Monday, December 03, 2012
Not what you think: Sororities
10085615 COMS369-L02
When I say the word “sorority” what comes to mind? Most people would say something along the lines of crazy white girls drinking and partying with frats, hazing rituals or initiation ceremonies that end up with sacrificing a goat. Now how many of you know that we have sororities on our campus? Well, we do and I am a part of one called Alpha Gamma Delta - and joining it was one of the best decisions I have made in my life. I am sorry to tell you that a sorority is not like how it is depicted in TV shows and movies. I do not go to parties with the fraternities, we have strict no hazing policies and goat sacrificing does not take place. I am not here to try to persuade you to join a sorority because the truth is, a sorority is not for everyone and it is up to you to decide if it is right for you. I am here to tell you what a sorority truly is and more specifically about my experience and how it has changed my life.
The word sorority comes from the latin word ‘soror’ meaning sister. A sorority is an organization of women students at a college or university, usually designated by Greek letters. A chapter is a campus group of a national organization. My sorority, Alpha Gamma Delta, AGD for short, was founded in 1904. Each campus sorority is called a chapter, and my chapter is designated Delta Nu. The Delta Nu chapter was installed at the University of Calgary in 1983. Sororities on campus are guided by a governing body called the National Panhellenic Conference who overseas over 26 sororities nationally. The National Panhellenic Conference exists to promote values and ethics in women's fraternities and encourages all members to be active and responsible leaders in their respective communities.
I first found out about sororities from my biological sister. She was a part of AGD when she went to UofC and not only was she in a sorority but she was also on the Students Union for three years. She attributed AGD as an important group for her to learn leadership and social skills. I was interested to see what it was all about so I decided to go through recruitment. In high school I was heavily involved in all the school clubs and there would be a time where I only had one day a week at lunch where I was not at a meeting. I love to volunteer and be involved in school. The switch over from high school to university was tons of fun but also a big change. The first semester of university was a huge learning experience for me, I stopped having contact with my high school friends and I was always invested in my studies or sleeping. Going to university became a routine of going to class in the morning and staying after school till late at night and going home. I wanted more out of my university experience and I wanted to be more involved. After I met the ladies at recruitment and found out about the range of things that a sorority did, I knew that it was right for me. In December 2011 I initiated and officially became a part of chapter.
Having AGD in my life helps me to stay balanced in my school life. The main themes of AGD are scholarship, philanthropy, leadership and sisterhood. We are here for school first which is why scholarship is so important, we have a minimum GPA which all members must attain so that we can make sure that school is their number one priority. We also hold tons of philanthropy events; AGD’s main organization we donate to is the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation and the Alberta Children’s Hospital. We have events such as teeter-totter for tots where we teeter totter for 24 hours to raise money for those philanthropic organizations. We also participate in other events like the campus food drive and Skate a Kid to Camp. By holding different offices in the sorority you build up your leadership skills. I am currently the website coordinator and the public relations coordinators for AGD and I have learned how important it is to maintain a good public image. Not only am I communicating to my chapter but I am communicating internationally. Since AGD is international there is a lot of paperwork that gets done and all of the meetings are held like professional business meetings which gets you prepared for the workplace environment after university.
There are many notable leaders that were formally in sororities. Carrie Chapman Catt was a women’s suffrage leader who helped campaign the passage of the 19th Amendment which gave women the right to vote. She founded the League of Women Voters and the International Alliance of women and served as president for the National American Woman Suffrage Association. She graduated from Iowa State College and was a member of Pi Beta Phi. Ann Moore was the Chairman and CEO of Time Inc. She was the company's first female CEO and was a member of Pi Beta Phi. These are only a few women who have made a difference and are part of a sorority.
Often times many people think sororities just party and drink all the time. But in fact my sorority is a dry sorority which means we do not associate drinking with the sorority. We are never to wear our badge or letter attire doing activities that may be deemed irresponsible. This is because the media has associated sororities with drinking and partying and that is not what a sorority is about. My sorority also has a strict no hazing policy. If a new member is seen with a chapter member drinking alcohol then that is considered hazing. None of the events are mandatory and it is up to the new member if they decide a sorority is right for them. Most people also depict members of sororities as white, blond and extremely rich girls. Well, I just so happen to be Asian and I am a poor university student. The sororities on campus do not discriminate based on race or religion. We are open to anyone who wants to join. This weekend my sorority initiated 11 new girls into chapter and they are all a wonderful addition to the group. The vision of Alpha Gamma Delta is “To live with purpose”. All of the ladies in my sorority have the same ideals and I want to share with you the purpose of Alpha Gamma Delta.
