THE BEDFORD READER PDF

adminComment(0)

The Bedford Reader centers on common ways of thinking and writing about all kinds of subjects, from everyday experiences to complex scientific theories. What- . Ebook download any format The Bedford Reader Unlimited Free E-Book Download now. (c) >>> page 1 of 8 PDF File: ec The Bedford Reader By X. J. Kennedy, Dorothy M. Kennedy, Jane E.


The Bedford Reader Pdf

Author:ISADORA REILLEY
Language:English, Dutch, Portuguese
Country:Libya
Genre:Lifestyle
Pages:718
Published (Last):10.11.2015
ISBN:189-6-48276-306-2
ePub File Size:24.36 MB
PDF File Size:19.80 MB
Distribution:Free* [*Sign up for free]
Downloads:40685
Uploaded by: REANNA

The Bedford Reader centers on common ways of thinking and writing about all the aim of The Bedford Reader is to move students to be writers. Get Free Read & Download Files The Bedford Er PDF. THE BEDFORD READER. Download: The Bedford Reader. THE BEDFORD READER - In this site isn`t. Kennedy, Jane E Aaron, Co Author Ellen Kuhl Repetto [PDF EBOOK EPUB Get Instant Access to The Bedford Reader By X J.

Brief Bedford Reader 11e & Easywriter With 2009 Mla And 2010 Apa Updates 4e por X. J. Kennedy

SlideShare Explore Search You. Submit Search. Successfully reported this slideshow. We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime. Upcoming SlideShare. Like this presentation? Why not share! An annual anal Embed Size px. Start on. Show related SlideShares at end. WordPress Shortcode. Published in: Full Name Comment goes here. Are you sure you want to Yes No.

Be the first to like this. No Downloads. Views Total views. Actions Shares. Embeds 0 No embeds. No notes for slide. Her essay explains the various lies told daily by most people.

But what about the untruths told to move forward in life? Not all lies are intentionally told to hurt people. There are necessary times when dishonesty is the best decision for all parties involved.

As a part of Ericsson's essay, she did not address this point. She, basically, gave various lies that people tell on a regular basis.

By not explaining why people lie has a negative affect on the reader and her essay. She did not completely explain her logic and arguments. The essay provides numerous facts, quotes, opinions, and examples to the reader.

This, somewhat, clarifies possible questions from the opposition and forces the reader Stephanie Ericsson's Rhetoric and Style "The Ways We Lie" The duality of mankind, or the belief that the human mind is made up of a good and evil part, has always been a matter of great interest for many philosophers, psychologists and writers. Hyde is a unavoidable classic on the subject; for its portrayal of both nature in the persons of Hyde and Jekyll is efficiently drawn in the symbolic descriptions, and the significant critic that is made through the novel, which is the hypocrisy of the society where image is more important than anything else, is still relevant today.

Stevenson, in his descriptions of Hyde and Jekyll and their actions demonstrates how the good part of the human mind Jekyll is better, more developed than the darker one, the innate evil, embodied by Hyde, which is harmful for society and the individual.

First, the physical appearance tells us a lot about Hyde and Jekyll and, at the same time, what the author thinks about the two parts of the human mind. In the descriptions made by observers, Jekyll appears to be a perfect, distinguished gentlemen. The good part of the human mind is therefore perceived as eminent, more distinguished than the other part.

Hyde, is seen by other people who meet him as a dangerous and terrifying beast. Although they cannot name why, Hyde appears to those who meet him as repulsively ugly. Stevenson, through his symbolic use of hair and small stature in his description of Hyde shows that this one is less developed and less distinguished than Jekyll.

The good part of the human mind, embodied by Jekyll is superior to the evil one, less developed and less attractive. Second, the setting is very relevant to the theme and tells us a lot about the differences between Hyde and Jekyll. The story takes place in Victorian London, in the late nineteenth century, on a background of middle-class gentlemen who respect the value of respectability and the dynamic of the Victorian society.

Knowing this, we see with the descriptions in the novel, that the doctor is more successful than Hyde. Even the butler, Poole, who opens the door, is said to be a well-dressed, loyal, elder and respectable servant.

