The Extent We Go to Win

If you know anything about Peru, soccer, or both—one thing is clear: results prove that Peruvian soccer teams are far from the best. With that being said, as I was on MSN today I saw there was an article that headlined “Peruvian team allegedly poison foes”. Of course I was intrigued only to be shocked by the report.

The headline states exactly what happened on the soccer field. In an attempt to win the game after a first rough half, Sport Ancash poisoned their opponents. Little by little players began to collapse in the middle of the field. In total four of the players from Hijos de Acosvinchos collapsed while playing and they were taken to the hospital. After investigations at the hospital, doctors found a sedative drug in the players’ bloodstreams. The coach from Sport Ancash (the team that poisoned the opponents) claims it was the chicken and energy drinks their opponents consumed before the game.

Despite having Peruvian blood, and thus should be a fan of their sports teams… this time I fear Sport Ancash did the poisoning. Morally the whole idea is truly baffling. This event sheds light on a larger idea. Mainly how the demand of winning forces players to sacrifice their dignity, values, and lives to the sport they love. Travel back in time to World Cup 1994: Columbia played the U.S. in the round of 16. A Columbian player scores an own goal causing the U.S. to advance. Upon the Columbian player’s return to his hometown, he is killed at a bar for scoring an own goal. What happened to the love for the game and not the demand and monetary reasons for winning?

While many agree that poisoning one’s foes is bad, a more pressing issue is the extent to which athletes in order to win. In this case, it was poising your opponents. Other athletes however choose to take steroids to help impact their game. Steroids are a widely controversial topic among athletics. I feel that athletes fall under the trap to use steroids based on pressures from society. In addition to a demanding schedule, traveling, and a relationship, players are expected to perform at their peak each time. The stress that sports entail, make it easy for athletes to begin using steroids.

So now for a brief debate: are steroids acceptable for athletes given their demanding schedules? A quick and dirty answer in my view is no. Steroids are enhancements and thus do not show the athlete’s actually potential; rather show what happens when you are under an influence. Interestingly enough, I found a teacher’s take on steroids saying that steroids should be acceptable. He points that with doctor’s approval steroids should not be looked down upon due to medical conditions. Furthermore, he notes that often times athletes are not completely drug free when going to play, so what is different with those “enhancers”.

If you buy into the teacher’s argument that is another thing on its own…

Halloween- American Style

The days are passing quickly in October, leading to the much-awaited night of scares and revealing costumes (in particular for older girls)-- it’s time for Halloween. Jogging my memory I remember how Halloween costumes have progressively changed throughout the years. I remember when I was one and was dressed as a pumpkin like so many other little ones, whereas last year girls around me were French maids, Playboy bunnies, and secretaries.

As a guy, seeing the low cut tops and fish nets make Halloween a night in a league of its own. However, my acceptance of the costumes comes purely from male instinct. A friend recently commented that he feels girls find it socially acceptable to dress the way most of them do: often in slutty costumes that cover close to nothing. Similarly, a girl down the hall agreed with my friend by adding it is the one night where she feels she can dress in such a manner and not be judged.

Certainly as a male college student, I find the costumes quite inviting. Parents on the other hand, are quick to make negative remarks at how their daughters are dressed and at the evolution of society. Costumes targeted to older females today are almost always promiscuous and revealing. Their daughters are gracing the streets in costumes that go against their upbringings and the values parents have instilled in them. While I am a fan, I will leave the negative judgments to the parents.  

Southern Millionaires University?

When I tell my friends about SMU, many joke about the school’s stereotypes. Some say all I have to do is breathe, have my parents take care of the tuition, and I'm set. Or like many of us have heard all too often—Southern Millionaires University. I couldn’t help but search how many people and websites have such a perception of us.

Take a look at this post from Urban Dictionary:

Where going to class is a formal affair and you can never re-wear an outfit. Guys sport Lacoste polo's with their Seven jeans and girls pop their collars underneath their sorority t-shirts. Where Rainbows, Northface jackets and Uggs are a staple for summer and winter weather. Where getting in the right Frat or Sorority house defines who you are for the next 3 years. Nobody cares what you drive, so long as it's a BMW or a Range Rover. Tailgating is a sport and watching football is a break between the pre-partying and the after party. No worries, we aren't sore losers we'll drink our weight in Alcohol whether we win or lose.

