Sexuality Paper Essay Example for Free

Sexuality Paper Essay In today’s society, we as men and women are burdened with a double standard of how one’s sex life is supposed to go. We hear from our friends and family, from churches and neighbors, that sex is something you do with the person you love and trust, someone who you are going to share the rest of your life with. Sex comes with marriage, and with marriage comes a promise that you will remain with this one person â€Å"’til death do us part. † But this is no longer the case, as people all over the world are having sex way before marriage. We develop attractions to the people we see in school or in the workplace, and we date each other, and in other cases, we â€Å"hook up.† This is where sex comes in. It seems as though we may have lost that meaning of sex and intimacy and promise, and now we have developed a game. A race even- who can have sex with more people? Who is the most experienced? Who is the best? And as we all want to try and win this race, backlash is inevitable. As men increase in numbers, they increase in â€Å"manliness† and power among each other. As women increase in numbers, they decrease to â€Å"sluts and â€Å"whores† or to â€Å"easy† individuals. Where in the world did this come from? Of course, the power of man did not originate in the 21st Century. Man has been the number one sex as early as the 1600s, when scientists, doctors and religion claimed that the bodies of men and women were one. A body in this time period was â€Å"fluid,† and ever changing, and men and women were represented in a hierarchy. A male body was a perfect body to compare all others to; it was strong, full of heat and truth. A female body was one that lacked vital heat and perfection, making these bodies the inverse of a male body. Women retained, inside, the reproductive structures that are visible on the male body. Women were weaker, softer and colder and always looked down upon. They were also considered more out of control and their morals could not be trusted. A less perfect body meant a less perfect character, citizen and being. But when the 19th Century was upon us, the idea of one body changed into two bodies. However, with this change, the idea of women as a lesser sex was still in motion as scientists tried to figure out the purpose of women, along with the role they should play in society. Physical and â€Å"natural† differences in the bodies of men and women justified the roles that men and women should play. This ultimately led to the view of separate spheres, of men as superior and â€Å"normal† and women as strictly here to reproduce and provide nourishment to their children and families. With these separate roles of men and women in society came gender roles, of men being â€Å"manly† and providing for the family, staying strong and representing his family in a positive manner, while women held down the fort at home, cooking for her husband after a long day at work and caring for the children she brought into this world, raising them to be respectable people just as she and her husband were. Women were to be feminine and dainty and beautiful, polite and have self-control. Men and women were to be opposites of each other, especially in the high class, white world. With these images, the role of sex in each of the lives of men and women became very different. For men to want desire and sex, they did as they please, since they were in charge and held the power. Men did not need to limit having sex to just the woman they were married too. But for women to think this way was considered out of control and even named Nymphomania at the time. Women resorted to ways of rebellion and sexual pleasure on their own such as solitary sex and relationships with other women. And as women pursued their sexual desires and needs, they began to pursue their needs in other ways too. Women have led a long fight in society in the workplace and the political world, constantly fighting for a piece of the power that men hold so close to them. The 1900s were a turn around for women in society as they earned the right to vote, the right to work outside of the home, to live alone, unmarried without children. Women were fighting to be equal with men, to be looked at in the same way and to be treated with just as much respect. Today, we have come a long way in this process as a society; we see women in power in politics, not just in The United States, but in other countries as well, where women are Presidents and Prime Ministers. So where and when did this double standard of sex come to be in our world? Why are women still looked down upon in the subject of sexual relations? To get some answers, I created a survey, and asked some people of my generation what they thought about this double standard, and if they even think it is still around today. Through Facebook, an ever-climbing social network, I posted a survey for anyone to take, asking 10 questions. Here is the outline of my survey: Sexuality Survey This is a survey to develop an idea of the sexual connotations between men and women and the number of sex partners they have had as well as how both sexes feel about it in today’s society. The survey asks a total of 8 questions and each question should be answered as honestly as possible. This survey is completely anonymous and voluntary. You do not have to answer any questions you do not feel comfortable answering. Your input is greatly appreciated in the class of Sociology 345: Sociology of Sexuality. Please Circle: I am a:MaleFemale My age is: d Please write a short response based on your personal feelings, experiences, and opinions. You do not have to answer anything you do not feel comfortable answering. Your input is greatly appreciated! Sexuality Survey Created by Taylor Tarpey This is a survey to develop an idea of the sexual connotations between men and women and the number of sex partners they have had as well as how both sexes feel about it in today’s society. The survey asks a total of 8 questions and each question should be answered as honestly as possible. This survey is completely anonymous and voluntary. You do not have to answer any questions you do not feel comfortable answering. Your input is greatly appreciated in the class of Sociology 345: Sociology of Sexuality. Please Circle: I am a:MaleFemale My age is: d Please write a short response based on your personal feelings, experiences, and opinions. You do not have to answer anything you do not feel comfortable answering. Your input is greatly appreciated! 