To gain understanding that wisdom may be vouchsafed to me.
To develop and prize health and vigor of body.
To cultivate acquaintance with many whom I meet.
To cherish friendships with but a chosen few and to study the perfecting of those friendships.
To welcome the opportunity of contributing to the world's work in the community where I am placed because of the joy of service thereby bestowed and the talent of leadership multiplied.
To honor my home, my country, my religious faith.
To hold truth inviolable, sincerity essential, kindness invaluable.
To covet beauty in environment, manner, word and thought.
To possess high ideals and to attain somewhat unto them.
This shall be my purpose that those who know me may esteem Alpha Gamma Delta for her attainments, revere her for her purposes and love her for her Womanhood.
The purpose is very special to me and it binds my sisters and I together. The best part of being in a sorority is the sisterly bond. These girls are not my friends they are my sisters and even though I may not be close to all of them I know I can always depend on them to be there for me. At the Epsilon Nu chapter at Central Oklahoma University a new member was diagnosed with metastatic melanoma which is a form of skin cancer. Even though her sisters only knew her for a few weeks the chapter made efforts to help by collecting donations and fundraising events and they have raised thousands to help her family pay the medical bills. The sisterhood bond in undeniable and unites us all together.
A sorority is like all the clubs combined into one. We focus on scholarship, philanthropy, leadership and of course sisterhood. Being in a sorority is a great experience and has made me well-rounded and balanced in student life. So next time you hear the word “sorority” I hope now you understand what it truly means. Thank you.
Useful Resources:
National Panhellenic Conference
Alpha Gamma Delta
Homosexual Parents Just as Good As Heterosexual Parents
10077491
L03
L03
Homosexuality and gay
and lesbian parents are no longer really a “shocker” in modern day society. T.V
shows and movies are regularly adding homosexual characters with children, and
celebrities are increasingly being open about their sexuality. Shows like Modern
Family with gay couple Cam and Mitchell who adopt their daughter Lily and Glee
with Rachel Berry and her gay dads, are becoming increasingly popular and
normal. Movies like The Kids are Alright which tells the story of 2 lesbian moms
are also being introduced; lead actress Annette Bening actually won an Oscar
for her role in the film. Children with same sex parents are becoming more
integrated into popular culture which I think is an important aspect in order
to get people to start seeing that it’s ok to have same sex parents in real
life. This is where the role of celebrities being open about being homosexual
parents comes into play like Elton John, Rosie O’Donnell, and Neil Patrick
Harris. They’re open about it and proud of it which I think is a really big
influence in trying to get more and more people to be ok with homosexuality. And
it’s not just in the celebrity world that we are seeing gay and lesbian parents
become more popular and abundant but also in everyday life. Not so much with our
generation and the older ones because homosexuality was and still is extremely
frowned upon by some, but we are seeing more of the younger generations with gay
and lesbian parents becoming more open and accepted.
For me personally I
never really knew what my view and stance was on homosexuality. I always
thought that I was ok with it and supported it but I will admit that when I
used to see two men or two women kissing I thought it was completely weird. I
thought it wasn’t as normal because I grew up with heterosexual parents and to
me having a mom and a dad was normal. It wasn’t that I thought it was unnatural
because I have always believed that love comes in all shapes and forms and it
doesn’t matter who you love. Although I did have this belief that all types of
love existed, I believed that some types of love were just more normal than
others. I was what you would call, not a homophobe which Merriam-Webster
Dictionary defines as the “irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination
against homosexuality or homosexuals”, but a heterosexist, which is “the belief
that heterosexism is the norm” as defined by Professor Johnston, one of my
communication professors at the University of Calgary. But
about three years ago my parents got divorced and about a year and a half ago
one my parents admitted to being homosexual. (Now I’m not going to state which
parent, mom or dad, became homosexual and not because I’m uncomfortable or
ashamed of it but because it is something personal to them that they are still
struggling with and wish to keep within our family.) To me this came as a huge
shock and surprise. When my parent first told me that they were interested in
the same sex a range of emotions came over me and I didn’t really know what to
feel. I wanted to support them but like I said I was so used to what I
considered “normal” that this seemed wrong and I wondered how they would change
as my parent. But after a couple weeks of confusion I had an epiphany like
moment and realized it didn’t matter what gender my parent was into, it didn’t
take away from the fact that they were my parent. It didn’t matter who they loved because they still
loved me and were going to continue to love, care, and parent me. The moment I
realized this, my view on the homosexual community and homosexuals as parents
completely changed. Within the past year I feel I have become a more open
minded, compassionate, and accepting person and I believe this is due to the
fact that homosexuality has been brought into my life on a personal level.
