Nov 14

American Red Cross and Superstorm Sandy

These two weeks have been hectic for a lot of people on the east coast. Hurricane Sandy has been the biggest headline for the last few weeks. This storm even sidelined the Presidential election. You can may have seen news coverage showing the damage done to New Jersey’s famous shore or parts of New York City especially Long Island and Staten Island. A disaster’s aftermath and recovery is the most difficult to get through. Non-Profit organizations geared towards disaster relief and governmental aid agencies participate in a bigger role during disaster aftermath and recovery. These organizations strive to bring normalcy to the community after the natural disaster by fundraising to provide victims with hot meals, blankets, and other necessities. The biggest disaster relief organization in the United States, American Red Cross has now raised over $131 million dollars for superstorm sandy alone. Yet, many people are criticizing the organization for not reaching the residents in the hardest hit areas. American Red Cross has the resources, then why disparity in its services? Can amount of fundraising and the pace of recovery be correlated?

It is too early to tell if governmental aid agencies or non-profit organization such as the American Red Cross, did not respond correctly. We are still in the beginning weeks of recovery from the storm. However, many residents and local officials have voiced their criticism towards the organization. Staten Island was the one of the hardest hit areas in New York. Local residents in Tottenville, southern portion of the Staten Island, are done hoping to receive any type of aid from any agency especially the American Red Cross. In fact, the residents of the town are cleaning up themselves without any outside help. One American Red Cross truck had come by, however clearly one truck cannot help all twelve thousand residents in this area. After the storm, many residents were having trouble finding the relief trucks or any information about relief. Sometimes these residents would find the truck, however they would return empty handed. The Red Cross did regular post updates on its website, however many people are unable to access the website due to loss of power. The organization regularly relies on social media to find hard hit areas. The American Red Cross should develop a surveillance system to find even the smallest hit areas that need aid. Social Media is not enough especially when there is no power.

But can we be blame the American Red Cross? It depends. This storm covered a huge geographic area, therefore it is difficult to have enough manpower to reach all of the communities as soon as possible. According to the Red Cross, they have sent out all their emergency relief trucks and all of their 5,800 volunteers.

Continue reading

Share

Nov 06

What’s the REAL Status of the Prison System?

Have you noticed any news recently about America’s prison system? Maybe you haven’t, but I have. And what I’ve seen is incredibly contradictory. On one hand you have politicians touting the reforms they’ve made by raising the minimum juvenile age or increasing the number of prison alternatives. But on the other, we see massive overcrowding in prisons and record numbers of people being sent there due to extreme or unfair sentencing laws. There’s a huge disconnect here and I think it’s something that we need to address. Quickly. If we want tosuccessfully reform our system.If you look at particular states, you’d probably think we were successfully reforming our prisons. Even TEXAS, the state most famous for it’s large prison population and pro-prison stances, has demonstrated an effort to reform. In fact, the state is reporting a reduction in prison population for the first time in decades. This is largely due to their rehabilitation programs they’ve recently implemented. They have begun sentencing people to alternative programs rather than just a prison sentence when possible. I think this is a great plan and positive step for the Texas prison system. Similar programs have been implemented in Washington state too. These focus on rehabilitating prisoners and reducing recidivism rates, although mostly in traditional prisons. In both cases, the state government on taking the initiative to try to reform a broken system. And I think they should be applauded.

However, these success stories are not present everywhere. And in fact, some states are moving in the opposite direction, due to policies like the three strikes law and extreme sentencing. In California, under the three strikes law people can get massive prison sentences for something as small as stealing a bike if they have a record. So hundreds, if not thousands of people, end up in prisons for years for minor infractions. Yes, some of them have more violent records and perhaps need longer sentences, but a majority of people sentenced under this law do not. In other cases, you see children getting prison sentences for missing school or writing on sidewalks. Yes, writing on sidewalks. Again, this is an extreme case. But examples of this still exist and I find that disturbing. Why are we creating newer, harsher laws to send more people to prison when there are so many alternatives?

How can we have these two things happening at the same time? Things are not simply evolving differently in different states, they are going in opposite directions. We have some laws sending an increasing number of people to prison and at the same time we have a push to find alternatives. Clearly, there’s a disconnect in what we think the purpose of imprisonment should be. This is something I’ve written about before, but I don’t think I understood the potential ramifications of this disconnect when I wrote about it previously. I still believe rehabilitation should be a central feature of our prison reforms. But these reforms can’t even begin to happen until we have agreement on a vision and process for reform. And as you can see, that simply does not exist right now.

