Summer '22 - Intro to American Government & Politics

In today’s America the issue of gun violence, particularly in regard to public shootings, is still a huge problem in our communities. Mass shootings have continued to be a problem in our communities, and the call for new gun control laws to be passed has become louder than ever. In my community of Birmingham, there was recently one of these mass shootings that took place. On Thursday, June 16th, a gunman opened fire inside a local church during a dinner and killed three church members and injured others. A man in the room was able to subdue the gunman and held him down until the police arrived. Police claimed that this person was a hero and his actions were extremely important in saving more lives from being lost. Others interviewed after the incident called for a culture change and for new and stricter gun laws to be added. Even Governor Ivey released a statement commenting on how these acts should never happen anywhere, especially a church. Tragedies like this incident at St. Stephens Episcopal Church have seemed to have been common in recent years. Incidents like this have taken place in Uvalde, Texas at Robb elementary school, Newton, Connecticut with Sandy hook, and in San Bernardino, California. All of these shootings in recent years have led to a huge push for new gun law reform. Some politicians are suggesting legislation that would ban the use of any form of assault rifles and make owning and carrying guns much more difficult for American citizens. Others counter argue that this could only lead to law abiding citizens not being able to own guns, whilst criminals will still have access to illegally owned weapons anyway. This issue has sparked much debate on what the future holds for gun ownership in America. 

For my community, this issue has sparked talks of the state legislature passing laws that would make it more difficult to acquire guns. This event will no doubt open the eyes of many locals, and potentially change public opinion in my area on the need for gun control reform. Reaction to this tragedy has led to community wide mourning. The shooter was identified and police added that he acted alone and this incident seemed to be isolated. Regardless, this will undoubtedly lead to more in my community to make it harder for mentally unsound people like this individual to get their hands on firearms. 

For the church members, this must be an even more difficult time and local politicians also are likely struggling with how this could happen in their city. For gun owners, this could potentially mean that owning and openly carrying guns could be drastically affected. Local and state lawmakers will now be tasked with finding solutions for preventing gun violence in our communities. On the national stage as well, the debate will continue over this issue and both parties will offer up solutions for how to get rid of this problem. Additionally, we could see the use of bodyguards and more police presence at public events like this in our area. There is already heavy police presence, especially in Hoover, at large events like school athletics or concerts, so the use of police at smaller events like church could begin to become more prominent. Potential laws that could now be proposed could involve stricter background checks on individuals hoping to buy firearms, as well as restrictions on certain types of guns like assault rifles. Further, adding requirements to gun owning like mandatory safety training and license renewal should help as well. This could help make sure that people that are mentally ill or have major issues are not currently owning guns and capable of incidents like this. Access to mental health services should also get better. Too often mental health is an issue that is not taken seriously enough, but realistically most of these shootings come from mentally ill people that would likely find a way to commit violence even without guns. Making sure that communities invest in programs like this will help make sure that less people suffer from mental health problems and become vulnerable to commit violent acts. Combined efforts by lawmakers to both make guns harder for mentally unstable individuals to come across, as well as increase police presence at public gatherings could help in making sure situations like this become less and less common. Hopefully, the local and state governments are hard at work making sure legislation is going to be passed that will make us less likely to see events like this happen.

Recent legislation on youth sports has banned many trans youth from playing or enacted invasive requirements for clearance. The American government's harsh new anti-trans laws do not only impact minors. Lia Thomas is the first transgender woman to win an NCAA swimming championship. She is twenty-two years old and met the requirements to swim on the women's team. Before 2022, the NCAA required that trans women had to be on testosterone suppression treatment to compete on a women’s team in any sport. Yet while the NCAA claims to be in favor of inclusion and fairness, Thoma’s win garnered little recognition. After her win, no one hugged her or congratulated her. The arena was quite beside a few polite applauses. Her presence as a trans woman on the women’s team provoked some fans leading to protesters lining up outside the arena. Protesters from the group called Save Women’s Sports stood along the walkway and yelled at Thomas with a microphone. They attacked and continuously yelled, “save women’s sports”. 

