Men's Basketball Team (1970-71)

Front left team member John Corlett is currently (2008) Dean of the Faculty of Applied Health Sciences

Cross Country Team (1970-71)

From Left to Right: Terry Neal, Doug Bowers, Art Wiebe, Gord Merrill, Dave Viney

1970-71 Curling Team

1970-71 Brock curling team in action. From L to R: Rob Kelly, John Donald, and John Goodwin

1970-71 Hockey Team

1970-71 Brock Generals Hockey team. The members from left to right - Back row: Tom Kearney (trainer), Joel Finlay, Tony Grey, Gregg Carrigan, Craig Morrison, Pat Moroney, Rick Charron, Jim Swain, Bill Fuller, Barry Hopkins, Mike McNiven, Rick Sullivan, Ed Barszcz, Phil McCann, Randy Oiling (Manager), Al Kellogg (Coach). Front row: Wayne Butt, Ron Powell, Tim Goodman, Pat McCann, Arkell Farr, Dave Perrin, Gregg Law. Missing: Jeff Della Vedova.

Part of the 1970-71 Hockey Team

Likely a photo of Jim Swain, Tony Grey, Ron Powell, Barry Hopkins, and Joel Finlay circa 1971. (From Left to Right) Second from the right remains unknown.

Part of the 1970-71 Hockey Team

Likely a photo of Rick Charron, Wayne Butt, and Mike McNiven. (From Left to Right) circa 1971

Part of the 1970-71 Hockey Team

Likely a photo of Rick Sullivan and Phil McCann. The man on the left remains unknown.

Women's Coxed Eight (1970-71)

with coach Tony Biernacki

Varsity Men's Coxed Eight (1970-71)

with coach Tony Biernacki

Junior Men's Eight (1970-71)

Rowing down the course.

1970-71 Rugby Team

Back Row: ?, John Stokes, Jim Brandford, Geoff Cudmore, Mike Nictota, Dave Iogna, Mike Cocca, Mike Taylor Front Row: ?, Rob Kelly, Alun Huges, Dave Underhill, Ken White, Joe ?, Mike ?, Jim Robinson

The problem of national integration in plural societies : a case study of Pakistan, 1947-71 /|nMuhammed A. Quddus. -- 260 St. Catharines [Ont. : s. n.],

Pakistan had a plural society per excellence. Its people were divided geographically between two separate regions, spoke different languages, had different cultures and economic structures. Like other plural societies elsewhere, Pakistan also faced the problem of national integration. Cleavages along the lines of traditional attachments are fundamental to any plural society, as they were in Pakistan. But their political manifestation could have been kept within managable limits if the Central Government, overwhelmingly composed of the West Pakistanis, was seriously committed to the task. All that Pakistan needed to maintain her integrated existence was deliberate, calculated and conscious efforts on the part of the Central Government to give the Bengalis, the majority linguistic and geographic group in the country, a partnership in the state of Pakistan, an effective power in the decision-making process of the country, a reasonable share from the economic resources of the country, and to show respect to their hopes and aspirations. In addition, Pakistan needed a national platform to bring her divergent linguistic and geographic groups toge~her for some common, national purpos~s. Political parties were the only institutions which could have served this purpose. Pakistan miserably failed to sustain national political parties and failed to satisfy Bengalis' demands. This failure eventually resulted in the falling apart of the political system of Pakistan in 1971.

Social comparison and body image in non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers

