Patriotism and Sport

Sport is often interconnected with superiority because it represents the best that country has to offer.  This usually means that athletes are talented, hard workers, and display a high level of sportsmanship.  However, history has shown us a time period where values and morals were not the primary concerns of athletes and their superiors. During the Cold War the United States was having an arms race against the USSR: democracy vs. communism.   In the article Sports, Drugs, and the Cold War, the world was in a mindset where “there was the assumption that the world has one winner and all the rest losers in each event [which] leads towards drug abuse.”  Each country wanted the biggest advantage possible to prove their point to the world therefore some supported or even provided their athletes with enhancement drugs to improve their athletic abilities.  The interesting factor is that in spite of several athletes not agreeing with the ethics of cheating, several did.  Honesty and integrity of the sport was thrown out the window and for the sake of patriotism.  Patriotism caused a complete shift of mindset for what each athlete though was the better cause.  It is fascinating that the rivalry between these two ideologies exceeded politics and not only affected the world but the principles and morals of some individuals.  Sport has always been a societal community where individuals come together to exemplify a common interest, but it has been proven to connect individuals with their nation in an astonishing manner.

Expectation we hold for our Athletes

Sacrifice, pressure, and preparation exemplified by athletes are characteristics that are also demonstrated in dogs that participate in dog fighting. When looking at the issue of sacrifice, athletes have always been revered for their athletic success and have been worshiped across the globe, living up to the hype. Often in today’s society fans are quick to turn on the teams they love if expectations are not met, which makes the athletes have to live up to the high expectations. The same situation applies to dog owners who easily discard a dog’s love and trust if they don’t live up to the owner’s expectations.  Sadly though, a dog’s sacrifice may come at the cost of more than just a bad season; it may cost them their life. Both the athletes and dogs deal with the pressure to perform. Athletes are held under high standards, applauded when they do something well and condemned if they make a mistake. They overcome physical strain to please the crowd, team, and community.  They are expected to win because winning is considered the most important aspect of sport to society.  This same intense atmosphere of successful performance comes in the dog fighting community, but on the next level. The dogs must perform well or face harm and brutal punishment from the owners that should always protect and support them. Due to the nature of society, both athletes and dogs are willing to prepare and train their hardest knowing that they will be cheered when they beat their opponents and praised when they destroy them.  Much like dogs that are trained to attack at any moment, athletes must be ready to perform once they enter field.  Both of these “athletes” are willing to put their lives on the line in exchange for love and acceptance from the crowd.  It seems like we have a tendency of choosing entertainment over the well being of athletes.  

Politics in the Olympics

The Olympics is a highly revered, ceremonious sporting event that was supposedly founded on the principle of bringing the world together for peace.  However, world politics has always managed to sneak in and make a worldwide statement.  During the 1968 Olympics two African Americans made a huge impact on the Civil Rights Movement for America. These two outstanding figures are gold medalist, Tommie Smith and bronze medalist John Carlos, brought politics into the Olympics to stand up for all African Americans.  There were several years of discrimination across a broken country that pretended like everything was fine for the rest of the world.  The stand of these two athletes removed the fabrication and brought out reality.  Their actions were not without consequence however, both were completely banned from future participation in the Olympics.  When they returned to US they had a very difficult time finding jobs and maintaining a stable lifestyle.   Another individual that participated in this eventful time that is often overlooked stood between these two great athletes, Peter Norman.  Peter Norman was an Australian athlete that raced against Carlos and Smith, placing in second in the 200 meter dash.  Despite Norman’s extraordinary athletic abilities he was a very well just man, raised to treat everyone equally despite differences of color, ethnicity, or religious beliefs.  At the time of the medal ceremony he took the boldest step of his career and wore a civil rights badge.  Ironically enough his stance for social activism backfired his athletic career.  Norman qualified several times to the ’72 Olympics but was not allowed to participate.  Australia did not even have the courtesy to invite him to partake in the ceremony held in Sydney in 2000.  Nevertheless, his incredible efforts were not in vain when the Track and Field Federation awarded him October 6^th or official Peter Norman Day.  So if politics is inevitable is there a way to work around it?  This is a very hard question to answer, especially in situations where the political statements are necessary. However, the impartiality of the Olympics is necessary to be able to run properly.  I guess we just have to be thankful for those athletes that are willing to set aside their dreams to do something better for the world.

