much better than lots of layers of cotton in cold weather.
Now when the mercury starts to drop toward the freezing mark, I wear tights, a long-sleeved technical shirt, and a fleece overshirt. I only wear my jacket when it's below freezing. I'll start off with lightweight glove liners, but will usually end up taking them off. The same with a hat. When it gets to about -10 C (14 F) I'll wear Gore-Tex pants over lighter weight tights and bring out the fleece gloves. I feel a bit like a female version of the Michelin Man when I run on cold fall and winter mornings.
Another reason why I'm running so well now is that my hamstring issues are gone. Once in a while I'll feel something in the butt crease/top of the hamstring. But for the most part I have been running pain-free, even with increased speed. It feels so good to be injury-free! I have had the hamstring problems for over a year and it feels great to be rid of them, or at least 98% rid of them.
Since I got back from the States in September I have also been getting back to my Pilates and weight lifting routines to strengthen my core and arms. OK, I'm not really lifting weights; I'm using resistance bands. But the effect is the same as weight lifting. I can tell that I'm getting stronger because I can do more of the Pilates exercises, arm exercises, and push-ups than I did before. After every run I massage my legs with my Stick, which helps them to recover faster. We older runners need all of the tricks we can find for faster recovery!
Once winter sets in with the ice and snow, I'll have to slow down in order to keep from breaking something. But until then, I'll enjoy the fall mornings and speedy "cool runnings."
I remember my first "cold weather" run back in 1990. My husband was working in England and I joined him. On one of my first days there I set out for a run. Being from San Diego at the time, England felt so cold and damp! In San Diego I would wear tights and long sleeves when it was between 10 and 15 C (50 to 59 F), just like all of the others in my running group. That January morning in England it was about 6 C (43 F) and I piled on the layers. I had (from the bottom up): tights (with stirrups no less!) with sweatpants over them, a t-shirt, long-sleeved shirt, sweatshirt, lightweight jacket, gloves, and a hat. Partway through my run I stripped off most of the layers and ended up carrying a lot of clothing back to the guesthouse where I was staying. I quickly learned that "less is more" when it comes to cold-weather running. A couple of good high-tech layers are much better than lots of layers of cotton in cold weather.
Now when the mercury starts to drop toward the freezing mark, I wear tights, a long-sleeved technical shirt, and a fleece overshirt. I only wear my jacket when it's below freezing. I'll start off with lightweight glove liners, but will usually end up taking them off. The same with a hat. When it gets to about -10 C (14 F) I'll wear Gore-Tex pants over lighter weight tights and bring out the fleece gloves. I feel a bit like a female version of the Michelin Man when I run on cold fall and winter mornings.
Another reason why I'm running so well now is that my hamstring issues are gone. Once in a while I'll feel something in the butt crease/top of the hamstring. But for the most part I have been running pain-free, even with increased speed. It feels so good to be injury-free! I have had the hamstring problems for over a year and it feels great to be rid of them, or at least 98% rid of them.
Since I got back from the States in September I have also been getting back to my Pilates and weight lifting routines to strengthen my core and arms. OK, I'm not really lifting weights; I'm using resistance bands. But the effect is the same as weight lifting. I can tell that I'm getting stronger because I can do more of the Pilates exercises, arm exercises, and push-ups than I did before. After every run I massage my legs with my Stick, which helps them to recover faster. We older runners need all of the tricks we can find for faster recovery!
Once winter sets in with the ice and snow, I'll have to slow down in order to keep from breaking something. But until then, I'll enjoy the fall mornings and speedy "cool runnings."
Saturday, October 1, 2011
Halloween Safety (or Paranoia)
Earlier this week I received a couple of flyers in my work e-mail about Halloween safety. Every year about this time the Safety Office puts out information about trick-or-treating on base. This year we got two flyers: one from the Safety Office and the other from the Teen Center. The Safety Office flyer was a Word document with information about trick-or-treating hours and standard safety tips. The Teen Center flyer was a cute Power Point presentation with safety tips mixed in with cartoon ghosts, witches, and goblins.
Most of the information in both flyers was common sense. For example, it says that kids should be visible and carry a flashlight or glow stick and they should wear costumes that fit properly. Cars aren't allowed in the on-base housing area during trick-or-treat hours. However, if kids wearing dark costumes wander to other areas on the base, it's a good thing for drivers to be able to see them. It also takes a lot of the fun out of trick-or-treating when you're constantly tripping over your costume.