Thus, according to the Victorian values, no doubt that Jekyll has, in the novel, a larger amount of ethic than Hyde and therefore is more respectable. Hence, Stevenson demonstrates, with the different places where the action takes place, how Jekyll is superior to Hyde. We see in the behaviour and actions of Hyde and Jekyll how the latter one is better but also how the former one is despicable. Henry Jekyll is a doctor, the caring job among all. His friends, such as Utterson and Lanyon, are all respectable and upright gentlemen who cherish honest hopes.

Throughout the novel, he always tries to undo the evil done by his other nasty part, Hyde. If the doctor does so, Hyde does exactly the opposite. Right from the beginning, we know that Hyde hangs around in the dirty areas of London, seeking undignified pleasures and immersing himself into depravity, vices and sins. His depravity and immorality are also underlined by the different ghastly crimes, taking aim at innocent people, he commits.

He first tramples a little girl and leaves her ill-treated, crying on the street and then beats to death a old man. We see that Hyde is not only less developed and more primitive in his actions than Jekyll, but also that these very actions are harmful for the society and lead to the destruction of the individual, as the author demonstrates when Jekyll ultimately commits suicide.

In conclusion, Stevenson demonstrates through the physical appearances, the setting and the actions of his characters how the evil part of our mind is smaller and weaker than the good one. By showing how Hyde is much smaller than Jekyll and by showing that the places and the frequentations he has are less respectable than those of Jekyll, he demonstrates the superiority of Jekyll and therefore, the superiority of the good side over the evil one.

Stevenson illustrates this by stating clearly the differences between Hyde and Jekyll, the evil and good side. The dark one is not only smaller, weaker and less distinguished but also leads to the destruction of the society and the individual. Stevenson also explores how the repression of the Victorian society leads to the release of that dark side, due to the will to break free from the value of respectability.

This is saying the government policy affects health care delivery in any given place. This paper is going to examine the proposed health care reform by the Obama-Biden plan. It is going to highlight the major current problems in health policy. This paper is also going to show what role the health industry played in the health reform.

Also, this paper is going to show that the profit driven HMOs are the problem and not the solution. Our health system has grave problems that require reform. These problems are examples of the unrelenting growth in the number of Americans uninsured over the past years. About one-third of the Americans are inadequately insure, either completely uninsured, or underinsured such that if a major illness like cancer, he or she would likely go bankrupt because of this disease and treatments he or she needs.

In this paper, the provisions of the national health reform law are going to be shown. This law is going to be expensive being implemented over several years will all the major provision that will be taking affect by… Pay for essay reviews This page features authentic sample assignments that you can view or download to help you develop and enhance your academic writing skills. They include academic essays, reports, case studies as well as reflective writing.

Many students have consulted with HELPS Advisors over the years and have wanted to view past assignments to guide them in their own writing. The assignments have been provided by staff and students with their consent to demonstrate original pieces of writing. The sample essays below are divided into specific disciplines to assist you in your writing.

They reflect different genres of writing according to the particular task for that assignment e. Each assignment is annotated with comments on the important elements of writing such as: argument and thesis, sentence and paragraph structure, style and register, transition language, critical thinking, and referencing.

Whenever you see a hyperlink, we recommend that you click on it as it will take you to the relevant page on the HELPS website for more detailed information. We recommend viewing these sample assignments at the beginning of, and during, your course of studies or subject so that you have an idea of the way in which your lecturer or tutor would expect you to write both in terms of language and content.

The sample assignments are ideal as a guide for most coursework students and include material from both undergraduate and postgraduate subjects. Customer service writing emails Feminism is both an intellectual commitment and a political movement that seeks justice for women and the end of sexism in all forms.

However, there are many different kinds of feminism. Feminists disagree about what sexism consists in, and what exactly ought to be done about it; they disagree about what it means to be a woman or a man and what social and political implications gender has or should have. Nonetheless, motivated by the quest for social justice, feminist inquiry provides a wide range of perspectives on social, cultural, and political phenomena.

Important topics for feminist theory and politics include: the body, class and work, disability, the family, globalization, human rights, popular culture, race and racism, reproduction, science, the self, sex work, and sexuality. Extended discussion of these topics is included in the sub-entries. Feminism brings many things to philosophy including not only a variety of particular moral and political claims, but ways of asking and answering questions, critiques of mainstream philosophical views and methods, and new topics of inquiry.

