The past few weeks have been very interesting for runners of all kinds. An athlete who could not run was carried. An athlete who can run was finally told he could. And in politics, Hillary Clinton was barraged with yet more calls to stop running.
Over 200,000 viewers enjoyed the YouTube video of Western Oregon University athlete Sara Tucholsky’s first home run. In a game against Central Washington University, Tucholsky hit the ball over the fence. At first base, she tore a ligament in her knee. When the umpire mistakenly ruled that one of her own team members could not run the bases for her, two Central Washington players picked her up and carried her around the bases. All over the blogosphere, Mallory Holtman and Liz Wallace are heralded as heroes for the selfless act that cost them the game but won them a place in our hearts -- and an entry on Wikipedia.
In other sports victories, double amputee Oscar Pistorius won the right to compete for a spot in the Olympics. Pistorius was born without fibulas (the long thin bones that run from knee to ankle.) Surgeons amputated both his legs below the knee when he was eleven months old. Running on special carbon-fiber blades, Pistorius holds the 400-meter Paralympic word record at 46.56 seconds.
Pistorius is not quite there yet; the qualifying requirement for the 400-meter event in Beijing is 45.55 seconds. The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) had barred Pistorius from all able-bodied competition including the Olympics, considering his carbon-fiber running blades a “mechanical advantage” over other runners. Their fear was not that he would fail, but that he might succeed.
If Pistorius makes the cut, he will not be the first Paralympian to qualify for the Olympics. Natalie du Toit, a swimmer from South Africa, qualified for the 2008 Olympics on May 3rd. Du Toit was already competing internationally when she lost her left leg in a motorcycle accident. Du Toit swims without a prosthetic, so fairness was never questioned. A poem on her wall states, “It is not a disgrace not to reach for the stars, But it is a disgrace not to have stars to reach for.”
Like Du Toit, Hillary Clinton is a person who is not easily contented by merely having stars out there. Both women are driven to win. In either case, a win represents far more than a personal victory. Clinton is hardly disabled in the political arena – indeed, America would be hard-pressed to come up with any candidate who is sharper, more well-known, or more qualified to lead our country than Hillary Clinton. Yet, in the political arena, merely being female is still a gigantic perception liability, almost like an athlete competing without a limb.
Throughout Clinton’s campaign, this column has recorded and analyzed a steady stream of media misogyny used to smear the senator and former first lady. While much of the onslaught is presented as humor, it is notable that comic references to Clinton’s sex are invariably negative, and frequently downright hateful.
Since Obama first became a serious challenger, pundits have called for Clinton to drop out of the race. As Clinton’s campaign noted, the drop out cries followed Clinton’s victories, not Obama’s. Clinton had become like the runner on carbon-fiber blades, and much of society wanted to deny her the right to even be a contender – not because she could not win, but because she just might.
Obama now commands a strong lead, but a Clinton nomination is still mathematically possible. Why should the Democratic nomination be ended prematurely? Some Democrats want to end it so the Democratic Party can unify against John McCain. Yet polls show that Clinton is a stronger candidate against McCain. Democrats may shoot themselves in the foot by trying to silence their best candidate.
Quitting now would not only mean giving up the nomination. It would also represent an enormous loss to women everywhere. What woman has not been pressured with these same tactics to “just go home?” Month after month, women continue to hear that they cannot “have it all” (i.e. family and career), even as the majority of American women continue to do just that. We are inundated with magazine articles, Internet essays and news items telling us that women are “opting out” and just going home in large numbers. The facts prove otherwise, but it does not stop the media from feeding the guilt complex carried by working mothers and discouraging us with claims that we cannot succeed.
Being female is still a disadvantage in many fields. Where women have made inroads, they still do not receive the same wages and honors accorded to men. The more education and training a woman has, the less likely she is to earn as much as her peers. The wage gap between male and female physicians, for example, is much greater than the wage gap between male and female cashiers.