However, there were a few things in the flyers that I found a bit odd. Maybe I've been spending too much time on the Free Range Kids blog (http://www.freerangekids.wordpress.com/), but these particular tips seemed to play into American parents' fears of kidnappers and possible dangers. The first one was to have parents inspect the candy and other "loot" when the kids get home. My son does this anyway to separate the "good" candy from the "lame." I watch him, mainly to see if there is a lot of chocolate candy. It works out well because he's a Gummi Bear man and I like chocolate. The premise behind this is all of the media stories about strangers poisoning Halloween candy and then giving it out. Every year there seem to be stories about apples with razor blades or poisoned candy. I remember them from my childhood. To further feed this fear, Stateside hospitals will x-ray Halloween candy for free to reasssure anxious parents. According to Snopes, there have been very few cases where kids were poisoned on Halloween. Those cases were not random poisonings by strangers, but premeditated acts by someone the children knew. http://www.snopes.com/horrors/poison/halloween.asp. Yet the fear persists that every other person that a child visits on Halloween night will put poison, razor blades, or needles in the candy.
One of the items on the flyer from the Safety Office said that kids shouldn't carry sharp objects like knives, swords, or brooms while trick-or-treating. Brooms??? I can see why a six-year-old knight shouldn't carry a real sword and understand why it's best that a young Ninja warrior leaves Mom's French chef knife at home. But when did a broom get designated a "sharp object?" Most girls who dress up as witches would "ride" their brooms, but I can see boys engaging in horseplay and doing swordfights with brooms or pretending that they're machine guns. They may even whack a friend with either the handle or bristles. But come to think of it, I just can't imagine why a boy would want to carry a broom on Halloween. I don't know too many boys who want to dress up as janitors or members of the Norwegian curling team. While I have heard of many deaths by swords or knives (I've read enough medieval history in my time), I haven't read anything about real deaths by brooms. There are urban legends about teenage girls who supposedly died while masturbating with a broom handle, but they are just that. http://www.snopes.com/college/risque/broom.asp.
As I mentioned before, the Power Point presentation was very cute. But there was one slide that played to the US obsession and paranoia about children being kidnapped by strangers. That slide said that kids shouldn't trick or treat alone. Young kids should be accompanied by an adult and older kids should go with at least one buddy. To me, that's plain common sense because there is safety in numbers. There was a little box that appeared on that slide which said that kids who are in a group have a reduced risk of being kidnapped. It was implied that any child out alone would be kidnapped. Believe it or not, there are not predators and kidnappers on every corner and hiding in every bush. Halloween would be one of the worst times to snatch a child because there are so many people around. It's one of the few times (at least in the States) that there are a lot of people out on the streets. Out of all of the child abductions in the States, an extremely small percentage are committed by strangers. The rest are committed by someone who the child knows and trusts.
Even if I wanted to snatch a child on Halloween, it would be an extremely difficult endeavor. First of all, the on-base housing area, where all of the trick or treating takes place (it hasn't spread to the local German community yet), is self-contained and very small. All of the residents know each other. They also know many families who live off-base. The kids also know each other plus the American kids who live off-base. If I were to make off with a kid, first of all, someone would stop me and ask what I'm doing with Major Smith's son. On Halloween night, there are a lot of people in the housing area walking about, giving out candy from their cars, or hanging around talking with other adults. Local Germans are also invited to come on base to trick or treat. In other words, there are a lot of potential witnesses. If I were planning to commit a crime I certainly don't want witnesses. Then there's the matter of exiting the housing area with a screaming, kicking child. The military police are at the housing area entrance/exit to give the kids glow sticks and candy, prevent people from driving into the housing area (it's closed to cars during trick or treat hours), and ensure that everything is orderly. The MPs would certainly notice something amiss if I were to try and leave the housing area with a kid who's making a big fuss. Even if a child was trick or treating alone in the on-base housing area, he stands a higher chance of being abducted by space aliens than by a flesh and blood stranger.
