Sport For Babies Essay Example For Students

Sport For Babies Essay A baby is born and the doctor looks at the proud parents or parent and saysthree simple words: Its a boy, or Its a girl! Before a newborn child even takeshis or her first breath of life outside the mothers womb, he or she isdistinguishable and characterized by gender. The baby is brought home anddressed in clothes that help friends, family and even strangers identify the sexof the child. Baby boys are dressed in blue and baby girls are dressed in pink. The baby boy may be dressed in a blue jumpsuit with a football or a baseballglove on it. The baby girl may wear a bow in their hair and flowered pajamas. Asthe boy begins to grow, he is given a miniature basketball and a hoop to playwith. The girl is given dolls an d doll clothes to dress them up in. Even goingfurther, eventually the boy may play with Legos and Lincoln Logs and the girlgets a PlaySchool oven and a plastic tea set with which to play house. Soundspretty normal right? Why? As illustrated in the not-so-fictional scenario above,gender socialization begins very early in life. Society has accepted suchstereotypical things as baby boy blue and baby girl pink to help identify thesex of a child. Heaven forbid the little Joey looks like a girl or b abyMichelle is mistaken for a boy. Mothers and fathers make it easy for everyone todistinguish their bundle of joy by utilizing the socially established genderstereotypes. But where and how did these stereotypes come from? Unfortunat ely, Idont think there is a definite answer to that question. We seem to accept thatblue is for boys and pink is for girls. Boys generally play with balls, toytrucks and building blocks whereas girls spend their time with dolls, tea setsand stuffed animals. But these are the stereotypes that are influenced by theparents. A baby child isnt concerned with his or her gender identity. As thechild gets older though, he or she will begin to develop an identity for his orherself and establish a personality th at reflects their masculinity orfemininity. In Nancy Chodorows essay Family Structure and FemininePersonality she examines the development of gender identity andpersonality. Except for the stereotypical examples I have given above whichagain are e stablished by the parents, Chodorow states that the development of achild is basically the same for boys and girls until the age of three. Duringthose first three years the mother is the dominant figure in the childs life. We will write a custom essay on Sport For Babies specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now The father plays a limited role until the child reaches the so called Oedipalperiod (beyond age 3). It is at this stage that children begin to try toseparate themselves from the clutches of their mother and establish their ownidentity. Chodorow examines how different this is for boys and girls. KFRC radiodisk jockey Ron Parker recently reported that out of a survey of one hundredfourth grade boys and one hundred fourth grade girls, the boys receive anaverage weekly allowance that is approximately 50% higher than the girlsreceive. On the average, the boys receive $4.18 as compared to the $2.67 paid tothe girls. To look even further, the survey reported that the boys only performthree household chores to earn their weekly allowance whereas the girls areperforming twel ve or more. Why are the girls expected to do four times as muchwork around the house than the boys are? Chodorow writes that a young boy isusually unable to identify with his masculinity through his father. The fatherisn? t as readily available to th e boy as the mother. Without the father tofollow example, Chodorow concludes that a boy will identify masculinecharacteristics be doing that which is not feminine. This could be anexplanation for the big difference in the number of chores the girls d o versusthe boys. Though you might disagree with the morality of this statement, youhave to admit that it is socially accepted that household chores are feminineduties. Young boys are bound to realize this and following Chodorow?s theory,will refuse to perform a lot of chores in an attempt to become moremasculine.GENDER?AND?THE?MEDIA Another aspect of everyday life that is highlyinfluential in gender socialization is the media. What we see on television orat the movies, what we read in the newsp aper or in magazines, what we see onbillboards or hear on the radio are all very significant on how we form aopinion on gender identity. Media publishers have very successfully learned to?play? to an audience and are extremely successful in communicat ing with theaudience they wish to reach. Advertisers are the biggest example of thisconcept. Society is very apt in recognizing images seen in commercials andprinted ads and viewing them as socially acceptable behavior. For example, beercompanies w ill target the twenty to thirty year old male audience and includescantily clad women enjoying their favorite beers. Ironically, popular women?smagazines also use beautiful women to promote cosmetics and beauty products(funny that both my examples sho w the exploitation of female images insocietymore on that later). How often do you think people question theactivities they see portrayed in advertising and question them as to therevalidity? Probably not very often. It is much easier for society to just acceptthe images and not bother to take the time to analyze their bias and untruenature. It is this societal ignorance