While some disagree with Thomas’s participation, Erica Sullivan, the Olympic medalist who lost against her has come out in support of her. Sullivan took third place and some claimed that it was unfair because Thomas has a “biological advantage” due to being assigned male at birth. Sullivan is not the only one, many other athletes and coaches are supportive of trans women. They believe that there are many benefits to participating in sports and don’t want to see people barred from the experience based on who they are or how they identify. Sullivan believes that Thomas has been unfairly targeted solely due to her being a trans woman. She emphasizes that Thomas trains just like all the other swimmers and does not win every competition. Thomas's losses do not make the headlines. 

Not every athlete is like Sullivan, Olympian Sharron Davies has been very vocal in her support of banning trans women from women's sports teams. When presenting her arguments she emphasizes that she grew up in a “very normal” working-class family from England. She has competed against a German Trans woman and describes her in very transphobic details. She misgenders her competitor and describes her as “dopped with testosterone” and having a “male physique”. Trans women participating in sports upset Davies so much she wrote a letter with 60 signatures to the International Olympic Committee to change the rules. On June 19th, FINA made new changes to its requirements. Davies was excited about the news and suggested the trans community create their own sports teams. 

After many states such as Texas and Ohio enacted harsh antitrans laws, the NCAA and FINA both changed their requirements for trans women's participation in sports. The NCAA now requires that trans women document their testosterone levels at the start of the season, six months later, and four weeks before championship selections. They also voted for a sport-by-sport approach to determine transgender participation. This freedom provided to individual sports committees has led to more harsh legislation. The world swimming governing body has banned transgender women from competing in women's events. The committee has decided to only permit swimmers who transitioned before the age of 12 to compete in women’s events. The claim was supported by scientists who stated “If you transition after the start of puberty, you have an unfair advantage, which is unfair.”.

Currently, there are no transgender women competing in elite levels of swimming. Yet trans swimmers like Thomas, who had aspirations of becoming elite swimmers, no longer can participate in a sport they love. The ban not only harms Thomas but generations of trans girls and women. The most likely to be harmed due to this banned are particularly minority athletes. Minority athletes already have to deal with a variety of stereotypes and ignorant views of trans women have caused more harm than good. The new age requirement for the start of hormone replacement therapy is unrealistic for many minority trans women who are disowned by their families and struggle with homelessness and poverty. They also face harder times finding therapists and doctors. These new laws are being put in place in the name of fairness while completely excluding an entire community.

Anyone who has tuned into the news over the past few days is aware of the significant Supreme Court ruling to overturn Roe v Wade. In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled in the Roe v Wade trial that a person’s right to chose to get an abortion is upheld by the Constitution in the Due Process Clause and the 14th Amendment. The ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization to allow the right to abortion to be up to the states puts every woman and person capable of carrying a child in danger. This decision is detrimental for the rights of women or people capable of carrying a child. In a country with no universal healthcare, adequate mandated paid maternity leave, or free preschool, one is now forced to carry a fetus to term in certain states and is given no help to care for the baby by the state. Abortion bans will unfairly effect women in poverty who cannot afford to have a child nor travel to somewhere where she can have a safe abortion. Some states currently have no exceptions on abortions for pregnancies where both the baby and mother will certainly die without abortion, rape, or incest. This seriously invalidates female life, depicting that the unborn child is more important than a woman’s health. And while abortion effects all people with wombs and the ability to carry children, it is still a womens issue as we are whom these prejudicial laws target.