1. Have you ever altered the number of sex partners you have had to avoid being judged? Why or why not? 2. How does it make you feel to hear that men in society today are perceived as â€Å"better† or â€Å"manly† or â€Å"pimps† if they have a high number of sex partners, and that women are perceived as â€Å"sluts† or â€Å"whores† or â€Å"easy† if they have a high number of sex partners? 3. How do you protect yourself from these connotations? 4. In your opinion, what does the number of sex partners a man or a woman has mean to you? To society? 5. In your opinion, do you think a man/woman who has had more sex partners than you is considered more experienced? Why or why not? 6. In your opinion, do you think a man/woman who has had more sex partners than you is considered less pure? Why or why not? 7. Have you ever been with a man/woman sexually and considered how this might change their social status? How it might change yours? Why or why not? 8. In your opinion, do you think the opinions of others about this sexual connotation that comes with men and women having a certain amount of sex partners, is changing in today’s society? Why or why not? 1. In your opinion, do you think a man/woman who has had more sex partners than you is considered less pure? Why or why not? 2. Have you ever been with a man/woman sexually and considered how this might change their social status? How it might change yours? Why or why not? 3. In your opinion, do you think the opinions of others about this sexual connotation that comes with men and women having a certain amount of sex partners, is changing in today’s society? Why or why not? 4. 9. Have you ever altered the number of sex partners you have had to avoid being judged? Why or why not? 10. How does it make you feel to hear that men in society today are perceived as â€Å"better† or â€Å"manly† or â€Å"pimps† if they have a high number of sex partners, and that women are perceived as â€Å"sluts† or â€Å"whores† or â€Å"easy† if they have a high number of sex partners? 11. How do you protect yourself from these connotations? 12. In your opinion, what does the number of sex partners a man or a woman has mean to you? To society? 13. In your opinion, do you think a man/woman who has had more sex partners than you is considered more experienced? Why or why not? 14. In your opinion, do you think a man/woman who has had more sex partners than you is considered less pure? Why or why not? 15. Have you ever been with a man/woman sexually and considered how this might change their social status? How it might change yours? Why or why not? 16. In your opinion, do you think the opinions of others about this sexual connotation that comes with men and women having a certain amount of sex partners, is changing in today’s society? Why or why not? 5. In your opinion, do you think a man/woman who has had more sex partners than you is considered less pure? Why or why not? 6. Have you ever been with a man/woman sexually and considered how this might change their social status? How it might change yours? Why or why not? 7. In your opinion, do you think the opinions of others about this sexual connotation that comes with men and women having a certain amount of sex partners, is changing in today’s society? Why or why not? 8. I developed these questions to try and answer many questions of my own. I am very curious to see what people have to say about this double standard and these connotations created by society, and I want to know where this judgment of having too many sexual partners comes from and how both men and women deal with it. I also want to know if people think this double standard has changed as we have advanced socially in our world, and if people really question the society they live in. To start, I received 29 total participants, with 27 who fully finished the survey. Since the survey was optional, I will use all of the data I have received. 20 of my responses were from females, although two of them only answered the first two questions, their age and sex, and 9 responses were male. More than half of these responses were 18-19 years old, five were 21 years old, and I had one of each of the following: a response from a 20 year old, a 42 year old, a 47 year old, and a 53 year old. I was surprised to see results from people well out of my generation, but thankful for these as they provided very different insight into this topic. In the first question, 22 participants answered no, they have not changed the number of sexual partners they have had for various reasons such as being content or not ashamed with the information, or they do not care what others think or that they should not be judged or given approval by others. I also had some answers such as, â€Å"it is a small number,† â€Å"I only tell those close to me,† and â€Å"I am not a whore.† On the other hand, I received six responses saying yes, simply for the reasons of embarrassment and not wanting to be judged. One answer was hard to place, for their response said they did not change this number, but it was only one person and they sometimes deny it. These answers left me with the observation that generally people are confident with their sexual choices and feel that they do not deserved to be judged, so they do not let it effect them. Others are afraid of embarrassment and shame. So why do they feel this way? My next question asked about the double standard of men and women, and the connotations related to it. I was interested in learning what participants thought of this negative standard in society. I received a large variety of responses, such as many displaying disgust and unfairness or anger and sadness, misjudgment and discrimination, even indifference and annoyance. Many gave similar answers in saying that men should not be glorified or in control, or that they should be â€Å"scolded† the way women are, or that there should be no standard at all and everyone should be looked at through the same eyes. Many participants questioned this double standard and the equality between men and women in society, even giving answers such as men and women have created this double standard themselves, and genders perceive their own gender in ways that they deem themselves hurtful or shameful, and also mentioned that society needs to be more informed. Others said this double standard was outdated, and that people â€Å"know what they want,† and that â€Å"sex is normal† and â€Å"we make our own decisions,† as well as, â€Å"we live in a Patriarchal society.