that clouds the mind and allows the imagesto continue to influence what we believe to be socially acceptable. And when society is presented with something or someone out of the ordinary which doesn?tfollow what we deem to be correct, we rebel and try to modify it to our sociallyacceptable standards.THE?ANDROGYNOUS?SCENARIO Imagine a baby born with novisible sex organs. N ow imagine after some tests that there are no internal orexternal sex organs whatsoever. No ovaries, no testes, no uterus, no vagina, nopenis, no glands that produce estrogen or testosterone, no semen, no eggs, noanything. Is this possible? Surprisi ngly yes. It is very possible and in factprobably more so that one thinks. Though rarely publicized, there are people inthis world that are physically indistinguishable as males or females. SallyJesse Raphael recently had one of these androgynous hu man beings on her popularmorning talk show. This person, known as Toby, is neither male nor female andprefers to live life in the androgynous state. Toby is the only known humanbeing in the world like this. Me dically feasible, yes; but is the androgy nousperson socially acceptable in our everyday lifestyle? Since Toby was born, Tobyhasn?t been able to live a normal life. Throughout childhood, Toby wasconstantly pressured to make a decision to either become a full fledged male orfemale. Doctors, teachers, friends and family all thought that Toby would bemuch happier if Toby could be classified as either a man or a woman. But Tobydidn?t think so. Toby made a decision to stay androgynous and it has causedsome very interesting results. Everyw here Toby goes identity comes intoquestion. Is Toby male or female? Toby is neither. But that?s not possible. Yetit is. Think about what you do everyday and how much of it relies on gender andthen think about Toby. What public restroom do you go in? What kind of clothesdo you wear? What store do you buy them in? What colors do you buy? What letteris after the word sex on your drivers license? How does Toby answer thesequestions? That?s not the point. Th e point is why does Toby have to a nswerthese questions? Because this is what we have determined to be socially correct. .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 , .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 .postImageUrl , .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 , .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1:hover , .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1:visited , .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1:active { border:0!important; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1:active , .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1 .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u6c7aa17a013486e694a3e6a6af8393d1:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Free College Admissionss: Learning from Mist EssayThere are two sexes, male and female and you must be one or the other. How canthere be an in between? Such a person should have no place in our culturallybiased s ociety.FEMALE?EXPLOITATION As I briefly mentioned earlier, advertisersutilize female images to sell products. Society associates beauty with thefemale and we are more inclined to pay attention to a beautiful woman presentedto us on a screen or a page in a magazine. But can this be more harmful to asociety than good. Recently in my woman?s studies class we were involved in astudent panel discussion regarding this topic. The presenters literally filled awall with im ages taken from magazines and ne wspapers and each of thephotographs were of beautiful women endorsing some product. Everything fromlingerie to Coca-Cola utilized a female image to attract attention to their ad. This doesn?t just stop in advertising either. A documentary viewed in t he sameclass entitled ?DreamWorld?, exposed the demeaning portrayal of women as sexobjects in music videos. Specifically those shown on the popular music videonetwork MTV. The women in the videos were all sex objects; beautiful, buxom,sexy, promiscu ous and lacked any moral values whatsoever. Also, the woman inthe music videos all served one main purpose: to satisfy the sexual needs ofmen. The documentary helped us to see how we are easily influenced by imageswhen we do not stop and think what t hey are showing us. Removed from thecontext of how they were originally intended to be shown, the images in thevideos were very disturbing to both men and women. But, for those who only seethem as they were produced, which is most of the viewing popu lation, the videosdo indeed portray these woman in a fantasized nature. This too can lead to whatsociety views as being socially acceptable. In a perfect world, there would b eno gender differentiation, no racial tension and no ?political incorrectness ?. But we live in an imperfect world that is currently making a turn towardsbecoming more ?PC? (politically correct). Fading away are such terms asfireman, stewardess, boyfriend and girlfriend, policeman and secretary. Now weare starting to use a mo re socially acceptable language and replacing suchterms with fire fighter, flight attendant, domestic partner or significantother, police officer and administrative assistant. We are slowly, and I do meanslowly, moving towards a non gender separated s ociety. Eventually we may beable to control what we see and how we see it, but until then we must rely onourselves to determine what is reality and what is part of a DreamWorld.