As a young woman, I am scared. This drastically affects my community and sets a precedent for the court to later take away more rights. Justice Thomas has already stated this overturning should lead the way for other decades-old ruling to be reexamined, like the right to contraceptives and same-sex marriage. Leaving these decisions up to the states as well will take away more of my rights as a woman living in a red state. I, nor a lot of college-aged women, do not plan on raising a child any time soon, but sexual assault and rape are still present on college campuses. The justice system has failed rape victims so many times, and it is scary to think that not only could that happen to myself or someone I am close to, but then one could be forced to carry a child. Overall, this ruling is just an example of how devalued women still are in society, and how we are often limited to our reproductive organs. 

However, many people consider the ruling a win for protecting innocent lives, despite the fact there is no concrete definition for when human life begins, whether a conception, birth, or anywhere in between, no matter one’s opinion. I grew up very religious in a traditional Greek Orthodox household, so I am very familiar with how one’s religious views can affect their ideologies. I can understand that some people believe due to their religion that life begins at conception and thus believe abortion is ending a life. But such ideals should not be enforced on every American. Upheld by the 1st Amendment, the US has freedom of religion, so many can argue that state’s prohibiting abortion based on one religion violates the Constitution. Ironically, this is the Supreme Court’s designed function under judicial review. Some people believe, regardless of their opinion on abortion, that states should have the power to decide. This argument is very reminiscent of the argument for slavery. Many people used to believe that since some state’s economies were dependent on slavery, and since every state has its own citizens with similar environments who may believe something different from the citizens of states across the country, slavery should have been left up to the states. Both this argument and the current argument for states to decide their own laws on abortion ignore the fact that human rights are at risk. Both civil rights and women's rights should be upheld by the federal government to prevent certain states from harming quality of life based on party politics or outside agendas.

It is very rare for the courts to go back on a previous decision, as precedent is held in high regard among justices. Following precedent has previously been important to keep the courts legitimate in the public’s eyes, and since the decision to overturn Roe v Wade, many citizens nor longer respect the Supreme Court. A seemingly simple solution to a ban on abortions is for one to not put themselves in a position to get an abortion. Practicing safe sex with contraceptives, waiting to engage in sexual activities until marriage, a committed relationship, or when one is in a position to fiscally and emotionally care for a child, or giving a child up for adoption may seem like a good alternative to abortion. But all of these so-called solutions have been disproven to be efficient. “Safe sex” is not fullproof, and with current discussions about banning contraceptives, this may not even be a viable option for very long. Simply not engaging is sexual activities is against human nature and absurd place all abstinence on women. Some women do not choose to engage, but may be forced to which could still result in a pregnancy. Lastly, the foster and adoption system in America is abysmal, and again with current discussions and even current limitations in place make it near impossible for anyone other that two married heterosexual people to adopt. A quite radical solution to the problems the Supreme Court has caused is to reorganize the construction of the Supreme Court. We could make it so justices are elected by the popular vote of the population, widen the number of justices sitting, and add an age limit or term limit for justices. 

Since 2003, the International Olympic Committee have permitted transgender athletes to compete in the Olympic Games under the gender in which they identify. Many elite female athletes such as Paula Radcliffe and Dame Kelly Holmes have questions about the policies and call for more research into whether transgender females have athletic advantages over cisgender female opponents. The opposition stems from the fact that men are taller than women on average, have a higher testosterone level, and overall greater muscle mass. They also have greater bone density and higher capacity to carry oxygen in the blood.

            A top male athlete achieves ten percent better than a female equivalent.  Therefore, some athletes believe that transgender women have a greater performance advantage after transitioning. However, there is not enough evidence to draw a conclusion for either side. A professor of Sport and Exercise Science at the University of Brighton says, “We need the evidence to be able to say that having transgender females competing against cisgender females is fair – or at least, we can make the argument that it’s fair.”

            Take muscle mass for example. In the hormonal treatment for the male-to-female transition, testosterone is decreased. Testosterone helps build muscle, so decreasing it will cause the muscle to diminish. But on the other hand, the muscle has the ability to grow to its former size, back to the normal sized muscle. In one study in 2004, scientists studied the physical changes over the course of transition. They found that the overlap in muscle mass between transgender and cisgender women remained similar. However, neither of the participants were athletes, and none of the physical changes were related to athleticism. Whether there is no advantage or the lack of scientific research, the answer remains unclear.

