As of November 2014, there are thirty-five states in the United States which have legalized same-sex marriage. This marks a turning point in history for those who identify as anything other than 'heterosexual'. Much of the protest against this movement for equality has, both historically and in the present, come from religious communities. Before the third century, unions between two men were celebrated and fairly common, as even emperors had husbands on occasion. As the fourth century approached, however, groups such as the Western European Church and the Council of Ancyra began to bar men who enjoyed the company of other men from communion and marriage, as it was seen as an abomination. These negative notions towards gays propagated throughout the world as christianity spread. Laws were put in place against homosexual conduct and punishments could be severe.

       The United States was not the first country to begin allowing marriage between the same genders, as it was legal in the Netherlands since 2000 and in Belgium in 2003. The large Christian community America's voter booths can be partly blamed for this slow build towards sexual orientation freedom. Homosexuals represent a minority of the human population (about 5% of adults), which is why it is very difficult for them to garner enough support to allow themselves hope for a more equal future. However, there are numerous obstacles in barring their way, most notably religious branches such as the Westboro Baptist Church, who have recently been featured in media due to their constant fight against queer rights. Religion has been, and will most likely always been, anti gay. 

      As is written in the constitution, each American is endowed with "certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness". To go against the LGBT community, or any culture or group for that matter, is unconstitutional, as opposition leads to the depriving of those being oppressed of their 'unalienable rights'. Suicide is the second leading cause of death among young people between the ages of ten and twenty four years old. These deaths could be prevented if the unnecessary mistreatment of people over what they have no control over (their sexual orientation) was not seen as 'acceptable' because of the view that homosexuality is a sin which is to be punishable for. 

Santa Claus brings hope to many children, but this hope can be in the form of material objects. There are advantages which can be exploited by kids believing in Santa and there can also be many long lasting negative effects. Kids are often loyal to Santa and expect a lot from him, so are we doing the right thing by teaching children to honor false legends?

There can be benefits for kids to believe in Santa. It brings joy and excitement to families: making cookies, putting out a glass of warm milk, and the number one thing -presents. Parenting is a tough job; therefore it can be beneficial for kids to believe in Santa so parents can manipulate them to behave all year. Then the parents who have money can perpetuate the lie by pretending to be Santa and easily buy their child whatever they desire for Christmas. When kids see the presents they asked Santa to get them, they believe that Santa knows they have been good. But sometimes it’s not easy to maintain that Santa illusion.

There can be negative outcomes for kids to believe in Santa. American families spend about $500 per child and 465 billion combined on Christmas gifts. Some families can’t afford the presents that their kids want. Kids want cell phones, tablets, video games or game stations - which causes a lot of stress when trying to afford those expensive gifts. A kid, whose parents can’t afford the present they want, will assume that Santa thinks they have been bad that year; even if they tried really hard to be good. This could destroy their self-esteem. Thus, parents are forced to be the Santa that every kid believes in. But it can be really hard to attain that responsibility if they are in debt. Even if these struggling parents can buy these gifts, it will be Santa who will get the credit. Kids should know it is their parents buying these expensive gifts, bought by working hard.  Instead they think a stranger makes gifts appear magically out of his bag. So, is it good parenting to tell their kids a lie that may eventually turn against them in the future?

It’s nice to have kids believe in Santa Claus because it brings them joy on Christmas. But sometimes it’s not appropriate to believe because of family struggles and the dishonesty. Unfortunately, the only hope that some kids have on Christmas is a present from Santa. Instead of supporting materialism, they should understand the true meaning of Christmas - peace on earth. So, is Santa Claus a good influence? Should we continue the indoctrination of this imaginative creature?     

In kindergarten, my friends and I would rummage through a chest full of costumes to play “dress-up,” layering on secondhand dresses, beads, flamboyant scarves, and high-heeled shoes. During elementary school, my sister shared her poofy princess dresses and 2-inch Barbie shoes with me. I can’t even remember the age I began illicitly trying on my mother’s beautiful satin pumps while she was at work. And I know I was not the only little girl interested in such frivolous accessories. High heels make girls feel older and women feel sexier, adding to their height and complimenting their outfit. So aside from the dangers of twisted ankles and scraped knees, which are just as likely when running or riding a bike, why are parents so hesitant about letting their daughters wear high heels?

