What’s My Race?

Self identifying race has never been more important to Americans than it is now. There has always been confusion when choosing people’s races on censuses, college forms, or any other event where there is the option to choose which race they identify as. The main reason for this confusion would be: How do they know what race they are? A person can see race as a category based on physical appearances and another can see it as a biological and cultural-based category. Most of the time, for censuses, Americans tend to change the race they identify. America is extremely diverse that the 2010 census includes an option to check multiple races and a final option for “Some Other Race” if some one couldn’t choose one of the listed races. The fact is, race can’t be defined as easily as black and white because our nation is filled with so many colors.

Specifically, people of mixed race face the conundrum of which race they should identify as when applying for colleges. One example would be Natasha Scott who has an African American father and an Asian mother. In 2011 when she was applying for college, she had to choose whether to identify as African American or Asian. The reason as to why this was a difficult choice was because if she put African American she would be more likely to be accepted into colleges than if she put Asian. She wasn’t sure if identifying as the race with more benefits was morally right. She is both races, but in this case, chose to be the one most beneficial to her.

As mentioned in the first paragraph, race is can be based on a person’s physical characteristics. 27 year old Brazilian Lucas Siqueira was denied a Brazilian government position because he identified himself as mixed race, but was considered Caucasian by the government. His looks made him White to the populace, but he considered himself Afro-Brazilian. So which race is he? This is what makes self-identification of race so important. Either a person can choose their own race, or others can choose for them. Neither is fully accepted as a way to determine one’s race.

Also mentioned in the first paragraph was how race can be based on a person’s biological make up and culture. In American history, a man was deemed Black if they had even a drop of Black blood in them. This was deemed the “one-drop rule.” Even if a man had White parents, White grandparents, and White great-grandparents, if his great-great-grandmother or grandfather was African American, he was considered Black. In this case, a person would have the right to identify as any race if they have even the tiniest amount of that race in their blood despite their physical appearance not matching their biological relations.

Works Cited:

“For Affirmative Action, Brazil Sets Up Controversial Boards To Determine Race.” NPR. 29 September 2016. Web. 31 October 2016.

“Millions of Americans changed their racial or ethnic identity from one census to the next.” Pew Research Center. 5 May 2014. Web. 31 October 2016.

“Minority Rules: Who Gets To Claim Status As A Person Of Color?” NPR. 16 May 2012. Web. 31 October 2016.

“On College Forms a Question of Race, or Races, Can Perplex.” The New York Times. 13 June 2011. Web. 31 October 2016.

Who’s Free in America

In America, there is a vast amount of unjust laws specifically created to unjustly send people to jail. More specifically, the 3 Strike Law, War on Drugs Act and the Stop and Frisk law, were designed to send people to jail, mostly whom are people of color. America doesn’t see anything wrong with these laws because people of color have been stereotyped as criminals. If it were possible to brainwash the majority of people to place a negative stereotype on the minority, mistreatment of the minority will be justified. This has given the government and law enforcement the green light to harass, imprison, and abuse people of color with little to no consequence.

There was a law passed in New York called Stop and Frisk, that goes against our 4th Amendment right. In the Constitution, the 4th Amendment states that, “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warren’s shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath of affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” Being a person of color isn’t illegal, nor is it probable cause for the police to stop and frisk someone.

Stop and frisk made it legal for police officers to stop, search, and question any individual they thought had drugs, weapons, or other illegal contraband on their person. It is nearly impossible to see anything someone has on their person if it is hidden by their clothing. To conclude that someone is possessing something illegal just by looking at them is stereotyping. This law is a legal way to racially profile an individual. It is not a coincidence that, African American and Latino communities located where Stop and Frisk is active are overwhelmingly targeted. Someone can be walking home innocently, and be stopped by police just because the police officer felt like it or stereotyped them as being a criminal. In the article “Stop-and-Frisk Campaign” on the “nyclu.org” they stated that “innocent New Yorker’s have been subject to police stops and street interrogation more than 4 million times since 2002.” This is a big problem that needs to be solved. This is a clear violation of rights, but America has let this law be active. Most Americans are not affected by stop-and-frisk so it is regularly ignored. On the behalf of the people living in the inner city, we feel like our rights are violated and we are discriminated against because of stop-and-frisk.