Feminist contributions to and interventions in mainstream philosophical debates are covered in entries under "Feminism, interventions".

Entries covered under the rubric "Feminism, topics" concern philosophical issues that arise as feminists articulate accounts of sexism, critique sexist social and cultural practices, and develop alternative visions of a just world. In short, they are philosophical topics that arise within feminism. Although there are many different and sometimes conflicting approaches to feminist philosophy, see "Feminism, approaches to" , it is instructive to begin by asking what, if anything, feminists as a group are committed to.

Considering some of the controversies over what feminism is provides a springboard for seeing how feminist commitments generate a host of philosophical topics, especially as those commitments confront the world as we know it. The term 'feminism' has many different uses and its meanings are often contested. For example, some writers use the term 'feminism' to refer to a historically specific political movement in the US and Europe ; other writers use it to refer to the belief that there are injustices against women, though there is no consensus on the exact list of these injustices.

My goal here will be to sketch some of the central uses of the term that are most relevant to those interested in contemporary feminist philosophy. For an overview of the history of feminist thought see: "Feminism, history of". The references I provide below are only a small sample of the work available on the topics in question; more complete bibliographies are available at the specific topical entries and also at the end of this entry.

Some feminists trace the origins of the term "feminism" in English as rooted in the movement in Europe and the US beginning with the mobilization for suffrage during the late 19th and early 20th century and refer to this movement as "First Wave" feminism. Those who employ this history often depict feminist as waning between the two world wars, to be "revived" in the late 's and early 's as what they label "Second Wave" feminism.

More recently, transformations of feminism in the past decade have been referred to as "Third Wave" feminism. However, other feminist scholars object to identifying feminism with these particular moments of political activism, on the grounds that doing so eclipses the fact that there has been resistance to male domination that should be considered "feminist" throughout history and across cultures: i. Moreover, even considering only relatively recent efforts to resist male domination in Europe and the US, the emphasis on "First" and "Second" Wave feminism ignores the ongoing resistance to male domination between the 's and 's and the resistance outside mainstream politics, particularly by women of color and working class women.

One might seek to solve these problems by emphasizing the political ideas that the term was apparently coined to capture, viz. This acknowledges that commitment to and advocacy for women's rights has not been confined to the Women's Liberation Movement in the West. But this too raises controversy, for it frames feminism within a broadly Liberal approach to political and economic life.

Although most feminists would probably agree that there is some sense of "rights" on which achieving equal rights for women is a necessary condition for feminism to succeed, most would also argue that this would not be sufficient. This is because women's oppression under male domination rarely if ever consists solely in depriving women of political and legal "rights", but also extends into the structure of our society and the content of our culture, and permeates our consciousness e.

Given the controversies over the term "feminism" and the politics of circumscribing the boundaries of a social movement, it is sometimes tempting to think that there is little point in demanding a definition of the term beyond a set of disjuncts that capture different instances.

However, at the same time it can be both intellectually and politically valuable to have a schematic framework that enables us to map at least some of our points of agreement and disagreement. I'll begin here by considering some of the basic elements of feminism as a political position. For an overview of different philosophical approaches to feminism, see "Feminism, approaches to". In many of its forms, feminism seems to involve at least two claims, one normative and the other descriptive.

The normative claim concerns how women ought or ought not to be viewed and treated and draws on a background conception of justice or broad moral position; the descriptive claim concerns how women are, as a matter of fact, viewed and treated, alleging that they are not being treated in accordance with the standards of justice or morality invoked in the normative claim.

Together the two claims provide reasons for working to change the way things are; hence, feminism is not just an intellectual but also a political movement. So, for example, a Liberal approach of the kind already mentioned might define feminism rather simplistically here in terms of two claims: On this account, that women and men ought to have equal rights and respect is the normative claim; and that women are denied equal rights and respect functions here as the descriptive claim.

Admittedly, the claim that women are disadvantaged with respect to rights and respect is not a "purely descriptive" claim since it plausibly involves an evaluative component.

However, my point here is simply that claims of this sort concern what is the case not what ought to be the case. Disagreements within feminism can occur with respect to either the descriptive or normative claim, e. Disagreements between feminists and non-feminists can also occur with respect to both the normative and descriptive claims, e.

