Marion Jones pleaded guilty to have taken performance enhancing drugs. She will be stripped of her 3 gold medals and 2 bronze medals that she won at the 2000 Sydney Olympics. She was proclaimed as the Fastest Woman on Earth, she was the Golden Girl, she was the epitome of dedication, strength and edurance. Today, she remains as a fallen hero, her honor, her honesty has been tarnished.
Some questions that arise in my head:
Are we too harsh on our sportspersons when we who hailed them as our heroes, our inspirations denounce them as soon as we know they used performance enhancing drugs?
Comparing the Individual achievements in other fields:
Do we take the Oscars away from the film stars when we know they underwent a cosmetic surgery, took god-knows-what to enhance their assets?
Do we not think Cobain was a creative force even though we knew of his addictions? Do we think he could have created that music if he was not high most of the time?
Do Da Vinci's masterpieces become any lesser in our eyes knowing that he was also high most of the times when he was at his creative best?
Could Viriginia Woolf's writing be as creative as it is today if she was not a regular pot smoker?
Most (not all) of the major artists - musicians, artists, performers - were or are regular users of some form of contraband drugs, or have resorted to artificial physical boosters (botox, cosmetic surgeries, silicone implants, etc)
I know I am comparing Apples to Oranges, Sports and Arts - not the same deal? Right? But then how do you measure Individual Achievements? Why is it OK in one and not in the other?
Mind you I am not advocating use of these drugs, I am just questioning why do we punish the baseball stars, the runners, the boxers, the swimmers or any other athletes? Why do we not give the same treatment to individuals from other fields? Why these double standards?
Aren't they all equally possesed with ambition , aren't they all equally driven to achieve or create or push those limits (creative, mental or physical) that were established by someone else?
I cannot answer this, can you?
30 mile weeks
10 years ago
Posts
4 comments:
The question is "Can doping be made legal?". Let us hypothetically assume it is. Since doping will enhance the performance of every athlete who takes it, to level the playing field every athlete will be forced to take drugs. Taking drugs has long-term harmful effects on human body. Why should an athlete, who represents all a healthy body can do be forced to harm his or her hard earned good health?
Who knows for sure whether Da Vinci, Virginia Woolf and many other artists who enjoyed drugs and alcohol, enhanced or destroyed their creative abilities?
Should bad apples looking riper than bad oranges be a reason to start a bad apple diet?
-Boni
My only point.. will be an athelete who is choosing to take drugs and likewise substance to boost his/her perf. is competing against other atheletes who are possibly not taking that and are competing for the equally gruelling physical task "at the exact same time". So the athlete who chooses to take those perf. enhancing drugs is IN the wrong, as its unfair to the other fair players who are depending on their true physical status.
On the other hand the creative geniuses mentioned, though I cannot attest to that, even if they were high at their creative best, they were "not" competing with any one else "at the exact same time" to achieve "the exact same results".
So basically we "are" discussing apples vs oranges.
Need to have a more parallel comparison.
-Urmi
My only point.. will be an athelete who is choosing to take drugs and likewise substance to boost his/her perf. is competing against other atheletes who are possibly not taking that and are competing for the equally gruelling physical task "at the exact same time". So the athlete who chooses to take those perf. enhancing drugs is IN the wrong, as its unfair to the other fair players who are depending on their true physical status.
On the other hand the creative geniuses mentioned, though I cannot attest to that, even if they were high at their creative best, they were "not" competing with any one else "at the exact same time" to achieve "the exact same results".
So basically we "are" discussing apples vs oranges.
Need to have a more parallel comparison.
-Urmi
No doubt, these drugs are bad and what not. No questions there. My quandary is around the treatment we give to these athletes, we shun them, we drag them down from their pedestals...we don't seem to be doing the same when it comes to other individual achievements. WHY? Will you take that Oscar back? Will you stop thinking of Mona Lisa as a masterpiece? I know there was no competition amongst artists to draw a "Mona Lisa" and then who does it best gets a gold medal.
To Urmi's point - "exact same time" would a Miss World or Miss Universe be treated the same way if they found out that she had liposuction or silicone implants to enhance her figure? How is this different?
Post a Comment