            According to the National College Athletic Association, NCAA, taking testosterone is legal in NCAA sports for treatment of gender dysphoria. The most recent transgender college athlete to make headlines is Lia Thomas. She competes for the University of Pennsylvania as a female swimmer. Setting female school and conference records in the pool with average athletic male times, makes people wonder if her competition is fair? Females who have trained all their years just to fall short against a born male opponent with muscles twice their size and sufficiently taller could be perceived as unfair.

            As a female college athlete myself, it takes the fun and love of competing away. In Division III, where there are no athletic scholarships or special privileges, but early morning workouts, long afternoon practice, weekend travel, and still the workload of a normal stressed college student, it brings up the question: Why do we do it?

None of us really know why. However, when I ask my peers on other teams and other genders, we do it because we simply love the sport. Nonetheless, knowing female sports soon might be dominated by competitors with a born advantage upsets me. It takes passion away from female sports because we will always be seen and viewed as the “weaker gender”. Women are already outnumbered by men in the sports industry. Girls and women shouldn’t give up their hard-won sports opportunities, no matter how real the harms suffered by transgendered athletes.

            Sports have been set up as binary with males and female categories. With the growing popularity of transgender competitors, sports need to adapt. New categories with new events and classifications should be established rather than trying to squeeze transgender athletes into one of the two options.

            The current rules for transgender athletes are flawed. Lia Thomas showed all of us that the current rules are unfair and forcing her into the women’s category only stimulates resentment. This doesn’t mean that transgender athletes should be discounted from the many benefits of sports. Rather, sports must adapt and create new classifications that are not harmful to women’s sports.

The Effect of the “Don’t Say Gay” bills and anti-LGBTQ+ legislation on American students

   One of the biggest and most frequently heard debates in regards to American schools is what material is considered suitable to teach children. Parents often have different views on what material they consider appropriate for their child. Perhaps the most frequently debated topic among parents is teachings about the LGBTQ+ community in schools. This is a particularly hot topic in 2022 due to the recent “Don’t Say Gay” bills. In March of 2022, Florida’s governor Ron DeSantis signed the “Parental Rights in Education” bill. This bill states that “Classroom instruction by school personnel or third parties on sexual orientation or gender identity may not occur in kindergarten through grade 3 or in a manner that is not age-appropriate or developmentally appropriate for students in accordance with state standards.” After this bill was signed, at least 20 states proposed what opponents call “Don’t Say Gay” bills. Many of these bills also require that teachers and counselors divulge information confided to them by students about gender or sexuality to those students’ parents. 

    These bills clearly have a significant effect on the education that students are receiving in schools, and call into question whether young students who are dealing with issues regarding their gender or sexuality are being disregarded. Those in favor of these bills believe that parents should have more of a say in what material is suitable for their child to learn about and that they should be able to sue if their child is receiving teachings that they do not consider age appropriate. Many believe that elementary age children are too young to comprehend issues regarding sexual orientation and gender identity and that curriculum in schools should be more parent approved overall. Those in opposition to these bills believe that American students are being deprived of a proper education, especially students who are questioning their own gender identity and sexuality. They also believe that it disregards students who do not come from traditional families. Many teachers believe that these bills put a rift between teachers and parents and give parents too much of a say in how they do their job. President Biden tweeted “I want every member of the LGBTQ+ community- especially the kids who will be impacted by this hateful bill- to know that you are loved and accepted just as you are. I have your back, and my administration will continue to fight for the protections you deserve. 