Many studies have been
done to compare the difference between children raised by either heterosexual
or homosexual parents. These types of studies involve observing, analyzing and
interviewing children in terms of teasing and social isolation, adjustment and
self-esteem, opposite gender role models, sexual orientation, and strengths. Ellen
C. Perrin, MD, a professor of pediatrics at Tufts University School of Medicine
in Boston, stated that, "The vast consensus of all the studies shows that
children of same-sex parents do as well as children whose parents are
heterosexual in every way.” (para.4) Majority of studies I looked at online agree
with Perrin and most found that children with homosexual parents were raised in
similar ways and had similar views and strengths. A study was done between 2009
and 2010 at the Center for Family Research at the University of Cambridge,
which involved researchers interviewing 82 children and young adults between
the ages of 4 and 27 who had some form of a homosexual parent in their life
(either both parents or one parent was homosexual). The study found that
majority of the kids were aware that “their family [was] a bit different… but
[that was] something to celebrate, not [to] worry about,” and that even though
many of their friends have questions about their family structure, majority of
their friends, “think it is a good thing, or don’t really care [about their
parents].” (page.3) The study did find that children and their parents were
subjected to judgment and bullying but, “wouldn’t want things to change, [and] wish
other people were more accepting.” (page.3) There are tests and studies that
conclude children raised by homosexual parents don’t fare as well as
heterosexually raised children because they get bullied for having gay or
lesbian parents. But bullying isn’t something that only children with
homosexual parents are subject to; there are many children with heterosexual
parents who get bullied for a range of reasons like being poor, having a
different color of skin, being a certain physical shape and size, or even for
not having the “coolest” backpack. Kids everywhere with all types of families
and parents get bullied so it is unfair to say that children shouldn’t have
homosexual parents just because they will get bullied. Also, the tricky thing
with these types of studies as Carl Berkowitz, M.D says is that they are “weighted
and biased, based on nothing more than the researcher's views,” (para.19) so it
is important to be careful with these studies to see if the researchers were
truthful and honest in analyzing the children and their household, or were just
making biased judgments.
There are many
misconceptions about homosexual parenting. A common misconception is that
homosexual parents will raise homosexual children. If this were true than all
current homosexuals must have had homosexual parents and grandparents and so on
and so on. But majority of homosexuals actually had heterosexual parents. So if
heterosexual parents can raise both heterosexual and homosexual children, then
homosexual parents can also raise both heterosexual and homosexual children. Another
misconception is that if you are a homosexual you are a child molester and a
pedophile. This is absurd and a complete slippery slope statement. Just because
you are gay does not mean that you are going to rape children. The American Academy
of Pediatrics posted a study in 1994 which looked at 352 children from ages 7
months to 17 years, who had been sexually abused, and had “charts reviewed to
determine the relationships of the children to the alleged offender.” (para.5) After
the reviews 35 cases were ruled out, 74 cases were allegedly committed by other
children and teenagers, 9 cases couldn’t identify an offender, and in the
remaining 269 cases only 2 offenders were identified as being gay or lesbian. This
means that 267 cases were committed by heterosexual offenders, and of those 267
cases, 222 of them had an “alleged offender [that] was a heterosexual partner
of a close relative of the child.” (para.6)
If all parents, no
matter what their sexual preference was, could teach their children not to discriminate
then soon this issue will not even exist in the world because everyone will be
accepting of each other. We need to teach each other to love rather than hate
and I know it sounds cliché and cheesy, but if we do this then our world could
be a much better and understanding place. Family gives us a sense of belonging.
Families come in all shapes and sizes and it’s not about their makeup but their
ability to nurture, love, and support their members. That is what makes
families the ideal place for children to be raised. As Alice, a seven year old
girl with lesbian moms said in the Cambridge study, “I’ve got two parents who
love me. It doesn’t matter if they’re a boy or girl.” (page.10)
Violence in Youth Entertainment: Looking Beyond the Fun
UCID: 10077161
COMS 369- L02
I
was out shopping for boots yesterday when I received a call from my youngest
brother. He was calling to remind me that I had promised him an early birthday
present. A few months back, in an attempt to get my brothers to clean the
house, I promised them that I would buy them a video game for their birthday.
Yesterday was the day of fulfilment, their old games have run their course,
their birthday is a month away and the newest Call of Duty game came out last month. It was time to get them that
new game.