Fame and Sports

Professional athletes are often revered by society for their physical abilities, talent, and hard work.  Some athletes however are treated beyond admiration and are placed in the highest pedestals.  Society has often overlooked wrongdoing of athletes due to their fame and popularity.  According to the USA  Today, out of 168 condemned athletes 2/3 were released and 6 were convicted compared to the “average” person that underwent the same accusation trial 80-85 % of the time and was convicted 90% the time in 2003.  Since fame of professional athletes has not decreased over time it is safe to assume that these statistics have worsened.  In 2009 Donte Stallworth a New Orleans Saint at the time, faced a 15 years sentence for manslaughter while intoxicated.  However, in the plea agreement Stallworth was condemned 30 days in prison, where he only served 24 of those days.  Manslaughter would be a life-time sentence for any other individual in America but not for Stallworth. Does the law validate impartiality with talent? Is it ethical to do so?  When did society place entertainment before reason? Money and fame has found loopholes through society’s justice system.  The worst part is that we as a society encourage these types of behaviors.  We devour the media that feeds off of issues like this one.

Superiority just Black or White?

In the past couple of decades the analysis of black and white athletes in competitive sports has flourished.  Several theories from “Great Speed But Little Stamina:” The Historical Debate Over Black Athletic Superiority” mention that black athletes’ dominance in sprinting events is due to “longer heel bone or stronger achilles tendon.”  Another hypothesis states that black athletes have more primitive DNA than white athletes which makes them superior in particular sports.  A further speculation is that black athletes are better at certain sports because they have grown up with fewer opportunities to excel in other sports that require additional financial support.  Another assumption is that the black race went through a genetic selection during the slavery movement, where only the fittest survived. Yet, another hypothesis states that black athletes work harder than their white counterpart and that is why they thrive at certain sports.  All of these theories are very hard to prove due to scientific restriction and immeasurable factors like which athlete is the hardest worker.  I do not comprehend why we as a society have to define and separate different races.  We are always assuming that if someone wins it is because he or she has an advantage therefore the fingers are now pointed towards race.  The flaw that I see in these theories is that there has been a lot of research to see the superiority in black athletes but not very many theories for white athletes.  If black athletes have anatomical and physiological traits that provide them with an advantage then there should be more research on what white athletes have that black athletes do not have.  I find it interesting that when there is an argument about race it usually just involves the black and white race, not any others.  I understand that there has to be a dividing line for scientific and sociological purposes, but I think it further segregates white and black societal views.  We have critics questioning why and how an athlete has an advantage that it rarely occurs to us that athletes may be better at certain sports because they worked harder than their counterparts to get there. 

Society and Football

In the Offensive Play article by Malcolm Gladwell, scientists have discovered evidence that the constant head on collisions in football may have a correlation with future dementia.  The ethical issue we as a society have to face is whether or not football should still be allowed as a sport.  The research presents that head on collision increased the amount of Tau within an athlete’s brain.  Tau is a substance is also commonly found within individuals with Alzheimer and other mental diseases.  This could possibly mean that athletes have an increased chance of having dementia after playing football.  We were asked in discussion whether or not we would allow our children to partake in a sport that would affect them for the rest of their lives. I feel like I would not deny my child participation in the sport but I would not encourage it by any means.  If my child insisted to want to play I would make sure he/she understood the consequences and the future harm it could cause him or her.  There is a possibility that the research is not correlated, since scientist still have a lot more research to do before they can come to a final conclusion.  I personally believe that even with the amount of research we have now, the situation is serious enough for us to think twice about sending professional athletes to play.  My concern is if society will consider letting go of football for the safety of its players.  Maybe we could come up with different rules to make athletes safer but people have argued if that it would no longer be considered football.  This is a very sensitive topic because football is everything to Americans.  However, social norms have changed before and it would not be impossible for it to change again.  Athletes are going to have to decide whether or not to believe the scientific data and gamble with possible mental dysfunction; while we as a society have to decide which is more important, the game or the safety of our athletes.   

The Connection between Athletes and Industries

During 1980’s Michael Jordan became one of the biggest hit sensations in the history of sports.  He was renowned for his infamous athleticism all over the world.  It was also during this era that the media flourished and with it, advertisement opportunities for companies wanting to sell their products.  Michael was the target for most of these industries because he was thought to be an individual with high morals and a role model for society.  Michael became the new sensation and according to The Sports Spectacle, Michael Jordan, and Nike: Unholy Alliance? that is even where the legendary logo “Just do it” came from.  Soon, both became associated and representative of each other, and if one went array so did the other one.  Nike was exploited for giving extremely low wages to factory workers, which ended up reflecting on Michael.  Michael was questioned several times on what he thought about the situation remarked that he could not control what Nike did or did not do.  Have industries and athletes been regarded as one entity or are they, as Michael believed, separate? Today, sports teams are drenched with advertisements from within the athlete’s gear to the score boards. Industries depend on athletes to endorse their products, and athletes depend on industries for an income.  The two are obviously connected but to what degree is the question.  Would athletes today cut their ties with an industry like Nike for the wages of factory workers? I have a feeling that most would not.  This aspect of sport has spiraled into a huge money making business, and since we are humans we want the most we can possibly get.  Athletes and industries need to recognize who they are signing with so that they will not create a negative image on each other.  One way to possibly fix this issue is to place restrictions on one another, which something very hard to control. Once an affiliation is formed there is nothing either party can do, they have taken a chance and live with the consequences. 

