What are the legal and the social standing of women in the early 1800s Essay

What are the legal and the social standing of women in the early 1800s - Essay Example This paper will discuss the legal and the social status that women had during the period of 18th century, especially focusing on the early years of the century. Body The status of women during the 18th century can clearly be understood through the theory of power, dominant and non-dominant class of George M. Fredrickson (Fredrickson, n.d.). According to Fredrickson there is a dominant group that owns and controls all the rights and they do not offer these rights to other individuals of the society and this group thinks that they are superior to other individuals of the society. Similarly women during the 1800s and before were recognized as weak by men as men were the people who formed the elite group and represented the dominant class. During the 1800s men worked in jobs where they were the producers of goods and services and women and their children stayed home. During the 1800s century, the myth was that women were weaker as compared to men and did not have the ability to conduct w ork that required intellectual and muscular power. This created a view that working in organizations was very hard and the role could only be conducted by women. During this period, the domestic chores such as taking care of home and making food were assigned to women and men were involved in labor that required both mental and physical fitness such as hunting and plowing. (Welter, 1996). The task that women conducted was quite heavy in nature but they were not realized as tasks that require strong physical and mental health. The main task that a woman had during the 19th century was giving birth to a child and they used to remain busy in this task for quite a long period of time. In the 1800s the majority of the population of America shared a belief that women were inclined towards religion and they were thought of as individuals who would work with God and will ensure that the world is free of evil through their love which was categorized as pure and full of passion and suffering. Religion was found to be the best associate of women as they could easily practice it within the boundary lines of their homes. No woman was allowed to stand against or not practice religion and those females who did so were treated in a negative manner. Women were highly regarded for their purity and sex before marriage was seen as a curse and an illegal form of activity. According to Thomas Jefferson’s concept of cultural assimilation those who had less power and rights should accept the norms and cultural values of those who were dominant in society. Thomas Jefferson’s theory of assimilation can be applied to the men and women of the 1800s. This is because men had more resources and they were the dominant ones, so the women who had fewer rights and were the non-dominant ones had to accept what their husbands had to give to them and comply with the demands of the husbands of that period. During the early period of the 19th century women even had an inferior status a ccording to law. Those females who were used to give up own identity and all the assets owned were transferred within the control of their husbands. The US law was even based on the idea that man had similar ownership over his wife and children as ownership of property. Fathers used to make decisions and law directed women to obey their husbands’ decision. Later during the 1830s and the 1840s certain changes to law were made. One such law was the Equity law that focused on giving equal rights to men and women. During the era of 1839, a woman legally had a right to sue her husband and

How Happy could Gay Men be in a Homophobic Society such as Ours Essay Example for Free