Stop and Frisk was designed to arrest people, mostly whom are people of color, who were deemed suspicious of being involved in illegal activity.  These police officers have preconceived notions that people of color are criminals, will prevent law enforcement from doing their job correctly. Some people who are on the outside of the Black community might think that it works. For example, when talking about Stop-and-Frisk, Donald Trump said, in the “Presidential Debate,” that “it worked very well in New York, it brought the crime rate way down but you take the gun away from criminals that shouldn’t be having it.” This shows that people that stereotype, don’t see that it is unconstitutional. People like Donald Trump will never know what it’s like living in America and getting discriminated against just for simply walking down the street. Even if it worked as a deterrent, there is very little way to tell if someone is involved in illegal activity, when banking on suspicion. Suspicions are opinionated and is not something that should be a basis for a law. Laws affect our country in its entirety and they have to be based upon facts not opinions.

To target a group of Americans, and strip them of any right stated in the constitution is clearly unconstitutional. It is the government’s responsibility to ensure Americans that their constitutional rights will be protected. To allow stop-and-frisk, the government is not upholding the constitution. Furthermore, laws before this were designed with prejudices and were deemed reasonable.

The war on drugs act was created by President Richard Nixon in 1971. In the article “The United States War on Drugs” it’s written that “He proclaimed, America’s public enemy number one in the United States is drug abuse.” In all actuality, he knew he had two groups of people who could hurt his presidency. On one and he wanted to get rid of the Hippies, who were against the war, and on the other hand he wanted to get rid of the Black Panthers, who were protecting the Black communities against discrimination and police brutality at all costs. To extinguish the two groups, Nixon associated the Hippies with marijuana and Black Panthers with heroin. This enabled law enforcement to eradicate both communities. As the age of the Hippies went away, so did the need to eradicate them. After the Hippies were extinguished, Latino’s took their place as the second target group. As for the Black Panthers, the Black communities never could recover from the connection with heroin. Even after the Black panthers were eradicated, the Black communities were still subject to mass incarceration due to drugs. They had no one to protect them against the very government that is supposed to protect them. This way of being tough on crime extended too many presidencies after Nixon.

Bill Clinton signed a crime bill in 1994, which enacted the three-strike law. The three-strike law was implemented to ensure that repeat offenders are kept in prison to serve 25 years to life sentences after committing a third offence. This meant that fewer people were being released from prison in turn, increasing the prison population. Clinton wanted to show he was tough on crime during his campaign so he acted. Clinton followed passed presidents who wanted to show they were tough on crime so he passed laws which created a spike of mass incarceration. Coinciding with the war on drugs act, the three-strikes law filled prisons with a population of majority Blacks and Hispanics. Bill Clinton took a page from Nixon’s book when he signed the crime bill in 1994. In the leading state of California, the prison population reached unthinkable numbers following this bill. By 2011 the prison population rose to almost double the prisons’ designed capacity. This overpopulation is the primary cause for the unconstitutional conditions found existing in the California prisons because it goes against health and safety regulations. Matthew Cate said, on “CNN.com” that “the governor and I strongly disagree with this ruling.” In the same article in 2006, “CNN” stated that “implementing the court’s ruling would result in up to 58,000 prisons being released.” These prisons are populated by mostly Black’s and Latino’s and it can be speculated that the reason this problem is being over looked is because the population is mostly Black and Latino.  

America is supposed to be a free country, but these shocking truths are showing that freedom in America depends on politic views or ethnicity. It might be criticized as being un-American when Black’s and Latino’s say they don’t feel free but experiencing life from their perspective’s might show why they question freedom in America. 