† Others, such as that last response, accepted the double standard, saying they were raised to believe this, or it is just a part of evolution and Darwinism, and that we should all just stop taking such hard offense, even that this standard will never change. Many of these responses had me wishing that people questioned society more. Why don’t we ask ourselves and others why we feel the way we do? If so many of us are against this double standard, than what is keeping it alive? And while it is alive, how are we protecting ourselves from it? That is the question I gave next, and I received three similar types of responses. The first seemed to be a string of advice, or things one should not do, such as do not care, do not judge, do not hook up, do not get involved with bad people, do not share this information, do not be bias, do not be a slut. The second type is advice saying that we should only share important information with those close to us, like family and friends, or specifically only those we are intimate with and care about, people we trust. The third type is that we should stand up to others, for others, and for ourselves, that we should question society for these connotations, and that we should break down these images society has placed on right and wrong. It looks as though some people are thinking critically here, questioning society and proposing we fight it, while others are creating more standards for society, such as those things we should not do. If we are so against society’s standards in the first place, why create more? My next question was more personal, asking what a person’s number of sex partners means to them, and to society. Many people said this represents how a person feels about themselves in a general sense or the standards they set for themselves, with things like insecurities or shyness, sexiness or promiscuity, even being easy, all come with having more sex partners. Many said the amount of sexual partners a person has depends on what they consider intimate, and whether or not emotion and intimacy has a â€Å"deep resonance within the individual,† or that we do not take sex seriously like we used to in the past. Some brought up the double standard introduced in the beginning of the survey, saying that more sex partners for a man meant praise and a woman was considered a whore. To society, participants talked about sex partners being a level of â€Å"coolness† or experience, how responsible we are and how well we are able to make decisions, as well as the fact that having a large number of sex partners is often represented in the media on TV and in magazines. I even received some responses that a high number of sexual partners shows how many times a person was under the influence. With these responses, it is evident that the number of sex partners a man or a woman has means a lot, to us and to society. Only once did I receive the answer of â€Å"nothing.† It seems as though sex and the number of partners we accumulate determines who we are and what kind of values we hold, yet sex is seems to have lost its true meaning of intimacy, closeness and love. My next question asked if a higher number of sex partners held by a male or female meant they had more experience. This question was a little vague, as people may define experience differently, but I was interested in seeing how we interpret experience, and how it relates to sex. Most of my responses said yes, these two factors are correlated, that more sexual partners equals more experience, simply for the reason that they have been with many different people, experiencing different things. But others argued against this, saying that â€Å"experience is not quantity, but quality,† many gave examples such as having only few sex partners for long periods of time, and being able to intimately get to know their partner, to â€Å"explore the body and it’s wants, needs, likes and dislikes,† is considered more experience compared to someone who has slept with many people just one time. As I stated earlier, participants agreed that experience means different things to different people, and I was interested in seeing how they interpreted this question. It is similar to my next question, which asks if participants considered having more sexual partners to be less pure. Most participants said no, that a number does not determine purity and that we never know the full circumstances of another individual. Some interpreted this in a religious way, indicating that purity was related to God. I had some answers that God forgives anyone and does not see anyone any less if they have more partners, as well as purity is disgraced with any form of premarital sexual activities, and since many of us partake in them, they do not matter. Of the responses I received that said yes, more sexual partners means one is less pure, said purity depends on age, and that being pure is ultimately remaining abstinent, or even that purity is related to cleanliness. One said we are more prone to sexually transmitted infections with more partners, and that if one is less pure, they are unclean. I was especially eager to read responses to this question because again, I was wondering how participants perceived the word pure. Very few interpreted this as a form of cleanliness, and many related it to religion and God. But many people said no, that purity and the number of sexual partners a person has are not related. I then asked if anyone had ever considered how being with another in a sexual way would change their social status, or that of their partner. The majority answered no, that they had never considered this before, some for the reason that they have never experienced this, or it was not considered at the time. Others responded by saying that social status does not matter during sex, only love and care for the other person is considered, or that they were not concerned with what other people thought. Of