Others disagree about the background moral or political views. In an effort to suggest a schematic account of feminism, Susan James characterizes feminism as follows: Feminism is grounded on the belief that women are oppressed or disadvantaged by comparison with men, and that their oppression is in some way illegitimate or unjustified. Under the umbrella of this general characterization there are, however, many interpretations of women and their oppression, so that it is a mistake to think of feminism as a single philosophical doctrine, or as implying an agreed political program.

James , James seems here to be using the notions of "oppression" and "disadvantage" as placeholders for more substantive accounts of injustice both normative and descriptive over which feminists disagree. Some might prefer to define feminism in terms of a normative claim alone: feminists are those who believe that women are entitled to equal rights, or equal respect, or… fill in the blank with one's preferred account of injustice , and one is not required to believe that women are currently being treated unjustly.

However, if we were to adopt this terminological convention, it would be harder to identify some of the interesting sources of disagreement both with and within feminism, and the term 'feminism' would lose much of its potential to unite those whose concerns and commitments extend beyond their moral beliefs to their social interpretations and political affiliations.

Feminists are not simply those who are committed in principle to justice for women; feminists take themselves to have reasons to bring about social change on women's behalf.

Taking "feminism" to entail both normative and empirical commitments also helps make sense of some uses of the term 'feminism' in recent popular discourse. In everyday conversation it is not uncommon to find both men and women prefixing a comment they might make about women with the caveat, "I'm not a feminist, but…". Of course this qualification might be and is used for various purposes, but one persistent usage seems to follow the qualification with some claim that is hard to distinguish from claims that feminists are wont to make.

Before you apply

If we see the identification "feminist" as implicitly committing one to both a normative stance about how things should be and an interpretation of current conditions, it is easy to imagine someone being in the position of wanting to cancel his or her endorsement of either the normative or the descriptive claim. So, e. Or one might be willing to acknowledge in a very general way that equality for women is a good thing, without being committed to interpreting particular everyday situations as unjust especially if is unclear how far these interpretations would have to extend.

Feminists, however, at least according to popular discourse, are ready to both adopt a broad account of what justice for women would require and interpret everyday situations as unjust by the standards of that account.

Those who explicitly cancel their commitment to feminism may then be happy to endorse some part of the view but are unwilling to endorse what they find to be a problematic package.

As mentioned above, there is considerable debate within feminism concerning the normative question: what would count as full justice for women? What is the nature of the wrong that feminism seeks to address? Is it that women have been denied equal respect for their differences?

Is it that women's experiences have been ignored and devalued? What framework should we employ to identify and address the issues? See, e. Feminist philosophers in particular have asked: Do the standard philosophical accounts of justice and morality provide us adequate resources to theorize male domination, or do we need distinctively feminist accounts? Note, however, that by phrasing the task as one of identifying the wrongs women suffer and have suffered , there is an implicit suggestion that women as a group can be usefully compared against men as a group with respect to their standing or position in society; and this seems to suggest that women as a group are treated in the same way, or that they all suffer the same injustices, and men as a group all reap the same advantages.

But of course this is not the case, or at least not straightforwardly so. As bell hooks so vividly pointed out, in when Betty Friedan urged women to reconsider the role of housewife and demanded greater opportunities for women to enter the workforce Friedan , Friedan was not speaking for working class women or most women of color hooks , Women as a group experience many different forms of injustice, and the sexism they encounter interacts in complex ways with other systems of oppression.

In contemporary terms, this is known as the problem of intersectionality Crenshaw This awareness has led some theorists to adopt a different term. Earlier, during the 's's, the term 'womanism' had sometimes been used for such intellectual and political commitments; more recently, Alice Walker has proposed that a newly defined "womanism" provides a contemporary alternative to "feminism" that better addresses the needs of Black women and women of color more generally Walker To consider some of the different strategies for responding to the phenomenon of intersectionality, let's return to the schematic claims that women are oppressed and this oppression is wrong or unjust.