The Price of Being Different

In the The New Yorker article of Either/Or, Caster Semenya participates in one of the most controversial ethical issue that sport has faced.  Semenya is a young woman that grew up in South Africa and has been competing in the 800 meter. This is a very normal scenario other than the fact that Semenya does not fit the physical or biological norm of a female athlete.  Semenya has a genetic disorder where she does not have all of the female reproductive organs but has triple the amount of testosterone.  Semenya was raised as a woman and considers herself a woman but whether or not she can compete as a woman is a different story.  She has been questioned throughout her athletic career and was used to having to “prove her femininity” to several judges.   In the world championship at Berlin she was once again confronted with the question of whether or not she was a woman, but this time she was forced to take a genetic test where her results confirmed a genetic disorder.  Unfortunately her results were leaked and Semenya’s participation in the competition became questioned.  Having tripled the amount of testosterone than any average women competitors was seen as an advantage.  She was ridiculed for her looks, toned figure, and deep voice.  She was told by complete strangers that she was a man, even though she was socially raised as a woman.  Semenya was only 18 at the time.  I cannot begin to imagine the situation this young women went through to cope with this tragedy.  The pressure of being called a cheater and not understanding how or why things came to be must have had devastating effects.  However, Semenya has proven to be very mature and has handled this situation to the best of her abilities.  She has not competed since the incident and hope that the situation will calm down before she decides whether or not to continue with her athletic career.  I think that this young woman should compete with other women in sports.  Every athlete has a different body type and different testosterone levels.  Semenya may have more muscles but she has worked hard for them just like any other athlete.  The choice, however, is up to society.

The Body

We as women have always been preoccupied with their body image and how we are viewed.  This may be due to the standards we believe men hold us up to, the standards that other women hold us up to, or our own standards.  In our class survey it seemed that most of us believed there was a clear line between looking healthy and having too much muscle.  It would make complete sense for women to embrace their bodies and their muscles just as well as men, but we have the mindset that women should be petite and fragile.  Beauty is not muscle it is being fit and thin.  In the article by Molly George, she mentions how women in sports are put in the position where they have to choose whether to be a better athlete or have an "ideal" body.  I felt the same way when I swam in high school. I was constantly worried about my body image, even though my friends and my family told me that I have nothing to worry about.  There are some individuals that cannot cope with the stress that they tend to go to extreme measures such as bulimia and anorexia.  This should not be an issue that women have to face, I wish that we could find beauty in muscles as well in our own body.  Unfortunately humanity feels the need to achieve perfection, whatever perfection is supposed to be. 

The New Epidemic

Obesity has become such an increasing concern that it was even mentioned to be an epidemic by Baker Harrell. It is an epidemic that can only be resolved by changing the mindset of people to pursue a healthier lifestyle.  Obesity mainly affected people in these past couple of decades so it is not well-known by the majority of society.  I feel like a lot of obese and overweight individuals understand that it is unhealthy but don’t recognize the side effects such as the increase risk of cancer, heart attack, and many other diseases.  Someone in class mentioned how a harsher approach may be more beneficial when trying to communicate with obese individuals so that they can be conscientious of their lifestyle.  I would have to disagree with this statement because having a negative influence on such a sensitive issue would only discourage the positive outcomes we are fighting for.  People that are overweight are constantly teased in school and other settings and would not appreciate being harassed by their doctors and trainers as well.  Body image is a very sensitive issue and I am positive that there are a lot of overweight people that have tried diets and pills to lose weight.  The lack of success must be overwhelming and some may only find comfort in food, ending their goals and making them feel devastated.  I feel like the choice to be healthy must be decided by the person that is overweight and supported by trainers and friends.  We must inform the masses of research results and somehow convince them that a change is possible and doable.

Kinesiology Majors

Kinesiology has not been a very renowned graduate program in the past couple of decades.  It was frowned upon due to the lack of research, little identification of the field, and not enough of a practical curriculum for a career.  In the next couple of years all of these issues were dealt with, and Kinesiology became one of the largest growing fields in the world today.  This is partially due to the increasing knowledge that exercising has a positive effect on society’s health.  In the past centuries exercise evolved from Posture and Physical Anthropometry, to Muscular Christianity, to Fitness centers, to the world of exercise we know today.  Since Kinesiology is such a new major and doctorate program there are several opportunities to branch out and expand on clinical care, research, and several sports area.  In spite of its growth, it is still undermined by society and many people think that Kinesiology majors become PE teachers.  It is a very common misconception because Kinesiology majors are not credited for their hard work.  Especially in the field of sports a lot of Sports Managers, Athletic Trainers, and Exercise Scientists partake in the "behind the scene" event coordination.  Some people don't understand the amount of dedication and hard work that has undergone to revolutionize this field.  I feel like we have come a very long way and will continue to grow throughout the next couple of years.

