Feminism Philosophy Essay Example for Free

Feminism Philosophy Essay At the onset, Valerie Solana’s SCUM Manifesto is a work that was clearly addressed to male species which she regarded as accidental a â€Å"biological accident. † The first two paragraphs of her work reveal her deep resentment on the role of men and women in the society. The last part of the first paragraph reflects her strong rejection of the male sex. Solanas identifies male in various ways but all describing the male as an undesirable species. To her, to be male is something that a man should be ashamed of and maleness is a dearth, a disease and that males are emotionally limited. She said male is completely an â€Å"isolated unit† and everything that he has in himself is nothing but a tool that he use to fulfill his drives and needs. Her work also reflect a seemingly an almost bitter feeling towards men. She used strong and very offending sentences emphasizing on the males’ purportedly many in capabilities including relationship except of his physical sensation. However, the male according to her is capable Solano’s obvious hatred to the male sex was also expressed in the way she describes how a male expresses himself. She described the male’s behavior as physically passive but then he does not like it. He expressed his frustration of his own passivity by screwing a woman he despises. She said the male project his passivity by projecting it onto women and by screwing. Overall, Valerie Solano’s work was an expression of her sentiments on the role between the male and the female in which she downgraded the role of the male species as concerns only of him self, but she gratifies women for her unselfish role. Solano stated that while mother cares for what is best for her children, the father only wants what is best for him. She was a man hater. In contrast with the work of Solano, Fry’s work is more objective although she also urges that women should detach themselves from the world of males and male dominated institution. This separation according to Fry is of various sorts which must includes institutions, relationships, roles and activities that are male dominated. Fry’s work reflects a more meaningful feminist opinion as she discussed important feminist issues leading to their objective of achieving liberation from the male dominance world. While Solano strongly reject the male describing him as incapable, emotionally weak, a disease, and so forth all maligning the male sex, Fry was more objective in a sense that she also put her feet on the other’s shoes. Though a real feminist and also a staunch advocate of the separation from male dominance, she described women’s role in the context of the traditional notion that men are the provider and the protector of women. Fry cited the notion of parasitism of the male and female in terms of family matters. But she insists that the parasitism â€Å"goes the other way around. † It is the male that is parasites to females’ because men are pathetic and used up by living by their own. In general, although both women were against the existing arrangement of the roles of men and women in the society, Solano was very radical in her views about the males’ role and the male as a person to the point that she appeared being a man-hater. Fry on the other hand, was more objective although she also deplored the male as weak and parasites to women. But unlike Solano’s views of the male which is very personal and very negative, Fry’s opinion reflects a carefully weigh ideas regarding the issues involving the role of men and women which in the perspective of feminist like them are offensive and binding to women. Is having a maid morally wrong? What are BARBARA Ehrenreich’s reasons for thinking so? Is correct? Why or why not? In my own opinion, having a maid is not morally wrong as long as they are not treated fairly, are not abused, and given just compensation. In the contexts of the employers, maids should not be viewed as slaves rather they should be considered as worker or even employees. Ong (2006) was right in her assessment that having a domestic helper or two is part of the â€Å"bargain with two-income families† (p. 201). Ong noted that a high standard of living is considered impossible â€Å"without one or even two foreign maids to take care of the household chores as well as of children or the elderly† (p. 201). Thus, having a maid at home should be considered as a social right, just like access to better schools, housing, shopping malls, and leisure. However, in the context of the families of these maids, to be maid in a foreign country is a source of hope on their economic miseries. Most of the families these maids came from are poor and the best option for them to survive is for their daughter to get employment overseas. In other words, hiring maids meant helping those families. Unfortunately, there are always people who discriminate others. They tend to abuse their domestic servants by giving them unequal and unfair treatment. According to the Human Rights Watch, many domestic helpers complain of abusive treatments such as not providing them enough food, longer working hours, and racist behavior. These are what is morally wrong and not the hiring of domestic helpers. Barbara Ehrenreich’s thinking about having maids at home On the other hand, Barbara Ehrenreich noted the movement of women around the world and draws a comparison that for every women executive who travels, large number of women from the third world countries leave their families to work as domestic servants in the first world countries. For Ehrenreich, this mass exodus of women is morally wrong because it results in odd displacements. Ehrenreich cited the facts that while these women carry with them the warmth of the female energy into the wealthy country that hired them; this is usually at the expense of their families left behind. Their absent deprive their families of her care which she willingly offer to the families that need her services abroad. For Ehrenreich, having domestic helpers harm one’s moral character and she calls on her readers not hire maids to clean the house. Ehrenreich argued having domestic servants clean the house is not good for the family especially the children. While Ehrenreich was more concern on are supposed to clean the house, which is usually done by the maids, she deplored that cleaning other people’s house is so gross and demeaning. While Ehrenreich may have a point, but this issue should not be seen as morally wrong rather it should viewed in the economic context. Having a maid is not morally wrong because it is a decent job for women who have fewer opportunities in life, especially those coming from very poor families in third world countries. As long as they are treated fairly and justly compensated, it is never morally wrong to employ somebody to do some jobs that one cannot do anymore. It is the most practical thing because it serves in two ways, it benefits the employer because they can concentrate in their work, and it benefits the maid because she will earn dollars for her family back home. Reference Fry, M. (1983) Some Reflection on Separatism and Power http://www. feminist-reprise. org/docs/fryesep. htm Ong, A. (2006) Neoliberalism as Exception USA: Duke University Press Solano, V. Avital, R. (2004) SCUM Manifesto USA: Verso