SMU- Southern Millionaires University

I do admit the post from Urban Dictionary is not terribly far fetched. With that said, I also think this post like others, are overly embellished making students come across as superficial and stuck up. Granted, many students come from affluent families, but that shouldn’t define who we are as students. It’s always a battle to defend SMU, because outsiders have such an idea of the school. If anything, those who see SMU in that regard should spend a day in our shoes, and notice it’s not all about wealth and a posh lifestyle. SMU is a work hard, play hard environment. 

America for the Win

Though America topped the charts at number one, this first place award isn’t exactly something to boast about.  In a recent report it was discovered that the U.S. is the fattest country with 68% of Americans overweight.  Not only is this issue concentrated on adults, but also on children today in the U.S.

After reading the article I couldn’t help but think about what I’m eating at the cafeteria.  Personally, I go from section to section filling my plate with whatever catches my eye. What’s more is I usually have five meals a day, none of which are breakfast since I don’t wake up that early. Maybe this freshman fifteen is slowly creeping up on me, and others as well.

Some economists like Franco Sassi, blame the continued increase of obesity on lower food prices. Food that for the most part is not healthy by any stretch of the imagination. I agree with Sassi’s claim in light of various TV commercials. Think of how many times a day you see a Taco Bell, Burger King, or McDonald’s advertisement rejoicing over the fact they have a new 99¢ meal. Not only do the prices and meals vary, but also fast food places are remaining opened at all hours of the day. Clearly there is a market if more fast-food places are opting to stay “opened til late”, as Taco Bell says. The lower food prices in conjunction with late hours, suit the American market since people are always in a rush to get somewhere.

Unhealthy habits are trickling down to younger generations causing an increase in childhood obesity. Childhood obesity cannot only scar a child due to bullying, but also increases the child’s health risks.  In my view, parents are to blame for childhood obesity. As mentioned earlier, many adults are too busy to make a home-cooked meal and thereby become fast-food addicts. Children then find fast-food an appropriate meal to settle for. On the other side of the spectrum technology hinders youth’s physical activity forcing children to choose playing video games and therefore be less active.

Check out both the article and the photos to see other countries that topped the charts.  Have any opinions on this growing trouble that is affecting younger generations at a steady rate?

Your Life Made Possible by Google

It’s funny how some words can become part of ordinary speech even if they aren’t traditional. Words like bling or how we use Google as a verb are two prime examples. Surely Google is a widely used search engine, but for it to become part of daily speech is quite interesting. Often times someone will be in search for something online, and the quick response is: Google it.

Clearly Google caught on to this craze long ago. Now in 2010, in a recent interview with Google’s CEO, Eric Shmidt says even more will be made possible by the search engine. How much more? Well the CEO believes the Internet already records so much information about people that teens will soon need to distance themselves from their pasts. He believes this “escape” will free people from bad pictures on risky nights and horrid memories. He went on to say that Google will even be able to know what is next on your “to-do list” based on recent searches and your present location because of Smartphone technology.

For the CEO these thoughts are nothing new. He expects Google to serve as an outlet for answers to our daily questions, and in turn help us plan our lives. I must admit this is quite horrifying. If anything it is as though “Big Brother” will now constantly have an eye on us. This new technology eradicates one’s personal liberty, maturity, and self-growth. Furthermore, the whole idea of removing parts of your past makes it seem as though people should be ashamed of their pasts. Shouldn’t our private lives remain private and thus a barrier should exist between one’s personal life and work life? What ever happened to one’s privacy?

If these advances are occurring now, what’s in store for future generations? I suppose the only thing that can be said for now is that time will tell.

Troubles Connecting

The way people connect today is changing too fast. Shortly after accepting my admissions offer, I began to receive friend requests from people I have never met that were going to be attending SMU. At first I didn’t think much of it, I mean after all everyone has Facebook…

Fast-forwarding to months ago, I was reading Zeitoun by Dave Eggers. Zeitioun, a native of Syria, depicts being thrown to the ground with a leg in his back. The treatment results from authorities raiding one of Zeitoun’s tenant’s homes and taking him to a police station. The description of his treatment raises question: Why was he not given a chance to explain himself? Perhaps given the severity of the situation plus fear, those in power took no chances to listen to explanations. Or, based on his skin tone and accent, it reminded authorities of the disaster on September 11^th.

The passage provoked further discussion though: How can we share pieces of our lives by adding people randomly on Facebook, but the same can’t be done when someone is in front of us? In other words, Zeitoun wasn’t given the opportunity to tell his story, yet somehow via Facebook people feel at ease to share their lives with others not even knowing them. Is technology changing the way we live for the better? Maybe we are becoming too shallow as a whole, and just accept theses requests to have more “friends” only to later realize a person’s profile looked better than they truly are.