            To properly answer this question, I had to do some research. It is not very thoroughly taught as to why high heels were invented. High-heeled footwear has existed as early as the 9^th century in Persia, as a solution to horseback riders’ feet slipping foreword on their stirrups. During the 16^th century in Europe, royalty (both men and women) wore them to appear taller and larger than life. Yet the sexual implications of high heels today cannot be ignored; in plain, it is not because of the health risks that parents discourage such shoes. They do not want their little girls to be exposed to unsavory glances. Unfortunately, this inference provokes more questions than it answers. Why exactly is walking on one’s tiptoes considered overtly sexual? Scientists have concluded it has to do with the evolution of human psychology (aided perhaps by sex symbols in popular media). More importantly, since high heels are still worn by millions of women and the majority of these women are not hit on or assaulted (as parents would have their daughters believe), at what age is wearing them finally appropriate?

A survey conducted by the American Podiatric Medical Association showed some 42% of women admitted that they would wear a shoe they liked even if it gave them discomfort. As revealed by the APMA, many mothers preach hypocritical sermons to their little girls when addressing provocative appearance. The age at which high heels, just as with makeup, become appropriate to wear is for parents to decide. Celebrities such as Katie Holmes allow their daughters to wear kitten heels (heels less than 2 inches) as young as first grade. The choice is entirely up to the individual, but depends on the fear-inducing ideas her parents brand into her mind.

Bibliography:

"High-heeled Footwear." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 22 Nov. 2014. Web. 21 Dec. 2014.

Americans perceive a terrorist as a man wearing a black mask and wielding an AK-47. The terrorist that Americans don’t see is the young man living across the street who watches Islamic propaganda on YouTube or the teenage girl on the lacrosse team who follows the Islamic State on Twitter. Americans worry about terrorists invading their country when in reality the seeds of extremism have already been planted in the minds of young adults in America. The national security of the United States has been structured to prevent extremists from entering the country, but there is no mechanism in place that is designed to catch the citizens who decide to become terrorists at home. These homegrown terrorists pose a significant threat to America as they are easily radicalized to become soldiers for Muslim extremist groups and they are in the ideal location to attack America at its weakest points. 

As Islamic extremists all over the world continue jihad against the United States, many Muslims in America feel that other Muslims in countries like Afghanistan are being oppressed and killed because of their religion by the US military. Their beliefs alienate them from the rest of America, so they begin to connect with the rhetoric espoused via social media by Muslim radicals. According to Rich Barrett, an expert on terrorism, the appeal of the Islamic jihadi groups is that it creates a sense of belonging to a group that is fighting to end injustice. Martin Couture-Rouleau is an example of one such person. A convert to Islam in 2008, he watched anti-Semitic videos on YouTube and followed the Islamic State on Facebook. His Facebook page also contained posts that derided the US military as “baby-killers”. After failing to leave the country to join rebels in Syria, he used his car to run over two Canadian soldiers. The US must be able to defend against the propaganda that is flowing into America through the Internet. 

Homegrown terrorists have an advantage over their colleagues in the Middle East: they understand their target better. They know the soft spots, the places that Americans feel secure and where an attack would be most effective at spreading chaos and terror throughout the country. Take the Boston Marathon bombings in 2013 as an example. The bombers, the Tsarnaev brothers, had lived in Boston since 2002 and had become familiar with the culture and importance surrounding the Boston Marathon. They understood that targeting this event would do more damage psychologically as well as physically because they had seen the value attached to the event by Bostonians. They learned how to create the bombs used in the attack from an Al-Qaeda magazine that can be accessed online. They had no terrorist connections until the brothers began to take religion more seriously and subscribe to Islamic extremist propaganda. The United States chooses to focus its resources on stopping terrorists from entering the country when, in reality, the more serious threat is from Americans who are radicalized by propaganda to commit atrocities in their home country.

