Joannie Rochette

Just this past Thursday in Joannie Rochette of Canada won the bronze medal in women's figure skating. Of course, winning a medal is a huge accomplishment, and I don't want to take anything away from what she achieved, but it is certain that she would not have received as much press if her mother had not passed away due a sudden heart attack the previous Sunday. It seems like there always has to be some tragedy or horrible accident in these athlete's lives as if to prove their strength. This also makes her front-page news instead of the girls who won gold and silver.

An article I read on CNN mentioned them briefly, and mentioned quickly that Kim Yu-Na broke the record with her long program and total score, but that was it. I think this is unfair because not only did she break the record, she shattered it; her total was a 228.56 and the record before that was around a 215. To top it off, she had the weight of an entire nation resting on her shoulders. Throughout her performance, the commentators kept saying how anything less than gold would be a disappointment, and when she had come in second at previous competitions she had received emails and letters asking her why she didn't win, rather than congratulating her on a good performance. So why isn't Yu-Na front page news? Probably because her story isn't tragic, and she won't be receiving anymore emails asking why she didn't win. To top it off, Mao Asada, the silver medalist from Japan, was the first women to land two triple axels in a single competition, and I believe the commentators said she was the first person (male or female) to land three. This was not even mentioned in the article.

Why does the media focus on what's going on outside the arena more than the actual performance? And why do you think tragedies get more focus than happy endings?

White Privilege

We recently read in class a piece entitled White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack by Peggy McIntosh, written in 1988. The summary of the piece was broken down into fifty points, which the author believed were privileges that she had because she is white and that someone of color would not have. Some of the points seemed more obvious than others, and some made you stop and think; most of the time, I agreed, though there were a few where I wasn't sure I completely agreed. For example, one of the latter points stated "I can easily find academic courses and institutions which give attention only to people of my race." Maybe it was not true when the article was written, but there are quite a few historically black universities, and it is against the law to deny entry to a college based on race (although I believe this still happens).

However, McIntosh made two very interesting claims, both of which I had never really stopped to think about, but I believe are true. One stated, "I am never asked to speak for all the people of my racial group." I never realized it, but people of minority groups, I feel, are often asked to state how their entire racial group feels about a certain topic. There is no regard for the fact that people's views can differ within these groups. For example, we read an article about women on college campuses today (women are not numerically a minority, but I feel that they are legally a minority), and many of the interviewees made rather broad generalizations about how women handle certain situations or their behavior. Often, the class did not agree with these statements, and we felt that the author should not have used these broad statements as evidence. The white majority, however, is never asked to represent the views of their entire racial group, but why? Another interesting point stated was, "I can chose blemish cover or bandages in 'flesh' color and have them more or less match my skin." I believe that as part of the white majority, I never stopped to think about, or perhaps I never realized that they were labeled 'flesh' color; the fact that they matched my skin color was one of the things I simply took as the way things worked.

What do you think about academics? And do you think that people purposely single out minority groups or give an advantage to the white majority on purpose? Why?

New Trier Referendum

Last night when I got home I found out that the referendum for New Trier had not passed by a significant margin. I was a supporter of the referendum, and have some trouble understanding why some people were so vehemently opposed to the renovation. I can understand if people think that parts of the renovations were unnecessary because I too felt that way about parts of the project. However, I take serious issue with the fact that there are several areas in our school which are not handicap-accessible; I think that this is unacceptable. What if you're in a wheelchair and you want to take AP Art or be a part of an orchestra? Too bad, you can't do that. We get away with breaking all sorts of codes because our school was built before the codes were put in place; that in and of its self goes to show how old the school is. We eat lunch in a 98-year-old cafeteria that is not big enough to hold the student body, and has leaks in the roof. A friend in orchestra recently reported that they had to stop class when the roof started leaking even though they are not on the top floor of the building and it wasn't raining. To me, it is clear that our school needs work. Not to mention, if the referendum had passed we would have received partial government funding for the project, but now that we have voted it down and put it off, the grants will no longer apply making future project more expensive. 
The other fact that severely bothered me is that numerous people I talked to could give no reasons behind their decisions other than the fact that they didn't want construction going on during their senior year and they didn't have any younger siblings so they didn't think it was worth it to have their taxes raised. Those, to me, are horrible excuses.
I know for some people this is still a touchy subject in some regards, and there are obviously plenty of people who were against the project, but I would really be interested in hearing what people think. Also, what were you basing your opinion on? Gut reaction or careful consideration?