Works Cited 

New York Civil Liberties Union. http://www.nyclu.org/issues/racial-justice/stop-and-frisk-practices. NYCLU Web. Accessed 31, Oct, 2016

Debate over whether standardized testing is an adequate measure of student success is centered around the idea of test equity. Standardized testing has one main purpose and that is to compare and assess students based on one standard. If every student does not receive the same opportunity to receive a high score, then the test is not equitable. Therefore, if test equity is not achieved then testing has not met its purpose and cannot be used to measure student achievement.

Putting children on the same level when taking high stakes standardized tests is test equity. Students should take a test that matches their culture and lifestyle. For example, the minority children described in Robert Green’s “The Impact of Standardized Testing on Minority Students,” demonstrate how the current test inequity harms minority children. Green argues that the current method of administering standardized tests, giving the same test to every one with little to no exceptions, is not equitable  at all. A minority student who speaks English as his or her second language is expected to understand the same vocabulary as a white child who has been exposed to the English language since birth. A poor black student is expected to have the same “common knowledge” as a wealthy white student despite a clear difference in life experiences. Sure, the questions on the page are the identical but the opportunity to receive a high score is different for every student. As of now, standardized tests for the most part favor Caucasian middle to upper class students. Test equity could be achieved by tailoring tests to students instead of attempting to tailor the students to the test.

Others, who do not agree with the aforementioned definition of test equity, often mistake test equity for test equality. James Aycock illustrates this definition in his article, “Teacher Voice: In Defense of Standardized Testing.” Aycock argues that every test and testing method has to be identical. This is because standardized tests are vital in determining what students know. The scores from tests give teachers the insight they need to determine what skills their students have mastered and which still need work. Since all students received the same test, teachers are able to make generalizations about the student body based on the scores.  According to this mindset, it is okay that minority students or lower class schools may produce lower scores than their wealthy  majority counterparts. They argue the tests are equitable but the education leading up to the tests is not. However, by Aycock’s own definition, the tests are not equitable. It is nearly impossible to give hundreds of thousands an identical test where no child has advantages or disadvantages due to factors such as class or race. The tests that Aycock describes as vital do achieve test equality but do not achieve test equity.

For example, take the Interaction Institute for Social Change’s “Equality vs. Equity Scenario.”  There are two people standing in front of a fence trying to watch a baseball game. They are both given one crate to stand on which makes one of them able to see over the fence while the other is still too short. This is equality since they are being given equal treatment. In the second image, the taller man keeps his one crate while the shorter man receives two crates. Now, both men are at the same height and able to view the game. This is equity because both men are receiving the same opportunity to watch the game. The treatment is fair and impartial. In the context of standardized testing, these definitions are upheld. Giving all students the same exact test, despite language, class, and other barriers that may help or hinder their scores, is test equality not test equity. Test equity is achieved when all students are given the same opportunity to receive a high score with their differences taken into account.

All in all, test equity and test equality are two completely different things and the importance and value of each will be important in determining the future of standardized testing. Having true test equity would mean ensuring that every student has the chance to receive a passing score with hard work. The test itself should not determine whether a student passes, the knowledge of the student should make that determination. Test equity also helps to lower the devastating effects of high stake testing. As of today, where test equality is achieved but not test equity, thousands of lower class and minority communities are suffering. Lower scores are more prevalent in those communities which means less funding and less academic progression for the students. Every community receives the same test, in order to achieve test equality, so the higher class communities prevail while the lower class minority communities suffer. With true test equity, tests would be more accommodating to the culture and dialect differences between groups. Therefore, all students would be capable of receiving the same score and only their knowledge would dictate the final grade.

Works Cited

Aycock, By James. “Teacher Voice: In Defense of Standardized Testing.” SCORE. N.p., 20 May 2014. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.

Green, Robert L., and Robert J. Griffore. “The Impact of Standardized Testing on Minority Students.” The Journal of Negro Education, vol. 49, no. 3, 1980, pp. 238–252.

Macguire, Angus, and IISC. “Illustrating Equality VS Equity.” Interaction Institute for Social Change. IISC, 01 June 2016. Web. 21 Nov. 2016.