    I personally believe that the “parental rights” bills should not be enforced. I disagree with the notion that elementary age children are too young to comprehend topics regarding sexual orientation and gender identity. A significant number of members of the LGBTQ+ community are aware of their sexuality at a young age. There are also millions of American children who are being raised by same-sex couples or have at least one gay or trans parent. I believe that the execution of these bills disregards these families and puts unnecessary trauma on these children. I believe that it will also greatly affect the education of American students in the years to come by making the topic of gender identity and sexual orientation “taboo”. These bills also have the potential to steer students away from counseling and getting the guidance and support that they need, leading to anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues down the road. Students will not have the freedom to discover themselves and they will not seek out guidance and information due to the fear of potentially being outed to their parents. I also think that these bills give parents too much power, and that they could lead to an abundance of major lawsuits and the possibility of other vital teachings being vetoed in the future.  In conclusion, these bills are harmful to students’ educations and to the LGBTQ+ community, as well as the American education system as a whole. 

In recent years, women have had more representation in the workforce. In fact, women’s participation in the workforce has been on the rise for the last fifty years. This is a huge achievement for women all over America. This increase has been caused by women getting better education, and the rates of women graduating has been increasing. Less women feel pressured to stay home to take care of their kids and more women over the age of fifty are staying in the workforce. It seems that women are becoming more confident in building a career for themselves than ever before. However, with more women working, there is still a high rate of gender discrimination in the workplace. This is one of the most prevalent challenges in the workforce that women in America face. There are many types of gender discriminations and also many effects that come with them.  But, according to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, any employment discrimination due to race, color, religion, sex or national origin, is in fact, illegal. It may be illegal, but this has not stopped men from harassing, underpaying, and unfairly treating their female coworkers, superiors, or employees. 

In a survey from Pew Research Center done in 2017, 42% of women in the workforce (4 in 10) in the United States reported to have been discriminated against because of their gender in some way.  Also, 25% of working women reported to have earned less than a man doing the same job. Furthermore, 23% of women claimed to have been treated like they were incompetent because of their gender. Women are also three times more likely to experience sexual harassment in the workplace than men. In an ABC News/ Washington Post Survey, a total of 54% of women claim to have in general encountered inappropriate and unwanted sexual advances from men. In addition, 30% of women say they have gotten these sexual advances at work. Also, over 80% of the cases of sexual harassment reported in 2017 came from women. Women with higher levels of education tend to experience more discrimination. For example, 57% of women with a postgraduate degree have reported to have experienced some type of gender discrimination while working as compared to only 40% with only a bachelor’s and 39% who do not have a college degree. However, education is not the only factor in workplace discrimination against women. Some companies might not hire a woman because of the possibility she might have to leave for a period of time if she decides to start a family. Also, mothers are still subject to earning less money than men no matter the quality of their work and they are sometimes still penalized for missing work to give birth. 

While a lot of women find these statistics and facts to be quite alarming, other women still deny the issue. This does not mean they do not acknowledge that gender discrimination exists, but more that it does not affect them in the workplace and it is not as big a challenge for women as people make it out to be. They think it happens at a much less rate and think other women have exaggerated the problem. It might have been a problem in the past but women have come a long way since then so it is not something to be concerned about anymore.  Some women find that the gender wage gap can be explained by a difference in jobs, positions, experience and hours worked. Many of these women find that these factors are much better explanations as opposed to sexism and misogyny.  Also, they find that the gender discrimination that does happen, is done on an independent level rather than a systemic one. Other women do not feel they are victims and have chosen to ignore gender discrimination because it has never happened to them specifically. Their work place might be a healthy work environment but that does not mean other women do not work in toxic environments. 

Combatting gender discrimination has been a constant battle since women began participating in the workforce.  One solution for workplaces to try and avoid gender discrimination is for employers to be upfront and transparent about payment from the beginning.  Explaining what needs to be done and how much experience is needed to reach certain amounts of pay and to make sure there are no discrepancies between men and women that deserve the same amount of pay. Also, workplaces implementing zero-tolerance policies for gender discrimination. Not only do these policies need to be implemented, they need to be very strictly enforced. There will be less frequent incidents if employees understand they will lose their job if they are treating anyone unfairly based solely on somebody’s gender. Training employees on the matter could also be very helpful. This could provide a safe space for working women and also education for those who do not understand the importance of treating female colleagues with respect. 