the few who answered yes, I was given many responses related more to how one would think of himself or herself after, not of the other person. Two responses I received were worried about how they would be looked at because of the status of the other person, specifically because of age and reputation of their partner, even race. This question has me questioning society. Are we really equal? Participants generally said that social status does not mean anything, yet we have socially segregated the sexual actions of men and women, creating a negative social status for women in the world of sex, while men rise above them. We argue that this double standard is wrong, yet we do not consider the differences we create, setting standards without even realizing we are doing so. My final question was directed at the idea of this double standard changing in society, and if anyone thought the opinions of others regarding to the negative connotations connected with men and women were changing. The majority of my responses were yes, that this double standard is changing, but for many reasons and in different ways. The main change observed in the responses given was that the outlook on women in society is changing. Women are becoming more independent, free and open, in society and the workplace, and it is now more acceptable for them to have more sex partners. The power is becoming more evenly distributed and it is not as much of a big deal as it used to be. Other responses were more general, saying no one cares anymore; we are becoming more lenient as a society, and specifically younger generations are not as concerned with their reputations as older generations are or once were. I also received some responses stating that society is changing it’s opinions for the worse, that this double standard is getting worse, or people are â€Å"getting pregnant too young.† Participants who said no, this double standard is not changing in the minds of society, said that people still talk of the number of sex partners, that we hear it on TV and in the media, and we discuss is with family and friends, or that the double standard â€Å"still stands for the most part.† With these responses, it looks like people see a change in this double standard, that as a society, we seem to be moving away from it and into equality. So why do we let the number of sexual partners still define us? Why are we still making judgments towards individuals, setting a standard for right and wrong in society, if we say that this double standard is decreasing as a whole? We could ask an endless amount of questions and analyze the thoughts and feelings of every individual in the world, and almost always get different answers. As a whole, I think we, as a society, need to stand up and speak out against the issues we perceive as wrong, and question the standards that we have set for ourselves, and society. We should question why we stand for something, or why we are against or for another, because it seems to me that we disagree with the negative connotations linked with sexuality and sexual activities, yet we enforce them in our own, as we create judgments and standards for what is right and wrong. It is true, that women are rising in society to be more equal with men- we have proof of that. Men and women are slowly becoming more equal in every way compared to what they once were so long ago, but are we becoming equal in the world of sex?

Mappes Theories of Sexual Morality

Mappes Theories of Sexual Morality Some feminists have been accused of providing a negative view of sex, suggesting that all sex is rape and that males are the negative gender. Yet, what Dworkin and MacKinnon were really talking about was that the difference been consensual sex and rape is one of degree and not of kind (Kinloch Grebowicz 2004). In other words, the same sex act occurs in rape or consensual relationships, and sometimes it is difficult to tell when a rape has occurred or the sex was desired. When examining sex, there are many points of view. Thomas A. Mappes writes about the idea of using another person for sexual gratification. Are people really being used? What is coercive and what is consensual? These questions loom when one examines the subject of sex. Mappes begins a piece entitled Sexual Morality and the Concept of Using Another Person with the notion that if in fact the nonmarital sex is not immoral, and that sex without love is not immoral either, then it stands to reason that there are no substantive moral restrictions on any acts of sex. This is a different concept to fathom. It would mean that an anything goes attitude would prevail and that orgies in the street would be permissible much like animals gather to mate. Yet, the reality is that human beings are modest. They hide their sex lives from their acquaintances. Some engage in relationships behind closed doors like Jesse James and Tiger Woods, but even when such clandestine affairs are out in the open, individuals explain it away as an addiction. It is difficult to pinpoint exactly what sexual morality is. Mappes employs Kantian ethics to make his points, noting that it is wrong to use A to get to point B if in fact the only reason to use A is to get to that B position. In other words, a man may date a woman and have sexual intercourse with her and derive satisfaction. Yet, the sex act should take place in the context of love, for example, and not just to derive pleasure. If however the man uses the woman to get from point A to point B and for his own uses alone, then he is using her. He talks about voluntary informed consent however (Mappes). When Mappes talks about using another person, he does not imply that the use is immoral. It merely exists. When lying is involved, then the sexual act is deceptive (Mappes). Depending on the circumstances, holding back information may be considered a form of deception (Mappes). One can imagine that if a woman is dating a man and does not know that the man is married, then she is being duped. Consent is tricky however. Someone may be used by another but both individuals really know what is going on. The rape victim who is forced at knife point is obviously someone who is not consenting to sex (Mappes). That is coerced. However, someone who consents to sex under unusual circumstances, is not necessary