Marriage by Gregory Corso Essay Example

Marriage by Gregory Corso Essay Example Marriage by Gregory Corso Paper Marriage by Gregory Corso Paper Pie Glue: The Sanctimonious Institution of Marriage Gregory Corsos poem Marriage is a lucid example of how John Clellon Holmes described the Beat Generation: a display of moral degeneration. The speaker of the poem is torn between submitting to the non-conformity of the Beats and conforming to societys strict views about marriage and social structure. The presence of conflicting thoughts- whether or not to get married and looking at the prospects of marriage from two different viewpoints, gives this satirical poem a lot of weight as a plea against the phony social construction that is marriage. The poem starts off with questions that are not, under usual circumstances asked by young eligible men. Yet these rhetorical questions seem to have the answers, sarcastic and satirical answers hidden in them. The speaker of the poem, a young man, ponders if he should â€Å"be good† (line 1). Being â€Å"good† is what everybody expects you to be, and the definition of this â€Å"good† that is talked about has nothing to do with morality. Rather, being good is just the action of conforming to society’s expectations of one’s actions and behavior. He contemplates what a date with him would be like. He would take the lady to a cemetery as opposed to the movies and talk about abominations such as werewolves and â€Å"forked clarinets†, which is probably a reference to the Devil’s forked tongue. And then, as any man would, he would â€Å"desire her and kiss her and all the preliminaries† (line 5) of foreplay. But as he would be about to advance further she, being a good girl, would stop him from going any further. He, being like any young man of age, would want sex. He would try to convince her, â€Å"You must feel! It’s beautiful to feel! †(line 7). He would try to coerce her with words, coerce her into giving in. He would eventually â€Å"be good† once more and refrain from having her. Instead, he would lay with her by a tombstone and look at the beauty of the starry sky. Once again, what he describes here is conventional romantic behavior that is expected by a young eligible gentleman. As hard as he tries, he seems to unintentionally spiral towards convention. He moves on in his imagination about what it would be like if things worked out fine and he and â€Å"the girl next door† (line 2) took their relationship to the next level: meeting the parents. In order to win their approval, he would certainly have to have his â€Å"back straightened, hair finally combed, strangled by a tie† (line 11). In this line and the lines that follow, the speaker of the poem is quite candid in his disapproval of the social norms and rituals of courtship and parental approval. He quite reluctantly sits â€Å"with his knees together† (line 12) and tries not to ask where the bathroom is in fear it would be a faux-pas. He asserts that it is just as hard for the other party, the parents to conform to this seemingly absurd social ritual. They have to sit across from a strange young man who would steal the innocence of their daughter â€Å"Mary Lou† (line 19). All this while, all that the speaker of the poem was thinking about was whether or not ask where the bath room is and occasionally entertaining himself with absurd and amusing thoughts such as â€Å"Flash Gordon soap† (line 15). Over â€Å"tea and homemade cookies† (line 20) they make small conversation to fill up the awkward silence. If the young man is deemed suitable, the parents happily give away their daughter to a young man who was a stranger not an hour ago. They ask what he does for a living, and he asks himself rhetorical questions: â€Å"Should I tell them? Would they like me then? † (line 21). He then ponders what the highly important, yet redundant wedding day would be like. The wedding is a big deal for the bride, so obviously a lot of her relatives and friends would be there. He, on the other hand would only have a few socially awkward friends to invite. And yet all these guests would be impatiently waiting â€Å"to get at the drinks and food† (line 28). The priest, probably from the bride’s church, knowing the bride’s innocence looks accusingly at the groom, thinking he had given in to carnal desires and turned to masturbation, an activity commonly regarded as sinful. And under all the pressure created by this social scenario, when the priest asks â€Å"Do you take this woman for your lawful wedded wife? (line 29) he hesitates and blurts out â€Å"Pie Glue† (line 30) which rhymes with the more commonly used term â€Å"I do†. Kirby Olson, in his book The Doubting Thomist, reads the poem