Works Cited

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/09/will-obamas-isis-strategy-actually-worsen-the-terror-threat/380465/

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/10/rep-michael-mccaul-isis-waging-war-online-recent-homegrown-attacks-examples-of-where-theyre-winning/

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/04/20/us/brother-religious-language

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/22/us/colorado-teens-syria-odyssey/

            Every year, usually in October or November, my dad gives me the same task: rake 25 bags of leaves.  I usually milk the “I have homework” excuse dry after a few weeks and am forced to pick the coldest day of autumn to go out. At this point, everyone in my family has already completed their share so I hit the yard with only a rake and some music.

            I think only of bags. Filled bags are friends and empty ones hold me back from freedom. Often I fill bags illegitimately. Sometimes I steal a few leaves from my neighbor’s knee-deep sea of leaves, or maybe I toss a soccer ball in to fill up space. Mainly, I just target the easy, exposed leaves, avoiding digging under bushes at all costs.

            After three or four long, painful and lonely hours, I have loosely filled twenty-five bags, winning my freedom. I feel amazing; a weight has been lifted from my shoulders. My dad, on the other hand, does not. The yard still looks terrible. Remnants of old piles dot the yard. A sharp line in the corner marks exactly where I reached twenty-five bags. My father’s main goal was to make the yard look nice and he failed. However, by his bag-filling standards, I have scored 100%.  The main goal was not achieved because of how my dad chose to measure its progress.

            I face a similar issue every day in school. School’s main objective seems obvious: Educate students. However, our school chooses to do this by giving students a series of tasks and ultimately measuring success with tests. I view these tasks similarly to how I view filling bags. I want them completed by any means necessary so I can move on with my life. This attitude leaves me with incomplete work and incomplete understanding. Many students with the same attitude turn to cheating to get by. The end result remains the same: good grades with poor understanding.

            The solution lies in changing education’s values. If I took pride in having a neat yard, I wouldn’t consider the number of bags I fill, nor would I waste time filling bags illegitimately and the end goal would be much cleaner. Similarly, if students valued learning over high test grades, students would actively seek out their own methods of learning instead of cheating. Students would go above and beyond their expectations and America’s future would be changed for the better.

            

         The issue of police brutality and the tense racial relations between police and people of color has been on almost everyone’s minds of late.  Just recently, two NYPD officers were slain in their cars, murdered by a man who was seeking to avenge the deaths of Mike Brown and Eric Garner who were themselves killed by police while unarmed. These cases of brutality and injustice have galvanized people into rival camps of “pro-police” and “anti-police”. Sadly, it does not have to be this way. Being against police brutality and injustice, and being disgusted with the actions of the murderer of those two police officers are not two mutually exclusive issues. Unfortunately, so many on both sides make it out to be this way.

            Putting the case of Mike Brown aside, where there was much more controversy surrounding what exactly happened, the cases of Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, and so many others clearly demonstrate that the police have been overstepping their bounds. Often, because many of these victims of brutality are black, the black community has become convinced that the police are out to get them. I don’t know, and highly doubt, that these police officers and many like them are racist in their intentions. But it is clear that many aspects of the criminal justice system do disproportionately impact minorities. The war on drugs has led to the mass incarceration of countless black men for victimless crimes. Minorities are disproportionately incarcerated compared to their white counterparts when it comes to drug use. As of 2006, 49.3% of state prisoners, or 656,000 individuals, were incarcerated for non-violent crimes. This is certainly unjust. The proliferation of laws and regulations has led to a police force constantly on the lookout for any wrong or violation, ever so slight, while taking their attention away from more serious crimes such as murder, rape, and robbery. In the case of Eric Garner, he was selling untaxed cigarettes. He was choked to death by a NYPD officer after resisting arrest. So there is some credibility behind the perception of the police being “out to get” minorities.