My
brothers are among the millions of individuals who wallow in video games like Call of Duty. According to the statistics
published on kotaku.com, Call of Duty
enjoys an audience of 10 million unique users on Xbox alone. A video game that comprises of missions on
realistically designed war sites, Call of
Duty, attracts an audience of all ages and forms a big part of the
entertainment our youth engages with.
The
theme of war in youth entertainment intrigues me. War is not only a prominent
theme in video games like Call of Duty,
but also in popular fiction books and movies that our youth is exposed to. One
such example is The Hunger Games, by
Suzanne Collins. Enjoying a vast readership, the Hunger Games can be listed as one of the most successful books
of our times. It attracts a wide variety of audience belonging to all age
groups and became one of the highest grossing films in Box Office after its
release in March.
The
popularity and vast acceptance of The
Hunger Games and Call of Duty as forms
of youth entertainment led me in to thinking about their implications on our
youth. Do themes of war and explicitly graphic scenes of murder and killing in
fictional setting diminish the gravity of such situations in reality? Can it be argued that such forms of media play
a role in desensitization of our youth? After looking into several sources on this
subject, I believe that such an argument can be legitimately made.
Just
like other examples of main stream media, both, Call of duty and Hunger Games, attract a lot of critical attention.
Fan sites are launched and blogs are written. Polls are posed to the general public
and votes are taken on trivial details. Statistics are recorded and academia
gets animated to find research topics hidden behind these forms of media. One
of the most important centres of attention in such academic pursuits is the
impact of these books and video games on children aged 10-18.
In
praise of Hunger Games, many argued that like Harry Potter, these books create
relatable scenarios that help in the intellectual and social development of
youth. Parents believe that the simple words and vivid explanations not only
contribute towards an easy read but are also more effective in providing
children the opportunity to learn from the characters. Katniss is constantly
promoted by fan sites as a strong role model based on her confidence in herself
and her dedication to her family. The book is also highly valued for its
attractiveness for young readers in an age where reading is argued to be a
dying habit among many.
Similarly,
Call of Duty enjoys enormous praise
in its own arena. The realistic graphic animations and the innovation in
missions attract gamers looking for adventure and, as Marcus Power puts it, the
thrill of “winning a war single-handedly”.
Having said that, the reputation of the game cannot be solely attributed
to its stature as the most realistic looking game, it also attributes to the
fact that game offers several options for multiple users. Gamers have the
option to engage in combat with their friends, and people from all over the
world. Call of Duty offers gamers
high level of engagement. It’s not just
about playing with the virtual player anymore. It’s about competition with real
people in real time.
While
the massive fan following of The Hunger
Games and Call of Duty assure us
of their strength as youth entertainment, the questions I posed earlier cannot
be ignored. How do such forms of media impact the social and intellectual
development youth? And what is our responsibility, as a society, to direct these
impacts in a positive direction?
To
answer such questions it is important to investigate the plot both of these
forms are built on. The theme of war evident in both of these forms is not a
fantasy created in the present rather depicts an ugly picture of our future. It
creates a picture of the world that we are building today. The Hunger Games depicts a fight over food and water, basic human
needs. The book centres on war: A war for resources fought amongst the
impoverished. On the other hand, Call of
Duty depicts a world under constant attack from the enemies. It portrays a
constant need to kill and murder in a state of war.
The
point that I am trying to raise through my article is that, the futuristic
picture painted in youth entertainment runs parallel to the world we live in
today. We live in a world where many regions are completely impoverished
fighting over resources, like food and water. In an article published in Forbes
magazine, Judy Martin discusses the sharp paradox that underlines forms media
of media we have discussed above. She states how “the very attempt to bring
attention to disparate voices and an increasingly divisive tone [is] also a
potential vessel disintegrating civility amongst our young”. It is important to
realize here that the unregulated exposure of youth to implicatively realistic
events in fiction is desensitizing them towards harsh human realities that
exist around them. My argument is that realities like wars and poverty might lose
their urgency and gravity for the coming generations if they are not educated
about them in the context of reality rather than fiction.
In
a research published on scienceblogs.com Nicholas Carnagay studied the impact
of violent video games by asking half of 257 volunteers to play violent video
games and half to play non-violent video games for 20 minutes. After the game
time was up, each volunteer was asked to watch clips of violent movie sequences
such as prison fights, shootings and police confrontations. Studies revealed that
volunteers who were violent gamers were “less aroused by the violent images
than nonviolent gamers”. The research indicated how individuals were
desensitized through violent video games.
