I’ve gotten used to smelling Juul smoke in my 9 a.m. lecture. It’s rare if I don’t see puffs of smoke periodically floating overhead in class. This is a clear sign that the Juul has become ubiquitous among students.

Some kids begin Juuling as early as middle school, and last month, the FDA said that among teens, vaping has reached “an epidemic proportion.” The CDC reported that over two million middle and high schoolers use e-cigarettes every day.

This rise in underage vaping can be blamed almost solely on the Juul. The FDA and parents alike have voiced their concern, but the issue goes deeper than the dangers of underage vaping. The Juul has become part of my generation’s identity, and if things don’t change soon, it may never leave.

A Juul may be a vaping device, but its widespread use has evolved into a staple of youth culture in America. Kids who would never have smoked cigarettes are starting to Juul because of the relative absence of a social taboo compared to tobacco.

Until the Juul is treated as something more than just a vape or e-cigarette, attempts to reduce its use will fail. The Juul has penetrated every corner of social media, from Instagram and Twitter to Soundcloud and Spotify. Celebrities and social media influencers can be seen with the Juul nonchalantly in hand all the time.

Kids who have access to technology are getting exposed to the Juul especially early. There’s not a stigma around Juuling like there is around smoking, and many parents aren’t clued into the Juul’s existence, so it’s easy for kids to get hooked early.

The explosion of Juul use and its prolific social media presence are evidence that it’s not just the addictive properties of nicotine that make the Juul so successful. There are many other e-cigarettes and vaping devices on the market, but somehow the Juul rose above them all. By looking like a thumb drive and being chargeable on the computer, the Juul fits well into the average student’s backpack.

Of course, the nicotine is a major factor as well. Each Juul pod contains as much nicotine as an entire pack of cigarettes. Being exposed to such high levels of nicotine at a young age can lead to long-term addiction, as well as other health problems including stunted growth. But these risks are easily glossed over by people touting that the Juul is healthier than cigarettes.

It’s easy for teens to rationalize vaping over smoking because of the lack of information about it. No long-term studies have been done on the health effects of vaping, so it’s presented as a risk-free alternative. The bottom line is that inhaling any kind of chemical isn’t good for you, even if the consequences aren’t defined yet.

Youth will always find ways to rebel, but the problem is that now we are constantly connected to social media and technology — two things that coexist perfectly in the Juul. The combination of sleek futuristic design and social media presence make it a perfect badge of hip rebellion.

Cigarettes used to be the go-to for rebellious teenagers, but according to the CDC, teenage smoking is at an all-time low at just below 16 percent. Kids may not be smoking cigarettes, but they’re vaping.

Vaping is a little too broad though, as Juul makes up 72 percent of the e-cigarette market. It would be more accurate to say kids are Juuling. No other nicotine product in recent memory has had the impact Juul has.

Anti-smoking ads targeted directly at the Juul have already started popping up, but that won’t be enough. The Juul is so integrated in our culture that change must come from the inside. Social media influencers and the role models of our youth need to be more cognizant of their platform and take the opportunity to fight underage nicotine use.

Getting teenagers unaddicted to nicotine is a lofty goal, but it’s one worth working toward. There is no one-step solution, and underage nicotine use will likely never completely disappear, but those aren’t reasons not to try.

A correction was made on 10/30/2018 to remove the assertion that the Juul is made by the company PAX.

The post Stevens: More than just a vape appeared first on Emerald Media.

The night of Oct. 6, I found myself in front of the television for four consecutive hours watching men and women beating each other to a pulp. This was UFC 229: McGregor v. Khabib, its violent glory withheld from network television in lieu of pay-per-view. Maybe I had forgotten that UFC stands for Ultimate Fighting Championship, but I was surprised at the savagery of these fights. It feels a bit odd to be in 2018, when awareness of danger in contact sports is at an all-time high, and watch two men punch each other in the head over and over.