Oddly, many feminists are among those calling for Hillary to pull out of the race. The Democratic contest has opened a generational divide between older and younger feminists. Younger feminists are apt to say that the gender of the candidate is completely immaterial, so long as he or she supports feminism.
Older feminists recognize a troubling historical parallel. In the 1800’s, the feminist movement was strong and suffragettes were closer than ever to their goal of votes for women. Many suffragettes were also abolitionists, and were willing to temporarily lay aside the cause of votes for women in order to fight slavery. After the Civil War, the feminist movement spent a great deal of energy and resources fighting for the rights of black men, including the right to vote. As a result, black men received the right to vote fifty years before women.
At a campaign stop in Kentucky, Hillary Clinton responds to those who urge her to quit. “You don’t stop democracy in its tracks. You don’t tell some states that they can’t vote and other states that have already had the opportunity that they’re somehow more important. I want everybody to vote and everybody to help pick our next president.”
So run for all you’re worth. Run in your dark pantsuit. Run on your carbon-fiber blades. Run till the wind in your ears drowns out the incessant whining of those who tell you to go home. They’re only afraid that somehow, against the odds, you just might win.
Monday, May 19, 2008
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Environmentalism on a shoestring
How to save the planet without busting your budget
Magazines and other media often paint environmentalism as a more expensive lifestyle choice. Often they use the “green” mantra to promote companies who pay for advertising. Every product that is manufactured (even if it is “green”) requires energy to produce and fuel to distribute. Each of these products also creates its own waste stream. Instead of buying more products, consumers need to look at ways to use current resources more wisely. Happily, such choices are easier on the pocketbook as well as the planet.
Take bottled water, for instance. Bottled water is increasingly popular because it seems somehow “safer” than tap water. However, as much as 40% of commercial bottled water is filled straight from the tap. Bottled water generally contains the same level of pharmaceuticals and contaminants as the water flowing from the tap. In fact, federal government standards and safety testing requirements are actually higher for municipalities than for bottlers. The plastic bottles themselves are also unhealthy, containing chemicals that have been linked to increases in cancer. So skip the bottled water and drink from the tap.
If you live in an area without drinkable water, opt for large containers rather than single-servings. This reduces waste and plastic exposure. Another tip: Do not refill and reuse water bottles. Containers that have been deemed safe (so far) for one-time use leach out more chemicals with repeated use, particularly if you wash them with hot water or in the dishwasher. The safest water bottles are made from metal.
Bisphenol A (BPA) is the chemical in plastic receiving the most scrutiny at this time. BPA has been shown to mimic estrogen in mammals. BPA exposure causes cancers and other dysfunctions in the sex organs of laboratory animals. In 2003-2004, the CDC found BPA in the urine of 93% of adults and children tested.
Bottle-fed babies are at greatest risk, since most baby bottles contain BPA. Heating the bottles in the microwave, boiling them, or washing them in the dishwasher increases leaching.
Canada has already banned baby bottles made with BPA. Here in America, Wal-Mart plans to phase out the bottles slowly by not restocking them. Until 2009, Wal-Mart will continue selling the contaminated bottles in spite of known health risks to babies.
As with bottled water, there is a way to feed babies that costs less and is healthier, too. Mothers who nurse their babies at the breast provide excellent nutrition from a clean, safe package. By contrast, formula offers only substandard nutrition in a chemically-tainted container. Formula costs $1,500 to $2,800 per year (depending on brand), and in many cases that cost is on the shoulders of taxpayers. In addition to the cost of the formula and the tainted bottles, increased healthcare costs make formula-feeding a far more expensive option.
Formula feeding is also an ecological disaster. Dairy production for formula destroys land and pollutes air and water. Artificial feeding also crowds our landfills with 550 million formula cans (that’s enough cans to circle the earth one and a half times, if stacked end to end). The plastic bottles and nipples take 200-450 years to disintegrate.