At the same time, the impulse of protesters of police brutality have demonstrated a dangerous tendency to deflect blame away from guilty perpetrators of brutality onto society at large. This dangerous tendency only serves to weaken the case for criminal justice reform and increased dialogue between the black community and law enforcement officers. When protesters and critics of police brutality deflect responsibility of the murderer of those two officers onto society at large or onto the more despicable actions of law enforcement, they only serve to weaken their own case. Is it not hypocritical to condemn the inexcusable actions on the part of law enforcement, while at the same time excusing the actions of the murderer? It is time that individuals are held responsible for their actions. Blaming “society” does nothing to institute positive, long-lasting change.    

Most humanitarian aid organizations will gladly report that billions of dollars are given to the impoverished citizens of developing countries each year. Global Humanitarian Assistance claimed in their annual report that global spending on humanitarian aid surpassed $17.9 billion in 2012. What these organizations fail to report, however, is that such copious amounts of aid regularly fail to reach their intended recipients.

The Red Cross and United Nations would never admit that they transfer aid from kind-hearted donors to nonfunctioning governments. The Guardian reports that in 2009, the UN halted aid shipments to the Gaza Strip after the corrupt Hamas government stole “thousands of tonnes of food and other provisions.” According to Express, British taxpayers were robbed of over $2 million when corrupt Ugandan government officials stole Britain’s aid packages in 2013. 

Humanitarian aid given to corrupt nations is wasteful. Instead of trickling down to those in need, corrupt governments cut off the flow of benefits long before the poor can access them. These individual officials benefit greatly from aid packages and resource access, so they have an incentive to demonstrate a need for continued support in their countries. Officials are faced with the option of putting in work to spur national growth and losing aid or stealing aid packages, perpetuating poverty, and guaranteeing future aid. Well, don’t donors just cut off aid to these types of countries? Studies by New York University found that there is no evidence “that aid donors give less to corrupt governments…in some cases donors give more.” 

Even when implemented in politically stable regions, humanitarian aid fails. Margaret Taylor, a fellow of the council on foreign relations, says, “Insurgents, terrorists, and other armed groups will continue to be a reality in fragile states and regions for donors looking to provide assistance.” Stability is a prerequisite for successful humanitarian aid. Articles published in the Humanitarian Practice Network (HPN) describe the failures of aid in Somalia, saying “Security deteriorated in Al Shabob areas during the course of the implementation period due to military incursions by the Kenyan and Ethiopian armies into Somalia.” Following violence in the region, the US State Department halted in supplying Somalia with over $50 million in aid, according to The New York Times. Terrorism and insurgency are just two of the many factors contributing to the failure of humanitarian aid. 

The HPN claims that in areas plagued by corruption and violence, less than half of humanitarian aid actually reaches those in need. This means that of the $17.9 billion donated in 2012, less than $9 billion was impactful. This magnitude of waste sets donor countries back while leaving the world’s poor populations ill-equipped to battle the cycle of poverty. 

            Occasionally, you wake up and have a wonderfully productive day, during which you do all the things that you were hoping to do. You take advantage of your time, and accomplish your goals, break new barriers and even get ahead on your upcoming tasks and deadlines. Other days, you don’t.


            Procrastination is a problem that affects everyone, in every part of the world, at one point or another. Whether it is an English essay or a college application, there is this perpetual desire to put it off until the last second. Some people even try to say that they “work better under pressure,” but while a little bit of stress can add a sense of urgency to a task, thus helping you complete it, too much stress can still become overwhelming. Yet, for some reason, we continue to choose to waste our time instead of taking advantage of it.


            While many people tend to blame genetics, an astrological disposition, or even the way they were raised for their inclination to procrastinate, there is a scientific explanation for this human tendency. Essentially, procrastination is the outcome of a battle between two parts of the human brain. The first part is the prefrontal cortex. This section of the brain deals with the logical, scheduling and decision-making parts of one’s thoughts. The other part of this cerebral war is the limbic system. This section is a very primitive but powerful part of one’s brain. It deals with the instinctual emotions and the pleasure center of the brain. So instead of writing your paper or filling out your tax returns, like your prefrontal cortex is saying you should, you instead choose to watch television, and make yourself some coffee, and so on, just as your powerful limbic system instructs you to do.