Unfortunately, this is a fairly difficult problem for the average person to solve. We don’t make legislation or coordinate reform efforts. But that doesn’t mean there’s nothing we can do. In fact, people in California are voting today on a ballot initiative to reform the three strikes law. They did this through a community effort, so obviously it’s possible for us to fight back. We can form grassroots campaigns to support rehabilitation centers. We can write letters to local and state leaders supporting reform. And I’m sure there’s more we can do. I’d love to hear other recommendations. Many people in prison don’t have a voice, we need to speak for them.

Share

Nov 05

How to Market a Female Athlete?

We all know about the icons of women’s sports. There’s Lisa Leslie, Mia Hamm, and the Williams sisters. Natalie Coughlin, Jennie Finch, and Candace Parker. All are female athletes who have successfully navigated both the playing and the marketing field. They are the select few who have managed to thrive in both environments. However, marketing female athletes has long been a challenge in the sporting world, which is still struggling to bridge the gap between femininity and athleticsm. Agents and advertisers alike are often stuck with the eternal question – how does one market a female athlete?

Marketers have realized that it’s easy to sell the blonde, a.k.a. Maria Sharapova (the highest paid female athlete in the world for the past eight years) and the beautiful, a.k.a. Danica Patrick (Yahoo’s most searched athlete, male or female last year). It’s Marketing 101. Beauty sells.

Do a quick Google search of “most famous female athletes” and the third highest hit is “Sex Sells: Female Athletes Who Know How to Market Themselves”. The fourth hit? “100 Hottest Female Athletes of All Time”. Not exactly what I mean by “famous”, but it’s the sad truth. Sex appeal sells, especially when it comes to female athletes. In the words of sports industry consultant, Marc Ganis, “never underestimate the importance of physical beauty to an athlete’s endorsement opportunities”.

It’s also easy to sell female athletes who are defined by their role in the family. Everybody loves to see athletes in the role of “loyal girlfriend” or “loving mother”. Society accepts such marketing because it fits in with traditional gender roles. It allows athletes to show their softer side, and allows them to be defined by their femininity first, and their athleticism second.

However, what can marketers do for those not considered particularly “feminine”? For the ones considered to be “tomboys” or “manly”, or even just those who possess particularly male characteristics, like aggressiveness and strength? How to deal with those athletes, who might be among the best of the world, yet don’t fit in with the traditional gender roles?

It all comes down to marketability; Americans won’t forget you if a company can sell you. But four decades since Title IX and 16 years since the launch of the WNBA, organizations are still figuring out how to attract consumers by marketing female pro athletes, especially those who might not conform to traditional notions of femininity.   -Fortune Magazine

Case in point: Remember the story about U.S. weightlifter, Sarah Robles? How she was ranked as the best American woman in the super heavyweight division coming into the Olympics, but was barely getting by financially due to a lack of endorsements and her general anonymity in the sporting world? Robles had to depend on a $400 monthly stipend from U.S.A. Weightlifting, along with help from her family, friends, and food pantries just to get by. The problem was that she didn’t fit the stereotype – she wasn’t a size two athlete, with blonde hair and blue eyes. She didn’t fit the mold. And therefore, she didn’t get the endorsement deals. While Robles is an extreme case, she highlights the dilemma that many female athletes face. How does one promote oneself when one isn’t able to “fit the mold”? Female athletes in all types of sports are dealing with the fact that success on the field doesn’t necessarily translate to success from a marketing standpoint.

Something I do like? Advertising campaigns like Nike’s “Voices” commercial this summer, which highlights the novel idea that women can indeed be athletes. Same goes for a Gatorade ad campaign introduced earlier this year, featuring soccer player Abby Wambach. In the commercial, Wambach is not framed as highly sexualized, or even particularly feminine – she’s simply portrayed as a fierce competitor. A refreshing take on the typical role of female athletes in advertising. Of course, it’s important to note that the majority of Gatorade’s executives are female. Funny how that works out.

Share

Oct 25

Why Girls’ Education is a Good Thing

On October 10th, Malala Yousafzai was shot in the head by Taliban gunmen while she was on a bus on her way to her home from school. You may have heard this incident either online or on the news. Malala Yousafzai is a young fourteen year old advocate for girl’s education. November 10th, 2012 is officially declared a global day of action for Malala and for millions of girls.