How Happy could Gay Men be in a Homophobic Society such as Ours Essay Homosexuality is no longer an undisclosed idea amongst us, and their existence in our society is no longer a question to be raised. As we know, they enter the same shops we visit every now and then; they ride the same buses and subways we catch; they walk the same streets we tread everyday; they breathe the same air we do, all for one apparent reason: they are no less human than any of us in this society could possibly be. Despite the common knowledge we all have about the existence of these people who suddenly came out from the box, it still raises different reactions from the crowd of the so called â€Å"normal people†Ã¢â‚¬â€as the society itself may refer to it. While others have learned to accept the given fact that there is a possibility of alteration to the socially set standard of normality, such as this one on the area of gender, there are still some who just couldn’t practice the act of coexistence with these so called â€Å"new breeds. There are still people who religiously believe that the defiance of the â€Å"norm† such as crossing from one gender to another is absolutely unacceptable. Given this reality, a lot of attempts have been made to somehow sway these people out of their enclosed bubbles. Even media, one of the most influential elements in our society, took a step further by recognizing the existence of gays and lesbians in their projects themed after differe nt slices of life—like the top notching series Will Grace, and the award-winning movie Philadelphia. With people’s warm embrace with the idea in moving pictures, it seemed no far from the possibility that they could, one way or another, welcome the idea in reality with open arms; the only question remaining is: how wide open could these people extend their arms based on what their televisions feed them? According to Marisa Conolly on her article entitled Homosexuality on Television: The Heterosexualization of Will Grace in Print Media, despite the television show Will Grace’s attempt to promote the â€Å"normality† of the existence of gay men in the society, the show wasn’t able to fully liberate the misunderstood bunch. Intentionally or not, certain limitations have been set by the said show, leaving unnecessary provisions among viewers which they could refer to in terms of classifying homosexuality unacceptable and acceptable for the public’s eyes. Generally, Will, one of the main characters of the said show who happens to play a part of a supposed homosexual, was somehow portrayed in a heterosexual manner; his mere association with Grace, a straight female character, shades the scene to a different color. Their supposed friendship was brought into a different heterosexual border of relationship, wherein platonic is brought into a twisted romantic angle—somehow portraying him caught in between the certainty of homosexuality and the tendency to lean on heterosexuality. Unfortunately, their possible interest to sell is totally negating the promotion of the other, thus making it more complicated for the viewers whether to absorb him as a subtle gay who simply seeks recognition, or as a male, in the middle of an identity crisis, still clinging on the idealism of heterosexuality through tricky dramatization of his relationship with a straight woman. The same idea was raised in the film Philadelphia by Jonathan Demme. On the said movie, instead weighing through the inconsistency of the perceived representation of character, the viewers are simply being caught in the middle of a life and death situation. Instead of making their viewers understand the real score within the extent of reality that the film itself is providing, they are subconsciously redefining pity as a substitute for this understanding. They have misused the forthcoming of death to the gay persona’s advantage by playing on it as if saying: â€Å"Hey, I am dying now of AIDS, and I am gay. Now that I will be leaving this mortal place soon, will you please have the compassion of accepting me for who I really am? † Personally, I don’t think that this is the proper way of educating the people because it is basically misleading. Though the two groups are closely knitted by its constant reception of seclusion from the society, it is unfair to define being gay no different from having AIDS. Being gay is not a deadly viral disease like AIDS; it is simply a way of life that is, more often than not, being misunderstood. Upon watching the film, I was left caught at the vagueness of Denzel Washington’s character. I thought at first that he will be the one responsible to set free Tom Hanks’ character, but by the end of the film, my hopes were dropped on the floor. His supposed homophobia, which I first thought will be the vital element he has as one of the lead character, somehow got lost in the latter part of the story. The issue tackled dealt mainly on Hanks’ viral illness and how most people generally react to it—giving the homosexuality issue, which is more widespread in reality, a weak standpoint. The common ground between the two different portrayals of gay men stated above is its tendency to seek for conditions before actually opening the idea of acceptance. For television sitcom Will Grace, they sought for a subtle way to conform with the â€Å"norms† by partially heterosexualizing the gay character, while for the movie Philadelphia, they played with emotions, most specifically guilt, by bringing into their attention that death is an uneventful future for the character. Basically, in their own particular ways, they are always looking for certain loop holes to pull off gayness acceptable—meaning gayness itself defines no reason to stand on its own. In this case, their uncritical viewers tend to get accustomed in looking for such passages before they actually accept certain circumstances, which unfortunately not every gay man has. In the end, publication of ideas and slices of life such as these only implies that as time passed by the society is still keeping its doors closed to the recognition of homosexuality’s existence. Again it only shows the greatest weakness that any society has: a fear of the â€Å"unordinary. † They are not exactly liberation but rather a form of deception in order to switch the attention of the critical public regarding their claim for ample recognition to homosexuals. None of these moving images placed a dot at the end of the statement â€Å"we accept homosexuality†; instead, they only made the issue more complex than ever by adding up the condition â€Å"if and only if† to the said declaration. If the shows themselves couldn’t accept the fact that gay men exist, how could their viewers do? I could give credit for the attempt pull out gays and lesbians from their malicious-satirical stereotype of simply being unpleasant, loud and mischievous, but still, that doesn’t make it enough for me. Compassion may be the best way to seek approval, but seeking proofs out of the ordinary and passing it off as the best solution is nothing but a substandard achievement. Homosexuality isn’t actually an issue seeking for a special treatment; that will be way too much for a goal now that it couldn’t even reach the approval of being lined up on the average level. All gays and lesbians need is the chance to be treated in a normal way—no more and no less than how people accept heterosexuals—where in they are not shoved away as if they are infectious beasts. Since media started this crooked representation of homosexuality on screen in the first place, I believe that they will be the only one who could correct this. Next time they produce best selling stories about homosexuals on their reels, they should try taking away those â€Å"special cases† that tend to sensationalize their stories—like exploring Will’s manly side as a gay man and Hanks’ incurable illness. If they want to represent gay men as part of the normal sector in our society, then they could probably represent them as simple as being another friendly neighbor from the block without a semi-romantic relationship with a straight female, but rather a nonchalant relationship with another man, or a successful lawyer who need not die at the end of the story just to gain recognition for his success as a lawyer; instead, he could just be another lawyer who saved the day—roles as simple as that, just like most heterosexuals portray. In that way, it will seem to be more realistic and fair for these people who usually live under the shadow of our judgmental society.