For mothers who intend on keeping a job no matter their family dynamic, single or married, they often experience a lot of discrimination and inequality in the workplace. An example of this would be if a mother is unable to come to work due to the lack of child care or her child is sick, she will receive backlash from her bosses, for they are more focused on the business and how they will be affected by her absence than on her well-being as a person or as a mother. If she is granted paid sick or vacation time, she can afford to miss a day here or there, but if she has multiple children and they get sick throughout the year, she can be penalized for overusing those given paid time off (PTO) or will have to take time off without any extra pay. 

The next issue that working moms face is the inequality in wages. While there is wage inequality throughout America, mothers who are expecting are financially penalized by getting a lower wage. This is referred to as the motherhood penalty. Men who are expecting a child face the opposite reaction from their job and receive a raise, this is called the fatherhood bonus to the fatherhood bump. This perpetuates the idea in capitalistic, corporate America that men are more valuable than women, especially in the job space. 

Many companies do not give women paid maternity leave when they have kids, making it harder on women who need the financial stability from staying at work and the need and desire to stay with their babies to feed them and care for them, and even create the bond between mother and baby. This time off is recommended by most doctors, yet corporate America does not deem this time as necessary nor a reason for women to have PTO. 

Lastly, many women are discriminated against before they obtain a job if they bring up having children because companies see them as a risk due to them possibly having to be late, call out, or leave early for their children. 

These examples are just the inequality that women face in the workplace. This does not include the stereotypes, micro aggression, not the pressure that is put on women who try to balance family and their career. This is just how the workplace or a company often takes advantage of women who try to start a family, rather than their life being wrapped up in their job. 

To play devil's advocate I will try to understand the opposing side of management in a corporation. I understand the frustration of having someone call out of work, especially when you are counting on them, but sometimes you must look at employees as people and less like minions or cogs in a machine. As for the motherhood penalty and the fatherhood bump, I think it is clear that if you can deem a man to get a raise why not a woman? Lastly, not paying for women to go on maternity leave I can see how you would not want to pay someone if they are not working, but this is technically a medical recommendation but to each their own for their own company policy.

My solution to this issue would conform to the need and demand for social progression like many other countries around the world are able to support their employees and give them financial compensation. Some European countries, such as Germany, allow for women and men who are expecting a child to have paid time off for paternity leave. They also allow for employees who do have children to have a set number of sick days for children on top of personal sick days and vacation days, all paid time off. They are able to afford this with fees and higher taxes, much like union fees in America. It is possible, it would just require more patience, empathy, and effort from upper management in companies to enforce and support their employees. 

For my second blog post, to follow along with my first one, I wanted to talk about the water contamination crisis that is starting to happen in Wilmington, North Carolina. Not just in North Carolina, the water crisis is a huge deal in some parts of America and all over the world. Water contamination happens through pollution, littering, industrial sites, and many other ways. Our water is a big part of everyday life and what we survive off of. If we do not keep our bays, streams, and estuaries clean, all of that toxic waste is going to end up in our oceans. This is most likely to affect the wildlife that lives there. Another reason why we should want to keep our bays, streams, and estuaries clean is how it is affecting our health and good drinking water. 

One big water contamination problem that has been affecting Wilmington, North Carolina is the 'Good Neighbor' campaign by Chemours. The campaign 'Good Neighbor' by Chemours was ultimately responsible for contaminating the Cape Fear River. A Biology professor from the University of North Carolina at Wilmington, Dr. Lary Cahoon expressed, “I just think it's completely wrong for polluters to trash the public's water supply and our recreational waters for their own profits.” I agree with this statement because no company should be able to take away the privilege of clean water from a community. As a result of the pollution in the Caper Fear Basin, my local water supply is affected as well. According to the ad campaign 'Good Neighbor' by Chemours, the company had to pay $12 million in fines to the state. In addition, the company's required to revamp the Fayetteville facility to properly dispose of chemical waste. 