being forced, even if there is some coercion or unsavory expectations in the mix. It seems as if coercion and deception are important elements when it comes to using another human being sexually (Mappes). The author concludes that using another person can only occur when someone either deceives, coerces, or takes advantage of someones desperate situation (Mappes). Many things enter the picture. Is there a threat involved, or an offer? In other words, is there coercion? An example is that in the film Indecent Proposal, a rich man offers a needy couple one million dollars for one night of sex. When they agree, their lives change. The wife does not realize how difficult living will be after essentially prostituting herself. There was no coercion. She was lured into it, but arguably she was used because a very rich man would take advantage of a poor couple. One can use the same logic to explain why women become prostitutes. Many say they are just paying the bills. Yet, one has to wonder if the situation is truly one where there is coercion or an exercise of free will. A similar storyline to Indecent Proposal comes from a recent episode of Gossip Girl where in an intricate plot; Blair is willing to sleep with her boyfriends cousin in order to win an empire back. She does it for the boyfriend, but in the end, it appears that she has not done the right thing. She was tricked into giving herself to someone she despises in order to change her circumstances. How does one know what an offer is really a threat? What question might be asked to determine whether a statement is an offer or a threat? One may ask what the outcome would be if one says yes or no. In the case of the film or television program mentioned, the outcome would result in a reduced amount of money and worldly goods. No harm would come to either woman or man. Yet, if the outcome would be loss of life or torture or something along those lines, then the offer would be construed as a threat. Coercion thus is not always equated with a threat. The author makes the point at the end that using another person occurs only when someone either deceives, coerces, or takes advantage of someones desperate situation (Mappes, 2007). This is true in that in all of these instances, one may use another sexually, but there are other situations where one may be used. For example, someone may enter into a relationship where a man is rather superficial. Perhaps he has narcissistic personality disorder and cannot love anyone in a deep sense. A woman enters a relationship with him and adores him. She does not realize he cannot love to the depths that she can. She falls in love with him but the problem is that he really cannot love her back. They have sex and she feels close to him, but he does not feel the same way even though he says I love you. He is not lying. For him, he loves her, but it is not in the same way she loves him. When he breaks up with her because he is bored of the relationship, and then starts a sexual relationship with a y ounger, more attractive woman, the woman who was dumped feels used. In respect to Mappes position, the author makes a good case, but there may be times when a coercive offer is part of the equation and there is an obvious use of another, or when there is no explicit sense of using another, someone will feel used. In the case of the narcissist, is the significant other really being used? Much depends on the mind of the reader. There is no coercive offer. If the woman feels used, that does not mean she was. There was no coercion or threat, so on some level, this case that appears to oppose the author really helps to support his point.

Platos Criticism of Democracy Essay -- Plato

Plato's Criticism of Democracy Do not be angry with me for speaking the truth; no man will survive who genuinely opposes you or any other crowd and prevents the occurrence of many unjust and illegal happenings in the city. A man who really fights for justice must lead a private, not a public, life if he is to survive for even a short time. (Apology 31e-32a) These are the words of Socrates, who spoke before the Athenian jury in the trial that would, ultimately, condemn him to his death. Through works such as the Apology and The Republic, we can see Plato’s distaste of the concept of democracy. Why does he consider democracy to be so flawed? Let us look through his own eyes and see what his individual criticisms are, and determine if the very concept of democracy is as flawed as he believes it to be. One of the contemporary definitions of democracy today is as follows: â€Å"Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives; Rule by the majority† (â€Å"Democracy† Def.1,4). Democracy, as a form of government, was a radical idea when it manifested; many governments in the early history of the world were totalitarian or tyrannical in nature, due to overarching beliefs that the strong ruled over the weak. Although the Greeks coined the word â€Å"democracy† – the words demos â€Å"people† and kratos â€Å"rule† conjoined together to mean, literally, â€Å"rule by the people† – there is speculation about weather or not certain other peoples, such as the Sumerians and the Indians, managed to engage in democratic methods of governance first. However, the history of democracy is not what is being discussed here; we are focusing on Plato’s criticism of democracy, particularly with regards to the Athenian model and his... ...n life. However, Plato’s criticisms should be kept in mind when determining the merit of a democratic government. Oh, would it not be great to have a democracy of philosophers, who would pursue truth and wisdom! Alas, we are only human, and susceptible to many evils and lies. The trick is to prevent such ignorant people from becoming the majority. At times, it seems nigh impossible to do so; curse our stupidity! WORKS CITED â€Å"Democracy.† Def.1,4. The American Heritage Dictionary. 2nd college ed. 1991. Plato. â€Å"The Apology.† Five Dialogues: Euthyphro, Apology, Cito, Meno, Phaedo. 2nd ed. Trans. Grube, G.M.A. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc, 2002. 36. Gorgias. Trans. Helmbold, W.C. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc, 1952. 18-19, 32-48. â€Å"Book V.† The Republic of Plato. Trans. Bloom, Allan. New York: Basic Books Inc, 1968. 153-154.