Very broadly, then, one might characterize the goal of feminism to be ending the oppression of women. But if we also acknowledge that women are oppressed not just by sexism, but in many ways, e. And some feminists have adopted this interpretation, e. Note, however, that not all agree with such an expansive definition of Feminism. One might agree that feminists ought to work to end all forms of oppression--oppression is unjust and feminists, like everyone else, have a moral obligation to fight injustice--without maintaining that it is the mission of feminism to end all oppression.

One might even believe that in order to accomplish feminism's goals it is necessary to combat racism and economic exploitation, but also think that there is a narrower set of specifically feminist objectives. In other words, opposing oppression in its many forms may be instrumental to, even a necessary means to, feminism, but not intrinsic to it.

Free Essays on The Ways We Lie by Stephanie Ericsson

We must understand that patriarchal domination shares an ideological foundation with racism and other forms of group oppression, and that there is no hope that it can be eradicated while these systems remain intact. This knowledge should consistently inform the direction of feminist theory and practice. In Feminist Theory: from margin to center, I suggest that defining feminism broadly as "a movement to end sexism and sexist oppression" would enable us to have a common political goal…Sharing a common goal does not imply that women and men will not have radically divergent perspectives on how that goal might be reached.

Feminism's objective is to end sexism, though because of its relation to other forms of oppression, this will require efforts to end other forms of oppression as well. For example, feminists who themselves remain racists will not be able to fully appreciate the broad impact of sexism on the lives of women of color.

Furthermore because sexist institutions are also, e. Following hooks' lead, we might characterize feminism schematically allowing the schema to be filled in differently by different accounts as the view that women are subject to sexist oppression and that this is wrong. This move shifts the burden of our inquiry from a characterization of what feminism is to a characterization of what sexism, or sexist oppression is.

As mentioned above, there are a variety of interpretations--feminist and otherwise--of what exactly oppression consists in, but the leading idea is that oppression consists in "an enclosing structure of forces and barriers which tends to the immobilization and reduction of a group or category of people Frye , Not just any "enclosing structure" is oppressive, however, for plausibly any process of socialization will create a structure that both limits and enables all individuals who live within it.

In the case of oppression, however, the "enclosing structures" in question are part of a broader system that asymmetrically and unjustly disadvantages one group and benefits another. It is a crucial feature of contemporary accounts, however, that one cannot assume that members of the privileged group have intentionally designed or maintained the system for their benefit.

The oppressive structure may be the result of an historical process whose originators are long gone, or it may be the unintended result of complex cooperative strategies gone wrong. Leaving aside at least for the moment further details in the account of oppression, the question remains: What makes a particular form of oppression sexist?

If we just say that a form of oppression counts as sexist oppression if it harms women, or even primarily harms women, this is not enough to distinguish it from other forms of oppression. Virtually all forms of oppression harm women, and arguably some besides sexism harm women primarily though not exclusively , e. Besides, as we've noted before, sexism is not only harmful to women, but is harmful to all of us. What makes a particular form of oppression sexist seems to be not just that it harms women, but that someone is subject to this form of oppression specifically because she is or at least appears to be a woman.

Racial oppression harms women, but racial oppression by itself doesn't harm them because they are women, it harms them because they are or appear to be members of a particular race.

The suggestion that sexist oppression consists in oppression to which one is subject by virtue of being or appearing to be a woman provides us at least the beginnings of an analytical tool for distinguishing subordinating structures that happen to affect some or even all women from those that are more specifically sexist.

First, we need to explicate further what it means to be oppressed "because you are a woman". Is to be oppressed "as a woman" to be oppressed in a particular way? Or can we be pluralists about what sexist oppression consists in without fragmenting the notion beyond usefulness? Two strategies for explicating sexist oppression have proven to be problematic. The first is to maintain that there is a form of oppression common to all women. For example, one might interpret Catharine Mac Kinnon's work as claiming that to be oppressed as a woman is to be viewed and treated as sexually subordinate, where this claim is grounded in the alleged universal fact of the eroticization of male dominance and female submission Mac Kinnon ; Mac Kinnon Although Mac Kinnon allows that sexual subordination can happen in a myriad of ways, her account is monistic in its attempt to unite the different forms of sexist oppression around a single core account that makes sexual objectification the focus.

