Dumb Arizona female runner calls out Olympic runner for running with headphones

Exactly who else is he endangering?

A "for-instance": he steps into the street in front of an oncoming car, the startled driver swerves and hits someone on the sidewalk.

That's how he's endangering others. (It's not hard to work these things out if you try a little.)

Are the deaf endangering others by walking around too? Or is it OK as long as they're aware of their surroundings?

Are you suggesting that deaf people choose to be deaf?

Nice.

Clearly he's suggesting that if any moronic buffoon blind person is able to cross the street without too much of an issue, obviously some half-intelligent runner with a bit of noise ringing in his ears can do.

Moron.

No, I just don't think being unable to hear (whether or not you are normally able to hear) makes you inherently unaware of your surroundings. As long as you pay attention you should be fine. And this is coming from someone who never runs with music.

I don't know Limoncello and he doesn't sound like a d-bag from this column (although neither does he sound like an intellectual giant). He also says "Something inside of her lit a spark strong enough to tell me that because I was wearing something that pushed music through my ears, I had no credibility as a runner," which I read as she said something disparaging in addition to her look.

His experience completely gels with my experience of many runners. On my quite bad D III team, when I was slower than the main group of men but a bit too fast for the fastest girls, I put on headphones before a long run. I was taken aback at how much the team felt entitled to criticize my choice. DIII-runner-girl-in-chief, who was very dedicated but somehow managed to be injured before every championship, said "Why the F*** would you want to wear headphones anyway?" And someone I considered a good friend said "when I run, every step, I think 'I'm glad I'm not injured. I'm glad I'm not injured.'"

Point is, runners can be really judgmental about running and lifestyle choices. Usually the worst ones are the ones who run for health and not for joy.

GenericID wrote:

So what you are suggesting is that because he's an Olympic runner it's OK for him to endanger others by wearing headphones on a city street?

Have any of you judgmental idiots actually ever run in Phoenix? Everyone runs on the network of canals that stretch throughout the area. They are long, flat, monotonous dirt roads that often bypass and go under main roadways and parallel the city's main water supply (canals) for miles and miles. Given that it's July, he was probably out at 4:00am, pitch black, and 98 degrees. Good on him for doing something to make his training more enjoyable.

No, I just don't think being unable to hear (whether or not you are normally able to hear) makes you inherently unaware of your surroundings.

I can't be bothered to research any deeper, but: "Regression analysis indicated that distraction was negatively, but weakly associated with displaying cautious pedestrian behaviors. Because traffic lights were routinely ignored and lack of caution was predicted by distraction, we suggest that inexpensive education efforts target pedestrians near college campuses."

Now change walking to running (an activity which requires more concentration on the task at hand, which in turn increases distraction) and that weak association might not be so weak.

Besides, nobody is talking about "inherent" unawareness - it only takes one moment of distraction to cause an accident on a city street, so why increase your chances of being distracted by doing something which is designed to distract your attention (if you don't listen to music to take your mind away from the task at hand, why do you listen to music?).

Because it doesn't get hot anywhere else in the world?

Flagstaffian wrote:

GenericID wrote:

So what you are suggesting is that because he's an Olympic runner it's OK for him to endanger others by wearing headphones on a city street?

Have any of you judgmental idiots actually ever run in Phoenix? Everyone runs on the network of canals that stretch throughout the area. They are long, flat, monotonous dirt roads that often bypass and go under main roadways and parallel the city's main water supply (canals) for miles and miles. Given that it's July, he was probably out at 4:00am, pitch black, and 98 degrees. Good on him for doing something to make his training more enjoyable.

The snobbiest runners out there are hobbyjoggers (and sub-elites) - I have never found an "actual" elite to be anything but friendly when you pass him.

The real question - what is Lemon doing in Phoenix in July????? (January - yes).......it makes no sense to me and my orderly, practical mind.

Why would anyone care about what someone they encountered at a crosswalk thought of them?

Flagstaffian wrote:

Have any of you judgmental idiots actually ever run in Phoenix? Everyone runs on the network of canals that stretch throughout the area. They are long, flat, monotonous dirt roads that often bypass and go under main roadways and parallel the city's main water supply (canals) for miles and miles. Given that it's July, he was probably out at 4:00am, pitch black, and 98 degrees. Good on him for doing something to make his training more enjoyable.

Given that he stated that he was waiting at a crosswalk, he evidently wasn't running at 4 a.m. in the pitch black on a canal towpath, now was he?

I don't think you are in any position to be calling other people idiots if you can't even manage to follow a link in the OP.

with particular reference to the 'for instance' given above, don't be ridiculous.

Anyone with half a brain cell in their nut knows to check for traffic when stepping into the road whether they're listening to music or not.

GenericID wrote:

[quote]Flagstaffian wrote:

Given that he stated that he was waiting at a crosswalk, he evidently wasn't running at 4 a.m. in the pitch black on a canal towpath, now was he?

I don't think you are in any position to be calling other people idiots if you can't even manage to follow a link in the OP.

If you are implying that I didn't read the linked article, you're incorrect. The canal system crosses many roadways by underpass, as well as several less busy residential streets by crosswalk.

I just don't agree with the sentiment that he was endangering others while he waited at the crosswalk, with headphones in, for a bunch of minivans heading for the community pool at 25mph is putting anyone in danger.

But feel free to keep spewing your ignorant jargon, troll.

Vanishing Point wrote:

with particular reference to the 'for instance' given above, don't be ridiculous.

Anyone with half a brain cell in their nut knows to check for traffic when stepping into the road whether they're listening to music or not.

Hey, you are absolutely right, that never, ever, happens!

Except:

Now, I don't actually give a crap if Lemoncello gets hit by a car, but if his selfish and ignorant behaviour were to be the cause of an innocent bystander getting killed, then it does concern me, because all runners would get tarred with the "selfish and ignorant" brush, and all our lives would be worse.

GenericID wrote:

Besides, nobody is talking about "inherent" unawareness - it only takes one moment of distraction to cause an accident on a city street, so why increase your chances of being distracted by doing something which is designed to distract your attention (if you don't listen to music to take your mind away from the task at hand, why do you listen to music?).

I have really bad ADHD and I run before taking my medication. Am I endangering people by running around unmedicated? Should I be taking my medication before every run?

I wasn't implying anything.

Ah, the "troll" label - so much fun! I've presented evidence that Lemoncello WAS, in fact, endangering others, but all you've got is your opinion. But hey, call me a troll if you like, I'm still right and you're still wrong.

First, you might want to look up the meaning of the word "weakly", because it pretty much invalidates your whole stupid argument. The study you posted showed a weak correlation, meaning most people have no noticeable difference in safety while wearing headphones.

Second, many people walk with headphones. Some of them get hit by cars. Many people walk without headphones. Some of them are also hit by cars. Posting examples of people who got hit while wearing headphones is not a convincing argument as to their danger.

"Something inside of her lit a spark strong enough to tell me that because I was wearing something that pushed music through my ears, I had no credibility as a runner."

....Yay, reading is fun, kiddos!!