“(Medical)  Heroin”

In my own words heroin is an illegal drug that is a chemical blend formed from morphine, which is a natural substance that is taken from a poppy plants seed. This drug is usually in a white or brown powder that can be injected into a vein which is considered mainlining, injected into a muscle, placed on tinfoil and inhaled as smoke through a straw or snorted as powder via the nose. Heroin is a narcotic powder (C 21 H 23 NO 5) that was formerly used as an sedative/pain killer. In 2011, 1.6% of people used heroin at lest once, but 23% who used it became dependent on it.   Heroin abuse is associated with many serious health conditions which include fatal overdose, spontaneous abortion, and infectious diseases such as hepatitis and HIV. The problem is how is medical heroin better than something regular heroin users have.  They are both harmful and people are still addicted to it.  Although when given by a doctor, it prevents  the crime of getting it off the street and its more likely to be clean.

Addiction is not something that the world takes lightly. There is no fast cure and the treatment is not easy.  A person’s brain creates dopamine which is spread from a neurotransmitter to send signals to other nerve cells. This plays a distinct part in the brain’s reward circuit.  The reward circuit plays a big role in the involvement of reinforcing behavior, motor control, and various hormones.  With the continuous use of the drug, the brain will adjust itself to the exceeding amount of dopamine. This in turn will force the brain to make less of it and/or reduce the ability of cells in the reward circuit to respond to it.  With the reduction of the natural high, addicts must use the drug to replace it. Even after someone quits, one small relapse can bring them back to square one because the addiction will always be there.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/heroin

http://www.drugfree.org/drug-guide/heroin/

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/heroin/what-heroin

http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/heroin

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/understanding-drug-use-addiction

The Misunderstanding of Rock ‘n’ Roll

Rock ‘n’ roll is often misunderstood due to how it is commonly portrayed in our society. This genre of music is almost always associated with dark forces and the occult, which in reality, is a prime example of “judging a book by its cover”.  As an unknown writer once said, “We live in a very superficial society. It is very easy to fall into the trap of looking only at the surface of people, things, and ideas without taking the time and effort to delve deeper into them.” A seemingly unrelated topic that works nicely as an analogy for this misjudgment is the treatment of Blacks throughout history.  At its surface, Rock ‘n’ roll does show signs of being solely based around darkness. However, underneath that surface is a wide collection of songs pertaining to the most eclectic of topics. Black people are judged because of their skin color, even though they are human beings just like everyone else. Until people open their minds (or their ears), and truly pay attention to who Black people are as individuals and what Rock ‘n’ roll truly signifies, they are left with demeaning and unfair images that are nowhere near the actuality.

An in depth look into Rock ‘n’ roll shows a melting pot of widely unrelated topics, most having nothing to do with dark forces and the occult. The anti-war and anti-violence sentiment of the 60’s can be heard through songs like Creedence Clearwater Revival’s “Fortunate Son”, which attacked militant patriotic behavior and the individuals who supported the fight without getting their own hands dirty, and Bruce Springsteen’s “Born in the U. S. A.”, which addresses the harmful effects that the Vietnam War had on Americans. Rock ‘n’ roll also has quite few songs about love, some coming from bands that would not normally be associated with the theme- including “Forever” by Kiss (which details a man’s realization that his love for a certain girl will last forever), and “Sweet Child O’ Mine” by Guns N’ Roses (which was inspired by a poem band mate Axl Rose wrote about his girlfriend at the time). And one of the best proofs that Rock ‘n’ roll was not centered on darkness is a little song by Jimmy Buffet called, “Cheeseburger in Paradise”. This song has no double meaning, and is entirely about a man’s love for cheeseburgers. There is absolutely nothing dark forces in it, which can be said for a majority of Rock ‘n’ roll songs.