Another problem that has been affecting the water in Wilmington is toxic chemicals that can cause problems down the road with health. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stated “The chemical reportedly caused problems for the liver, kidneys, immune system and development of offspring. The EPA also noted an association with cancer.” The water that surrounds my community contains stated from Sweeney Water Treatment Plant “Cape Fear customers’ drinking water contains 7.78 parts per trillion of GenX, but CFPUA (Cape Fear Public Utility Authority) hopes to change that soon.” GenX is a man-made chemical compound called poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) that do not naturally grow in the environment. These are used in broad commercial practices like food packaging, nonstick coatings, and firefighting foam. Our water is getting contaminated by the practices of businesses that think it is okay to not care about the environment around them. 

I believe more legislation to regulate business practices would be a helpful solution. The environmental impact of business practices should be avoided by following certain laws. An organization shouldn't be allowed to produce a certain level of greenhouse gas emissions, for example. Additionally, it should not be allowed to dump toxic waste into the waterways. It is the responsibility of every company to protect the resources that are around them. If they do not comply with these laws or rules, then they should be subject to a fine, just as Chemours had to pay for their actions. Another alternative is to use reverse osmosis water filters for communities that already have been affected by toxic chemicals. By processing water this way, most contaminants, dirt, and bacteria are removed, leaving the water safe to drink.

           Climate change is no longer an issue that can be dealt with in the future and pushed to the side. Overall, climate change can be described at the long-term shifts in temperature and weather patterns. These can occur both naturally and from human activities. One of the main driving factors of climate change is human activities. For example, burning coal and fossil fuels. Climate change can affect various things such as an individual’s health, safety, housing, ability to grow food, and work. In recent years, warming oceans and melting glaciers have caused global sea levels to experience an increase. Florida as a whole has experienced an 8-inch increase in sea level since 1950. In addition, these higher temperatures are projected to lead to an increased risk of cardiovascular disease and cerebrovascular disease. In Pensacola, the effect of global warming has caused extreme flooding due to more frequent and intense storms. This increased amount of stormwater can affect runoff systems and lead to contamination of nutrients, trash, bacteria, or sediments in local waterways. Also, these warming temperatures have led to an increased danger to mold. Of course, working in conditions with mold can cause trouble breathing and frequent sinus infections.

            Overall, the population of Pensacola Florida is hesitant to believe that climate change has caused such an issue in their community. In an article discussing the mold fiasco in 2020, different residents of Pensacola commented things such as “Mold? On the gulf coast? Shocking!” and “Never listen to religious fanatics who claim climate change is something we should fear. It's all BS. There is no crisis.” These comments clearly show that some people do not agree with all the climate change claims. However, older people such as my grandparents and their friends cannot complain enough about the many effects seen by climate change. Things such as the dreadful and miserable heat, their breathing problems, and issues they face year after year preparing for hurricane season. Even when it’s not hurricane season, rain is something they always have to be aware of.

Luckily, Pensacola has experience handling issues dealing with contamination due to flooding. One solution they implemented was converting a pond that was polluting contaminated rainwater in Pensacola Bay into a capture and runoff treatment system. This advanced system filtered out contaminants within the stormwater, improving the water quality of the pond and serving as a home for different wetland species. It also improved the sustainability of both Pensacola Bay and the coastal wetland. This project led to more projects in which finding was provided through the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. In addition to addressing rainwater, the city council of Pensacola created the Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Task Force in 2018 to address more climate crisis issues. Also, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) awarded the city with grant money to work on improving how coastal communities experience flooding, erosion, and habitat shifts from rising sea levels. These different programs set the groundwork for the improvement that needs to be seen in the future. In 2021, Pensacola has applied for a grant from the Florida DEP to conduct a vulnerability plan and develop a plan based on the results. Although none of these solutions involve a plan to limit Pensacola’s contributions to climate change, they do involve various plans to combat the side effects of climate change.