A Different Perspective of Heathcliff Essay -- Character Analysis, Hea

What is a traditional hero? In many works of literature, the author portrays a character that is faced with many difficult obstacles, in which the character often prevails and becomes a hero. The challenges, which the character undergoes, allows the reader to appreciate the character due to their bravery, courage, and their willingness to sacrifice. In Wuthering Heights by Emily Brontà «, many readers are able to view Heathcliff as a hero, but how? Heathcliff is not a traditional hero. In fact, the term Byronic hero, would fit Heathcliff’s description in every aspect. Now, what are the characteristics of a Byronic hero? In order to be classified as a Byronic hero, the character needs to display: a high level of intelligence, a troubled past, emotional conflicts, a disliking of social restraints or rules, the status of a social outcast, dark attributes, a taste for vengeance, but most importantly, with all of the negative attributes, the character has the ability to show strong affection for another. These traits are the outline to the plot of Wuthering Heights. Heathcliff resides in the country of Yorkshire, where his estate, Wuthering Heights, is â€Å"completely removed from the stir of society†(Brontà «, 1). Heathcliff enjoys solitude and â€Å"guests are so exceedingly rare in this house†(6), and becomes irritated when guests do visit, wishing â€Å"no repetition of my intrusion†(7). Heathcliff acquires the dark attributes in the novel as if â€Å"a ray fell on his features†(101), stating at the beginning, Heathcliff came from a poverty-stricken country of Liverpool as a â€Å"wicked boy†(53) with â€Å"black eyes†(1), â€Å"black hair†(38), and being â€Å"dirty†(38). With Heathcliff coming from a different nationality, his childhood was uneasy. Hindley, Heathcliff... ...everyone was meaningless, â€Å"I have lost the faculty of enjoying their destruction†(355), and the only thing that will ever bring himself happiness, is to be with his love, Catherine. Many readers view Heathcliff’s actions as absurd, inappropriate, and outrageous. Readers feel Heathcliff hasâ€Å"†¦come from the devil†(38) due to his actions. On the other hand, some readers feel sympathy for Heathcliff and understand that a rough childhood and the loss of his true love to another man justifies his actions. Heathcliff holds all the traits of a Byronic hero: the dark characteristics, a taste for vengeance, emotional conflicts, but with all the flaws, Heathcliff is still capable of being passionate and the ability to show strong affection for Catherine. Heathcliff is no ordinary traditional hero, but in Lord Byron’s eyes, he is the perfect example of a Byronic Hero.

Hooligans Essay -- Hooliganism Football Sports Athletics Essays

Hooligans â€Å"Hundreds of English fans have been departed from Belgium after scenes of mass violence in Belgian cities and football authorities have threatened to expel the English team from the competition if there is another outbreak of the English Disease† This was an article dated 20 June 2000 written by an English journalist. It is obvious from this article that world is facing a great problem nowadays. Actually it would be wrong to use the term ‘nowadays’ because the ‘English Disease’ namely hooliganism have been a problem for many centuries. There are many things to say on hooliganism but first it would be better to start with its definition. Hooliganism doesn’t have a standard definition. But it can be defined as destruction of properties or injury to persons, sometimes involving theft, whether by a gang or a small group of young people. Hooliganism is characterised as a lack of self-control, love of malicious mischief and idleness passing into dishonest and crime. Hooligans are usually made up of boys and young men, aged between 15 and 25 and their main targets are other groups, who only differ from them in their being composed of fans of another football team. And another interesting fact about hooligans is that they consider themselves to be true fans: they support the team for better or worse, they create the highly praised ‘atmosphere’ inside stadiums. Their main interest does not seem much to see brilliant football but to see their team win. As I mentioned in the beginning football hooliganism is known as the ‘English Disease’ but it has been a problem throughout Europe especially in Germany, Holland, Italy and Belgium as well as in the UK. Also Greece, Czech Republic, Denmark, Austria and Turkey witnessed these disturbances in football matches. There are a lot of work done all around the world to avoid the harm hooligans give to the environment and themselves. European Parliament and the National Parliaments of the European Union made effort to avoid the violence throughout Europe. European Council issued a report on hooliganism September 1999 and tried to take further steps on this problem. After all the work done by various sociologists and initiatives of the European Institutions still it is difficult to observe decline in violence in European Stadiums. To make it clear that World is suffering enough from hooliganism for many years... ...cisive measures like banning Britain from football games. I want to end my essay with an article written by Graham L. Jones in 26.06.2000. This article will be helpful in making a summary of the works about hooliganism. ‘The time for talk is over: Ban the Brits! Don’t wait another minute. Forget the possible quarterfinal game. Send Britain from Euro 2000 back to home. Yes, it’s my own country I’m talking about. And yes, it’s the team and players that I want to see pay the price for the absolute ineffectiveness of English Government and English judiciary doing nothing about hooliganism’ Bibliography HOLT R. 1989.Sport and the British. Oxford: Oxford University Press KERR H. 1994.Understanding Soccer Hooliganism. Buckingam: Open University Press TAYLOR R. 1992.Football and its Fans. Leicester: Leicester Universty Press Resources from Internet noviolence.com/archives dailynews.yahoo.com-22.06.2000 bbc.com- Hooliganism made in England but big abroad-26.02.1998 titonet.com/hooligans thesportjournal.com- A developmental view of soccer hooliganism by A.J Harley intorminc.co.uk- Hooliganism-a political football eserver.org- Playing for England by Paul Smith