Another
interesting thing to take in account here is a film put together by Josh
Brickler: “Post-Newtonianism”. In his film, Brickler features two panels:
“juxtaposing actual war footage on one side, and sequences from Call of Duty on the other. The film
included audio from the WikiLeaks videos gradually converging with audio from
the video game.” In the video
description, Brickler quotes the Call of
Duty representative who defines the game as a “great training products” for
soldiers. The idea behind the film is how video games like Call of duty serve
the purpose of desensitizing individuals towards hideous acts of war.
It
is important to state here, that the purpose of this article is not to suggest
a complete opposition to forms of media. Media is an important and powerful
part of our society. As a young individual myself, I am not against youth
entertainment. But as a member of greater society, I believe that it is my job
to play a role in regulating the exposure to media for our youth. I am
responsible to educate my brothers, and in the future, my children, about the
bigger picture of social conditions that make the world we live in. As a
society all of us can play a part in imparting that education to our youth
which would provide them the context of reality that fictional forms of media
lack. Without that education, a plot focusing
on wars, killings and poverty can be reduced to a form of exciting and fun entertainment,
blocking out hidden social meaning. As a society it is our responsibility to
look beyond the fun.
Sources:
Building Keystone XL
Stina Nagel
COMS 369 L02
It is undeniable that North America is a land vast
natural beauty. The majestic Rocky Mountains, stretching across the
Canadian/American border, are a worldwide icon, visited by millions of people
every year. The crisp, clear mountain lakes and lush vegetation look like a
postcard three hundred and sixty-five days of the year. We in Canada are
immensely proud of our natural wonders, as are our neighbors to the south. And
not one of us wants to see that beauty destroyed. It is this fear which causes
unease with the proposal of the Keystone XL pipeline and why so many oppose its
construction.
The pipeline would run from the oil sands in
northern Alberta to refineries in Nebraska (and later Texas), transporting
countless barrels of crude oil to be made into usable product in the United
States. TransCanada, the company behind the Keystone XL project, has estimated
that construction and maintenance over a realistic 100-year life span of the
project would generate 570,000 jobs. In a country where the employment rate is
an astronomical 7.9%, this seems to be too good an opportunity for Americans to
overlook. And yet, the US government refuses to approve construction. Why? Two
reasons: economic protectionists in the White House and pressure from
environmental lobby groups.
There are far too many Americans, particularly
those in power, who feel that the US economy should be kept within their
borders. This opinion is far too widespread and prominent among Americans in
positions of power, the most important being. President Barrack Obama. Their
ideas are all well and good, however there is a fatal flaw in their belief; the
United States does not have the capability to meet its domestic oil needs. Without
a safe, steady and secure source of energy, other industries will come to a
standstill. This demand is currently being supplied by overseas imports from
the Middle East and Asia; however, these imports are costly and dangerous to
ship via tanker. In addition, purchasing oil from certain overseas countries
supports oppressive dictatorships that violate human rights. If it is necessary
to import oil from other countries, would it not be preferable to work with a
trusted neighbor and bring oil in by pipeline, the safest method of
transportation available? Keystone XL is clearly the answer.
If environmental lobby groups were
to achieve their goals, the oil and gas industry would be shut down in it’s
entirety and constructing Keystone XL would be out of the question. Not only
would Keystone XL astronomically benefit the oil industry as a whole, it would
facilitate further development of the oil sands in Alberta, which many
misinformed lobbyists see as “dirty oil.” This however is purely poor
information. Oil produced in northern Alberta is no different than oil from
anywhere else in the world. Not only that but every day, members of the Oil
Sands Development Group, a coalition of companies with stakes the oil sands,
are working towards more environmentally conscious ways of excavating and
transporting oil. At present however, “Steel pipelines provide the safest, most efficient
and most economical way to transport oil” (TransCanada). Studies have shown
that leaks in steel pipelines are rare and when spills do occur, the majority
are less than three barrels, a miniscule amount compared to disasters such as
the Exxon Valdez and the offshore BP oil spill. Designers have also factored
spill prevention into the blueprints for Keystone XL. Strategically placed
control centers will also be located along 1897 kilometers of pipeline that would
enable the flow of oil to be stopped within a matter of minutes if a leak
should occur. It is understandable that environmental groups would be concerned
with the possibility of leaks; Keystone XL is set to cross many beautiful and
vital natural resources, such as the Ogallala Aquifer. In spite of their
reservations, oil is necessary to our present way of life and pipeline is the
safest and most efficient method to transport Canadian surplus to the United
States where it is needed.
The
oil sands in northern Alberta are the third largest known reserve of oil in the
world. Traditionally, a suspected
location of oil must be explored and tested before real excavation can begin.