Although Mac Kinnon's work provides a powerful resource for analyzing women's subordination, many have argued that it is too narrow, e. Although certainly sexual subordination is a factor in sexist oppression, it requires us to fabricate implausible explanations of social life to suppose that all divisions of labor that exploit women as women stem from the "eroticization of dominance and submission".

Moreover, it isn't obvious that in order to make sense of sexist oppression we need to seek a single form of oppression common to all women. This approach is not only flawed in its exclusion of all but the most elite women in its paradigm, but it assumes that privilege in other areas does not affect the phenomenon under consideration. A second problematic strategy has been to consider as paradigms those who are oppressed only as women, with the thought that complex cases bringing in additional forms of oppression will obscure what is distinctive of sexist oppression.

As Elizabeth Spelman makes the point: …no woman is subject to any form of oppression simply because she is a woman; which forms of oppression she is subject to depend on what "kind" of woman she is. In a world in which a woman might be subject to racism, classism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, if she is not so subject it is because of her race, class, religion, sexual orientation. So it can never be the case that the treatment of a woman has only to do with her gender and nothing to do with her class or race.

Spelman , Recent accounts of oppression are designed to allow that oppression takes many forms, and refuse to identify one form as more basic or fundamental than the rest. Sexist or racist oppression, for example, will manifest itself in different ways in different contexts, e. For example, Iris Young describes five "faces" of oppression: exploitation, marginalization, powerlessness, cultural imperialism, and systematic violence Young c, Ch.

Acknowledging this does not go quite far enough, however, for monistic theorists such as Mac Kinnon could grant this much. Pluralist accounts of sexist oppression must also allow that there isn't an over-arching explanation of sexist oppression that applies to all its forms: in some cases it may be that women's oppression as women is due to the eroticization of male dominance, but in other cases it may be better explained by women's reproductive value in establishing kinship structures Rubin , or by the shifting demands of globalization within an ethnically stratified workplace.

In other words, pluralists resist the temptation to "grand social theory," "overarching metanarratives," "monocausal explanations," to allow that the explanation of sexism in a particular historical context will rely on economic, political, legal, and cultural factors that are specific to that context which would prevent the account from being generalized to all instances of sexism Fraser and Nicholson It is still compatible with pluralist methods to seek out patterns in women's social positions and structural explanations within and across social contexts, but in doing so we must be highly sensitive to historical and cultural variation.

However, if we pursue a pluralist strategy in understanding sexist oppression, what unifies all the instances as instances of sexism? After all, we cannot assume that the oppression in question takes the same form in different contexts, and we cannot assume that there is an underlying explanation of the different ways it manifests itself. So can we even speak of there being a unified set of cases--something we can call "sexist oppression"--at all? Some feminists would urge us to recognize that there isn't a systematic way to unify the different instances of sexism, and correspondingly, there is no systematic unity in what counts as feminism: instead we should see the basis for feminist unity in coalition building Reagon Different groups work to combat different forms of oppression; some groups take oppression against women as women as a primary concern.

If there is a basis for cooperation between some subset of these groups in a given context, then finding that basis is an accomplishment, but should not be taken for granted.

An alternative, however, would be to grant that in practice unity among feminists cannot be taken for granted, but to begin with a theoretical common-ground among feminist views that does not assume that sexism appears in the same form or for the same reasons in all contexts. We saw above that one promising strategy for distinguishing sexism from racism, classism, and other forms of injustice is to focus on the idea that if an individual is suffering sexist oppression, then an important part of the explanation why she is subject to the injustice is that she is or appears to be a woman.

This includes cases in which women as a group are explicitly targeted by a policy or a practice, but also includes cases where the policy or practice affects women due to a history of sexism, even if they are not explicitly targeted.

For example, if women are deprived an education and so are, on the whole, illiterate. And if under these circumstances only those who are literate are entitled to vote.

Then we can say that women as a group are being disenfranchised and that this is a form of sexist oppression because part of the explanation of why women cannot vote is that they are women, and women are deprived an education. The commonality among the cases is to be found in the role of gender in the explanation of the injustice rather than the specific form the injustice takes. Continuing with this intentional openness in the exact nature of the wrong, the question still remains what it means to say that women are subjected to injustice because they are women.

To address this question, it may help to consider a familiar ambiguity in the notion "because": are we concerned here with causal explanations or justifications?