Body image refers to an individual's internal representation ofhis/her outer self (Cash, 1994; Thompson, Heinberg, Altabe, & Tantleff-Dunn, 1999). It is a multidimensional construct which includes an individual's attitudes towards hislher own physical characteristics (Bane & McAuley, 1998; Cash, 1994; Cash, 2004; Davison & McCabe, 2005; Muth & Cash, 1997; Sabiston, Crocker, & Munroe-Chandler, 2005). Social comparison is the process of thinking about the self in relation to others in order to determine if one's opinions and abilities are adequate and to assess one's social status (Festinger, 1954; Wood, 1996). Research investigating the role of social comparisons on body image has provided some information on the types and nature of the comparisons that are made. The act of making social comparisons may have a negative impact on body image (van den Berg et ai., 2007). Although exercise may improve body image, the impact of social comparisons in exercise settings may be less positive, and there may be differences in the social comparison tendencies between non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers. The present study examined the nature of social comparisons that female collegeaged non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers made with respect to their bodies, and the relationship of these social comparisons to body image attitudes. Specifically, the frequency and direction of comparisons on specific tal-gets and body dimensions were examined in both non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers. Finally, the relationship between body-image attitudes and the frequency and direction with which body-related social comparisons were made for non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers were examined. One hundred and fifty-two participants completed the study (n = 70 non or ill infrequent exercisers; n = 82 exercisers). Participants completed measures of social physique anxiety (SPA), body dissatisfaction, body esteem, body image cognitions, leisure time physical activity, and social comparisons. Results suggested that both groups (non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers) generally made social comparisons and most frequently made comparisons with same-sex friends, and least frequently with same-sex parents. Also, both groups made more appearance-related comparisons than non-appearance-related comparisons. Further, both groups made more negative comparisons with almost all targets. However, non or infrequent exercisers generally made more negative comparisons on all body dimensions, while exercisers made negative comparisons only on weight and body shape dimensions. MANOV As were conducted to examine if any differences on social comparisons between the two groups existed. Results of the MANOVAs indicated that frequency of comparisons with targets, the frequency of comparisons on body dimensions, and direction of comparisons with targets did not differ based on exercise status. However, the direction of comparison of specific body dimensions revealed a significant (F (7, 144) = 3.26,p < .05; 1]2 = .132) difference based on exercise status. Follow-up ANOVAs showed significant differences on five variables: physical attractiveness (F (1, 150) = 6.33,p < .05; 1]2 = .041); fitness (F(l, 150) = 11.89,p < .05; 1]2 = .073); co-ordination (F(I, 150) = 5.61,p < .05; 1]2 = .036); strength (F(I, dO) = 12.83,p < .05; 1]2 = .079); muscle mass or tone (F(l, 150) = 17.34,p < .05; 1]2 = 1.04), with exercisers making more positive comparisons than non or infrequent exercisers. The results from the regression analyses for non or infrequent exercisers showed appearance orientation was a significant predictor of the frequency of social comparisons N (B = .429, SEB = .154, /3 = .312,p < .01). Also, trait body image measures accounted for significant variance in the direction of social comparisons (F(9, 57) = 13.43,p < .001, R2adj = .68). Specifically, SPA (B = -.583, SEB = .186, /3 = -.446,p < .01) and body esteem-weight concerns (B = .522, SEB = .207, /3 = .432,p < .01) were significant predictors of the direction of comparisons. For exercisers, regressions revealed that specific trait measures of body image significantly predicted the frequency of comparisons (F(9, 71) = 8.67,p < .001, R2adj = .463). Specifically, SPA (B = .508, SEB = .147, /3 = .497,p < .01) and appearance orientation (B = .457, SEB = .134, /3 = .335,p < .01) were significant predictors of the frequency of social comparisons. Lastly, for exercisers, the results for the regression of body image measures on the direction of social comparisons were also significant (F(9, 70) = 14.65,p < .001, R2adj = .609) with body dissatisfaction (B = .368, SEB = .143, /3 = .362,p < .05), appearan.ce orientation (B = .256, SEB = .123, /3 = .175,p < .05), and fitness orientation (B = .423, SEB = .194, /3 = .266,p < .05) significant predictors of the direction of social comparison. The results indicated that young women made frequent social comparisons regardless of exercise status. However, exercisers m,a de more positive comparisons on all the body dimensions than non or infrequent exercisers. Also, certain trait body image measures may be good predictors of one's body comp~son tendencies. However, the measures which predict comparison tendencies may be different for non or infrequent exercisers and exercisers. Future research should examine the effects of social comparisons in different populations (i.e., males, the obese, older adults, etc.). Implications for practice and research were discussed.