Gender Inequality in College Athletics

Title IX is a pathetic attempt to fix the inequality seen in college athletics. Title IX suggests that colleges are supposed to treat female and male athletes the same and not favor one over the other. However, recent NCAA investigations have revealed that the NCAA spends between $1700 and $2229 more for each male athlete than each female athlete during NCAA championship events. This was seen during the 2021 March Madness when the men were provided with a large weightlifting facility with access to many machines and different kinds of equipment. The women were given one rack of dumbbells and a stack of old yoga mats. In the 2021 Softball college world series the female athletes were not even provided showers in the locker rooms, yet the baseball players had showers, saunas, and free massages. In my own high school, there was a locker room for each male sport, yet all of the female athletes had to share a closet sized “locker room.” There were three men’s weight rooms and the girls had to bring dumbbells into the choir room to workout. Even though Title IX attempts to remove inequality, the NCAA gives little regard to the idea of increasing funding for female athletics. In a majority of the incidents of inequality, the NCAA tries to cover it up until female athletes have gathered the support of the media. It is only when the NCAA fears bad press that they will try to solve the issue. This shows that not only does the NCAA really only care about money, but their promises of promoting gender equality are empty. The NCAA will only try to fix a problem if the problem has generated the attention of the public and they risk losing peoples’ financial support. The NCAA only cares about gender equality if it is convenient to do so.

            This problem starts at the very beginning of a female athlete’s career, when female athletes are given less attention, less funding, and less access to facilities. Society tells young girls that they are not as valuable as their male classmates because they are girls. Society tells girls to give up playing sports because “you throw like a girl” or “you run like a girl.” This insult will devalue an athlete just because of their sex. Society will tell an 8-year-old that she will never have important athletic success. Mediocre professional male sports teams will still get more attention and praise than successful female teams. Why should young girls feel inclined to pursue a sport if all of her peers tell her she is not important? Inequality runs rampant on social media like Instagram and TikTok. A post about a female athlete’s performance is filled with comments from boys saying that they could do better or that the sport is easier. When I was growing up playing softball, my achievements were not as celebrated as much because the “ball is bigger and easier to hit,” “the fences are shorter,” and the “pitching is slower.” The idea that girls sports are not as important as boys sports is engrained into every child when the boys are playing in nicer facilities with nicer equipment, when coaches use “____ like a girl” to denote poor performance, and when replays of a football scrimmage gets more air time than the women’s volleyball national championship.

            Counterarguments to this problem almost always come from men and are either suggesting money or biology. People will say that men’s sports are more important because they are capable of more, or they are better athletes than women because of genetic factors. Although this argument is not the major one, it still affects the self-worth of female athletes. Most people will argue that women’s sports are not as broadcasted because they do not generate as much revenue. How can something generate revenue when there is no advertising? This argument is invalid because in the past 10 years, there have been at least 100K more viewers on average for the women’s college world series vs. the men’s college world series. These are the same events that the softball players were denied access to facilities like showers because of a lack of funding. Much of the community of female college athletes hold the same opinion. A majority of female athletes fail to speak out because they have never seen it as an issue since they grew up being taught that their sport did not matter. Some female athletes do speak up however they are met with unwilling and sexist coaches and administrators. 

            The best way to solve this issue is to bring awareness to the situation and hold the NCAA accountable for their actions. Female athletes that have a platform need to use it to advocate not only for equality within college athletics, but also need to fight for equality within youth sports. Female athletes in situations where they experience inequality need to document their situation whether it be filming the facilities or documenting sexist conversations so that the NCAA will have no chance to try to cover it up. The NCAA needs to equalize the funding given to athletes and the treatment of the athletes should not depend on what is between an athlete’s legs.