as many others have read it: as Corsos outburst against hackneyed social rituals, but he also adds some interesting observations. He notes how Pie Glue rhymes with the more commonly used phrase I do and also claims that this apparent non-sense outburst is in fact a cry of fear, fear of being stuck with one woman (â€Å"hairy pie being a term used for a vagina) for the rest of his life. Once the inessential ceremonies of the wedding are over, all the young men would pat him on the back and offer their obscene congratulations and send the newlyweds off to a honeymoon to a cliched honeymoon spot where dozens of other newly bonded couples go â€Å"to do the same thing†(line 39) consummate their marriage. This is common knowledge, everyone does it, and everyone knows that: â€Å"The indifferent clerk†¦/ the lobby zombies†¦/ the whistling elevator man†¦/ the winking bellboy†¦/ everybody† (lines 40 – 43). Here the poet repetitively uses the words â€Å"The†¦knowing†, bringing emphasis that the actions of the honeymooners are common knowledge and almost taken for granted as a chore, a duty to be performed as opposed to a beautiful expression of love. The use of anaphora strengthens his point. At this point the speaker of the poem is frustrated by thinking about the hackneyed constraints of such a social bondage and convinces himself that he would not do the same things as the other honeymooner were doing; instead he would â€Å"Stay up all night! Stare that hotel clerk in the eye! / Screaming: I deny honeymoon! I deny honeymoon! / running rampant into those almost climactic suites/ yelling Radio belly! Cat shovel! † (lines 45-48). He would be the demon of marriage, the advocate of divorce, a stereotypical madman who would warn the newly weds of the traps they have fallen into and the impending misfortunes they are about to face. Even in being a loner, an iconoclast, the poet fails to describe something new, he fails in his efforts to describe a nonconformist to the idea of marriage and ends up describing just another common social icon: the pariah, the crazy man that people try to believe does not exist. In beginning of the 5th paragraph, the speaker of the poem tries to imagine what a blissful married life would be like, what it would be like to be loved, to â€Å"How nice itd be to come home to her/ and sit by the fireplace and she in the kitchen/ aproned young and lovely†(lines 53-55). He tries to imagine what it would be like to live a calm, quiet married life would be like. He ends up imagining a life where the most exciting part of his day would the wife burning the roast. The serene scene of quiet, peaceful family life lasts but only a few moments before he starts to think of the absurdities once more: â€Å"Christmas teeth! Radiant brains! Apple deaf! † (line 59). Sarcastic comments follow. He tells of how he would do all kinds of unusual things, say weird things to strangers who come to his house, how he would paste stamps on the fence. He also thinks of alternate scenes, different stereotypes of married life: a small house in snow-covered Connecticut, with a lot of babies or in tiny apartment in New York City. How would his life be then? All he could think of was how hackneyed, boring his life would be. He does however see himself in New York, living in a beautiful penthouse with a great view, with a beautiful, smart and sophisticated wife, but he didn’t believe he could be tied up and â€Å"married to that pleasant prison dream-† (line 102). What is it then that drives people to get married and live this grueling lifestyle we call marriage? The thoughts of love appear only towards the very end of the poem, he wonders whether he should get married, conform to the very institution that disgusts him so, and call it a sacrifice for his love; he wonders what he would do if marriage was the only option left for him to be with the one he loves. Although marriage is thought of as the ultimate commitment to love, the two have nothing in common. The speaker knows he would be willing to sacrifice some and conform to social norms only if he meets â€Å"the one† for him. In his book on Corso’s works Gregory Stephenson reads into the poem and realizes that the poet was, at the end of the poem, reminds the readers that marriage is in fact the ultimate act of physical and emotional attraction between two people, and not the phony religious bondage that it has become. The fact that all through the poem the speaker dismisses the very concept of marriage and yet claims he would willingly wait 2000 years for a loved one is proof of the poet’s belief of love and the cleft between love and marriage. The entire poem is in essence a hopeful, romantic love poem.