Essay --

Though the national public opinions on marijuana and the use of it have recently gained massive media attention, the question still largely remains: â€Å"Do the benefits of marijuana uses outweigh the potential risks associated with it?† The truth of the matter is that all of the negative attributes that would come along with its legalization and usage make one wonder why the nation is even deliberating on the subject. These main reasons clearly identify why marijuana should remain illegal. First, marijuana legalization poses a serious risk for the occurrence of an upswing in teen marijuana use. Secondly, marijuana poses countless health risks on individuals who use it. Finally, the benefits associated with marijuana use are minimal, to say the least, and therefore would do nothing more than allow people to get high at free will. Overall, even though marijuana has been heavily promoted through its own advocates as well as the media as a substance with a plethora of benefits, the legalization of the use of this drug would ultimately do more harm than good. It’s no secret that the media has heavily glamorized marijuana usage in recent times. Teens are watching as more and more states put marijuana legalization measures on their ballots. They are watching as states like Washington and Colorado legalize recreational marijuana use. Not to mention all the stars that glamorize drugs. Teens watch as stars they admire like Miley Cyrus openly proclaim their love for marijuana and getting stoned from it. (Rivera) Slogans like â€Å"Just Say No† are slowly fading from the minds of our nation’s teens. When teens watch things like this occur, it’s easy to see why they may want to begin using marijuana. The issue with this is that an upswing in teen ma... ...uana’s benefits probably do not outweigh its drawbacks, and therefore should remain illegal. Marijuana is and will remain a hot topic in American minds from years to come. Its legal status, though, is the situation at hand and the question remains: â€Å"Does the drug carry enough positive qualities to overcome all of its negative attributes?† The simple answer to that question is â€Å"no.† The drug poses a serious risk in an upswing of teen marijuana use, it has been proven to contain numerous health risks, and its benefits are so small and minimally-researched that likely the only â€Å"benefit† to come from its legalization is freedom for people to get stoned at their own discretion. To sum it up, marijuana is simply something that can do without legalizing. Keeping its status illegal will ultimately help keep our citizens from going down a road they certainly do not need to.

Narendra Damodardas Modi, a leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Essay