I'm all for kids having a safe and fun Halloween experience. Like in previous years, either my husband or me will drive my son and some of his friends to the base. While the boys score as many treats as they can, whoever brings the kids will talk with the other adults and maybe have a cup of Gluehwein (hot spiced red wine). When we get home, we'll check out the number of Gummi Bear packets and chocolates. But we definitely won't be paranoid about poisoned candy, broom-related deaths, or kidnappers.
Most of the information in both flyers was common sense. For example, it says that kids should be visible and carry a flashlight or glow stick and they should wear costumes that fit properly. Cars aren't allowed in the on-base housing area during trick-or-treat hours. However, if kids wearing dark costumes wander to other areas on the base, it's a good thing for drivers to be able to see them. It also takes a lot of the fun out of trick-or-treating when you're constantly tripping over your costume.
However, there were a few things in the flyers that I found a bit odd. Maybe I've been spending too much time on the Free Range Kids blog (http://www.freerangekids.wordpress.com/), but these particular tips seemed to play into American parents' fears of kidnappers and possible dangers. The first one was to have parents inspect the candy and other "loot" when the kids get home. My son does this anyway to separate the "good" candy from the "lame." I watch him, mainly to see if there is a lot of chocolate candy. It works out well because he's a Gummi Bear man and I like chocolate. The premise behind this is all of the media stories about strangers poisoning Halloween candy and then giving it out. Every year there seem to be stories about apples with razor blades or poisoned candy. I remember them from my childhood. To further feed this fear, Stateside hospitals will x-ray Halloween candy for free to reasssure anxious parents. According to Snopes, there have been very few cases where kids were poisoned on Halloween. Those cases were not random poisonings by strangers, but premeditated acts by someone the children knew. http://www.snopes.com/horrors/poison/halloween.asp. Yet the fear persists that every other person that a child visits on Halloween night will put poison, razor blades, or needles in the candy.
One of the items on the flyer from the Safety Office said that kids shouldn't carry sharp objects like knives, swords, or brooms while trick-or-treating. Brooms??? I can see why a six-year-old knight shouldn't carry a real sword and understand why it's best that a young Ninja warrior leaves Mom's French chef knife at home. But when did a broom get designated a "sharp object?" Most girls who dress up as witches would "ride" their brooms, but I can see boys engaging in horseplay and doing swordfights with brooms or pretending that they're machine guns. They may even whack a friend with either the handle or bristles. But come to think of it, I just can't imagine why a boy would want to carry a broom on Halloween. I don't know too many boys who want to dress up as janitors or members of the Norwegian curling team. While I have heard of many deaths by swords or knives (I've read enough medieval history in my time), I haven't read anything about real deaths by brooms. There are urban legends about teenage girls who supposedly died while masturbating with a broom handle, but they are just that. http://www.snopes.com/college/risque/broom.asp.
As I mentioned before, the Power Point presentation was very cute. But there was one slide that played to the US obsession and paranoia about children being kidnapped by strangers. That slide said that kids shouldn't trick or treat alone. Young kids should be accompanied by an adult and older kids should go with at least one buddy. To me, that's plain common sense because there is safety in numbers. There was a little box that appeared on that slide which said that kids who are in a group have a reduced risk of being kidnapped. It was implied that any child out alone would be kidnapped. Believe it or not, there are not predators and kidnappers on every corner and hiding in every bush. Halloween would be one of the worst times to snatch a child because there are so many people around. It's one of the few times (at least in the States) that there are a lot of people out on the streets. Out of all of the child abductions in the States, an extremely small percentage are committed by strangers. The rest are committed by someone who the child knows and trusts.
Even if I wanted to snatch a child on Halloween, it would be an extremely difficult endeavor. First of all, the on-base housing area, where all of the trick or treating takes place (it hasn't spread to the local German community yet), is self-contained and very small. All of the residents know each other. They also know many families who live off-base. The kids also know each other plus the American kids who live off-base. If I were to make off with a kid, first of all, someone would stop me and ask what I'm doing with Major Smith's son. On Halloween night, there are a lot of people in the housing area walking about, giving out candy from their cars, or hanging around talking with other adults. Local Germans are also invited to come on base to trick or treat. In other words, there are a lot of potential witnesses. If I were planning to commit a crime I certainly don't want witnesses. Then there's the matter of exiting the housing area with a screaming, kicking child. The military police are at the housing area entrance/exit to give the kids glow sticks and candy, prevent people from driving into the housing area (it's closed to cars during trick or treat hours), and ensure that everything is orderly. The MPs would certainly notice something amiss if I were to try and leave the housing area with a kid who's making a big fuss. Even if a child was trick or treating alone in the on-base housing area, he stands a higher chance of being abducted by space aliens than by a flesh and blood stranger.
