The Instability of Mobility; the Immobility of Stability

June 20, 2017 – 10:13 am

There is a tsunami of bad form in fitness promoted even by “medical” professionals. The belief is that because an individual has medical licensure, then anything they promote must be accurate. Medical licensure is specific and contextual to educational foci. They can be wrong and often are (hence, second opinions). There is a new generation of physiotherapist, chiropractor and health professional who believe and espouse that any movement is better than no movement; an anti-stability sentiment.

Having observed this industry and even pioneered the disciplines of mobility and flow twenty years ago, I am appalled at how far the pendulum has swung the opposite direction. This is not what my work was intended to promote, so when I see them promoting to “always stay mobile” and “never stop being in flow” I want to say: stop it.

Three decades ago, we were mired in an anti-mobility epoch, where “stabilization” was the favored mode and synonymous with health. Removing movement freedom was believed to improve bodily strength. Tension lay at the opposite pole from velocity, so more movement decreases strength. That’s true, but it was polarized, and eventually imprisoned movement.

Now, the work of myself and others of my era, is being perverted into a polarized, unbalanced radicalization of mobility and flow.

It appears more like a sociological shift to a belief in greater liberty versus security; exactly the same shift that believes we should have less securities and more freedoms, and that they should be protected when they perceive their freedoms endangered.

The problem is that without security, there is no stability
Freedom isn’t free: liberty derives from the WORK done by the stable components.

You can’t have mobility without stability. You can’t be free to move, if every part is free to move. You collapse into a ruptured gelatinous mess. And so, many trainers, coaches, therapists and docs are a complete mess. Their form is anywhere from suboptimal to a complete train wreck, and they’re creating a following that are even worse (remember the copy-error phenomenon: if you start with good, you result with poor over time; if you start with poor, you get a disaster over time). The current hyperbolized movement fetish doesn’t realize that it’s the product of a socio-political pendulum of thought, because it’s members dogmatically refuse to be individually discriminating minds seeking BALANCE between mobility and stability, between freedom and security.

Like over-stabilization becomes a totalitarianism of the body where any movement is wrong, over-mobilization becomes a fascism of the body where any stabilization is considered to be limiting and #triggering their freedom to move.

Eventually, from your stability-avoidance, you become repeatedly injured due to lacking the structural platform to move, like shooting a cannon out of a canoe. So, then, you have to go to rehabilitation, back into a machine that behaves with the stability you’ve been denying. And, your pendulum will swing again… What a tragic waste of a good body.

Study history and in particular, study the history of thought. Just because something sounds like a good idea in the moment (”all movement freedom is good”), doesn’t mean that it is. Get stable, so you don’t lose your freedom to move over time. Technique is a balance between stability and mobility: a tensegrity. Focus on form, not movement. And if you’re a professional, show more responsibility for your actions so that you remain part of the solution and not the progenitor of the next problem.

You must be logged in to post a comment.