Wristband rage questionable

By Lisa Moreno

In May 2004, the yellow "LIVESTRONG" plastic wristbands debuted, and since then those plastic bands have spawned other ubiquitous armbands available for every occasion and cause.

Gone are the days of donating money to a charitable organization simply because you want to contribute.

We have adopted the mentality of "what's in it for me," and the response has come in the form of an embossed rubber band.

Personally, I don't understand what people hope to gain by wearing these bracelets. Many of the issues that are reinforced with these armbands are issues that people are aware of already. I think that it would be difficult to find someone in his or her right mind that, for example, opposes finding a cure for cancer.

I understand that we all desire recognition for a good deed or that perhaps relating to a greater social movement is really that important.

But when did we become so narcissistic that we need tokens to show everyone else that we have done something honorable?

The overwhelming response to the "LIVESTRONG" bracelet, with more than 30 million sold (not including counterfeits), has naturally lead other charitable organizations to want to create something similar so they too can reap the benefits (and profits) of this new armband fad.

One worthy cause that has recently jumped onto the altruism-bracelet bandwagon is the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation.

This organization was created in 1982 and, up until about six months ago, no large mass of people (especially college students) felt the need to implement an accessory into their daily wardrobe that shows support for the eradication of breast cancer.

For your information, the Susan G. Komen breast cancer awareness wristband is pink in color with the words "Sharing the Promise" embossed upon it. Chances are, if you look up from reading this article you will see a passerby wearing one.

This whole armband movement has become so popular that companies are selling these bracelets to simply make a quick buck: this is evident with Nike and their $8.99 "Baller ID" series of bands, which were endorsed by Denver Nuggets star Carmelo Anthony.

This price is a bit steep, especially on a college budget. But worry not, you can get a similar (and nearly identical) item at Walgreen's for only a dollar.

There are currently a wide variety of bracelets available with words like "love," "dream" and "hope" on them. But it gets worse! Some of these bracelets glow in the dark and are even fruit scented. Please, tell me why we are depending upon the olfactory sense to help us remember to "love" and "dream?"

You can even get a wristband for free by simply purchasing the latest volume of "Now That's What I Call Music." With your order you will get an armband with the company's namesake stamped right on it!

Maybe I am being a bit harsh, but I'm really not sure how much more of this I can take.

Granted, the main purpose of the bracelets are for fundraising; that is an admirable thing that cannot be disputed. But they have accomplished more than simply getting people to buy them and in the process inadvertently giving money to their cause.

My real problem with these bracelets is not what they represent, but the fact that people seem to be mindlessly wearing them just because it is the new "thing" to do. It seems to me that some of the people who wear the bracelets don't even know why they are wearing them to begin with.

My favorite example of this was dropped into my lap care of two fellow Santa Clara students. Two girls (who are avid band wearers themselves) were sitting in class one day when one girl asked the other, "What does that color stand for?" Naturally, she was referring to ring of milky white plastic around her friend's wrist. The bracelet wearer responded, "You know, to save the children." The other girl's response: "What children?" And the answer: "Like, poor kids."

Fortunately, the conversation stopped right there and nothing else was said regarding that mysterious white wristband. It is my belief that if you don't have something intelligent to say about a cause that you are supporting, then perhaps you should not be supporting it after all.

It is conversations like these, in concert with the blatant commercialism that is now associated with these wristbands, that has turned me off.

It's not that I disagree with the principle. There are many issues in our society and the broader world that are deserving of our support. Things such as cancer, poverty and human rights are all worthy and necessary issues indeed. However this trend has led to the idea that quasi-altruism is acceptable.

To me, this bracelet fad is like the Atkins diet: Everyone has to try it before we can all come to our senses are realize what a senseless idea it was to begin with.

* Lisa Moreno is a junior communication major.