I'm all for kids having a safe and fun Halloween experience. Like in previous years, either my husband or me will drive my son and some of his friends to the base. While the boys score as many treats as they can, whoever brings the kids will talk with the other adults and maybe have a cup of Gluehwein (hot spiced red wine). When we get home, we'll check out the number of Gummi Bear packets and chocolates. But we definitely won't be paranoid about poisoned candy, broom-related deaths, or kidnappers.
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
A Little Running
It has been a while since I actually wrote something about running. I've been focusing more on the "and life" side of things. The main reason is there hasn't been anything remarkable about my running lately.
After three weeks in the States, where I only ran three times and did the elliptical trainer twice, I put on some weight. Much as I would have liked to, I couldn't blame it on drying my pants in the dryer instead of on a clothesline or female hormonal cycles. When I went back to work a couple of weeks ago, my work uniform was tight. Since the uniform company does the laundering, I couldn't be in denial any longer. Nope, it was from eating too much good (and not so good for you) food and a decreased activity level.
My running was already at a fairly low level due to hamstring problems that I've had for the past year. After my half-marathon last October, I should have taken some time off to rest it. But I didn't. I trained through it for my half-marathon last June, then decided to really take it easy. I had a 10K race in mind in Wolfratshausen (about halfway between Garmisch and Munich) in October, but realized after coming back from the States that it wasn't realistic to do it. Now I'm taking things easier and really enjoying my runs instead of viewing them as training for my next race.
The one good thing about my long break is that it allowed my hamstring problems to improve. While the muscles haven't healed 100%, they are much better than they were before my trip. It used to be that I would feel soreness in the butt crease on my right side that would radiate down my hamstring. I would run through it because I was so used to it. Now I just feel a slight soreness in the butt crease that gets better each time I run. There is no more soreness radiating down my leg. I've been keeping my runs in the 5-6 km range, though I'm starting to increase my longer runs to about 7 or 8 km.
I can tell that I'm losing the weight that I gained in the States. My clothing isn't so tight anymore. I'm also getting my speed back. When I first came back, I was very slow and sluggish. Part of that was because of warm weather, but it was also due to carrying a couple of extra kilograms. With the cooler weather and losing my "States weight," I'm feeling faster again. I still wouldn't call myself a speed demon by any stretch of the imagination. But I'm quickly getting back to where I was.
There are several choices of races to do next year. If I'm feeling 100% healthy with no muscle issues, I may try for the Munich Marathon in October 2012. If I don't do the marathon, I can do my usual City Run half-marathon in June, the half-marathon that accompanies the marathon in October, the Wolfratshausen 10K, or the Eibsee Run in October. I could also do a combination of any of those races. I'll see how I'm doing after ski season.
After three weeks in the States, where I only ran three times and did the elliptical trainer twice, I put on some weight. Much as I would have liked to, I couldn't blame it on drying my pants in the dryer instead of on a clothesline or female hormonal cycles. When I went back to work a couple of weeks ago, my work uniform was tight. Since the uniform company does the laundering, I couldn't be in denial any longer. Nope, it was from eating too much good (and not so good for you) food and a decreased activity level.
My running was already at a fairly low level due to hamstring problems that I've had for the past year. After my half-marathon last October, I should have taken some time off to rest it. But I didn't. I trained through it for my half-marathon last June, then decided to really take it easy. I had a 10K race in mind in Wolfratshausen (about halfway between Garmisch and Munich) in October, but realized after coming back from the States that it wasn't realistic to do it. Now I'm taking things easier and really enjoying my runs instead of viewing them as training for my next race.
The one good thing about my long break is that it allowed my hamstring problems to improve. While the muscles haven't healed 100%, they are much better than they were before my trip. It used to be that I would feel soreness in the butt crease on my right side that would radiate down my hamstring. I would run through it because I was so used to it. Now I just feel a slight soreness in the butt crease that gets better each time I run. There is no more soreness radiating down my leg. I've been keeping my runs in the 5-6 km range, though I'm starting to increase my longer runs to about 7 or 8 km.