Is Nick a Good Narrator Essay

As the teller of facts for all of his observations, Nick proves to be a reliable narrator for this story. He is unaffected by what goes on around him, despite people bringing him into personal situations. Nick is factual with details. He is as well, a very private person though, and tells us little of himself during the events. In telling us about his growing up years shows us that Nick has learned many admirable things. In Chapter 1 he tells us how he was raised and the advices given him by his father. These included council on how to speak to people in general. As quoted by Nick, his father told him â€Å" ‘Whenever you feel like criticizing any one’ he told me, ‘just remember that all the people in this world haven’t had the advantages that you’ve had. ’ â€Å" He admits to us here that â€Å"In consequence I’m inclined to reserve all judgments†. He did not appear to like being drawn into drama and would avoid it at all cost. The abnormal mind is quick to detect and attach itself to this quality when it appears in a normal person, and so it came about that in college I was unjustly accused of being a politician, because I was privy to the secret griefs of wild, unknown men. Most of the con? dences were unsought – frequently I have feigned sleep, preoccupation, or a hostile levity when I realized by some unmistakable sign that an intimate revelation was quivering on the horizon. † When describing events, Nick seems again unattached. He tells us what people wear, what they say and how they say it, with much emotion. On his own home in the af? uent area that he had moved (Chapter 2) â€Å"My own house was an eye-sore, but it was a small eye-sore, and it had been overlooked, so I had a view of the water, a partial view of my neighbor’s lawn, and the consoling proximity of millionaires – all for eighty dollars a month. When he tells us about Tom he explains (Chapter 2) â€Å"His speaking voice, a gruff husky tenor, added to the impression of fractiousness he conveyed. There was a touch of paternal contempt in it, even toward people he liked—and there were men at New Haven who had hated his guts. When he introduces Daisy and Jordon for the ? rst time in (Chapter 2) â€Å"The only completely stationary object in the room was an enormous couch on which two young women were buoyed up as though upon an anchored Is Nick a good Narrator? ESSAY THE GREAT GATSBY! PJD balloon. They were both in white and their dresses were rippling and fluttering as if they had just been blown back in after a short flight around the house. † he then goes on with further detail â€Å"The younger of the two was a stranger to me. She was extended full length at her end of the divan, completely motionless and with her chin raised a little as if she were balancing something on it which was quite likely to fall. If she saw me out of the corner of her eyes she gave no hint of it—indeed, I was almost surprised into murmuring an apology for having disturbed her by coming in. The other girl, Daisy, made an attempt to rise—she leaned slightly forward with a conscientious expression— then she laughed, an absurd, charming little laugh, and I laughed too and came forward into the room. The only time we see him express any real emotion is when he realizes that they are all sitting around doing a lot of nothing except to anger and upset each other and that not one person has wished him a ‘Happy Birthday’ that day. He himself, until that moment had forgotten that he turned 30 on that extraordinarily hot day (Chapter 7) â€Å"‘No †¦ I just remembered that today’s my birthday. ’ I was thirty. Before me stretched the portentous menacing road of a new decade. † Nick’s privacy is highlighted in events that have taken place in the novel, but not carried forward with any great detail. Though he describes his college year, followed by his time in the army and going to war, he leaves a lot of personal things out. The ? rst couple of things that stand out regarding his personal privacy. He makes friends with a co-worker and after knowing each other a very short time, the two decide to rent a house together in the country. The friend is shipped off to Washington by the ? rm immediately on renting â€Å"a weather beaten cardboard bungalow at eighty a month†. In that same paragraph, we learn that Nick has a dog with him â€Å"at least I had him for a few days until he ran away. Nor does he talk about having a girlfriend out west or someone that he has befriended at very least, though in Chapter 2 after he meets his cousin Daisy, her husband (and Nick’s former classmate) Tom and their friend Jordan Baker (a Is Nick a good Narrator? ESSAY THE GREAT GATSBY! PJD professional golfer). Daisy suddenly says to Nick, as he is leaving â€Å" ‘I forgot to ask you something, and it’s important. We heard you were engaged to a girl out West. ’ â€Å" Nick wards of the question saying â€Å" ‘It’s libel. I’m too poor. â€Å" He then goes on privately that he was aware of this story, but that it was not true. He says â€Å"The fact that gossip had published the banns was one of the reasons I had come east. † He only refers to the woman at hand as an â€Å"old friend†. Nick spoke with clarity on the events of the summer. He described in detail, the costuming and events, the locations and people. Nick seemed unbiased and disconnected in an unemotional way, until the events of his own birthday. Overall, Nick seemed to have a good grasp of the people and events of that summer, while leaving details of himself to be determined.