The Romans Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

The Romans - Term Paper Example This paper examines the influence of roman civilization on the contemporary society, with focus on engineering, science, mathematics, science and politics. The Roman Empire is the hallmark of Roman civilization and it spread across three continents. The continents included parts of the current Europe, Africa and Asia. The vastness of the empire and its longevity facilitated its widespread influence across the globe. According to Kagan et al (2003), the Western Roman Empire lasted for 1101 years, from 625BC to AD 476. The eastern Roman Empire lasted up to AD 1432. In total, the entire Roman Empire lasted a remarkable 2078 years (Kagan et al, 2003). Comparing it with United States and the significant influence that the country has had in the modern society for a period of less than 250 years, it is apparent Roman Empire had tremendous impact in the world. Before investigating the contribution of the empire to the modern society, it important to examine its salient features. Roman Empir e had a strong military organization that played a critical role in acquisition of larger territories and maintaining absolute loyalty to the emperor. In a period where armies were armed with rudimentary weapons such as spears, swords and shields, the Roman military displayed high level of organization and spirit that ensured success in virtually all battles they were engaged in. According to Rogers (2010), Hellenistic philosophy and roman stoicism played a critical role in maintaining military discipline especially in challenging battles. As their territories expanded, the Romans exerted their influence, bringing with them their culture and language. Latin was the official language of the Romans and after acquisition of larger territories; it was adapted in the entire empire. However, the language later developed and differentiated into two namely vulgar and classical Latin (Kagan, et al, 2003). Classical Latin became the official language for use in academics while Vulgar Latin la ter evolved due to its fluidity to give raise to various languages. Some of the languages that originated from Vulgar Latin include Spanish, Portuguese, French, Romanian and Italian among others (Rogers, 2010). Although Latin was the official language in the empire, the eastern part remained under heavy influence of the Greek language. Kagan et al (2003) attributed the widespread use of Greek in the empire to strong historical ties between Rome and Greece. Greece remained an influential part of Roman Empire in the entire period of the civilization. Kagan et al (2003) argues that while Greeks were popular thinkers, the Roman were doers and practical individuals. The relationship between Greece and the Romans played a crucial role in the stimulating development of science, engineering, mathematics and other technologies in the Roman Empire. The natural character of the Romans is another unique trait that determined the progress of the empire. According to Rogers (2010), Romans were co mpetent at adapting, preserving, applying and disseminating information and technology. This trait enabled them to adapt technology from Greek, who had a rich history of philosophy, science, medicine, and art among other important traditions. Hence, Romans were practical people who applied the technology and information from their Greek counterparts to develop their empire, while Greeks were the innovators. For this reason, Rogers (2010) argues that Romans did not develop

The Black Power Mixtape Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

The Black Power Mixtape - Essay Example   Ã¢â‚¬Å"The Black Power Mixtape† was directed by Goran Hugo Olsson a Swedish and helps depict a story of black power movement in a neutral eye. A little odd is the fact that the Swedish Journalists were following and recording the efforts and of course frustrations by blacks surviving in America’s back streets.   All the documentation was for long stored in a basement for close to forty years until the making of this Mixtape. Indeed a Mixtape, the film presents the facts as they were, raw in a matter of speaking put together. It is refreshing due to its arbitrariness, not following a style but with the theme of showing the Black power in the 1960’s and early 1970’s. The stylistic approaches used by the director of the film displays the struggles of blacks in 1960’s in a random and virgin, non-fictional memorabilia depicting the atmosphere as it was and benefited the presentation of a cinema of truth. The film is a compilation of interviews from people that championed the Black power movement who after witnessing or experiencing the struggles of their own kind, had to stand up for themselves. Interviews include inter alia; Angela Davis, Stokely Carmichael, Bobby Seale, Eldridge Cleaver, Huey Newton and Dr. Martin Luther King. Their words and voice resonating and evoking such an era-specific picture of what occurred. Fictional movies such as ‘Mississippi Burning’ and Tate Taylor’s ‘The Help’ have often brought this era out in a palatable way.... Angela Davis’s voice interview when in jail reverberates over and over again in my head when she says, â€Å"You ask me if I approve of violence, I just find that incredible.† She struggles to show the misconceptions towards her people, the black people. It shows the irony of the situation where a people violent and racist towards the black people, depict violence as coming from the black people. She evokes so much by her words and silence too just after the short interview that resonates almost half a century later. Stokely Carmichael agrees with the idea of Dr Martin Luther King policy of non-violence as a method for blacks to use to change the hearts of the racial discriminators. In his interview, the impossibility of Dr King’s method is brought out in a humorous and almost seductive way amid the chaotic and dangerous atmosphere. Impossibility in this method is because to be moved to a change of heart required conscience which discriminators seem not to have a s seen by Carmichael. We are reminded of the many failed revolutions and counterrevolutions in a time that shaped the culture that we enjoy today. During an interview with Stokely Carmichael’s mother Mabel, the film takes an awakening turn. In an inspiring and downright courageous act, Stokely takes the microphone from the Swedish journalist and asks his mother why his father, a carpenter was laid off so often. Even without watching more of the film, one can tell the frustration, this fresh graduate feels knowing too well the truth but watching his mother struggle to go around the facts. The lack of freedom of expression or the double standard of it, the fear experienced by the ‘coloured’ people as the mother calls them. The result of the film is sobering making one