I can tell that I'm losing the weight that I gained in the States. My clothing isn't so tight anymore. I'm also getting my speed back. When I first came back, I was very slow and sluggish. Part of that was because of warm weather, but it was also due to carrying a couple of extra kilograms. With the cooler weather and losing my "States weight," I'm feeling faster again. I still wouldn't call myself a speed demon by any stretch of the imagination. But I'm quickly getting back to where I was.
There are several choices of races to do next year. If I'm feeling 100% healthy with no muscle issues, I may try for the Munich Marathon in October 2012. If I don't do the marathon, I can do my usual City Run half-marathon in June, the half-marathon that accompanies the marathon in October, the Wolfratshausen 10K, or the Eibsee Run in October. I could also do a combination of any of those races. I'll see how I'm doing after ski season.
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Josef Stalin and Parenting
The following is a continuation of a comment that I made on the Free Range Kids blog yesterday. Here is the link to the original post on FRK: http://freerangekids.wordpress.com/2011/09/15/why-it-feels-like-kids-are-being-kidnapped-all-the-time/. My comment is toward the end under the name "gap.runner." It's the second comment that I made to that post.
What does Josef Stalin have to do with parenting? At first glance, it would seem that the two are opposites. Josef Stalin was an evil dictator who was responsible for the death of about 20 million of his fellow Soviet citizens. It doesn't get more evil than saying, "One death is a tragedy, one million a statistic" in reference to the number of people who died during Stalin's reign in Soviet prison camps and of starvation in the Ukraine during forced collectivization. Parents are generally viewed as nurturing people who want the best for their children (though their children can sometimes view them as dictators), which is the opposite of how Stalin was.
A couple of days ago Lenore Skenazy, the author of the Free Range Kids (FRK) site, posted a story about the perception that people in the States have that children are constantly being abducted by strangers. In fact, very few kids are kidnapped and murdered by strangers (see the link above). The vast majority of abducted kids are taken by parents in custody disputes or by others that the child knows. Even though stranger abduction is very rare, it gets a lot of airplay in the media because it's such a rare event. These news stories also play to every parent's worst fear and make them afraid to let their children do things that they did as kids, such as walk or cycle to school alone.
There is a climate of fear in the States with parenting that would make Comrade Stalin very proud. Sometimes I think that the media has taken a page out of Stalin's playbook to reinforce the fears that parents have. Very rare events like stranger abduction, choking on button batteries, poisoned Halloween candy, and pedophiles in public bathrooms are played up in the news media. Mundane events, such as kids walking to school or taking a bus in town by themselves and arriving at their destinations safe and sound, are not broadcast at all. The perception is that the world is a dangerous place and children should never be without a parent in sight. I think if Comrade Stalin were alive today, the current media would expand on his quote that I cited above. It would go something like this, "One abducted child’s death is a tragedy that needs to be exploited for all it’s worth in order to instill fear and reinforce helicopter parenting; one million children walking, cycling, or taking public transportation by themselves without any incidents is a statistic that must be ignored or downplayed because it goes against the prevailing societal norms.”
Just as Soviets in Stalin's time feared a midnight knock on the door from the KGB, parents now live in fear whether they are helicopter parents or more free-range. Helicopter parents see pedophiles and kidnappers on every street corner and behind every bush. They are afraid to let their kids out of their sight because if they did, their children would be abducted and vanish without a trace in the blink of an eye. These are the parents who accompany their children everywhere and don't even let their children do sleepovers because the host parents could be pedophiles. Parents who are free-range (not negligent, but those who give their kids developmentally-appropriate independence) also have fears. Back in Stalin's time, there was a system of informants who denounced their friends, co-workers, neighbors, and even family members to the authorities. Free-range parents have been turned in to the police or Child Protective Services (CPS) for letting their kids walk to the store alone or leaving them in the car alone for a short time. Several free-rangers who are regulars on the FRK site say that they have either run into busybodies who turned them in to CPS or the police because their kids were unaccompanied by an adult while playing with other kids in their neighborhoods!
