I'm excited for the other home games now, even though Notre Dame still has 0 wins after four games. From all accounts, it seems that this is the first time that the Irish are doing this badly. Oh well. Other things aside from the football match make the game days fun. There are the yummy brats, the yummy hamburgers, the cute tumblers for my Diet Coke, and the marching band. I'm good to go for all the other home games. I will be taking the MPRE (Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam), which is a component of the bar exam, on the morning of the Navy game, but I hear that the exam finishes at noon, so I will have no problem watching the game after.
I still don't completely understand football, but I like watching it now. Go Irish! Win something. But even if you don't, I will be in the 100,000+-person stadium, munching on my brat and gulping down Diet Coke.
I had a moment of true panic yesterday: I was cheering for Notre Dame when I realized that I was wearing a green shirt and waving a white towel. I was, like, oh my gosh, I am wearing La Salle colors. Eeek!!! I calmed down though when I saw that our football team was attired in blue, white, and gold. Except for the gold, those are still Ateneo colors. And with the gold, those are Assumption colors, the plaid skirt notwithstanding. So whew.
Call me silly, but I don't think I can wear green anymore at a sporting event. It's just too ... off. That said, I'm glad that I haven't gotten The Shirt yet. Every year, Notre Dame comes up with The Shirt, which is what every fan should wear to the game day, just so people are all wearing the same thing. Two years ago, the shirt was yellow. Last year, it was dark blue, and this year, it was dark green. I've been planning for a while to get The Shirt because I got a season pass this year, but for some reason, I have never gotten around to it. That's a good thing! After yesterday's experience, I think what I'm going to do is get a # 7 blue jersey. I feel a special affiliation with Jimmy Clausen, just because I have read and heard so much about him. That way, I can cheer for the Irish while wearing Ateneo colors.
That's a good idea. Now it's off to the bookstore at some point for my football jersey.
The Ateneo-La Salle rivalry got featured in the N.Y. Times. Click here to see the article.
The article gives a lot of detail, and it does a good job of putting the rivalry into context. But I think the obvious bias towards Ateneo lessens its credibility a bit. Take this line, for example, "La Salle’s players have a menacing swagger, with tattoos, headbands, shaved heads and chin-strap beards." That's not true. Some of La Salle's players do look like that, but others definitely don't. Take J.V. Casio, for example, or T.Y. Tang. These two are my favorite La Salle players because they both play clean and they're just really good. T.Y., my brother's friend from Xavier, is a really nice guy too. And also, does Eric Salamat's last name, meaning thank you in Filipino, really contribute to the squeaky-clean image of the team? I'm from Ateneo and I'm a Blue Eagle fan, but that line had me snorting Diet Coke through my nose. Honestly. Let's not be ridiculous now.
I'm curious about the writer of this artcile, Raphael Bartholomew. I don't think he was in Ateneo when I was there, which was from 2000 to 2004. I'm also looking forward to his book about Philippine basketball. If this article is any indication, it should be a pretty interesting read.
In any case, I hope Ateneo wins the title this year. Oh please, oh please, oh please! I am behind the team 100% from the middle of nowhere that is South Bend, Indiana. Go Ateneo! One Big Fight!
My friend and I got into a friendly argument about whether the term "differently abled" has any merit. For those who don't know, "differently abled" is the supposed politically correct term for "disabled." I stand behind that term completely.
The problem with "disabled" is how it equates the possession of ability to those who were born with normal body parts and who could use those parts in the conventional way. And if for one reason or another, your body does not function the way it should, then you're labeled as disabled. I don't agree with that. As I pointed out to my friend, a man who is born without arms can still grasp utensils with his foot and eat with it or even draw with it. He could still get from point A to point B by using his arms to pull his body along, even if he can't walk. The man does have ability, albeit not in the normal sense. The fact that the handicapped do things differently does not mean that they are disabled. They're just differently abled, that's all.
The term "disabled" is inherently demeaning, I think. Why do people have to be measured according to the ability of most people? And if they can't meet that standard, why are they automatically disabled? I can't shoot like Michael Jordan can. Does that mean I'm disabled?
It's not like me to rise to the defense of a supposedly politically correct label. I generally feel that political correctness is a concept that we are all better of without. But something about this term strikes a chord with me. The term disabled goes to a person's body and how he relates to the world, as we can only relate to the world through our body, however that is shaped or formed. The label then is entirely inaccurate and insulting to someone's personhood. It is for this same reason that I consider other supposedly politically correct terms like "vertically challenged" or "horizontally challenged" to be entirely unneccessary and even a tad ludicrous.
If you were following the argument I've been making, then you'd understand the logic of that statement. If you don't understand it, then let's talk. And if you don't care, then have a good evening.