            Now, while today’s society requires the productivity and cooperation of everyone in order to maintain itself, from time to time, a little bit of procrastination is not a horrible thing. The fact of the matter is that procrastination is your body’s way of telling you that your brain is tired. When the prefrontal cortex is no longer powerful enough to overcome the short term satisfaction of the limbic system, you succumb to these desires, and in turn, you procrastinate. While you don’t want to become overwhelmed with all the work that you put off, it is okay to take a break every now and then, because your brain needs it. So when you’re finding it hard to focus on the task at hand, maybe it’s time to get a snack, or play some videogames, because your prefrontal cortex might actually be telling you it needs to rest. Just remember that your work is not going to disappear, and once you’ve rested a bit, you’ll need to get right back to it so as to not stress yourself out and crumble under the pressure that was caused by your procrastination.

 

 

Sources:

http://www.realsimple.com/work-life/life-strategies/time-management/procrastination

http://www.talentedladiesclub.com/all-help/why-do-we-procrastinate-and-how-to-cheat-our-brains-into-working/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procrastination

Students all over the country grow up believing Ivy League schools, such Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc, are the ultimate goal and highest level of achievement in our society. These schools are known to contain the most intelligent people in the world and to result in the highest paying jobs in today’s society. We are told from the start to “strive for greatness” and in the case of college options, “greatness” is solely considered private colleges. However, when have graduates of private colleges been proven to earn higher incomes than those attending state schools? If a well motivated student is simply unable to afford a private college are they sacrificing a hefty post college salary? Is thousands of dollars in debt worth a private school diploma? 

Not only do private colleges produce graduates with debt striking close to $40,000 but they often require hard working parents to empty their entire life savings in order to pay tuition. Although public, state colleges are far more financially intelligent, they lack the reputation private colleges, such as the Ivy League, contain. Students who work hard throughout high school, “striving for greatness”, would often be let down or disappointed by the thought of a state school. Thousands of students a year agree to enormous amounts of debt with the sole purpose of attending a prestigious college and graduating with a diploma they believe is more valuable.

In my opinion, a hardworking student who has been well motivated, and academically successful throughout their whole life can benefit greatly from a public school diploma and little to no debt, where as an Ivy League diploma and a college debt of tens of thousands of dollars is unnecessary. A hard working person will continue to “strive for greatness” no matter what situation they are placed in. According to the Washington Post, “..how much you make depends on you, not where you get in.” The common misconception that prestigious diplomas will always result in large salaries needs to be illuminated from our society in order to elicit hope in those hard working students who grow up knowing a private college tuition is out of their reach, those students who are disappointed in turning down an acceptance letter to a private school, those students who “settle” for the education of a state school not based on their intelligence but their parents income, those students who can one day be equally successful as a Harvard graduate if they put forth enough effort. 

On average, children spend approximately 7 hours and 38 minutes on a screen daily, either on a computer, a TV, a video game or a cell phone. The average weekly value given is 50 hours, meaning a child is wasting 2,400 hours on a screen per year. But is this time really wasted time? The ongoing debate argues that screens are ruining Children, causing obesity from lack of physical activity, the loss of social skills, the loss of imagination and the dimishing of empathy for others. However, even with these disadvantages, technology allows children to have instant access to information about the world, to learn motor skills and to enhance their intelligence.