Malala Yousafzai is from the northwestern Swat district in Pakistan. In her district, the Taliban edict had banned and condemned girl’s education. Many schools were burned down or closed by the militant group. Despite the ban, Malala still attended school to learn. She begun as a young activist at age eleven, and she had blogged under a pen name for BCC News sharing her experiences living under the ban. Her dream is to see all thirty-two million girls in her home country of Pakistan to go to school and be educated. Fortunately, Malala survived the assassination attempt. She is currently recovering and is receiving medical treatment in the United Kingdom under tight security. This incident has opened everyone’s’ eyes from top leaders to activists. People are around the globe are finally discussing and supporting girls’ right for education. Malala Yousafzai has been known around the world for her determination to learn and to receive an education in a developing country. Now, she has become the symbol of the movement to push for girls’ education in all developing countries.

It is surprising that even in the twenty-first century, we are still fighting for education to be right, not a privilege for the few. Why is it such a problem that girls are in school and learning? That they are improving their families’ futures? I really do not see any negative consequences associated with learning how to read, calculating equations, or writing. Educating girls is not only beneficial for the girl, but her entire community benefits from it. Here are my top three reasons why girls’ education is a good thing:

Continue reading

Share

Oct 24

Who is the “Real” Bully?

There is a huge discrepancy between the message of morality and Christianity that the American Family Association  professes and what they practice. Recently in the news Bryan Fischer, an AFA spokesperson, harshly criticized the Southern Poverty Law center (SPL) “mix it up” lunch day program. He stated that the “mix it up” lunch program is like “poisoned Halloween candy.” His criticism resulted in the withdrawal of 200 schools from the “mix it up” lunch program. The AFA states that the “mix it up” lunch day endorses the acceptance of homosexuality in public schools, elementary schools and junior high schools. They have continued this tirade although SPL have emphasized that the “mix it up” lunch event is aimed at highlighting the overall issue of bullying in general. Although, the AFA is an organization that prides itself on exposing anti-Christian messages in the media and society.  The targeting of an organization that is aimed towards the prevention of bullying and the moral development of young people raises the question of who is the real bully in this situation.

The SPL- “Mix it up” lunch program

The SPL “mix it up” lunch program which started eleven years ago is s designed to teach tolerance, break up clichés and prevent bullying. The lunch program is scheduled for October 30th with 2,580 schools signed on to participate. The “mix it up” program encourages students in schools across America to intermingle and get to know peers with whom they would normally not interact. This program is a jump -off program that launches other respect and anti- bullying programs throughout the school year. A program which even for a day allows students to interact, and intermingle outside of their cliques teaches students that they can make a difference in the world around them.

The attitude and bigotry expressed by the AFA towards an anti-bullying program aimed at empowering students, is a clear indication of intolerance and hate in our society under the disguise of Christianity. The October 30th lunch day, although being marred by the American Family Association (AFA) accusations, is the perfect teaching opportunity to educate youth about the bigotry or intolerance in our society. This situation shines a light on the Continue reading

Share

Oct 23

Libya’s Anniversary

 Brief Editorial Note: Some of you may have noticed that I’ve been absent from Not Enough Good for the past few weeks. I suspended my posts so that I could move to London and settle into my new schedule as an International Relations graduate student, and now that I’ve (mostly) done so I will be posting once a month.

This past Saturday, October 20th, marks the one-year anniversary of Libyan dictator Muammar 

Gaddafi’s death, so I’m sure you can guess what this will be about: how Libyans are dealing with this anniversary and how the country has fared in the past year. And, just as a warning, many of the links in this post will contain graphic images, as is the nature of articles discussing Gaddafi’s death.

Libyans have been celebrating Gaddafi’s death this weekend, particularly in wake of the rumors that Gaddafi’s youngest son and militia leader, Khamis, has been declared dead (that link also contains a short video clip of Libyans gathered in Martyrs’ Square and discussing what this new turn of events means for them). The youngest Gaddafi was reportedly killed on Saturday during fighting between pro-Gaddafi forces and supporters of the new Libyan government in the town of Bani Walid, a pro-Gaddafi stronghold, though it is unclear whether he died during the fight or if he was fatally wounded and died after being captured. This is also not the first time Khamis has been declared dead, hence the “rumors” rather than outright statement of fact; Khamis was declared dead at least 4 other times since March of 2011, and in fact just three days before this latest death rumor Human Rights Watch released a report in which they stated that Khamis had been killed on August 29th, 2011, though his body was never found. Some have suggested this death rumor was started to divert attention from the shelling of Bani Walid, as the pro-Gaddafi forces in Bani Walid had complained that they are being wiped off the map and a protest was held outside the parliament in support of the town.