The Bedford Reader PDF

On one hand, the claim that someone is oppressed because she is a woman suggests that the best causal explanation of the subordination in question will make reference to her sex: e. On the other hand, the claim that someone is oppressed because she is a woman suggests that the rationale or basis for the oppressive structures requires that one be sensitive to someone's sex in determining how they should be viewed and treated, i. Note, however, that in both sorts of cases the fact that one is or appears to be a woman need not be the only factor relevant in explaining the injustice.

But if the injustice takes a form that, e. For example, the practice of raping Bosnian women was an intersectional injustice: it targeted them both because they were Bosnian and because they were women. Of course, these two understandings of being oppressed because you are a woman are not incompatible; in fact they typically support one another.

Because human actions are often best explained by the framework employed for justifying them, one's sex may play a large role in determining how one is treated because the background understandings for what's appropriate treatment draw invidious distinctions between the sexes. In other words, the causal mechanism for sexism often passes through problematic representations of women and gender roles.

In each of the cases of being oppressed as a woman mentioned above, Paula suffers injustice, but a crucial factor in explaining the injustice is that Paula is a member of a particular group, viz. This, I think, is crucial in understanding why sexism and racism, and other --isms are most often understood as kinds of oppression. Oppression is injustice that, first and foremost, concerns groups; individuals are oppressed just in case they are subjected to injustice because of their group membership.

On this view, to claim that women as women suffer injustice is to claim that women are oppressed. There are disagreements among feminists about the nature of justice in general and the nature of sexism, in particular, the specific kinds of injustice or wrong women suffer; and the group who should be the primary focus of feminist efforts. Nonetheless, feminists are committed to bringing about social change to end injustice against women, in particular, injustice against women as women.

The emphasis here is on general resources useful for doing research in feminist philosophy or interdisciplinary feminist theory, e. The list is incomplete and will be regularly revised and expanded.

Further resources on topics in feminism such as popular culture, reproductive rights, sex work, are available within each sub-entry on that topic. It is approximately 1, words long and 3 pages in length. You can jump around with ideas, make multiple attempts, backtrack and explore the essay without investing too much time in a finished product. An outline is a preliminary summary of written work, typically hierarchically organized in headings and subheadings.

Structuring and organizing large volumes of information and research in a traditional outline is the first step in the writing process. Outlines help demonstrate the thinking process behind an essay or report which can help show a teacher where a student may need help or further instruction. Viewed as the first step in the writing process and the best way to organize notes and large amounts of information, outlines help students build essays and reports in a structured way.

Before diving into writing a paper, begin with a main idea or thesis which is a short summary of the central idea about which the student will write.

Then students support those ideas with more specific examples or supporting facts. An outline can be fine-tuned by editing, rearranging and changing priorities of topics and subtopics. By grouping bits of information and categorizing, students can begin compiling notes, building and organizing essays.

Inspiration Software encourages teachers to emphasize the importance of pre-writing steps such as brainstorming and outlining, in order to help students write more cohesive and complete essays.

These outlining tools make it easy for students to arrange and rearrange their notes in a way that makes the most sense to them. However, not all students find traditional outlining easy. For more visual learners, starting with a concept map or idea map feels more natural and makes the process more manageable. Inspiration Software recognizes that not every student learns in the same way.

Inspiration, Kidspiration and Webspiration Classroom all contain integrated Outline and Diagram views.I remember the day I met her, it was the first day of high school and I was very nervous because I did not know anybody from there.

If you don't look around once in a while you might miss it. It provides evidence that this dynamic is far more important than previously believed, and that personal ethics are less predictive of such behavior.

Find hundreds more in-store. The agency offers safe, fixed rate mortgages; rental assistance for low-income families and individuals; and financing for the development of quality, affordable rental housing. Not just any "enclosing structure" is oppressive, however, for plausibly any process of socialization will create a structure that both limits and enables all individuals who live within it.

With the Fee Only Financial Planning Bedford Nh free woodworking plans package, you will get help to build all kinds of projects, be it furniture, sheds, beds or wind generators. Welcome to Chesterfield, NH. Book Details Author:

CRISTEN from Boulder
I do fancy sharing PDF docs zestily. Review my other articles. I am highly influenced by keep away.
>