One common conception is that obesity stems from using an electronic device for an extended period of time when they should be doing physical activity.  Physical activity is absolutely necessary for children and technology is distracting them from it. However, a child can still use these devices and exercise enough to find a balance between the two.  Further studies show that technology is ruining the emotions of children. “Studies over the past decade have concluded that a large number of adolescents and teens today are having difficulty identifying emotions in people, thus creating an inability to feel empathy toward others who may be feeling pain, sorrow, anger and other emotions.” This idea illustrates that the exposure of violence on TV shows and video games is having a negative effect on children. This is true but it would be the same as if the child is brought up by violent parents so a video game is not the only way a child can be exposed to violence.  Also these video games and apps are taking away from the child’s imagination. Imagination is a vital part of a child’s life in order for them to learn to be creative. This statement is valid but even though they may not have room for imagination, video games do motivate children to think. It teaches them how to logically think by grasping different inputs by developing motor skills and hand-eye coordination due to movements needed to effectively navigate a play in a video game. This kind of thinking is extraordinary for children to understand at a young age. Obesity, violence and lack of creativity all contribute to the fact that technology is bad for children when technology is abused but if used at the appropriate time and for the right amount of time, technology can be highly influential in the advancement of a child’s intelligence.

Works Cited:

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/patientinstructions/000355.htm

http://www.care2.com/greenliving/children-and-technology-should-you-be-concerned.html

            It’s been on my to-do list for months. It’s been on my mind for even longer. It’s been the subject of countless conversations with well-meaning relatives who mistakenly see it as a stressless topic. Right now I have exactly three books sitting on my desk to prepare me for it, taunting me with confusing math equations, supererogatory vocabulary, and the reminder that a single test can completely change the next five years of my life- maybe longer. Any student planning on going to college will tell you how stressful the SATs are.  We spend months studying and strategizing and subjecting ourselves to painful prep classes for three hours and forty-five minutes of variables and vocabulary that will determine our future. But are the SATs really worth the stress students face? Recently it has become clear that they aren’t.

                At its birth in 1926, the SAT stood for the Scholastic Aptitude Test, with the intention that the test would measure natural intelligence among high school students. Today, however, students are more often than not hiring tutors, buying books, and taking classes to prepare themselves for the SATs. The test preparation industry rakes in $861 million annually, according to ibisworld.com.  And for good reason. For years, everyone who can so much as spell SAT drill into our heads the importance of performing as well as we possibly can on the SATs, so it only makes sense we take all the help we can get. The only problem is that some students can get more help than others. While some families can afford to hire private tutors who can condition their child to know exactly what to do during the test, other families struggle to afford the $30 SAT prep books. As a result, students with financially stable families have an inherent advantage over those without. And this advantage shows in the test scores. Maureen Downey, an education columnist for ajc.com states that “every school with a poverty rate over 80 percent scored below 1400… [and] every school with a poverty rate under 20 percent scored above 1500”  with the average being 1452.

                Wealth isn’t the only factor that can play into SAT scores. A student could have a learning disability that makes test taking more difficult even if he or she knows the material, or could be more inclined towards subjects the SATs don’t prioritize, like science, history, or the arts. He or she could not have English as their first language. Maybe he or she is just “a bad test taker.” Because of the factors that make the SATs imperfect judges of intelligence, the test is not a good indicator of how well a student will do in college. Jill Tiefenthaler, a professor at Wake Forest University, explains that since making SAT scores an optional part of the university’s application process, Wake Forest has gotten more applications from students “who are  artists and critical thinkers and not great test-takers, first-generation students with fabulous high school records and no access to the test preparation industry” who would perform better in college than some students who get near-perfect SAT scores.

                The SATs are set to change in 2016, making them more accessible to different kinds of students, according to College Board. Will these changes fix the faulty measurement of a student’s worth that is the SATs? Most likely not. But will they a step in the right direction? I guess we’ll find out in 2016.

Sources:

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2009/09/04/sats-do-not-take-the-full-measure-of-a-high-school-student

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/sats/test/what.html

http://www.ibisworld.com/industry/tutoring-test-preparation-franchises.html

http://www.ajc.com/weblogs/get-schooled/2013/oct/06/ajc-special-report-sat-scores-rise-family-wealth-n/

School is something (maybe the only thing) all teens have in common. It's something we all have to do, whether we do it well or not. We all enter the building attempting to get through the day, all on our toes, urgently awaiting the final bell at 2:19. This bell can signify to some, sleep, to others, homework, sports, but to someone else it could signify angst, sadness or even fear. We all go to the same place everyday, but everything in other aspects of our lives can be so different. We don't actually know each other, we don't know what each of us goes through everyday after the final bell at 2:19. We walk through the halls, look around and actually think we might know each other, in reality, that is not the case at all.