This is a lengthy and expensive process and one that does not always lead to
productive oil reservoir. This is not the case in the oil sands. The oil is
there, it only needs to be harvested. We in Canada have much more oil than we
can consume, therefore we need to export it. It is also the heart of Alberta’s
economy and funds equalization payments for the rest of the country. On the
other hand, the US is entirely incapable of meeting it’s own demand. The laws
of supply and demand paint a clear picture wherein the United States needs
Canadian oil to survive. The facts speak for themselves; Keystone XL is the
answer.
The
need for Keystone XL is apparent and yet many still oppose its construction. At
present, United States government has halted any progress for the foreseeable
future. Canadian and American citizens need to work together to ensure the
economic prosperity of both our nations. There is action we can take: writing
to politicians and expressing the need for this project, as well spreading the
correct information regarding Keystone XL and the oil and gas industry. With
this project, we can enjoy both economic prosperity and the beauty of land we
live on for generations to come.
For more information,
please visit:
http://www.oilsandsdevelopers.ca/
Why You Should Join a Student Club
Student ID: 1016257 Class: COMS369-L02
What if there was a
low-cost way for you to get the most out of your undergraduate experience, gain
some leadership skills, make some new friends, as well as differentiate
yourself from others in the job market?
Joining a student club
is a great way to do all of the above and enhance your experience at the
University of Calgary. In this context, a student club is a recognized body of
students that work towards a common goal and purpose. They can be as large or as
small as one wants, and can center on almost anything.
At the beginning of my
four and a half years at the University of Calgary, I made it a goal to join as
many student clubs as possible in order to spruce up resume so companies would
hire me. I joined clubs like the Commerce Undergraduate Society, EcoClub, Kids
Help Phone, Big Brothers and Big Sisters, and other clubs that I thought would
look great to a recruiter looking at my resume. I took on very passive roles in
the clubs, just doing the bare minimum that would qualify me as a member. Needless
to say, this backfired. When I was questioned about these experiences in job
interviews, I was not able to expand on them due to my inactivity in each club,
making my involvement almost useless. It was not until my third year that I
decided to focus on just a few clubs that really spoke to my interests and
expertise. I joined Alliances in Marketing (AIM), the student marketing club at
the Haskayne School of Business, where I was a member of the academic
portfolio. In this role, I led exam review sessions for students and developed
midterm exam packages for students enrolled in the introductory marketing class
for all business students. This led to me being a teaching assistant for the
course, which helped me build connections in the industry, eventually allowing
me to meet my future employer who I will be starting my dream job with after I
graduate. I can fully attribute this job opportunity to my involvement in clubs
and the connections I built there. Currently, I am the President of Alliances
in Marketing, where I get to help other students make connections in the
industry as well.
If that was not enough
to convince you to join a club, I have come up with five other reasons for you
to get involved:
1. There is something for everyone
You
may be thinking that joining student clubs are exclusive to “keeners”, or for a
specific type of person that does not fit who you are. While those types of
people do join clubs, there are so many clubs available at the University of
Calgary (U of C) that you do not have to be a certain type of person to get
involved. According to the Students’ Union’s website as of 2012, the U of C offers
over 300 student clubs ranging from sports to music to religion to hobbies,
making it difficult not to find at least one club that speaks to your
interests. Some of the interesting ones that I found when browsing the Students
Union homepage are the Food and Wine Club, Quidditch Club, Students in
Communications Club, and Speakmasters Club.
2.
Involved
students are more successful academically
You may also be thinking that you do not have
time to join a club due to your heavy course load or other school activities.
While limited time will always be an issue for students, consider this: studies
have shown repeatedly that students who are involved do better academically.
According to the National Survey of Student Engagement (2012), student success
is directly linked to student involvement as the more involved students are in
the institution, the more invested they will be.
3. Develop useful skills
Potential
employers will look for more than just a degree when you apply to their
company. They will want students who do more than just go through the motions
and who can be a valuable asset to their company. You can build social skills,
networking skills, leadership skills, and countless others depending on the
role you take on in the club. Oftentimes, these are skills that cannot be fully
developed in a classroom setting, so taking advantage of the opportunities that
student clubs offer is a great way to learn them.
4. Enhance Your Resume
We
all would like to spice up our resume to make us more attractive to recruiters.
What is going to differentiate you from someone else with the exact same GPA as
you? Student club involvement can make the difference.
5. Make New Friends and Meet New
People
While
it is not impossible to make friends in a classroom setting, it can be
difficult. With over 30,000 students at the University of Calgary, you may meet
a classmate and then never see him or her again. On the other hand, student
organizations allow you to talk with like-minded people on a regular basis and
build long term relationships that can go beyond university.