The misunderstanding of Rock ‘n’ roll can be paralleled with the unfair treatment of Blacks throughout history.  Opinion on them is commonly based on their skin color instead of who they are as a person. Take Solomon Northup, the free African- American who had to endure twelve years as a slave. As a few writers from the Encyclopedia Britannica have said, “Solomon received some education and worked on his family’s farm as a child. He married Anne Hampton in 1828. In 1834, after selling their farm, the couple moved to Saratoga Springs, New York, where they worked odd jobs to support their three children. Northup also established a reputation as a talented fiddler.” Contrary to the popular belief of the time that African-Americans were savages and naturally inferior to White Americans, Solomon Northup was a hard worker who was able to create a mostly stable lifestyle for his family, and even became a renown musician. Unfortunately, he was lured by two men who judged him based off of his skin to travel to Washington DC, where he was drugged and sold into slavery. For the next twelve years he worked as a slave for different masters, who did not believe that he was a free and educated African-American. He was being judged by his skin, not his true self. After finally securing his freedom, Northup ended up writing his memoir, which revealed to the world his side of the story. Another Black individual who was much more than he appeared to be on the outside was Thomas-Alexandre Dumas. The father of famed writer Alexandre Dumas, Thomas-Alexandre Dumas defied expectations and led an adventure of a life. As Tom Reiss, author of The Black Count: Glory, Revolution, Betrayal and the Real Count of Monte Cristo, says in an  interview with NPR’s Scott Simon , “He’s a black man, born into slavery, and then he rises higher than any black man rose in a white society before our own time,” and that, “He became a four-star general and challenges Napoleon, and he did it all 200 years ago, at the height of slavery.” In a time when Blacks were commonly found to be slaves, this one man was able to break expectations by becoming a respected general for the French army. And although his life story ended in an unfortunate manner, thanks in part to a ploy by Napoleon (who disliked Dumas for being successful and the opposite of him physically) to get rid of him, Dumas’ influence lived on, especially through some of his son’s most popular characters, such as Edmond Dantès and the musketeer d’Artagnan. Both Solomon Northup and Thomas-Alexandre Dumas highlight the “judging of a book by its cover” that took place in history,  which in turn mirrors the misunderstanding of Rock ‘n’ roll.

Rock ‘n’ roll is a Black person enduring the negative biases of people of different skin color. It is a misunderstood genre of music, incorrectly portrayed in society. And at its most basic level, Rock ‘n’ Roll is a book judged by its cover.

Works Cited

New Source Cole, Rachel, David Fiske, Rachel Seligman, and Clifford Brown. “Solomon Northup.” Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Encyclopedia Britannica, n.d. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.

New Source Simon, Scott, and Tom Reiss. “‘The Black Count,’ A Hero On The Field, And The Page.” NPR. NPR, n.d. Web. 21 Nov. 2016.

Unknown. “Don’t Judge a Book By Its Cover.” Modern Day Adages. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.

Sports Injuries

Proper practice and training leads to a healthier athlete with less chance of injury.  Athletes these days are much more prone to injuries then a non-athlete.  There are all different injuries that can happen to a an athlete in which sometimes can end their careers.  When we think about a common injury that happens frequently, we can think of a pitcher in baseball tearing his UCL in his arm requiring Tommy John Surgery.  The thing is these are not the only injuries that happen to people.  A non-athlete can get injured as well but with a lesser chance.  When an injury happens, we all look at the success rate of coming back as the same athlete.  There are all different types of different injuries to different sported athletes.  What if we could look at one surgery that some say should get done before the injury even happens because it makes the athlete stronger.

We compare football to baseball injuries and see that yes they both do happen but they are strangely different type of injuries.  Looking at the sports at first we realize basic things right away.  In football, no one uses there arm to throw something besides the quarterback and when it comes to baseball, every single player on the team uses there arm every play.  Looking at this, we know that there are different injuries in which baseball usually has arm injuries as football usually doesn’t have many arm injuries at all.