Why Play?

Play is a very commonly used word that has various meanings in our society.  We “play” tic tac toe, “play” video games, “play” instruments, “play” games, “play” sports, etc.    According to Allen Guttmann’s Ritual to Record, he states that “play is any nonutilitarian physical or intellectual activity pursued for its own sake.”  According to our reading play is divided into spontaneous and organized.  Organized play can either be competitive or noncompetitive, and competitive play can either be intellectual or physical.  I suppose that the purpose for us to define play is to be able to classify sport, which is considered a competitive contest of organized play.  I don’t believe that play is the right term for the basis of sport.   I feel like play in itself is a broad term that describes spontaneity and organization instead of defining them.  I would probably change the to categorization of play and replace it with activity due to fact that it further defines spontaneity and organization.  Organized activity would then be divided into competitive and noncompetitive, and so on as listed above.  

"Better, Stronger, Faster"

In the documentary “Bigger, Stronger, Faster” Christopher Bell highlighted several points that I found interesting.  Chris mentioned the fixation of winning in the American society, and the need to fulfill our American Dreams.  “The American Dream” has changed significantly over the past decades; from the emphasis of sustaining a family and getting a job to having the best and being the best no matter what.  The achievement of this goal is stressed by society in the theory that if you don’t step on someone, you will get stepped on.  There doesn’t seem to be a limitation to winning or being the best, and in sports this means that enhancement drugs are merely a step to the ladder of success.  So, should enhancement drugs be allowed in the sporting industry? Chris’ brothers thought so, but in spite of their claims they were not able to fully accept that what they were doing was the right thing.  Neither brother was able to openly announce that he was taking enhancement drugs to his peers or parents.  The brothers valued winning more than their morals.  When did value and morality have to have a dividing line? It seems like lately our society chooses to defy morality so that we can accomplish something "greater" for ourselves.  Will we ever be happy with this kind of greatness?

Enhancement Drugs

Our topic of discussion today was over whether or not enhancement drugs should be allowed in the sports industry. In this situation I value the morality of the sport more than winning the game. I think enhancement drugs set a bad example for young athletes in our society because it gives them an easier path to success.  What kind of life lesson would the next generation learn if we permit loopholes?  But others may think that doping for example allows athletes to further improve their natural ability.  But what would happen if all drugs were legalized and the playing field was even? Wouldn’t athletes want to be even better?  Would genetic doping be next? I feel like genetic doping is inhumanly because it changes the genetic make-up of an individual. Genetic make-up is very complicated in the fact that several genes affect one another and are intertwined in a very specific way; changing something very small can cause a huge difference in an individual.  There are a lot of “ifs” in this controversial issue and I would have to admit that Dr. Todd’s solutions is the most rational.  Why not separate the two leagues? One that allows doping and or any enhancement drugs, and one that would maintain the athlete’s natural ability.  The sports industry could even make fields larger and re-invent the sport adapting to each player’s need.  Then society could stick to their morals and support whichever industry they chose. There would be controversies, of course, with athletes who dope and try to enter the league of those who do not.  In this situation I would recommend that these athletes should be banded from the sports industry indefinitely. 

September 1st!

In our class lecture we discussed the unusual situation of Coach Brown and his unique strategy to win a football game.  I personally believe that sewing on footballs to the front of player's shirts was immoral due to the dishonesty of the game and Golden Rule.  I disagree more with his action because of its result than with his approach of winning.  What kind of message is he sending out to his players? That he does not think they would be able to win if he had not come up with this tactic? He should be confident in his ability as a coach and believe in his players, rather than finding loopholes in rulebooks.  His football team may not have been the strongest but that is just a reflection of his coaching abilities.  

The other issue we addressed in class was whether or not we would allow a student with down-syndrome play in the football team.  This issue is very difficult because there are several factors that must be considered:  how good of a football player he is, how confident he is in learning plays, his ability in carrying out a play, etc… If I went with my moral value with the information presented, I would not allow this boy to play due to the possibility of him getting hurt.  I would probably put beneficence before justice because I would feel responsible if he got injured.  I understand that in football every player has a possibility of getting hurt, but this boy would have a greater disadvantage than all the others.  However, the factors mentioned above would definitely be a factor in my decision.  If he demonstrated capabilities to play the game, I would recruit him like any other player.