Explore how chapter 56 in Pride and Prejudice fits into the overall scheme of the text Essay Example for Free

Explore how chapter 56 in Pride and Prejudice fits into the overall scheme of the text Essay What social comments do you think Jane Austen is making in this chapter? Pride and Prejudice was written by Jane Austen in 1813. The novel describes and exaggerates the life in which in Austen lived. The title Pride and Prejudice refers to the ways in which Elizabeth Bennet and Mr. Darcy first view each other. The story involves the lives of many different classes and how they interact with each other; it is also informing us of the way certain types of people were treated in those days. Near the end of the novel, Lady Catherine de Burgh comes to visit Elizabeth to try and persuade her not to marry Darcy. I will explore this chapter to find out what social comments Austen tries to make throughout the novel about the world she lived in. Chapter 56 is a summary of the whole novel. Lady Catherine has come to see Elizabeth to make her withdraw her acceptance of marriage to her nephew, Mr. Darcy. Lizzy is shocked by these accusations, as she has heard nothing of the sort, so wonders where Lady Catherine heard the rumours. She is the type of person who thinks that everybodys business is her own because she is of the higher class. It has been planned since Darcy and Lady Catherines daughter were born that they were to be wed and now she hears of Darcy proposing to another lady has outraged her. That is why she has come to visit Elizabeth to stop her marrying Darcy. From the moment lady Catherine arrived she was very rude and not welcoming. She says things such as, you have a very small park here, and this must be a most inconvenient sitting room. As soon as she entered the Bennets home she made no effort on being civil or polite to their family. If Elizabeth were to behave in this manner when she was at Rosings it wouldnt have been tolerated in the slightest. The only reason Lady Catherine gets away with it is because she is a lady and very rich and of the higher class. Anyone who was below her would put up with her behaviour because it was not his or her place in those days to accuse her of being impolite. Jane Austen grew up in this world where the rich people were almost the celebrities of the day. In our world famous people have the money, the expensive cars and clothes and a celebrity status, where the public would stop and look at them and always aspire to be like them. In Austens time it was very much the same but the lower classes and even middle were always looking up to the higher classes and admiring them. This is why people with the money could be as rude and stuck up to people as they wanted because in the end they were the ones with the power and the money to do what they wanted. Lady Catherines reason for visiting Elizabeth was not what the family had thought. Elizabeth expected a letter from Charlotte yet no letter was given. Instead Lady Catherine remarked upon a, prettyish kind of a little wilderness on one side of your lawn. Again she is not really being as polite as she could have been about the garden. From this point Elizabeth realised that she wanted to be alone. She had realised that Catherine was again being very rude and stuck up and so made no effort to talk to her. Lady Catherine begins with, your own heart, your own conscience, must tell you why I come. Elizabeth doesnt have any idea what she is talking about. Lady Catherine talks about her conscience, which is showing that Lizzy is to feel guilty about whatever she has been accused of. She tells Lizzy that rumours have reached her that her and Mr. Darcy were to be engaged and says though I know it must be a scandalous falsehood, Lady Catherine cannot comprehend this idea, to think that a middle class person such as Miss Bennet, who has no real connections, would even consider accepting an offer of this sort. Lady Catherine does not hold back on her true feelings about the subject and as Elizabeth has been brought up in the proper manner she has to respect her. Elizabeth soon becomes tired of her picking at everything that is wrong with her and her family and is not rude but stands up for herself. She asks Lady Catherine if the only reason they should not wed is because she wants him to marry her daughter, then what is there to stop her? She replies with honour, decorum, prudence, nay, interest, forbid it. This is the long list that she has against Lizzy. The social points she is trying to make is that in those days if a family were to have such a disgrace as Lydias elopement then no man should be interested in them, rich men such as Bingley and Darcy should marry same class or higher and that there were some very snooty people who would disagree with the association of certain families! They dont have a lot of land so are not as wealthy and high class.families like this always tried to marry higher up. Need to put in that Bennetts dont have a lot of land or money so lady Catherine looks down. Not too sure how to say this fits in with the rest of the book or how the chapter does? Bit stuck but will be done properly when handed in; in neat its a promise