Examples of injuries in both sports that are very common are a torn UCL in baseball and a torn ACL in football.  Looking at both injuries, we find that they are the some of the longest recovery times post operation in all sports.  The time that happens after surgery from an injury is called post operation.  During this time an athlete rehabs and rests to let the body try to get back to full strength.  There are all different time lengths for all different types of injuries.  For example, Tommy John surgery usually leaves an athlete out of commission for at least 9 months as to if someone in football gets surgery on something as much as a torn meniscus can have them out for as short of a time at 6 weeks.  As a person gets injured, everyones bodies are different and can heal faster or some can take longer then others so nothing is ever set in stone.

We could say that there as many leading causes behind sport injuries such as overuse, stops and twists, falls, improper equipment, new or increased activity, fatigue, unilateral movements, and technique and posture.  All these reasons are different causes behind an injury to an athlete.  Being an athlete, you need to be in the best shape of your life and push your body harder then it should be pushed at some points which why athletes are ore prone to injury.  There are ways to prevent injuries but some things we can control.  WE see sometimes that there are injuries that happen to someone just randomly because they took a wrong step.

Injuries do happen to athletes.  They are all different in different sports and there are different reasons why they do happen each time.  Its never good when they do happen and it is sad to see but it is a part of being an athlete.  There are ways to prevent these from happening but not in all cases.  Injuries are all different, it is important to know how to make your body in the best shape for all different sports so that these injuries do not happen.

Work Cited

“Regressive Tax”

In my own words, I describe a regressive tax as a tax that affects and taxes the poor more than it does to wealthier citizens. This tax can be either income, sales, or property. A regressive tax can be a tax on food, clothing, or even prescription medication.

So if the government imposes a tax on certain sales, it may sound regressive. But if the tax is only on luxury items then it is not regressive. If the sales tax does not tax  basic items that people need, the cost of essential items will not go up. People who have low incomes will not be affected by the tax of they only buy essential items (groceries, clothing, and prescription  medication).  These items listed in the previous sentence are exempt from the New Jersey 7% sales tax. This sales tax will go down to 6.875% on January 1, 2017.

The sales tax only applies to to luxury items. This includes, but is not limited to: prepared meals, tobacco, alcohol, and candy.  If someone chooses to pay a tax then it is not regressive, it is voluntary. A tax only on luxury items is not a regressive tax because it does not place more of a burden on the people who can least afford to pay the tax. I think that New Jersey should not lower its sales tax at all. It should be left at 7%. This is a fair tax because it does not place a tax burden on the people with low income. I would not define the sales tax in New Jersey as regressive.

Works Cited

Does Aggression Equal Violence?

Aggressive behavior does not necessarily mean violence. For decades, politicians and parents have been blaming violent video games as the catalyst for violent behavior in those who play them. A year ago, the American Psychological Association released a study indicating that video games do increase aggression and decrease empathy and sensitivity. At face value, one might think that this proves the claims correct, and that video games do incite violence out of its audience. However, this study does not quite prove that. The study says violent video games increase aggressive behavior, but there is still no correlation between this changed behavior and outright violence.

To better understand what I mean, one must better understand what aggressive behavior entails. According to the University of North Carolina, aggressive behavior is a persistent pattern of behavior that causes or threatens harm to people. Aggression is seen in many forms. There are verbal forms such as taunts and threats. Physical forms such as tantrums, throwing, and fights. Covert forms such as lying, stealing and drug use. Besides, these there are many other types. The fact of the matter is that some forms of aggression are less severe than others. Without a doubt, any form of physical aggression can easily lead to violence, but other forms such as lying or taunting are less clear. With such a broad spectrum of what is considered aggression, saying violent video games causes aggressive activities is a weak argument in blaming them for violent crimes.

To elaborate, someone who plays violent video games might end up being more prone to taunt others. They may even lie or steal more often. There is even the potential that these games could lead to a violent crime, but each form of aggression listed above is very different. Whether it be verbal or physical, noticeable or subtle. There is nothing that truly links one form of aggression to another, besides them just being a form of aggression. Violent video games may only increase one form of aggressive behavior, or it could increase all of them. Despite the research done, there is not enough to pinpoint violent behavior as an effect of increased aggression. In turn, this also means there is not enough to indicate violent behavior as an effect of video games.