Evaluation of the Endosymbiosis Theory

Evaluation of the Evidence The modern version of the endosymbiosis hypothesis was developed and promoted by Dr. Lynn Margulis in 1970. The term endosymbiosis comes from â€Å"endo† meaning â€Å"within,† and symbiosis which occurs when two different species benefit from living and working together (Genetic Science Learning Center). This theory proposes that the organelles of eukaryotic cells, specifically the mitochondria and chloroplasts, were once free-floating bacteria that were ingested by larger, prokaryotic bacteria by means of endocytosis.The host bacteria benefitted from the engulfment of the organelles as they were able to carry out functions, such as cellular respiration, more efficiently than the host itself could. Therefore, the free-living bacteria were not digested, and consequently over time their DNA was combined with the host bacterial cell’s DNA to eventually develop a new form of cells called eukaryotes.One of the most eminent pieces of evidenc e that supports the hypothesis is that although prokaryotic cells and eukaryotic cells are quite distinctive in physiological characteristics, some of the organelles of eukaryotes share a number of staggering similarities with prokaryotes. Like prokaryotes, the mitochondrion and chloroplast both replicate through means of binary fission, unlike the eukaryotic cells that contain them, which undergo mitosis.Moreover, prokaryotes and the abovementioned eukaryotic organelles have circular DNA, whereas eukaryotes have linear DNA. The size of the DNA is also a factor in the theory as the prokaryotic DNA and the DNA of the organelles is similar in size, and much smaller than that of eukaryotic cells. The dissimilarities between the physical characteristics of the DNA in the eukaryotic nucleus and the DNA in the organelles lead to the impression that the organelles were once bacterial (prokaryotic) symbionts (IUPUI Department of Biology).However, since the DNA in the nucleus and the organel les replicate independently of each other, there is the possibility that random mutations may have occurred, thus causing the discrepancies in the DNA over a certain period of time. Therefore, this evidence is not conclusive proof that the organelles are possible descendants of ancestral bacteria. Additionally, chloroplasts and mitochondria are surrounded by a double membrane. This provides further evidence to the endosymbiosis theory because it suggests that these organelles were ingested by a primitive host (Genetic Science Learning Center).To explain this circumstance, the host cell ingests the bacterium through phagocytosis – a form of endocytosis – which results in an additional lipid bilayer formed by the vesicle membrane, in addition to the bacterium’s inner plasma membrane (IUPUI Department of Biology). There is no other known cause as to why these organelles have double membranes, other than the widely-accepted endosymbiotic theory. In the field of scie nce, a theory is a well-established explanation based on extensive experimentation and observation, and is generally accepted as fact by the scientific community (Genetic Science Learning Center).Although some of the evidence provided in support of the endosymbiosis hypothesis is not irrefutable, there is more evidence is support of the theory, than there is against it. Therefore, in my opinion, the amount of research put into this topic over the years and the various evidences that have been unearthed in support of it, as well as the lack of proof against it, lead me to accepting this theory as conclusive. However, I also want to note that research is always being done, and in the near future it is possible that scientists may propose new, improved theories.REFERENCES Genetic Science Learning Center (1969, December 31). The Evolution of the Cell. Retrieved on October 8, 2012 from http://learn. genetics. utah. edu/content/begin/cells/organelles/ IUPUI Department of Biology (2002, Ja nuary 14). The Endosymbiotic Theory. Retrieved on October 8, 2012 from http://www. biology. iupui. edu/biocourses/N100/2k2endosymb. html Caprette, D. R. (2008). Evolutionary Origin of Mitochondria. Retrieved on October 8, 2012 from http://www. ruf. rice. edu/~bioslabs/studies/mitochondria/mitorigin. html