To me, it's all an allusion. We walk through the beige, dull hallways being judged with every move we make. Other kids, teachers, faculty, everyone is observing how we talk, walk, interact, etc. There is not one moment during the day that we, as students in this huge judgmental facility, aren't being placed into certain groups.

A short, goofy-looking boy with glasses is automatically classified as a geek, when actually this boy couldn't care less about education and school. He could very well love to perform on stage; he's actually a very talented actor who can automatically become any character once he steps foot into the spotlight. We would never have guessed this because we never give ourselves enough time to find out who we all are. We don't know each other, we just know what role we each are supposed to play and who we're supposed to be. Just because a girl has long, blonde hair, pretty clothes, a lot of friends, a boyfriend and a pretty smile doesn't mean she's happy. We have no idea what she could be going through physically, mentally, family wise, we don't even know if she has a family. She might not want to be classified as happy and popular, she somehow wants to come out with her true identity, but can never seem to be given enough time to figure it out. We all jump to conclusions based on what we're all supposed to be, today life is too rushed and hectic to actually think about who someone wants to be.

Next time that bell rings at 2:19, look to the person next to you. Think about who they are to you, think about who they actually are to themselves.

            For most young athletes, the dream is to bring in a fortune playing the sport that they love.  But, what comes next?  The plan for so many of these flashing stars ends there, with no further goals or aspirations on their mind.  This truncated dream results in a riches to rags situation for a vast majority of these professional athletes.  A 2014 study reported that 78% of NFL players declare bankruptcy within five years of their retirement.  Meaning an NFL player is about 245% more likely to file for bankruptcy than any other American, which is astonishing as the average professional football player makes $1,847,750 more than the average American.  The cause for these bright lights to burn out so quickly before our eyes is the failure to teach aspiring athletes personal finance or money management.

            The NFL throws large sums of money into the hands of twenty-two year old kids, and expects them to figure it out for themselves.  The money usually goes straight to supporting a lavish uncontrolled lifestyle that cannot be maintained.  No matter what caliber the athlete is at, the first contract they sign with the NFL will most likely be the most money they’ve ever seen.  Former Detroit Lions offensive tackle Lomas Brown stated, “You think you’re invincible and you’re going to play the game forever.   You don’t think of planning an exit strategy”.  Without thinking of the future, the newfound wealth is distributed to partying, cars, jewels, mansions, etc.   For example, the recently retired Warren Sapp has already claimed to be $6.7 million in debt after a career that brought in over $82 million.  Within Sapp’s assets were 240 pairs of Air Jordan sneakers and a lion skin rug.  Sapp is just one example of many players who fall victim to indulgent spending, and then lose it all after their career ends.

            As players enter the profitable league they are exposed to an infinite amount of new experiences and opportunities.  Many times a player becomes a provider for numerous friends and family members who look at the player’s success as a way to pull them up in the world.  Possible business ventures and investment deals are brought to the attention of these young athletes.  The NCAA has no personal finance classes required of its student-athletes.  No one has provided them with the right financial knowledge to approach these deals with the ability to handle them correctly.  This leads to players losing their fortunes in bad deals or to be buried in bills for their expansive network of friends and family, whom they think they can help.   Crippling business ventures in cosmetics and a Hard-Rock-Café knock off chain caused Rhagib “Rocket” Ismail to lose his small fortune of nearly $18 million. 

These young adults are leaving college with no finance experience or any idea of how to manage their copious funds.  Too many of these athletes believe their wealth is never ending and they take on more than they can manage.  Young athletes need to be educated on how to effectively use their newly accumulated wealth in order to allow them to function financially beyond their careers.  The NCCA and NFL must provide lectures and services on money management, so that they can help reduce the number of bankrupt individuals coming out of their league.    