Disrespect and trash talk seem to be staples of the UFC, but this time things seemed more personal. In a video before the fight, Conor McGregor is seen throwing a chair through the window of Khabib Nurmagomedov’s team bus. I thought this seemed a little extreme but attributed it to all the pageantry and fake hate involved with fighting sports. Then the fights happened. After three lower tier — but equally brutal — fights, the marquee fight begins.

Finally, the main attraction. McGregor and Khabib step out of the shadows into the ring with the kind of swagger only the UFC can create. Though both contestants weigh less than I do, they seem larger than life and ready to draw blood.

The fight didn’t last long. It only took Khabib three minutes to get McGregor to submit. This is when my interest in the UFC peaked. Khabib jumped out of the ring to attack a member of Conor’s team. Then someone else jumped into the ring to fight McGregor himself, and the arena turned into a brawl.

Despite the UFC’s being built around fighting and trash talk, this time things went too far. Khabib wasn’t allowed to leave with the belt he earned because of this post-match fight, and both players were fined heavily.

The fight that occurred in the crowd after the event only reinforced my feeling that the UFC is out of place. These are modern day gladiators. It’s no longer sport, just a violent grudge match fueled by real anger.

During this fight, there was definitely an underlying feeling of resentment coming from Khabib. That resentment culminated violently at the end of the fight, but after hearing Khabib’s side, his actions make more sense.

Leading up to the fight, there was a lot of trash talk as usual, but the cultural differences between the two amplified that difference. After the altercation, Khabib took to Instagram to voice his opinion, saying: “Why didn’t you fire anyone when their team attacked the bus and injured a couple of people? They could have killed someone there, why no one says anything about insulting my homeland, religion, nation, family?”

This statement was made in response to members of Khabibs team having fights canceled forcibly by the UFC after the McGregor incident. Khabib feels McGregor’s team started the fight by being highly disrespectful of his culture, as well as physically attacking them.

McGregor’s behavior being tolerated makes the UFC look irresponsible. The resentment between McGregor and Khabib might have seemed like it was for show, but things went too far and the UFC responded poorly to Conor’s harassment.

Apart from catching a few landmark fights like Pacquiao v. Mayweather, I haven’t paid much attention to UFC; however, I seem to find myself forking over money for more at least once a year. I’d be willing to bet I’m not the only seasonal UFC fan, as there’s something undeniably entertaining about watching a fight. In the end, the violence might be what keeps the UFC alive, but more controversies like this could serve as knockout blows to end the sport as we know it.

The post Stevens: The Wrong Kind of Fight appeared first on Emerald Media.

It’s a dangerous job to try and remove sixty-five year old landmines from unstable soil, but that is the task at hand for South and North Korean soldiers. North Korea’s ever charismatic leader Kim Jong-Un has begun lowering his defenses for the first time. This came in the form of landmines being removed from the border of the two Koreas, known as the DMZ

Surprisingly Donald Trump might have had a role in this process. On June 12th of this year Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un met for the first time, and Trump had nothing but good things to say about him. The two met in order to work towards the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, but it seems like they came away as friends. CNN released an article about their meeting after which Trump said: “I think our whole relationship with North Korea and the Korean Peninsula is going to be a very different situation than it has in the past.”

Also, a little more than a week ago on September 29th, Donald Trump was quoted in numerous articles as saying “We fell in love” when referring to his relationship with Kim Jong-Un.

Kim Jong-Un seems to be finally letting his guard down, but should we take it at face value?

The removal of landmines on the border is a great first step, but Trump’s fondness of Kim Jong-Un shouldn’t be reassuring.

This is because Trump has a history of pandering to heavy handed leaders. Vladimir Putin has been praised by Trump many times, enough so that CNN released an article chronicling his statements on Putin. Trump has said things like: I believe that President Putin really feels, and he feels strongly, that he did not meddle in our election.”

Since 1953 when the Korean war unofficially came to a close, North Korea has been isolated and hostile to the outside world. Through its hereditary dictatorship, the Kims have maintained total control of North Korea. South Korea sits prosperously only a few miles below, but contact between the two is scarce. This is why it’s exciting to hear about the removal of the land mines that separate the two.