Narendra Damodardas Modi ([nÉ™reË ndÃŒ ªrÉ™ dÃŒ ªÃ‰â€˜Ã‹ moË dÃŒ ªÃ‰â„¢rÉ™dÃŒ ªÃ‰â€˜Ã‹ s moË dÃŒ ªiË ] ( listen), born 17 September 1950) is the 15th and current Prime Minister of India. Modi, a leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), also served as Chief Minister of Gujarat from 2001–14. He represents Varanasi as its Member of Parliament (MP). Modi was a key strategist for the BJP in the successful 1995 and 1998 Gujarat state election campaigns. He became Chief Minister of Gujarat in October 2001 and served longer by far in that position than anyone else to date. Modi was a major campaign figure in the 2009 general election, which the BJP-led National Democratic Alliance lost to the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA). He led the BJP in the 2014 general election, which resulted in an outright majority for the BJP in the Lok Sabha (the lower house of the Indian parliament), the first time that any party had done so since 1984. Modi is a Hindu Nationalist and a member of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS).[2][3] He is a controversial figure both within India as well as internationally[4][5][6][7] as his administration has been criticised for the incidents surrounding the 2002 Gujarat riots.[7][8] Modi has been praised for his economic policies, which are credited with creating an environment for a high rate of economic growth in Gujarat.[9] However, his administration has also been criticised for failing to make a significant positive impact upon the human development of the state.[10] Modi was born on 17 September 1950 to a family of grocers belonging to the backward Ghanchi-Teli (oil-presser) community, in Vadnagar in Mehsana district of erstwhile Bombay State (present-day Gujarat), India.[11][12][13][14][15] He was the third of four children born to Damodardas Mulchand Modi and his wife, Heeraben.[16] He helped his father sell tea at Vadnagar railway station. As a child and as a teenager, he ran a tea stall with his brother near a bus terminus.[17][18] In 1967, he completed his schooling in Vadnagar, where a teacher described him as being an average student, but a keen debater who had an interest in theatre.[17][19] That interest has influenced how he now projects himself in politics.[20] At the age of eight, Modi came in contact with RSS and he began attending its local shakhas where he came in contact with Lakshmanrao Inamdar, popularly known as Vakil Saheb, who is known as his political guru and mentor. Inamdar inducted Modi as a balswayamsevak, a junior cadet in RSS. During his morning exercise session at the keri pitha shakha of RSS, he  also came in contact with Vasant Gajendragadkar and Nathalal Jaghda, leaders of the Jan Sangh who later founded the BJP’s Gujarat state unit in 1980.[21][22][23][24][25][26] Modi’s parents arranged his marriage as a child, in keeping with the traditions of the Ghanchi caste. He was engaged at the age of 13 to Jashodaben Chimanlal and the couple were married by the time he was 18. They spent very little time together and were soon estranged because Modi decided to pursue an itinerant life.[17][27] However as per Modi’s biographer Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay, the marriage was never consummated.[28] Having remained silent on his marital status, during declarations related to candidature during four state elections since 2002 and having claimed that his status as a single person meant that he had no reason to be corrupt, Modi acknowledged Jashodaben as his legal spouse when filling in his nomination form for the 2014 Lok Sabha elections.[29][30] As per Modi in Kishore Makwana’s Common Man Narendra Modi, published in 2014, after leaving home at 17, he went to Ramakrishna Mission ashram in Rajkot and then to the Belur Math near Kolkata. Then he went to Guwahati and later joined another ashram set up by Swami Vivekananda in Almora, in the Himalayan foothills. Two years after, he returned to Vadnagar and after a brief halt at his house, Modi left again for Ahmedabad, where he lived and worked in a tea stall run by his uncle where he again came in contact with Lakshmanrao Inamdar who was then based at Hedgewar Bhavan, the RSS headquarters in the city.[21][22][23] He then worked in the staff canteen of Gujarat State Road Transport Corporation until he became a full–time pracharak (propagandist) of the RSS in 1970.[25] In 1978, Modi graduated with an extramural degree through Distance Education in political science from Delhi University.[22][28] In 1983, while remaining as a pracharak in the RSS, completed his Master’s degree in political science from Gujarat University.[19][31] He still continues to visit Belur Math occasionally[32][33] and talks about his reverence for the Ramakrishna Mission.