The Hobbit by JRR Tolkein :: essays research papers

The Hobbit Title: The Hobbit Author: J.R.R. Tolkien Setting: The setting of the story takes place in the lands of Wilderland. It is through Wilderland that the hobbit and the dwarves travel to retrieve their lost treasure. As they move on through Wilderland, they encounter different people and different problems, making it more of an adventure. Characters: protagonists: Bilbo Baggins- he is the main character of story. The tiny hobbit is convinced by the great wizard Gandalf to undertake a long journey with thirteen dwarves to help them retrieve their lost treasure. Bilbo, at first, seems to be of no use to the dwarfs, almost getting them killed by the giant trolls. Eventually he shows his value to dwarves by saving them numerous times from death and imprisonment. Thorin- He is the most important dwarf. His father was the king under the mountain of Lonely Mountain. After the fall of his kingdom, the treasure that belonged to his father was lost to the evil dragon Smaug. He leads the other twelve dwarfs in hopes of regaining the treasure and his kingdom. Gandalf- He is the great wizard who helped organize the adventure. At first he travels with the dwarves and the hobbit but leaves them because he has other business to attend to. Beorn- is a large man who can change shapes into other animals. He lives by himself in large house with animals who he can speak to. He helps the dwarves and the hobbit after they have escaped from the goblins. He later joins them in the Battle of the Five Armies to help defeat the goblins and and the wargs. Bard- He is the man who slays Smaug and becomes the new master of the town where the men dwell on Long Lake. antagonists: the trolls (Bert, Tom, Bill)- they capture the dwarves and Bilbo with the intention of eating them. They are saved when Gandalf creates confusion between them (the trolls) allowing the adventurers to escape. Goblins- they also capture the adventurers but not before Thorin could kill the Great Goblin and then escape. This caused them to pursue the group and their anger towards them led to the cause the Battle of the Five Armies. Smaug- He is the evil dragon who takes over Lonely Mountain and all its gold within it. He is stirred from his sleep by Bilbo and while trying to destroy the town on the river, he is killed by Bard. Exposition: The general situation is revealed by the narrator who tells the story in the third person. The narrator makes direct comments usually explaining parts of the story that won't be made clear until later in the novel.

Nagel, Chisholm, and Locke †Metaphysics of the Mind Essay

It is very difficult to attribute characteristics to a mind when we know it does not actually exist in the physical realm. Though, personal identity has been connected to the mind. However, it is tricky to determine what exactly comprises one’s personal identity. Although it is a difficult concept to grasp, philosophers such as Nagel and Chisholm attempt to construct their own position on the characteristics of the mind. By comparing Nagel and Chisholm’s positions on personal identity, it is evident that identity is a development of both body and mind. Nagel shows that we cannot properly identify a mind, and if this is the case then it is impossible to attribute personal identity to a mind. In turn, he attacks the idea that personal identity can be defined in terms of physical attributes. Chisholm shows that although things are constantly changing, they still remain the same. He argues that it is the mind that holds our identity, regardless of physical alteration. In my view, the physicalist perspective of identity is the most logical when contrasted to the mentalist argument simply due to the fact that we do have a self-identity, and Nagel does not attempt to define what it is. Locke’s argument finds a middle ground between Nagel and Chisholm as he argues for a conscious and bodily continuity of the mind. In order to identify the mind-body problem and argue that identity is a development of the mind, Nagel’s position must be analyzed. Firstly, when addressing the mind-body problem, Nagel states that one cannot explain the mind body relationship through logic, functions, or intentions. He argues that these states can be ascribed to robots that may indeed behave like people, however robots do not experience anything, and it is experience that influences the mind (436). Nagel’s bat analogy helps solidify his position on experience which is that no one can experience the same thing as another. He claims that; â€Å"even to form a conception of what it is Kristen Biduk 6949215 like to be a bat†¦one must take up the bat’s point of view† (442). Meaning, one must have the same thinking patterns as the other which Nagel argues is impossible. He argues that it is our consciousness which provides the mind-body problem. Although one can relate to what it is like to be a bat, it is impossible to fully comprehend it because in order to become a bat, conscious-ness must be forgotten. For that reason, one cannot know that others have a mind, but one can perceive that they do. Chisholm opens his argument with providing an analysis of the Ship of Theseus and explains that identity is transitive, meaning that it is always changing. Similarly, he uses the example of the river and how although it is the same exact river, it is given different identities based on geographical location. The identity of the river is changing. Based on his view of alteration, Chisholm suggests three possibilities for alteration and identity. Firstly, we can deny the transitivity of identity, but he proves this to be a problem. His second suggestion is that nothing alters, but this too proves to be problematic. For example, if one was to cross the border of the United States of America and the border patrol officer asked if he was the same as the person in the photo, he would say no. Because, when that photo was taken he had certain characteristics, and now, x amount of