When Stalin ran the USSR, those who didn't follow the prevailing social norms were sent off to Siberian or northern Russian prison camps. While free-range parents don't get shipped off to the Soviet gulag, there have been many cases of parents and kids being detained or threatened by the police for innocent activities. For example, Ms. Skenazy wrote about an incident where her son took a commuter train by himself at age 10 to visit a friend and was detained by the police at his destination for riding alone. This was part of a post about a 10-year-old Tennessee girl whose mother was threatened with child neglect for the heinous crime of letting the daughter ride her bike to school alone. Here is the link:
http://freerangekids.wordpress.com/2011/09/13/criminally-confident-in-our-kids/
There is another parenting fear: the fear of their child being left behind his peers. This fear starts very early. Toy makers and the media feed into this fear and tell parents that if they don't buy a certain toy, their child is destined to be the night janitor at McDonald's. And parents buy into it. They believe that their child must be fluent in Mandarin, be able to compose a symphony, and be able to read St. Augustine in the original Latin by age 3. If their child is "retarded" and doesn't do all of those things, forget about Harvard or Yale. Parents really need to trust themselves and let their children develop on their own timetables. In many cases, doing something early is not always better. Kids in the States are pushed to read at an early age. Finnish kids start school at age 7 and don't learn their alphabet or how to read until they're in first grade. One would think that the kids in Finland are miles behind the rest of the world. Au contraire. On international reading tests given to kids in industrial nations, Finland is one of the top-ranked countries. The US is way below Finland, despite its emphasis pushing kids to achieve at an early age.
It would be great if the media would devote less airtime to rare, yet sensational, events and spend more time talking about how safe it really is for kids to walk, ride their bikes, or take public transportation by themselves to wherever they're going. We all did those things when we were kids and are still alive. I imagine newscasts that say, "The 972 kids in Springfield who walked or rode their bikes to school today without a parent all made it there and back home again without any incidents," would be very boring. But I believe that parents need to hear more stories like that in order to realize that the world really is a safe place for their kids. Until that day comes, the best pieces of parenting advice are: turn off the TV, let your child develop at his own pace, and lose the fear and trust your instincts and about what is appropriate for your particular children.
What does Josef Stalin have to do with parenting? At first glance, it would seem that the two are opposites. Josef Stalin was an evil dictator who was responsible for the death of about 20 million of his fellow Soviet citizens. It doesn't get more evil than saying, "One death is a tragedy, one million a statistic" in reference to the number of people who died during Stalin's reign in Soviet prison camps and of starvation in the Ukraine during forced collectivization. Parents are generally viewed as nurturing people who want the best for their children (though their children can sometimes view them as dictators), which is the opposite of how Stalin was.
A couple of days ago Lenore Skenazy, the author of the Free Range Kids (FRK) site, posted a story about the perception that people in the States have that children are constantly being abducted by strangers. In fact, very few kids are kidnapped and murdered by strangers (see the link above). The vast majority of abducted kids are taken by parents in custody disputes or by others that the child knows. Even though stranger abduction is very rare, it gets a lot of airplay in the media because it's such a rare event. These news stories also play to every parent's worst fear and make them afraid to let their children do things that they did as kids, such as walk or cycle to school alone.
There is a climate of fear in the States with parenting that would make Comrade Stalin very proud. Sometimes I think that the media has taken a page out of Stalin's playbook to reinforce the fears that parents have. Very rare events like stranger abduction, choking on button batteries, poisoned Halloween candy, and pedophiles in public bathrooms are played up in the news media. Mundane events, such as kids walking to school or taking a bus in town by themselves and arriving at their destinations safe and sound, are not broadcast at all. The perception is that the world is a dangerous place and children should never be without a parent in sight. I think if Comrade Stalin were alive today, the current media would expand on his quote that I cited above. It would go something like this, "One abducted child’s death is a tragedy that needs to be exploited for all it’s worth in order to instill fear and reinforce helicopter parenting; one million children walking, cycling, or taking public transportation by themselves without any incidents is a statistic that must be ignored or downplayed because it goes against the prevailing societal norms.”
