Before I dive into the core of this tight, straight-to-the-point fitness article, let’s address the obvious. It’s wild that these days, searching for “female training” or “women’s fitness” brings up images that push an outdated idea about how women should train. We know what it implies: that women should lift only light weights for higher reps to look “toned” and sleek. And my reaction is a mix of frustration and disbelief.
That tone feels toxic — as if women shouldn’t or can’t train with real weights — and that would set women’s fitness back for decades. It would provoke outrage and embarrassment in the movement. For the record: that supposed book doesn’t exist.
I’ve written several pieces on this site about training women, and I’ve argued that many women, by and large, don’t chase deadlifts of 1.5x their body weight, strict unassisted chins, or barbell work on their back. I’m a big fan of performance-based goals, but plenty of women do very well with programs that use light weights or no weights at all. Anything that nudges someone to be active rather than binge-watching Netflix is a win to me.
That said, as a strength coach, I’m biased. I think programs that promise dramatic results with gimmicks—like 10–20 pounds lost in a week in exchange for a cabbage-soup detox—usually produce poor results.
There’s one thing I’ve often skipped over in my critiques of female-specific training. The biggest problem with the idea of “female-specific training” is using that term in the first place. I’ve thought about this for a while and realized it’s worth calling out.
I remember a story Mike Boyle tells about any so-called “ACL prevention program” for female athletes. He says it’s nonsense. We can talk about research showing women are more likely to tear ACLs, how knee alignment and hormonal factors can play a role, but at the end of the day there isn’t a separate ACL prevention program. A well-designed plan that strengthens the whole body (especially the posterior chain), teaches deceleration and proper landing, and works on change of direction and overall movement quality is, in itself, an ACL prevention program.
Really, it isn’t so much an ACL issue with women as it is a general strength issue. That doesn’t apply to every woman, of course, but many are given a more guided approach to programming than they need. The key is simply getting stronger—plain and simple.
So even if there are differences in goals or how they’d like to look, any program that teaches the basic movements—squat, hip hinge, push, pull, lunge, carry—adjusted for the individual’s needs and built on progressive overload, is a good program.
Do we really need to call it “female-specific”? Or could we just train the fundamentals for everyone and let the labels fade? After all, it wouldn’t require gimmicks, special rooms, or interpretive dance to Beyonce lyrics. Perhaps a straightforward, movement-based approach is all that’s needed.
