I'm a big fan of working out. In fact, I almost never miss a day doing something physical through the Peloton App. [If you want to try out the platform--strength, yoga, cardio, rowing, etc--you can click the photo above to get a sixty-day free trial. I don't get anything if you sign up; you'd be doing it for you, not for me.]
As you already know if we've spoken for more than a few minutes, I'm a big fan of daily exercise and of listening to podcasts. At one point last winter, while I was getting in my morning stroll, maybe while wearing a weighted vest, I was listening to a podcast (sorry, I don't remember which one, or I'd have the citation and link here for you.) in which the host said that too many people equate being soft with being weak.
I probably stopped walking so that I could consider every part of this statement. First, I thought about "soft," which comes in a lot of forms. (I'm limiting this list to how the word could be applied to people, which leaves out some greats--soft-served ice cream, for example.)
- soft-spoken: people usually lean in to catch every word given from a smart person with a quiet voice
- a big softie: usually a large person whom others can make bend to their will
- soft in body: someone who doesn't workout or whose muscles are covered in insulation
- soft in the head: muddled in one's thinking, maybe having always been that way or maybe having experienced something that's limited one's mental capacity
But I think the "soft" in the expression is about being willing to listen to differing ideas and change one's mind. It's the opposite of being hard, of being stubborn. And while it's not always good to bend to others' wills, it takes great strength to listen fully with an open enough mind to allow our opinions and beliefs to be persuaded, not to be so hard as to stick to what's not working.
Then I thought about being weak. Of course, there's the literal meaning of having muscles that aren't active and trained enough to carry a heavy load, but there's also weak-willed and weak-minded.
So obviously, in a few of the definitions, these two could be the same, which made me think about how exactly they could be different. Here's where I landed: strength of character is in a person who has the backbone to stand up against what's wrong but also the generosity of spirit to listen and provide a safe, squishy landing pad for those who are struggling.
To me, this sounds like anyone who nurtures, which made me think that equating "soft" and "weak" is, ultimately, misogynistic. Have I taken the idea too far? Maybe you can slow your stroll to consider this leap...and share your responses in the comments.