So ditch the bottled water, and the baby bottles, too. Here are a few other tricks to reduce environmental impact and save money:
Cut down on plastic shopping bags. Think of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, a floating island of plastic debris twice as big as Texas. The debris is particularly dangerous for birds and sea turtles. Turtles mistake floating plastic bags for jellyfish. Birds swallow tiny bits of broken-down plastic, which they cannot pass or break down. As plastic fills the stomach, no room remains for digesting real food. The animals literally starve to death. According to Greenpeace, at least 267 marine species have suffered from ingestion or entanglement of such debris.
Ireland, Uganda and most recently China have all banned free plastic shopping bags, recognizing the enormous environmental impact the bags create. The Chinese ban is particularly significant in light of China’s reputation as a producer of lead toys and unprecedented carbon emissions. The Chinese ban alone saves approximately 37 million barrels of oil.
Small families may be able to get by with reusable shopping bags. I have not found this to be practical for our large family, but I request that items like milk, juice, and laundry detergent be placed in my cart without a bag. Like many families, we reuse plastic shopping bags for small trashcans, stinky messes, or wet bathing suits. Some grocery stores collect and recycle plastic bags, and many still offer paper bags, which are easier to recycle.
Another way to help save the planet is to use non-toxic household cleaners. Clean the mirrors with vinegar-and-water and old newspapers. Try Borax or baking soda for scrubbing. These products are cheaper, more environmentally-friendly, and also safer for any pets or toddlers who may find them in your cupboard.
Use half the recommended laundry detergent, and skip the fabric softener altogether. For stubborn stains, break out the Borax for a bit of scrubbing. An outdoor clothesline saves energy and results in whiter whites. Even if line-drying is not practical all the time, use it when it is. Every kilowatt we forgo prolongs the life of the world we live in.
Buy locally-grown produce. In the summer time, fruit stands abound in town squares and on rural back roads. Produce from stands is likely to be fresher and have fewer chemicals, whereas grocery store produce often comes from other countries, is heavily sprayed and/or waxed, and is picked before it ripens. Eating locally-grown produce reduces America’s dependence on foreign oil, saves fossil fuels and reduces greenhouse gasses associated with trucking food to chain stores. Patronizing local businesses is also a win-win for the community.
Buy second-hand. When you purchased used goods, you not only save money, you also prevent that item for ending up in the landfill and you prevent a similar item from being produced. Second-hand items also lack the packaging that creates so much unnecessary waste. Clothing and furniture are our favorite second-hand items.
To look at some of the magazine articles and websites on environmentalism, one would think that “going green” must involve an enormous shopping trip. In practice, families often find that the most sensible environmental solutions actually save money.
Magazines and other media often paint environmentalism as a more expensive lifestyle choice. Often they use the “green” mantra to promote companies who pay for advertising. Every product that is manufactured (even if it is “green”) requires energy to produce and fuel to distribute. Each of these products also creates its own waste stream. Instead of buying more products, consumers need to look at ways to use current resources more wisely. Happily, such choices are easier on the pocketbook as well as the planet.
Take bottled water, for instance. Bottled water is increasingly popular because it seems somehow “safer” than tap water. However, as much as 40% of commercial bottled water is filled straight from the tap. Bottled water generally contains the same level of pharmaceuticals and contaminants as the water flowing from the tap. In fact, federal government standards and safety testing requirements are actually higher for municipalities than for bottlers. The plastic bottles themselves are also unhealthy, containing chemicals that have been linked to increases in cancer. So skip the bottled water and drink from the tap.
If you live in an area without drinkable water, opt for large containers rather than single-servings. This reduces waste and plastic exposure. Another tip: Do not refill and reuse water bottles. Containers that have been deemed safe (so far) for one-time use leach out more chemicals with repeated use, particularly if you wash them with hot water or in the dishwasher. The safest water bottles are made from metal.
Bisphenol A (BPA) is the chemical in plastic receiving the most scrutiny at this time. BPA has been shown to mimic estrogen in mammals. BPA exposure causes cancers and other dysfunctions in the sex organs of laboratory animals. In 2003-2004, the CDC found BPA in the urine of 93% of adults and children tested.
