регистрация / вход

Shogan Sport Participation Essay Research Paper 22

Shogan, Sport Participation Essay, Research Paper 22) Shogan suggests that sport participants should question and refuse the disciplines of sport that normalize practices that would be considered harmful otherwise, to test the limits of their identities, both inside and outside competition and through hybridity and diversity.

Shogan, Sport Participation Essay, Research Paper

22) Shogan suggests that sport participants should question and refuse the disciplines of sport that normalize practices that would be considered harmful otherwise, to test the limits of their identities, both inside and outside competition and through hybridity and diversity. I disagree yet agree with her solutions to the problem of ethics in sport. In 1952 732 athletes from 30 countries competed in 22 events during the Olympics in oslo, Norway. In 1996 15 thousand athletes and coaches from 197 countries competed in the summer Olympics in Atlanta Georgia, (fact book, USOC). We live in an era of increased intellectual and physical stamina. We see now more than ever that it is encourage to branch out into different fields of study. We aren’t constricted or limited to concentrating on one particular area i.e., double major, major-minor and LER’s. Why should the athlete not be considered able to handle more than one feild of study. In this I mean that thier sport is one field of study while school is another. To suggest otherwise would be to condone the stereotype that, ” athletes are big dumb jocks”. Athetes learn better/equal skills of delegating their time. “Hydrid Athletes” are not only graduating with engineering, pre-med and molecular biology degrees but toward the tops of their classes. These are neither exceptions to nor the rule. More and more athletes are realizing that sport is meerly an instrument to obtain the knowledge. I agree with her to an extent because without questioning certain practices strides could not be made to progress in a positive manner.

23) The privatization of profit is at 100 percent profit to the teams, owners and players. Tax payers shell out the money with only the realization of ticket costs going up and inexpensive seating availability going down. While, with socialization of risk, we are seeing land area being used for entertainment, taxes and revenue being diverted away from where it would an can do the most good with the prospect that the owner may still move the team. Even the die hard fan has to realize that the money could be put to better use. You won’t see corporate welfare recipients homeless or without food but it seems to me that they always have their hands out. But, is it a swindle? We as a society have the power to say no, we are not going to pay. But, we have no true allegiance, what one area won’t pay another will. Thus, ” privatization of profit” and ” socialization of risk” is the norm and will be. There will be no corporate welfare reform to accompany social welfare reform. This may and is a pessimistic point of view, but I see no change happening in my lifetime. For their to be a possibility for change, the powers in charge would have to adopt a sort of communistic frame of mind. That is, the majority of them would have to want to spread the wealth to mean stream society. So, yes the possibility is there, but highly unlikely to happen. Too many owners are in the business for self profit over joy and love of their respective sports.

ОТКРЫТЬ САМ ДОКУМЕНТ В НОВОМ ОКНЕ

ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ  [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя:

Комментарий