In March of 2017 I went to South Korea with my school to talk to South Koreans about the idea of reunification. From my experience the youth of South Korea are less interested in reunification than the adults. Being in Seoul and going to the DMZ to look into North Korea was shocking. South Korea is so clearly prospering and at moments in Seoul I felt like I was in some bizarre future. Just across the border though is North Korea, one of the least prosperous nations in the world.

South Korea doesn’t feel like it needs to reunify with the North. North Korea is the one who would benefit from reunification.

Though the connection to the North might be fading, reunifying is still the goal of the South, and the removal of landmines is an important first step.

It’s good to be optimistic about the future of North Korea, but the thought of Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un being close is odd. Kim Jong-Un has had little direct contact with the United States and yet the two have bonded quite quickly. Trump should give more respect to the people living in terrible conditions under his rule and keep their relationship political.

Maybe Donald Trump really is coaxing Kim Jong-Un down from the ledge, but I don’t think he’s going about it in the right way, and I don’t trust him. It’s good the landmines are being removed, and it’s good Trump is talking to him, but we can’t forget the severity of the situation. Kim Jong-Un is a despotic monarch and millions have suffered under him. Trump should be more cognizant of who Un is.

With any luck, the future is bright for North Korea. If Trump’s friendship is what it takes then we’ll have to live with it.

The post Stevens: A Step In the Right Direction for North Korea appeared first on Emerald Media.

Serena Williams was dethroned in the 2018 Women’s US Open final by twenty-year-old Naomi Osaka. Apart from this being an important victory for Osaka, it has also set an important precedent for women’s tennis. Serena was the recipient of a violation for coaching, then subsequently a violation for breaking her racket.

Williams received a third violation for making rude comments towards the ref, Carlos Ramos. A microphone picked up Williams saying: “You’re attacking my character. Yes you are. You owe me an apology, You will never, ever, ever be on another court of mine as long as you live. You are the liar…When are you going to give me my apology. You owe me an apology. Say it. Say you’re sorry. … And you stole a point from me. You’re a thief, too!”

These comments might seem extreme to some, but professional tennis isn’t new to poor sportsmanship. In both men’s and women’s pro tennis, especially at the highest level, being rude to the ref is somewhat commonplace. What’s important are the penalties Serena received, and the way she reacted.

Serena forfeited an entire game for the receiving a third penalty, and this has sparked a conversation about sexism in pro tennis. Serena and her fans believe she was the victim of unfair treatment based on her race and gender. In an interview following the match, Serena said: “If you’re female, you should be able to do even half of what a guy can do.” This claim has been supported by other professional players and spectators alike. Even  legendary women’s tennis player Billie Jean King has praised Serena for standing up for women’s rights.

Former professional tennis player James Blake tweeted a response to this issue which expressed sympathy, saying: “I will admit I have said worse and not gotten penalized. And I’ve also been given a “soft warning” by the ump where they tell you knock it off or I will have to give you a violation.  He should have at least given her that courtesy. Sad to mar a well played final that way.”

James’s tweet isn’t a confirmation of Serena’s claims, but it shows that there is likely evidence to support her.

On the men’s side, some have been punished even harder. In the US open last year, Italian player Fabio Fognini was kicked out of the tournament for his comments to the ref. Fabio cursed at the ref in Italian. For his vulgarity, Fabio was banned from the US Open and fined tens of thousands of dollars.

The problem with claiming that men get away with more than women, is that the referee’s aren’t consistent. Yelling at a referee isn’t like a line call, it’s not either in or out, it’s all based on the severity of the comments and how the ref received them. The subjectiveness of violations like these is going to lead to bias no matter what.