News of the death and the violent clashes in Bani Walid have largely overshadowed any celebrations or demonstrations that may have occurred to mark the anniversary of Gaddafi’s death, at least in the news, so it’s difficult to say how Libyans are feeling after their first year without Gaddafi. What is clear, though, is that the country has been in turmoil the whole year and seems no closer to peace than it was. Elections were held for the first time in July, but the new parliament remains divided and unable to agree on a new government. Bani Walid has been a contentious issue for some time now, as have the other pro-Gaddafi strongholds, including the town of Zintan, where a powerful militia is protecting Saif al-Islam, another one of Gaddafi’s sons. Criminal gangs have been cutting down trees to sell the timber, schools are struggling, the stock exchange has almost no activity, and the internet is quite shoddy. When Gaddafi was in charge the only organization not controlled by the state was the Boy Scouts, and therefore few people have any idea how to organize and govern the country.

The rough year has not dampened Libyan optimism for the future, however. The transition has been difficult, yes, but the country was a dictatorship for four decades, so it’s no surprise that it’s been a struggle to pull things together now. The fear and repression of the Gaddafi regime is over, and most people were happy to see him (and his family) go and hope that the country becomes a successful unitary state. Hopefully the next year will bring some of the changes that the country desperately needs, and hopefully things will continue to improve after that. There’s a lot to be done, for sure: building institutions, a legal system, a successful government, the list goes on and on. The country seems to be teetering on the verge of civil war, and many of the major cities are acting more like city states than regional centers. Still, Libyans now have a sense of hope and optimism for the future that was lacking under Gaddafi’s regime.

Share

Oct 22

What About the Democratic Republic of the Congo?

Let’s talk about the Democratic Republic of the Congo. What about it exactly, you may be asking? Good question. Because up until last week, I had never even heard of the country mentioned in the media before. That’s before I learned that it was the location of the deadliest conflict in the world since World War II.

There has been widespread violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) since the mid 1990s (for reasons too complicated to fully explain in this short article), responsible for the deaths of at least five million people over the course of the last sixteen years. To put it in perspective, the average loss of life in the DRC currently is equivalent to September 11th occurring every two days, in a country that is only one-sixth the size of our own. So why exactly had I never heard of it before?

Technically speaking, the civil war is over. A peace agreement was signed in 2002. General elections were held for the first time in 2006. But the real problems? They’re far from over. Since reaching “peace” in 2002, living conditions have actually worsened in the DRC and are now among the worst in the world, according to the Index of Human Development. It’s estimated that approximately 45,000 people die each month due to conflict related causes (primary hunger and disease). Hundreds of thousands of Congolese have been displaced and rendered homeless due to the conflict. Around 80% of the population survives on less than $2 per day. So once again, I asked myself, why hadn’t I heard of the conflict before?

“Of the three broadcast nightlies, ABC World News gave the Congo the most coverage over those five years [2004-2008] —with nine stories total, or an average of less than two per year. NBC Nightly News covered the country six times and CBS Evening News brought up the rear with its single segment in five years. The PBS NewsHour did slightly better, with 20 mentions, or an average of four per year”. –Congo Ignored, Not Forgotten (Julie Hollar)

That’s a whopping sixteen stories total about the DRC on major nightly news reports (ABC/NBC/CBS) over the span of five years. No wonder I had never heard of it before.

My goal is not to paint the Democratic Republic of the Congo as some war-laden country, desperately in need of saving from the West. That’s not why I’m writing this article, and that’s not why I think it should be plastered all over the news. My concern lies in the simple fact that I never even knew the conflict existed until it came to my attention in one of my classes this semester.

I believe that we have a responsibility – as citizens of the world – to know when such violence is occurring around the globe, that threaten the well-being, safety, and security of our fellow citizens.

I believe that journalists have a responsibility, a social responsibility, to report on such atrocities – and therefore ensure that they are brought to the public’s attention.   

While that vision might come off as optimistic, idealistic, or in some people’s eyes – simply naive – I truly hope this to be the case. It is the responsibility of the journalist to open up people’s eyes to the events taking place both in their local communities, and around the world.  It is the responsibility of the journalist to keep the public informed on such events, and to begin to unravel the complexities, which surround such political and social conflicts. For news editors to assume that “no one is interested in Africa” simply because A. “the situation must be hopeless” and B. “therefore defying any chance of a solution” is both misguided and unethical.