Now that you are
familiar with some of the benefits of joining a student club, you are probably
wondering what you can do to get involved. First, you need to find out what
kind of club interests you. While it is important to get involved, it is even
more important to join the right kind of club for you. The easiest way is to
visit the Students’ Union website (www.su.ucalgary.ca)
and look through the list of clubs that are available to you. Another way is to
attend Clubs Week, which is the five-day event held during the second week of
the academic semester, where you can talk directly with club members. The worst
that can happen is you walk away with some free swag and candy, so this is an
easy and convenient way to find out more about different clubs. Lastly, if you
do not see a club that relates to your particular interests, you can even apply
to start your own club!
In conclusion, there is
so much more to learning than just attending classes, just memorizing a bunch
of terms, just writing another essay and just leaving this university with a
piece of paper. Whether it is to get a job, meet some like-minded people, or
develop new skills, I strongly recommend that you get the most out of your
short stay here at the University of Calgary and get involved!
Useful
sources:
National
Survey of Student Engagement. (2012). Student
involvement means success all around. Retrieved November 23rd,
2012 from http://blog.orgsync.com/2009/student-involvement-means-success-all-around/
University
of Calgary Students’ Union. (2012). SU clubs.
Retrieved November 23rd, 2012 from http://www.su.ucalgary.ca/page/quality-student-life/clubs
Breed Specific Legislation
Growing up
I was always the little girl who loved animals. Anything to do with animals was
something that I was interested in. So it came as no surprise to my parents
when I started to volunteer at the Calgary Humane Society when I was sixteen.
After a couple of years of doing various volunteer jobs with the Calgary Humane
Society, I decided to get a job as an adoptions counselor. This job opened my
eyes to the horrible lives that many animals in Calgary are subjected to. It
was also at this job that I learned about the persecution of specific dogs
based on their breeds. Breed Specific Legislation (BSL) is a law that is aimed
at specific dog breeds that have been deemed “dangerous”. These laws vary from
outright bans on specific dog breeds to strict restrictions and conditions
being placed on ownership of specific breeds of dogs. Calgary fortunately does
not have any laws aimed at specific dog breeds and because of this, the Calgary
Humane Society has become a safe haven for many dogs that have been displaced
because of BSL. When BSL is enacted one of two things happens. In the good
cases, the dogs that have no history of aggression are grandfathered into the
law and are allowed to live out their natural lives with their families. The
second case, which is the most common scenario, is that all dogs that are
identified as the breed targeted by the BSL are torn from their families and
killed. Families are forced to make a decision between uprooting their lives
and moving somewhere that their pet is allowed, or they are forced to give up
their beloved pet. In some cases, if the dog is lucky, a rescue agency will
step in and work with the family to have the dog relocated to an agency that is
located somewhere not affected by BSL and the dog will be rehomed. Calgary is
such a place. When I worked at the CHS, we were constantly receiving dogs from
not only Canada but from the United States as well. While it is difficult for
legislative bodies to address issues such as dog bites in a way that appeases
society, Breed Specific Legislation is not the answer. Breed Specific
Legislation overgeneralizes dog breeds, brings to light enforcement issues as
well as dog breed identification issues, punishes upstanding citizens in
society, and potentially creates ‘new’ aggressive dog breeds.
BSL
overgeneralizes dog breeds by branding all dogs of a particular breed as
aggressive dogs. This is unfair; as dogs are no longer being judged based on
their individual personalities or behavioral history but are being judged under
an umbrella category of their breed. Conversely, the legislations target
specific breeds such as Pitbulls and Rottweilers, but fail to take into account
other breeds of dogs that could potentially be dangers. The American
Temperament Test Society is a not-for-profit agency that was set up to create a
test that could be used to determine the temperaments of the various dog
breeds. There has been an increasing need for a uniform temperament test such
as this since BSL has become more common. Interestingly, in 2011, the American
Pit Bull Terrier scored an 86.8%, American Staffordshire Terrier scored 84.2%,
and the Rottweiler scored 83.9%. Contrast these numbers with dogs that are
typically considered the penultimate family dogs such as Golden Retrievers who
scored 85.2% and Bernese Mountain Dogs who 85.6% and you can see that these
dogs that have been labeled as aggressive by mainstream society are actually
ending up in the same categories as the dogs that are considered family
friendly pets.