The Wounded Platoon

Being currently in the military I have mixed reactions when viewing this video. I perform the same role as â€Å"Doc† Krebs did, but for the Air Force Reserve. There Is a lot to consider when discussing this documentary. It was well constructed In the sense that those interviewed held various positions representing nearly every step of the larger process that is the war. First I would like to discuss the issue of battle itself. Few of our nation's military actually sees combat, it is largely support for those who do. Of those who are placed In a combat situation the number of those is sustained combat day after day Is even fewer.Infantry during an offensive tactical plan are typically those who have suffered the worst. To make matters worse this particular war is extremely taxing of a person's psyche. Unlike most wars of the past the enemy is not readily identifiable. They wear no uniforms they blend in with the population. Threatening the locals into keeping quiet about which buildings they are in is not uncommon. It is no wonder that returning soldiers are scanning rooftops or firing at the first male they see viewing the site of an explosion. Who Is to say they didn't set It off?Often the explosion from an DIED Is the first wave of an oncoming attack and the gunfire is not far behind. It is easy to say that they should know better sitting on your couch watching this video. But nine months into a deployment especially one where you are on the offensive, not all people are strong enough to know the difference in that split second. The truth is we will never know. Many of the soldiers Interviewed trace the root of their problems back to the death of SST Huh. This was the first of many multiple traumas they encountered. They ere not yet numb to the effects of war.Numbness In itself Is a survival mechanism; as mentioned by a troop in the video, that is necessary to perform at the level needed. In that instant it's kill or be killed, nothing else matters. I t also was especially tragic since the SST that was killed was so well respected and liked. Some of the members did seek help and this is where we get our first glimpse of the larger problem. The speech given by George Bush sending an additional ASK troops Into battle sets off a chain reaction. There are only 25% of young people In this nation that are insider â€Å"fit† to join the military.This is due to a number of reasons such as weight, fitness level, health status, previous surgeries and intelligence level to name a few. It also takes a considerable amount of time from the start of a recruit signing the papers to get them to basic training, which can take months in itself. Then they must be able to complete that successfully and move on and successfully complete their lob specific training. There Is additional training specific to the region and special tactics that also must be completed before a member is even eligible to deploy.That is even if they are infantry as pr eviously mentioned, most of the military does not perform that role. So this brings us to the decisions made by the top level command. Does the military typically allow criminals? No. Do they allow those with pending charges to deploy? No. Do they allow those who are mentally unstable to deploy without first getting treatment? No. Until this war they didn't allow All of these factors security threat overseas, and it worked. A multitude of factors that will forever remain unknown to everyone except the few who made the rules and we will fully know what he rational was.With that being said when the president says you must send this many men, you do. In an ideal world there would be enough to go around. Sure they could have pulled from another base. But what the video doesn't address is anyone else's deployment cycle. This platoon was Just one of many in the same situation. Do you send someone over to Iraq for another year 2 months after they have been reunited with their family? The g eneral population and the vast majority of the military itself do not know the manning of the force or who is actually eligible to deploy out of those who are in. It is certainly a tough call to make.I'm certain that those who made it knew that there would be a downfall in some regard. In this case it is the medical system. The onset of this year we Just completed, has saw a tremendous surge in life- changing injuries and service connected disabilities. As mentioned in the video it is an abnormal situation to be placed in. Many of those who were shown in the video were deemed unfit for continued military service following their deployment, specifically for PETS. A diagnosis of PETS cannot be made initially after a traumatic vent, the symptoms must be present for several months and disrupt daily functioning.Irritability, a sense of being on guard, short temper, easily startled and nightmares are some of a plethora of symptoms experienced. Access to care is another shortfall mentioned in this video. Some of the soldiers did not seek treatment due to stigma. Others such as Nash sought treatment too late after he had resorted to drugs and alcohol first. I will say that the military did fail them in the sense of the initial treatment. I wish I knew why this was the case. I can only speculate that it is due to not being fully aware of the tuition, money and a lack of available resources to treat these members.This brings us to another failure not mentioned in the video. It is unclear what role the soldiers next in their chain of command (direct supervisor) played in this process. They could have advocated for the member, but more importantly they could have simply been there and stuck with them through every aspect of their treatment giving them support at every turn. It is impossible to tell from the video if an attempt was made and the supervisor was shut out, or if one of these men portrayed was the supervisor of the others. That is how the leadership system brok e down.There is absolutely no way that the commander is responsible directly. Commanders are only informed of a patient seeking mental health treatment and they follow the recommendations given by those who actually evaluated the patient. They are given zero information on the diagnosis. Secondly they would be completely unaware of their subordinates behavior off duty. The failure of the mental health system in the military is not surprising. The VA system is shambles and has been before the influx of patients since the onset of this ar.Staffing and overcrowding is commonplace, at least it would appear the federal government cannot turn a blind eye anymore and is addressing this issue. The mental health system has strict rules about duty limitations and determines who is eligible for continued service based on condition but it is obvious in this case they if this process was started on these members as it can take months for a member to be considered at maximal medical improvement. It is only at this point after the government has done everything in their power to aid the member that they can aka the decision to retain or discharge the individual.They simply may not have had the time, or the member may have forced leadership's hand by committing other faults such as felonies as evidenced in the video. It is certainly disheartening to see our military portrayed in this fashion although for some it is a reality. Despite what is shown in this video I feel that our mental health in the US military is performing better than ever before and operates at a high level. Certainly they could use more resources and staff but that cost money that may not be slotted for this particular concern.Budget drives every action in Washington and sometimes it takes a crisis before those who serve us will listen. It will take years to rectify the VA system, and there will also be problems and people lost in the system as they try to seek help as they are exiting the military by choic e or otherwise. I am proud to serve in the military and help those who are wounded, physically or psychologically and will continue to do so. You must have faith that those above you are making the best and most informed decisions they can, even though you will never understand the factors that went into such a decision.