Convince local media outlets that you do care about humanitarian interests, both locally and around the world. Write letters to the editor of your local paper, leave comments on online articles, tweet at your favorite television stations – utilize the technology at your fingertips to its fullest potential in order to voice your concern about the lack of coverage in the DRC… and wherever else such conflicts may be taking place (because let’s be real – you probably haven’t even heard of them yet).

Share

Oct 19

Are Schools Responsible When Bullying Results in Teen Suicide?

The increase in teen suicide associated with cases of bullying has resulted in lawsuits being filed against some schools. Messages left behind by suicide victims through social media, or letters chronicling their prolonged and continuous bullying while in the care of school officials, have prompted blame against some schools. Everyday, it is estimated that 160,000 kids nationwide stay home from school due to fear of being bullied.  While, some research shows a correlation between various types of bullying and suicidal risks, there is no definitive statistics that determines that teen suicide is directly attributed to bullying. However, the increase in cases involving bullying, and its relation to suicide has emerged as a public health issue. Aside, from accidents and homicide, the Centers for Disease control reports that suicide is the third leading cause of death in young people between 15-24, and the fourth leading cause of death in children between 10 -14. Teen suicide is among the leading cause of death among teenagers in the United States and around the world.  The main question is: Are school officials responsible when bullying in their schools result in suicide? My answer is: they are responsible to an extent.

School officials are “somewhat responsible” when bullying in their school is so severe and excessive as to possibly result in suicide. This is because they are the “gate keepers” and are responsible for the holistic development of their entire student body. The climate that a school wishes to promote in terms of moral code and conduct will be embodied by the student body; if school officials actively lead and exemplify theses codes. Schools do have a responsibility to address the issue of bullying and educating students towards the intolerance of behaviors indicative of severe bullying, disparagement, discrimination and bigotry. Most instances related to suicide related deaths have been associated with prolong, excessive continuous bullying. Schools in which these episodes have occurred imply that the school has “dropped the ball.” It also suggests that the school in question does not promote an environment that is concerned with the fostering and development of young people as responsible, social respectful beings.

Schools are not only responsible for providing a safe environment from possible external threats to student in their care. It is their primary responsibility to cultivate and create a climate that encourages, and promotes intolerance in their students towards behaviors that can be deemed as bullying or derogatory against others. Schools should strive to create an atmosphere that will stifle not just bullying; but instill in their students a sense of responsibility to recognize and raise questions about behaviors that result in the discrimination and degradation of others. Schools are responsible for setting not only high academic standards for students, but also instilling in students moral standards and encouraging the practice of respect towards each other as social beings.

Schools should address bullying not just as a single entity concerning an individual, but treat it as a teaching opportunity towards the development of a socially well adjusted student body. Schools should aim to educate through guidance, practice, and facilitation. This will create individuals who will not only refrain from such behaviors but find it unacceptable in others. Students will be quick to correct, educate, and question such behaviors in their peers, promoting growth and social change. Schools which think that bullying is an isolated event and think that academic achievement surpasses the education of moral development are missing the opportunity to guide the minds, and actions of tomorrows men and women.

Share

Oct 17

Celebs Gone Good Part Two

Celebrities can create great publicity about an issue because they have the power to persuade people to take action towards a social cause. A few weeks ago, I wrote about Emma Stone and Andrew Garfield, celebrities that used an unique opportunity to promote their social good causes. Many celebrities are often happy to use their fame to bring awareness to a cause.
Sometimes celebrities that are very passionate about a cause, may decide to start a non-profit organization. Celebrities such as Lady Gaga, Matt Damon, Ben Affleck, and Brad Pitt are examples of celebrities that created their own charities. The main question is: Are these celebrity charities effective?  Do they create sustainable impact? My answer: It depends.
Sometimes passion and fame cannot be enough to successfully and effectively run a non-profit organization. It requires much more work and effort.

