Bodyweight Experiment

I've been checking out Sonnon's system for the past couple days. Watched scores of the videos, and I've been thinking/reading about accessibility as well.

Then, yesterday, my buddy Jeremy reminded me of the importance of instructors and students (see my earlier post)--something I'd been forgetting. So I started watching videos by various RMAX instructors--see their fitness, their quality, and watch their methodologies. In that process, I came across Bodyweight Exercise Revolution. I bought it today for $47 for several reasons. First, I like spending money on training materials. Second, I wanted to see the quality of material which Sonnon's coaches and overall company, RMAX and CST, produced. That is, are they able to maintain a consistent presentation, quality, and them throughout their materials. As BER is based upon a Sonnon process, the 4x7, and the BER is written by two of Sonnon's coaches, I wanted to see how well they took the process and presented it. Step one is to work through the BER and see how clear and viable I think it is (personal & subjective). Second step is, if I like it, compare it to the original 4x7 system--does it maintain and/or improve on the foundational principles. Third, and most importantly, does it deliver. Fourth, I've had prior experience working with bodyweight exercises, and I wanted to compare that workout to the BER approach.

Please note: I provide links not to promote the services, nor do I earn a commission. Instead, they are so people can see, with ease, exactly what I'm talking about. Second, I find it very important for my mental health and academic success to be invested in my research. This means I like to be engaged somehow with the materials. As I am currently working on accessibility and the web, and web training interests me, this seems like a great way to bridge those interests.

I am not really sure how this biases me in my research. I definitely see this approach as activist or engaged research, and that seems to be a consistent thread in the disability studies (I forget where this is mentioned in the DSR). In some ways, I do not care because I know that I would not be involved if I did not care--I would not be writing this if I didn't see my self, my people, my family, and my friends benefiting from this work and research. I just cannot approach my doctoral work or classes without some way of leveraging my own personal interests, goals, and investment.

Some of this reminds me of Dr. Rickly's May Seminar presentation where she spoke about the value of lived experience and including that in research methodologies and/or as evidence. While lived experience is not just the evidence I am seeking, lived experience and its subjective value is what drives my research and motivates the questions I ask. As such, it seems that much of research--engaged research--is very subjective because of the researchers' personal interests. Then again, I know that not all researchers are personally invested.

When I started this course, I thought I would focus on the vision/sight issues centered around macular degeneration because my family has a history of it. Great way to learn about tools useful to my family, and it has been educational. But, once again, training took over--and marketing. I love looking at the marketing of training, and I wish I had thousands to drop to acquire products for analysis. Alas, I don't think the state wants to support that research agenda. In the mean time, I like the freedom that doctoral course research allows me, and I like the demands/expectations. It guarantees that I will learn a lot, and I'll learn a lot of things about materials which interest me.

There are few things cooler than learning!