laser essays

laser essays Before we can learn about the laser we need to know a little bit about light (since that is what a laser is made of). Light from our sun, or from an electric bulb, is called white light. It is really a mixture of all the different colours of light. The colours range from violet, indigo, and blue, to green, yellow, orange, and red. These make up the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum. Light is made up of particles, called PHOTONS, which travel in waves. The difference in the colour depends on the wavelength of the light. Violet light has the shortest wavelength while red has the longest. There are other parts of the electromagnetic spectrum which includes infra-red, radar, television radio and micro- waves (past red on the spectrum), and on the other end of the spectrum are the other invisible radiations, ultra- violet, X rays, micro waves and gamma rays. The wavelength of the light is important to the subject of the laser. A laser is made up of COHERENT light, a special kind of light in which the wavelengths of the light are all the same length, and the crests of these waves are all lined up, or in PHASE. The word Laser is an acronym for Light Amplification by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. What does that mean? Basically a laser is a device which produces and then amplifies light waves and concentrates them The principles of the laser (and it's cousin the maser) were established long before these devices were successfully developed. In 1916 Albert Einstein proposed stimulated emission, and other fundamental ideas were discussed by V.A. Fabrikant in 1940. These ideas, followed by decades of intensive development of microwave technology set the stage for the first maser (a laser made up of micro-waves), and this in turn helped to produce more advances in this area of science. These efforts cumulated in July 1960 ...

Susan B Anthony essays

Susan B Anthony essays When was the last time you sat down and contemplated how different our lives would be today without the right to vote or without equality amongst blacks and females with white males....probably the last time somebody said something about it. Did you stop to think how this all came about? We can all thank Susan B Anthony for all that women have today. If there werent individuals fighting for rights on behalf of all of us then, now, or in the future, would it be different today? These are all questions that I have asked myself on numerous occasions, and this is why Susan B Anthony comes to mind. It all began back in 1820 in Adams, Massachusetts when Susan Brownell Anthony was born. On February 15, Daniel and Lucy Anthony had their second of eight children. Susans father, Daniel, was a very strict Quaker who owned a textile mill, and after the loss of the business, Daniel moved the family to Rochester, NY for a fresh start as a farmer. Throughout her life, her father was always encouraging his children to become their own individuals and always provided the best education possible. From that Susan became a teacher at Canajoharie Academy and soon became the head of the Female Department, making a measly $110 a year. She soon became aware of the fact that the male teachers were making a considerably higher amount, and this angered her. That was when her crusade for equality first began. After teaching for fifteen years, she began the full-time job of being a leader, crusader, abolitionist, educational reformer, labor activist, temperance worker, suffragist and also a womans rights campaigner. Susan B Anthony did some remarkable things for todays society, but it is nearly impossible to just focus on one; however, for me as a woman who wants only equality, the work that she put forth towards the womens right to vote seemed to have been the only way to go. Anthony knew that the only way women ha...