Recently in the New York Times, it was reported that Wyclef Jean’s charity, Yele was shut down. The charity was created to help raise money for the aftermath of the earthquake in Haiti.
It was reported that there was no financial proof that the money reached the targeted population and the charity was suffering from debts. The charity officially closed this summer. As you can tell, the millions of dollars raised to help with the aftermath of the earthquake did not reach to the people of Haiti. Apparently, Yele spent over nine million dollars for travel, salaries, fees, office and warehouse expenses. A similar celebrity charity, Sean Penn’s J/P Haitian relief organization only spent 1.3 million dollars on these costs. You can clearly see the discrepancy between the numbers. Similarly, Kanye West created his own non-profit organization to help decrease the number of high school dropouts in the country by providing under-served youth access to music production programs. However, it was reported none of the money donated went directly to the cause. Instead, the foundation spent over five hundred thousand dollars in salaries and various other overhead costs. Finally, Madonna’s charity Raising Malawi met a similar fate. Her organization strived to build schools for impoverished girls in Malawi. Because of management and financial problems, there was no progress for over six years. In fact, her organization wasted about 3.8 million dollars on a school that will never be built. The superstar singer had to to hand over responsibility of building and running the schools to other community organizations. Two of the main reasons why these charities failed was because of horrible management and the lack of good financial bookkeeping.

However, not every celebrity charity is a failure. It all depends on the management and the celebrity. There are many celebrities out there that are running successful charities. For example, Matt Damon’s water.org is a very successful charity and has made real effective progress. Instead of directly relying on others, Matt Damon has made himself an expert in his own cause and made this his second career. He gives out annual reports regarding the progress at conferences, and he discusses issues with the people he is helping. He is overall very involved in his organization in almost everything. In order to actually successfully achieve a goal, you need time and knowledge.

Celebrities do not always need to start a non-profit organization just to help a cause. If they do, it is important that these celebrities actually focus on their organization fully, rather than relying on others running the organization for them. It would be better if they can support organizations that already focus on the same cause. Being a cheerleader for non-profit organization, can be more beneficial and will help make a better impact. Sometimes, passion is not only enough. Time, expertise, and dedication are very necessary as well.

Share

Oct 16

Breast Cancer Awareness Month: Who’s Really Benefitting?

As I’m sure you know, it’s breast cancer awareness month! There’s pink everywhere. Charity runs every weekend. And information about breast cancer in every facet of the media. Which is a huge change from 20 years ago when many people were too embarrassed to even talk about the disease. Since my mother is a breast cancer survivor, I’ve always been a huge supporter of this month and never really thought to question it. However, I recently read an article attacking one business’s use of the breast cancer awareness campaign to increase its earnings profits. So I decided it was probably worth my while to look into the details behind this movement and see what impact itreally has. And here’s what I found out:
National breast cancer awareness monthwas founded in 1985 as a partnership between the American Cancer Society and Imperial Chemistry Industries (a lead producer of anti-breast cancer drugs) to promote breast cancer awareness and mammography specifically as a method of early detection. Estee Lauder joined the movement in 1993 and created the pink ribbon that we all now associate with breast cancer awareness. Since then, the movement has become an international phenomenon and helps raise millions of dollars each year to help fund cancer research.

 

Clearly, this seems like an overall happy and positive situation. However, there have been reports of certain groups taking advantage of the popularity of this Think Pink movement. The NFL is one such example. If you watch an NFL games, you’ve noticed all the pink the players wear in the month of October. I mean some players get REALLY into it, which is of course entertaining. Is there anything better than grown men running around hitting each other while covered in pink? But the players aren’t the only ones sporting pink attire. The owners have gotten in on the action too. They sell jerseys, hats, player paraphernalia, basically all the normal gear, but this time in pink. Great idea right? Unfortunately, only 5% of the proceeds from these sales will go to breast cancer awareness and research groups. The NFL KEEPS the rest of the money as profits. They’re taking something good and altruistic and turning it into yet another money-making scheme.

But don’t get too down yet. The movement really does seem to be working. Women feel more comfortable discussing the disease. People are more knowledgeable about how to give self exams. Which means they’re catching the disease earlier so they can really fight. That, maybe more than anything, is what can save a woman’s life. So all this awareness actually is having a positive impact on women’s lives. And not even just women. Literally everyone these days gets involved with the movement. Men, women, children, you name. You even have celebrities traveling the world making speeches and spreading the message beyond the United States. So we have all this positive energy and effort going into this wonderful cause to help save women’s lives.

Now we have to assess the entire situation. Should we be angry like some women are with the NFL? Should we not support their particular efforts in the breast cancer awareness campaign? Should our entire view of the movement be tainted by these businessmen? Does that mean we have to start questioning other businesses that get involved with the movement? I’m not sure Continue reading

Share