Interestingly, Carlos Ramos, the ref who handed down Serena’s punishment, is known for being a straight shooter. He used to play tennis himself, but his love for the rules pushed him to become a ref. A New York Times article interviewed one of Ramos’s old superiors, who said that Ramos was committed to being a good ref, “He recalled the laserlike focus Ramos gave to even the lowest level game, umpiring ‘as if he were at Wimbledon.’”

Another reason this issue is being talked about so much is that it was the US Open final. Naomi Osaka is only twenty years old, and people were surprised and excited to see her make it to the final. Naomi’s underdog status made for a very entertaining match leading up to the latter half. But as the match came to a close, both competitors were in tears. Serena was expressing her frustration with the calls of the ump. Meanwhile, Naomi was coping with the crowd’s reaction to the calls of the ref and the subsequent outcome of the match.

Being twenty years old myself, I can’t imagine being booed by tens of thousands of people after winning the US Open. At the end of that match, the focus should have been on Naomi, not Serena or the referee. Ultimately it was the ref’s poor calling that was the problem, but Naomi shouldn’t have had to left her first US open win in tears.

I do not necessarily agree with the calls made against Serena, but I am also not fully convinced the calls were made because she is a black woman. Given the reputation of Ramos and the inconsistency of tennis reffing on the whole, it is difficult to confidently say he made the calls out of bias. Regardless of if Serena deserved the punishment, both men and women in professional tennis should be held accountable for their words and actions.

The post Stevens: Is Professional Tennis Sexist? appeared first on Emerald Media.

On September 14th, Netflix aired the fifth season of their ever depressing animated original, Bojack Horseman. Since season one, Will Arnett has been loaning his voice to the titular character, guiding the show through its many ups and downs. Bojack Horseman is a show that takes on difficult issues like mental illness, substance abuse, and depression. What’s surprising is the confidence with which the show marches through these issues, despite being an animated comedy.

The shows main character, Bojack Horseman, has been through quite a lot by season 5. Bojack was a sitcom star in the 70’s and since has been fighting to stay relevant whilst questioning his purpose. The character of Bojack is not a particularly likeable one, due to his questionable sexual behaviour, substance abuse, and physical violence. Though Bojack behaves deplorably he is always remorseful and wants to change, though it seems impossible. All of this remains true in season 5, but this season the show addresses his failure to change head on.

Season 5 covers many themes, but one major theme is the marginalization of women in media. In the show a disgraced celebrity is up for a part on the same show as Bojack. This celebrity was disgraced for racist and sexist comments, as well as a disrespectful call to his daughter. This character is satire of celebrities like Mel Gibson who have been recorded saying surprisingly offensive things. This Mel Gibson type is given another chance, then another, then another, and of course he messes all of them up by spouting slurs left and right. This is a jab at the media cycle that continues to offer bad men chance after chance.

During the disgraced celebrities attempts at reconciling his mistakes, a photographer catches a photo of Bojack making a funny face, which is interpreted as a stand against his disgraced costar. Bojack then inadvertently becomes a male feminist, and finding it marketable, rides it out.

This is just one of the smaller story arcs within Bojack Horseman that seek to parody real life in a way that makes it so glaringly obvious that what’s going on is wrong. Bojack Horseman is a show with many messages, and for the most part they’re all delivered well.

During season 5, Bojack is working on his new crime drama Philbert. Philbert appears to be another gritty crime drama with an anti-hero at the center, but as season 5 of Bojack progresses, it becomes clear that the show Philbert is a metaphor for Bojack Horseman itself. The main character of Philbert is a bad guy, just like Bojack, but Bojack says that the show Philbert makes him feel good about himself, because maybe it’s okay not to be a good guy.

This is commentary on how television can normalize unhealthy behavior. Lots of shows like Bojack Horseman feature flawed characters who do terrible things, but are somehow redeemed through remorse. The idea that feeling bad about doing something is enough for you to be forgiven is not true. Being a bad person isn’t ok just because you feel bad about it, and Bojack Horseman addresses this using the show Philbert.

I am impressed at the amount of depth to both the characters and the writing in this season of Bojack.