Just as Soviets in Stalin's time feared a midnight knock on the door from the KGB, parents now live in fear whether they are helicopter parents or more free-range. Helicopter parents see pedophiles and kidnappers on every street corner and behind every bush. They are afraid to let their kids out of their sight because if they did, their children would be abducted and vanish without a trace in the blink of an eye. These are the parents who accompany their children everywhere and don't even let their children do sleepovers because the host parents could be pedophiles. Parents who are free-range (not negligent, but those who give their kids developmentally-appropriate independence) also have fears. Back in Stalin's time, there was a system of informants who denounced their friends, co-workers, neighbors, and even family members to the authorities. Free-range parents have been turned in to the police or Child Protective Services (CPS) for letting their kids walk to the store alone or leaving them in the car alone for a short time. Several free-rangers who are regulars on the FRK site say that they have either run into busybodies who turned them in to CPS or the police because their kids were unaccompanied by an adult while playing with other kids in their neighborhoods!
When Stalin ran the USSR, those who didn't follow the prevailing social norms were sent off to Siberian or northern Russian prison camps. While free-range parents don't get shipped off to the Soviet gulag, there have been many cases of parents and kids being detained or threatened by the police for innocent activities. For example, Ms. Skenazy wrote about an incident where her son took a commuter train by himself at age 10 to visit a friend and was detained by the police at his destination for riding alone. This was part of a post about a 10-year-old Tennessee girl whose mother was threatened with child neglect for the heinous crime of letting the daughter ride her bike to school alone. Here is the link:
http://freerangekids.wordpress.com/2011/09/13/criminally-confident-in-our-kids/
There is another parenting fear: the fear of their child being left behind his peers. This fear starts very early. Toy makers and the media feed into this fear and tell parents that if they don't buy a certain toy, their child is destined to be the night janitor at McDonald's. And parents buy into it. They believe that their child must be fluent in Mandarin, be able to compose a symphony, and be able to read St. Augustine in the original Latin by age 3. If their child is "retarded" and doesn't do all of those things, forget about Harvard or Yale. Parents really need to trust themselves and let their children develop on their own timetables. In many cases, doing something early is not always better. Kids in the States are pushed to read at an early age. Finnish kids start school at age 7 and don't learn their alphabet or how to read until they're in first grade. One would think that the kids in Finland are miles behind the rest of the world. Au contraire. On international reading tests given to kids in industrial nations, Finland is one of the top-ranked countries. The US is way below Finland, despite its emphasis pushing kids to achieve at an early age.
It would be great if the media would devote less airtime to rare, yet sensational, events and spend more time talking about how safe it really is for kids to walk, ride their bikes, or take public transportation by themselves to wherever they're going. We all did those things when we were kids and are still alive. I imagine newscasts that say, "The 972 kids in Springfield who walked or rode their bikes to school today without a parent all made it there and back home again without any incidents," would be very boring. But I believe that parents need to hear more stories like that in order to realize that the world really is a safe place for their kids. Until that day comes, the best pieces of parenting advice are: turn off the TV, let your child develop at his own pace, and lose the fear and trust your instincts and about what is appropriate for your particular children.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
East and West
I've been "off the air" for the past 4 weeks because of having limited Internet access during my trip to the States. Here are some random thoughts about my vacation:
* If I had the choice to live in either Los Angeles or New York City, I would take NYC. The LA freeways and drivers are downright scary. I feel much safer on the subway in NYC. In LA you have to drive everywhere, while in NYC you can walk or take the subway. The trains, especially the expresses, are very fast and efficient. The NYC subway system is very easy to use and goes just about anywhere in the city. My brother is a real subway expert and goes back and forth between the local and express trains. He owns a car, but takes the subway in the city. In my brother's neighborhood, there are stores within walking distance of his apartment, so a car really isn't necessary. The one down side of living in NYC is that the grocery stores are outrageously expensive.
* Because California is built around cars, there are gas stations on almost every corner. Maybe I was in the wrong neighborhoods in NYC, or the gas stations there are camoflauged, but I didn't see any gas stations there. But there have to be gas stations somewhere in NYC because people own cars and the taxi drivers need something to power their vehicles.
* I loved the variety of buildings in NYC. Many of the buildings have little statues or gargoyles on them. I could easily spend a month there doing nothing but photographing the buildings and all of their little details.