years later he has different characteristics, and is therefore a different person. Clearly this is an issue. Thirdly, he analyzes Butler’s position on the misuse of the word ‘is’ in that, for example; there exists something at a certain place (P) at a certain time (t) that is identical with same thing at a different place (Q) at a different time (t1). By saying identical, he means they exist in together, however it is mathematically impossible. He concludes that such things are entia per alio (made of). Entia per alio is something that exists because a Kristen Biduk 6949215 mind makes it up. For example, a pencil is entia per alio because without a mind, it is simply an object. The mind makes the pencil an object for writing. Without a mind giving meaning to something, that something has no identity. In regards to self-identity, I find it difficult to agree with the mentalist perspective. Nagel’s writing, â€Å"What is it like to be a Bat? † does not provide sufficient insight to the development of self and self-identity. He bases his writing solely based on defining the mind. It is true to say that we cannot properly identify a mind. How can we as a whole, understand something we do not actually know exists? We can assume it exists but it provides no understanding. Based on this belief, Nagel concludes that because we cannot properly identify a mind, we cannot connect personal identity to a mind. But where can we find our personal identity? He claims that our identity does not lie within our physical attributes which leaves identity suspending in the air. The mentalist perspective is limiting in the sense that it does not take in to account outside variables that can impact one’s identity. We are not born with an identity and I feel as though Nagel’s position is implying that we are. Additionally, our identity is developed from our consciousness, and we do not become conscious of ourselves at infancy. We develop our self-identity through time and it is consistently changing. Chisholm is much more realistic when it comes to defining personal identity. We cannot assume that our identity is purely based on our minds, for our minds are influenced by our physicality. In turn, our physicality is influenced by society. We identify with ourselves based on what others think of us. For example, if someone weighs three hundred pounds, they may identify themselves as unhealthy because that is what society has told them. Similarly, if that three hundred pound person lost weight and now weighed one hundred and thirty pounds, that Kristen Biduk 6949215 person may identify themselves as healthy. If they used diet and exercise as a method to lose the weight, they may identify as athletic. This proves that personal identity is indeed transitive. It will always be in a constant state of change depending on the influences around them. We have identity because others around us have provided us with our identity. One could argue then that if one was to lose only ten pounds then identity will not change because the change is only slight. If we analyze the Ship of Theseus once more, Chisholm argues that slight changes still have an impact on our identity because our identity is always changing. By using the problem of Theseus’s ship however, it gives us ideas of identity for inanimate objects. One could argue that it is not relatable to beings with consciousness however I would have to disagree. Our consciousness, or our memories are what hold our self-identity. If we lose an arm or leg, we are still the same person because our minds still hold our memory. While the mentalist perspective does not take into account physical impressions, and the physicalist perspective lacks some insight on our own consciousness, Locke provides an explanation that touches on both sides. Locke argues for a conscious continuity and not a bodily one. He begins with clarifying that all minds have a common structure wherein there are two qualities within our identity: primary and secondary. The primary quality consists of consciousness. I can identify with myself because I am conscious of my own existence. The secondary qualities consist of qualities that are changing, such as hair length or weight. He insists that our primary qualities are what provide us with identity however he agrees that secondary qualities must be analyzed. Our secondary qualities are always changing while our primary qualities are static. Without the secondary qualities, our identity would not change, Kristen Biduk 6949215 which Chisholm proved. In comparison to both Nagel and Chisholm, Locke’s argument holds the truest because he takes into account both perspectives and develops the most logical understanding of identity. Additionally, Locke states that there is a first and third person perspective on identity. The first person identity is what one makes of himself. The third person helps confirm one’s identity. Both of these together help form one’s true personal identity. For one without outside influences has nothing to base their identity on. For example, if one was to look at cases of people raised in isolation, it will be seen that they have no sense of reality or identity. They were left to their own thoughts with no outside stimulation. When they leave their isolated prisons, they rediscover their identity by identifying with their outside influences. In conclusion, it is almost impossible to justify the mind/body problem. Both Nagel and Chisholm’s perspectives on identity are fairly vague and both lack a deeper understanding of the mind. I truly believe that it is the mind that holds our identity. However an identity is highly structured by its outside influences. Without a body or without society, one would have no identity. Some can argue that there can be a mind without a body, but it just doesn’t make rational sense. If hypothetically, one was to have their mind switched into a different body, he would still identify as himself. For it is our mind that holds our identity, however our mind is within a body.