Though animated, Bojack Horseman manages to take on serious issues with poise. Not only does it provide important commentary on the trappings of modern society and our fight to be good people, but it does so well enough to make the audience question their own behavior. Themes of self worth, purpose and other large life questions permeate the shows writing. The character development seen from season one until now makes the characters themselves seem read. Unlike almost every animated show today, the characters aren’t perfect, but rather deeply complex and flawed, making them hard to sympathize with

The previous four seasons of Bojack Horseman left me with quite a lot of anticipation for the fifth, and I’m happy to say that that anticipation was well deserved. If you have the chance I highly recommend checking out Bojack Horseman, it’s funny, smart, and respects its audience more than most modern television.

The post Stevens: Netflix’s best original is animated appeared first on Emerald Media.

The last ten months has seen the Hip Hop community coping with the loss of three major artists. Rappers Lil Peep and XXXTentacion passed away earlier this year, but most recently, Pittsburgh rapper Mac Miller was found dead in his California home. The death was ruled an apparent overdose which sparked a lot of controversy and misdirected backlash at singer-songwriter Ariana Grande due to their recent breakup.

Their relationship began two years ago, which led to a newfound happiness that helped Mac sober up and inspired him to write more upbeat songs about love and enjoying life. Unfortunately, their relationship ended in May of this year. In the following week it became clear that Mac was no longer sober, and only eight days after the break up he crashed his car and was charged with a DUI.

Fans flooded Twitter and Instagram with their feelings about the breakup. Most people respectfully tweeted their condolences, but some saw the situation differently, as seen in this popular tweet from user Elijah Flint: “Mac Miller totaling his G wagon and getting a DUI after Ariana Grande dumped him for another dude after he poured his heart out on a ten song album to her called the divine feminine is just the most heartbreaking thing happening in Hollywood.”

This idea not only unjustly villanizes Ariana by blaming her for Mac’s actions, but is also insulting to Mac as it strips him of his personal autonomy. Ariana addressed these ideas in her response by saying that it is, “absurd that you minimize female self-respect and self worth by saying someone should stay in a toxic relationship because he wrote an album about them.”

Fast forward to September 7th when Mac was found dead. The Hip Hop community and fans around the world mourned his death.

Deciding how to react to the death of someone is incredibly difficult and everyone copes differently, but blaming somebody you don’t know is wrong. The dynamic of Ariana and Mac’s relationship remains largely unknown, but Mac’s struggles with drugs and alcohol have always been public knowledge, and acting like these problems were created by Ariana is at best uninformed, and at worst intentionally hurtful.

Regardless of what exactly ended the relationship between Ariana and Mac, it was Ariana’s right to walk away, and how Mac coped with the separation was of his own choosing. When you’re in a relationship with someone, even if it lasts for a long time, you are never obligated to stay no matter the circumstances.

Mac’s death was untimely and tragic to the outside world, but within his music it almost sounds like he saw it coming. In one line off the song “Perfect Circle/God Speed” Mac raps:

Everybody say I need rehab

Cause I’m speedin’ with a blindfold on and won’t be long ‘til they watching me crash

And they don’t wanna see that

They don’t want me to OD and have to talk to my mother

Telling her they could have done more to help me

And she’ll be crying saying that she’ll do anything to have me back

It’s clear that Mac was honest in his music, which was in part what created his large fan base. Mac’s music feels real and human, chronicling the struggles of a person battling depression and substance abuse. True Mac Miller fans who have listened to his music for what it is and heard the story he’s trying to tell will find his death all the more tragic. Mac knew he was headed down a rough path and he clearly wanted to avoid it, even if only for his family’s sake.

Mac was a wonderful person who touched the lives of many, myself included. He was a smart and genuine guy who knew he had problems, and to blame Ariana for his death is disrespectful to both Ariana’s and Mac’s memory. His music shaped the lives of young people across the country, and though he’s gone, his memory will live on in his music forever.

The post Stevens: Dealing with tragedy the wrong way appeared first on Emerald Media.