Work Cited:

http://www.munknee.com/78-of-nfl-players-go-bankrupt-within-5-years/

http://www.ibtimes.com/why-do-so-many-athletes-go-broke-799155

http://work.chron.com/much-money-nfl-player-make-year-2377.html

http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us/

http://news.uscourts.gov/bankruptcy-filings-down-11-percent-march-2014

What makes a good, captivating, and successful TV show? Some of the most critically acclaimed shows of 2014 include “Game of Thrones”, “Orange is the New Black”, “Breaking Bad”, “True Detective”, and “Boardwalk Empire”- but what really makes these shows “good”?   Is it the amount of well-known actors in the program? Is it the advertisements that make a show successful?  The answer is no.  Though advertisements and big names are essential in attracting viewers to a show quickly, a show’s quality will determine the number of fans in the long run.  For example, “Game of Thrones” and “Orange is the New Black” are Netflix and HBO originals, meaning they have no advertisements.  However, they continue to be not only critically acclaimed, but also at the height of discussion in and out of the television industry. 

It is not everything surrounding the TV show--the network, the promotion, the fame--that makes it good, but rather what is actually happening in the program itself.  It’s about the characters, the scripts, the ingenuity.  In order for TV shows to be successful, they don’t need advertisement-what they need is a likeable, leading character.  Main roles, whether it’s Olivia Pope sleeping with the president (Scandal) or Walter White cooking meth to support his family (Breaking Bad), need to have a secret that makes viewers demand more.  A complex leading character will hook his or her audience, and allow screenwriters to expand these intricate ideas.   These types of characters are necessary for building a successful show so that viewers are able to empathize with them, while also being able to learn from them, and grow with them, week after week.                                                                                                                    

A captivating show must also be willing to cross lines.  HBO’s “Game of Thrones” is a prime example of this.  It is one of the best television shows of this time, and the main reason why is because of its constant shocking moments that push the limits and take its viewers by complete surprise.  The show essentially reveals that the heir to the throne was born out of incest.  This very concept is shocking, and is followed by the equally as shocking murders that take place episode after episode.  This element of surprise is crucial for hooking the audience and keeps them wanting more.                                            

There are so many elements to television that just the action and drama.  Writers must create characters in which people can identify with and a plot that is flexible enough to allow for shocking revelations.  People want to be surprised.  People want to be excited for what will happen next.   The only time a television show can thrive is when it is focused on the story rather than the monetary benefit.

Basketball is a big part of my life, it always has been. I was introduced to the game before I can remember and have been in love with it ever since. Only recently, for whatever reasons, have I found it to be more than just a game. I’ve come to find out that basketball has taught me more than I realized, and the knowledge that I gain from it, whether it concerns myself or my surroundings,  is something that I can carry for the rest of my life.

One meaningful achievement, probably the most important, basketball helped me with was understanding courage. Courage is a hard thing to figure. Courage can be defined differently by different people, and basketball helped me find my definition.

One of the biggest parts of my game that I can improve is attacking the basket. It is not so much that I am athletically incapable, and it is not a matter of being aggressive. I believe it is simply that I don’t have the courage to. It takes courage to come down on the very next possession and shoot the ball after you’ve just air balled. It takes courage to take the last shot with the clock winding down. Believing in yourself, that is what I believe defines courage. Believing that you are just as important, just as talented as anyone else can take you far both in the game of basketball, and in life.

 For me personally, I’ve realized that I’m not intimidated by my opponent but actually by my teammates. What makes me so special that I get to take the shot, when I know my teammate next to me is just as capable of doing so. However, how am I supposed to get playing time with that mindset; how am I going to succeed with that mindset.  It takes courage to push through the boundaries that people, including yourself, set you to. It takes courage to tell yourself something and sincerely believe it, especially when others tell you different. It is extremely easier to remain stagnant and not push yourself to do better. It is easier to be content with sitting on the bench and claiming there’s nothing you can do. I’ve learned taking the other path and pushing to do better, or believing in myself, takes the most courage any act can require. Basketball has taught me growth begins at the end of my comfort zone, and finally taking that first step out of my comfort zone is the most courageous act I can ever do.