Bottle-fed babies are at greatest risk, since most baby bottles contain BPA. Heating the bottles in the microwave, boiling them, or washing them in the dishwasher increases leaching.
Canada has already banned baby bottles made with BPA. Here in America, Wal-Mart plans to phase out the bottles slowly by not restocking them. Until 2009, Wal-Mart will continue selling the contaminated bottles in spite of known health risks to babies.
As with bottled water, there is a way to feed babies that costs less and is healthier, too. Mothers who nurse their babies at the breast provide excellent nutrition from a clean, safe package. By contrast, formula offers only substandard nutrition in a chemically-tainted container. Formula costs $1,500 to $2,800 per year (depending on brand), and in many cases that cost is on the shoulders of taxpayers. In addition to the cost of the formula and the tainted bottles, increased healthcare costs make formula-feeding a far more expensive option.
Formula feeding is also an ecological disaster. Dairy production for formula destroys land and pollutes air and water. Artificial feeding also crowds our landfills with 550 million formula cans (that’s enough cans to circle the earth one and a half times, if stacked end to end). The plastic bottles and nipples take 200-450 years to disintegrate.
So ditch the bottled water, and the baby bottles, too. Here are a few other tricks to reduce environmental impact and save money:
Cut down on plastic shopping bags. Think of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, a floating island of plastic debris twice as big as Texas. The debris is particularly dangerous for birds and sea turtles. Turtles mistake floating plastic bags for jellyfish. Birds swallow tiny bits of broken-down plastic, which they cannot pass or break down. As plastic fills the stomach, no room remains for digesting real food. The animals literally starve to death. According to Greenpeace, at least 267 marine species have suffered from ingestion or entanglement of such debris.
Ireland, Uganda and most recently China have all banned free plastic shopping bags, recognizing the enormous environmental impact the bags create. The Chinese ban is particularly significant in light of China’s reputation as a producer of lead toys and unprecedented carbon emissions. The Chinese ban alone saves approximately 37 million barrels of oil.
Small families may be able to get by with reusable shopping bags. I have not found this to be practical for our large family, but I request that items like milk, juice, and laundry detergent be placed in my cart without a bag. Like many families, we reuse plastic shopping bags for small trashcans, stinky messes, or wet bathing suits. Some grocery stores collect and recycle plastic bags, and many still offer paper bags, which are easier to recycle.
Another way to help save the planet is to use non-toxic household cleaners. Clean the mirrors with vinegar-and-water and old newspapers. Try Borax or baking soda for scrubbing. These products are cheaper, more environmentally-friendly, and also safer for any pets or toddlers who may find them in your cupboard.
Use half the recommended laundry detergent, and skip the fabric softener altogether. For stubborn stains, break out the Borax for a bit of scrubbing. An outdoor clothesline saves energy and results in whiter whites. Even if line-drying is not practical all the time, use it when it is. Every kilowatt we forgo prolongs the life of the world we live in.
Buy locally-grown produce. In the summer time, fruit stands abound in town squares and on rural back roads. Produce from stands is likely to be fresher and have fewer chemicals, whereas grocery store produce often comes from other countries, is heavily sprayed and/or waxed, and is picked before it ripens. Eating locally-grown produce reduces America’s dependence on foreign oil, saves fossil fuels and reduces greenhouse gasses associated with trucking food to chain stores. Patronizing local businesses is also a win-win for the community.
Buy second-hand. When you purchased used goods, you not only save money, you also prevent that item for ending up in the landfill and you prevent a similar item from being produced. Second-hand items also lack the packaging that creates so much unnecessary waste. Clothing and furniture are our favorite second-hand items.
To look at some of the magazine articles and websites on environmentalism, one would think that “going green” must involve an enormous shopping trip. In practice, families often find that the most sensible environmental solutions actually save money.
Jeannie Babb Taylor
May, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