Issues with
enforcement should also be taken into consideration. Many dog bites that occur
happen in areas such as neighborhoods where leash bylaws are in effect. This
creates a twofold issues. First of all, these dogs are not on leash in a
leashed area and consequently, the owners are not acting like responsible
owners should. Individuals who are not responsible owners are the types of
people who are unlikely to abide by any BSL that may be enacted. Secondly,
officials are clearly not enforcing current laws adequately so how will they
enforce BSL any better? In fact, if animal bylaw authorities are forced to
focus on enforcing BSL, they are not able to focus on laws that are already in
place that would better serve to making communities safer. The American Society
for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA) points out that BSL is more of
a compromise to community safety than an enhancement because leash laws, spay
and neuter laws, dog licensing laws, dog fighting laws, and anti-tethering laws
are much more effective laws at preventing dog aggression. If attention is
being taken away from enforcing these laws in favor of enforcing BSL on dogs
and owners who have no history of aggressive incidents, then there creates a
potential for many aggressive dogs and irresponsible dog owners to go
undetected and unpunished.
Another
factor of enforcement that needs to be considered is people’s inability to
accurately identify dog breeds. The dog most commonly affected by BSL is the
‘pit bill’ but the ‘pit bull’ is not a breed of dog. The term ‘pit bull’ is a
generic term for four different dog breeds; the American Pit Bull Terrier, the
American Staffordshire Terrier, and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, and the
Bull Terrier. This furthers the complexity of BSL because if people, mainly the
authorities, cannot identify the dog breed it is hard to enforce any
legislation that may be applicable. Generally it requires an expert such as a
veterinarian to determine whether or not a dog belongs to a particular breed or
in the case of mix-breed dogs, what various breeds the dog has in it. BSL is a
simple solution to a complex problem. People looking for an aggressive dog will
simply find another dog breed to suit their needs.
No agency
that could be considered an expert or authority on dogs supports the idea of
breed specific legislation. Agencies that would be considered authorities would
be Veterinary Associations, Kennel Clubs, and Rescue Agencies. The Canadian
Veterinary Medical Association, the Canadian Kennel Club, and the Canadian
Federation of Humane Societies have all published statements and reports
expressing their concerns about BSL and what they think should be done instead.
So what should be done if BSL is
not the answer? Current laws must be enforced properly. If a law is not
enforced then individuals really have no reason to abide by it. The penalties
for disobeying these laws also need to be stern and individuals should face
additional penalties if they specifically trained the dog to be aggressive
whether it is for guarding purposes or fighting purposes. The ASPCA points out
that in 2006, 84% of the fatal dog attacks were by dogs that were owned by
irresponsible owners who abused the dog, allowed the dog to be unsupervised
with children, or did not control the animal in a humane way. Laws directed not
at specific breeds but at dogs that behave aggressively should be enacted. If
there are clear guidelines on what constitutes as an aggressive act and what
authorities should do if an aggressive act occurs, communities would be much
safer. This allows animal bylaw agents to focus on problem dogs and owners
rather than waste their time on responsible owners who have well behaved dogs.
Education
is imperative. Children must also be educated about dogs as they are
statistically at the greatest risk of being bitten by a dog. It is because of
this that many Humane Societies have set up programs that are specifically
designed to educate children about dogs and how to interact with them.
Education has to go further than this though as adults also need to be educated
on how to properly train, socialize, and treat their pets. A solution to this
could be a law that makes it mandatory for anyone either buying or adopting a
dog to take a course on how to properly train and care for a pet dog.
Finally,
people need to spay and neuter their pets. According to the ASPCA, over 70% of
dog bites are from unneutered male dogs and that is 2006, 97% of all the dogs
involved in fatal attacks were not spayed or neutered. This is an astounding
statistic, and ultimately, unless an individual is an accredited breeder who’s
dog is registered with their local kennel club, there is no reason whatsoever
that a dog should not be spayed or neutered.
Ultimately,
enforcement and education are the two biggest factors in preventing dog bites.
Breed specific legislations serve only as a political tool to give citizens a
false sense of security. Rather than persecuting innocent dogs, citizens should
be educated and law enforcement agencies should focus on punishing the deed, not
the breed.
Useful Sources
American Humane Association. (2012). Breed Specific
Legislation. Retrieved from: http://www.americanhumane.org/animals/stop-animal-abuse/fact-sheets/breed-specific-legislation.html
American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
(2012). Breed Specific Legislation. Retrieved from: http://www.aspca.org/fight-animal-cruelty/dog-fighting/breed-specific-legislation.aspx
American Temperament Test Society, Inc. (2011). Breed
Statistic. Retrieved from: http://www.americanhumane.org/animals/stop-animal-abuse/fact-sheets/breed-specific-legislation.html
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]