Works Cited

American Psychological Association. American Psychological Association, 13 Aug. 2015. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.

Fraser, Mark W., James K. Nash, Maeda J. Galinsky, and Kathleen M. Darwin. “The Making Choices Program: Social Problem- Solving Skills …” University of North Carolina. N.p., n.d. Web. 30 Oct. 2016.

What’s the Difference?

Sports can bring all kinds of people together. There can be many individuals on one team, or a sport can even be played with just one person, like tennis for example. The Olympics bring hundreds of countries together to see which is better at playing games than others. People all over the world play many different kinds of sports. Running, balls, nets, balls, keeping score,  courts, and fields are just a few aspects all sports have. Some sports are very similar to each other too, like softball and baseball or tennis and badminton. Sports like tennis and badminton are also a pair of sports that are modified towards each other. They both have the same concept, but many differences. Softball and baseball both have the same general rules, like needing to get three outs and using a ball to pitch to a batter. They both have a first, second, and third base that runners run to so they can score. Though these basic and simple rules are a few aspects what these sports have in common, their differences are increased.

When baseball is compared to baseball, the obvious difference is the gender of each sport. Baseball has boys on the field and softball has girls. There is no actual law that says girls can’t play baseball and boys can’t play softball, but this is mainly just how it is. Another difference is the size of the field. Both sports have dirt and grass, but the softball field is smaller than the baseball field. In baseball, the standard base distance is 90 feet from base to base, but in softball they are 60 feet apart. The fence in softball are usually about 220 feet or so. Baseball’s fence is about 400 feet from home plate. The pitching distance from home plate is also different. They softball mound is only 43 feet from home, and the baseball mound is 60 feet. The baseball mound is also higher because of the extra dirt under the mound, where as in softball it is flat. This effects each sport’s pitching as well.

The size of the balls are a big difference as well. The baseball is only 9 inches in circumference , and the softball is 12 inches and it is yellow too. This effects the weight of each ball. The bats that each sport uses also have differences. Maximum bats for softball are 34 inched long and weigh 24 ounces. Baseball bats have the maximum length of 34 inches and weigh 32 ounces. Though the length is the same, the weight is an important factor.

Even though there is are many differences in baseball and softball, there are also many differences in tennis and badminton. These two pairs of sports are both very similar, but require different skill levels. There is also a huge difference between the sports tennis and badminton. These sports are very similar to softball and baseball because they both are sports with the same aspect, but with different difficulty levels. Tennis and badminton are both played with a racket. Though tennis is played on a 78 feet long court, while badminton’s court is only 44 feet long, they are very different.

Tennis rackets are much heavier than a badminton racket. A tennis racket may weigh about three quarters of a pound; while a badminton racket is only just a quarter of a pound. This difference might change that athlete’s need for strength in their arms. To say that one sport is harder than the other is very difficult. A tennis player having to play a badminton match will have difficulty and vise versa.

Overall, for softball and baseball, the pitching makes the most difference. The elevated mound in baseball makes the pitch have to move downward to get into the strike zone. The baseball pitch also is thrown with an overhand motion. Softball pitching is completely different. This kind of pitching is thrown with the windmill, underhand motion. The mound is not elevated in softball. Because it is a flat surface and the ball is released low, the ball must go upward to make it into the strike zone.

All of these factors are important in playing the game. These are also important to take into when a batter is up to bat. Though these sports have big differences, they have the same concepts. Due to this amount of differences, there must also be different difficulty levels as well. This would make one sport more difficult than the other.

Works Citied

CK”s Baseball 4U, B. C. (2014, February 27). What’s the Difference between Baseball and Softball? Retrieved October 30, 2016.

H. (2014). Difference Between Tennis and Badminton. Retrieved November 23, 2016

Mann, B. A. (2011, September 30). Baseball vs. Softball. Retrieved October 30, 2016.

The Difference Between Baseball & Softball | iSport.com. (n.d.). Retrieved October 30, 2016.