Health Problems Linked to Smoking Tobacco :: Papers

Health Problems Linked to Smoking Tobacco It is a universally accepted fact that smoking cigarettes or tobacco is detrimental to your health. There is an endless list of health problems that are directly caused or affected by smoking, including lung cancer, heart disease, stroke, and emphysema. Short-term effects of smoking include a significant increase in heart rate and a drop in skin temperature. Respiration rate is also increased. In novice smokers, diarrhea and vomiting may occur. Although the central nervous system is, in fact, stimulated by smoking, smokers usually feel it relaxes them. Long-term effects are mainly on the bronchiopulmonary and cardiovascular systems. Smoking is the main cause of lung cancer (related to 90% of all lung cancer cases). Other factors, notably industrial carcinogens may be involved, especially among smokers. An average smoker is ten times more likely to get lung cancer than in a nonsmoker. Smoking is estimated to be responsible for 30% of all cancer deaths. It is also associated with cancers of the mouth, throat, colon, pancreas, bladder, kidneys, stomach, and cervix, and related to 75% of chronic bronchitis cases and 80% of emphysema cases. Tobacco also affects the digestive system. Gastric and duodenal (the upper section of the small intestine) ulcers are twice as common and twice as likely to cause death in smokers as in nonsmokers. Skin wounds may heal less quickly in smokers, partly because smoking depletes the body of vitamin C. Smokers may also have less effective immune systems than nonsmokers. Tobacco use is associated with 25% to 30% of all cardiovascular disease. Smokers have a 70% higher rate of coronary heart disease than nonsmokers, nearly twice the risk of heart attack, and five times the risk of stroke. Tobacco use can lead to physical and psychological dependence on nicotine, particularly in cigarette smokers. The United States Surgeon General's 1988 report states that "cigarettes and other forms of tobacco are just as addicting as heroin and cocaine." People who are physically dependent on tobacco suffer a withdrawal reaction when they stop using it. Some signs of withdrawal are: irritability, anxiety, headaches, sleep disturbances (insomnia or drowsiness), difficulty concentrating, decreased heart rate and increased appetite, and a craving for nicotine.

A World Without Chemistry Essay

A world without chemmistry would be simply disastrous. We would have no phones, no lightbulbs, no social networking! Almost everything we use in our daily lifes depends on chemistry to exist, from the food we eat to the clothes on our backs. If we had never studied chemistry we wouldn’t have liquid oxygen. This was developed in the 1800s and is now probably best-known for its role as rocket fuel. Without rockets the space race wouldn’t have happened, or all the everyday things that we got from programmes related to it – from satellite TV to the internet. Chemistry has been called ‘the central science’ because of its role and influence on all of the sciences. It involves the study of the basic units of matter, and without that knowledge other sciences such as physics and biology would not have been particularly successful. Before a world of modern chemistry, humans had very limited ways of preserving foods. It would be very hard to find clean water nowadays if it weren’t for chemistry. Deadly waterborne diseases such as cholera, dysentery and typhoid would be very common. Without chemistry, we would not be able to understand the composition of food. We would not be able to tell what foods are good for us and what foods are bad. We would not be able to estimate the shelf life of foods. We also wouldn’t know how to how to nourish our body with food that would protect us from illnesses such as rickets, osteoporosis and scurvy. Chemistry has enabled us to make up for the nutrients we miss out on, with important vitamins and minerals in capsule form, and fortified breakfast cereals. Without chemistry we would not have modern medicine. Disease and illness would be spreading like wildfire! When modern chemistry began to take off, by the 17th century, the average life expectancy was only 35 years. Advancements in chemistry was able to change that. Nowadays, the life expectancy in Ireland is 80. 32 years. Without modern chemistry we would not have been able to achieve such a high age of life expectancy. Without chemistry, penicillin would never have existed, and minor cuts and grazes and low-grade viruses would often progress to serious illness and fatal septicaemia (blood poisoning). Without chemistry we wouldn’t have salicylic acid! That’s the chemical name for aspirin, the cheap wonder-drug which has given us relief from headaches and fever as well as helping to prevent strokes and heart attacks. And what would us poor, pimply teenagers do without this wonderous chemical to fight all our spots? All I can say is, THANK YOU CHEMISTRY! Chemistry plays a big role in every aspect of our lives. It has allowed other sciences to blossom and has expanded our collective knowledge. We understand how the tiniest components of the human body work and can predict the composition of planets millions of miles away.

Essay on Modern Peoples Lifestyle

Essay on Modern Peoples Lifestyle Today, a lot of people sit throughout whole days in offices in front of their PCs and forget how important it is to do regular physical exercises. In fact, they have to be involved in everyone’s daily routine. Apart from doing exercises, it is important to mind what you eat during your day. The modern lifestyle of coach potatoes or fanatic office workers, which many people choose, will certainly bring about a lot of negative results. Despite the fact that everyone is aware of the bad consequences their lifestyle can bring, they do not stop leading them and eating junk food. People in favor of active lifestyle know that healthy food can be really tasty. In fact, the taste of junk food seems terrible to them. That is the right life position, to which all the people have to strive. In addition, junk food can cause a lot of diseases. The high fat content in these food items can result in obesity and will definitely shorten your life. If you want to live longer, the first thing that you have to do is to get accustomed to healthy food and forget all the addresses of fast food restaurants. The other one is to stop making up excuses for not doing physical exercises. It doesn’t mean that you have to have long daily work-outs. All you have to do is allocate 20 to 30 minutes a day for some simple, but extremely useful moves of your body. Thus, all you have to do is make a decision whether to live your life full of diseases and boring daily activities, or to take a position of active person, involved in many different events without the constant need to go to the hospital.