* New York City is a walking city. There are so many people out walking. One of the things that I noticed about NYC is that there are very few obese people. Because the majority of people ride the subway (and have to take stairs to get to and from the trains because there aren't any elevators), then have to walk from the subway stop to their final destinations, they are getting a little bit of exercise. In California it seems like there are a lot more obese people and people riding on Rascals. People only walk from their cars to the stores. Even the department and grocery stores provide Rascals for their customers. I only saw one person in NYC riding on a Rascal and he looked like he was about 90 years old. Everyone else was on foot.
* The most over-the-top thing that I saw on my trip was at one of the malls in Los Angeles. An older woman was pushing an umbrella stroller with mosquito netting. The stroller was festooned with little fairy figures. When I looked in the stroller, there was a Chihuahua lying in it. My stepmother, who was with me, asked the other lady if the dog was named Tinker Bell. The lady said that the dog's name was Twinkles. At least that name fit, though it would have been funny if it was named Killer. I've seen little dogs in bike baskets, but never in strollers at the mall.
* The number of Germans who love going to Death Valley in the summer never ceases to amaze me. Even though was 50 C (122 F) in the shade, the Germans that I met in Lone Pine all had to go to Death Valley. There's something about the desert that attracts the Germans. Maybe it's because the desert is very different from Germany, maybe it's because the lowest point in the USA is in Death Valley, or maybe simply because it's warmer than Germany will ever be and Germans are real sun and heat worshipers. Whatever the reason, it's a "must see" on a German's California itinerary. If I were to plan a trip to Death Valley, it would be in the winter, spring, or fall when the weather was bearable.
* Carmine's in NYC is not just a restaurant, it's an experience.
* If I had the choice to live in either Los Angeles or New York City, I would take NYC. The LA freeways and drivers are downright scary. I feel much safer on the subway in NYC. In LA you have to drive everywhere, while in NYC you can walk or take the subway. The trains, especially the expresses, are very fast and efficient. The NYC subway system is very easy to use and goes just about anywhere in the city. My brother is a real subway expert and goes back and forth between the local and express trains. He owns a car, but takes the subway in the city. In my brother's neighborhood, there are stores within walking distance of his apartment, so a car really isn't necessary. The one down side of living in NYC is that the grocery stores are outrageously expensive.
* Because California is built around cars, there are gas stations on almost every corner. Maybe I was in the wrong neighborhoods in NYC, or the gas stations there are camoflauged, but I didn't see any gas stations there. But there have to be gas stations somewhere in NYC because people own cars and the taxi drivers need something to power their vehicles.
* I loved the variety of buildings in NYC. Many of the buildings have little statues or gargoyles on them. I could easily spend a month there doing nothing but photographing the buildings and all of their little details.
* New York City is a walking city. There are so many people out walking. One of the things that I noticed about NYC is that there are very few obese people. Because the majority of people ride the subway (and have to take stairs to get to and from the trains because there aren't any elevators), then have to walk from the subway stop to their final destinations, they are getting a little bit of exercise. In California it seems like there are a lot more obese people and people riding on Rascals. People only walk from their cars to the stores. Even the department and grocery stores provide Rascals for their customers. I only saw one person in NYC riding on a Rascal and he looked like he was about 90 years old. Everyone else was on foot.
* The most over-the-top thing that I saw on my trip was at one of the malls in Los Angeles. An older woman was pushing an umbrella stroller with mosquito netting. The stroller was festooned with little fairy figures. When I looked in the stroller, there was a Chihuahua lying in it. My stepmother, who was with me, asked the other lady if the dog was named Tinker Bell. The lady said that the dog's name was Twinkles. At least that name fit, though it would have been funny if it was named Killer. I've seen little dogs in bike baskets, but never in strollers at the mall.
* The number of Germans who love going to Death Valley in the summer never ceases to amaze me. Even though was 50 C (122 F) in the shade, the Germans that I met in Lone Pine all had to go to Death Valley. There's something about the desert that attracts the Germans. Maybe it's because the desert is very different from Germany, maybe it's because the lowest point in the USA is in Death Valley, or maybe simply because it's warmer than Germany will ever be and Germans are real sun and heat worshipers. Whatever the reason, it's a "must see" on a German's California itinerary. If I were to plan a trip to Death Valley, it would be in the winter, spring, or fall when the weather was bearable.
* Carmine's in NYC is not just a restaurant, it's an experience.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
