Social injustice Essay Example for Free

Social injustice Essay We’ve all applied to a job and didn’t get it. Did you ever think to yourself it was some type of discrimination? Social and racial discriminations happen all the time in the workplace. You may be turned down from a job because of your race, social status, or even your gender. Many times in the workplace people are deemed unfit for the position, but why? Why should it matter if you’re a female or male for certain jobs positions? Who says a male cant preform the job to potential as a female or visa versa? If you walk into a Claire’s, per say, it will be all women working there and I’m sure when males walk in they feel discriminated to ask for an application because all they see is females working in there; It’s a double standard contraception. However, it’s how society implies how or what kind of roles the male or female should contribute to the work environment. I for one have thought of applying for a certain job that society would not †expect† a young man to partake in, so sadly knowing I would have fulfilled the job exceptionally suitable did not take it because I cared about what other people thought of. Race is one of the biggest struggles for many perfectly applicable people who would fulfill the desired job they want to apply for. One of the most sensitive subjects that have been around for decades would be peoples race. I have two close friends, whom are extremely hard working, book smart, and have great social skills who applied for a high end job down south after college. They were turned down =, and for what? What color they were? This is one of the biggest disappointments our society still has to deal with to this day. Perfectly adequate young men or women could perform any job they believe and work hard for and they should NEVER be turned down for their race. Because who would know if that certain raced man or woman would have executed that job better than lets say the white raced man or woman? The way people look is another example of a high social injustice situation. The â€Å" benefit of the doubt† is the proper mindset of what every interviewer should have. Say a man comes into an interview with tattoos and wearing jeans and a dirty button up, yes, they look like they don’t care but that’s all they can afford to look like until they are hired and get a job. Vs. a man who comes in tight suit, brief case and put together. The man with the tattoos is a hard workingman and has all the exceptional social skills they need to fulfill the job, and the man in the suit is only book smart and has no patience to work with people. The interviewer picks the man with the suit because he looks more †suitable† for the job. That is not acceptable. The other man would no doubt work extremely hard to make sure he executed his job to the highest standards. But what our society and the work place wants is who will be the fresh face that is the face for the company. The â€Å"benefit of the doubt† is dying in these kinds of situations because our society these days expects a certain kind of person to be dealing with customers and when doing so, look a †certain† way. I’m sorry but our society these days, is just not right. And we all need to start giving the benefit of the doubt and know what the real â€Å"face of the company is†. All these examples of Social Injustice are what real people are living through/with every day of their lives and its man vs. society when they deal with these situations. It’s just not right that there are people out there who think its acceptable to turn down adequate males or females who could perform a job better than people they hire whom they think they can. And if there is a day that it happens to myself I will stick up for myself and prove that person wrong because all the people who have been turned down know what they are capable of and its not fair they don’t get the chance to show what they can do.

Initiation Story Essay -- essays papers

Initiation Story "A&P", written by John Updike, is based on a moment in the life of a cashier. He was known as Sammy and he referred to his position in the grocery store as a slot checker. Sammy spent his time watching and wondering about customers. One day, while working, three girls dressed in bikinis entered the store and attracted his attention. He describes the three girls movements and watches them as they roam throughout the store. Eventually, the girls work their way to Sammy's cashier station to purchase the item which they have selected. Then Lengel, the manager of the store, enters and embarrasses the girls for their attire. As a result, Sammy quits his job at the A&P. This short story is an example of an initiation story through its use of characterization and plot. Sammy, the slot checker, at the "A&P" evolved throughout the story. Initially, he was only a cashier who was using his idol time to critique the customers who came passing through. His job was beneath his mental capabilities and so this was the only way he could keep himself bu...

Do you agree with the view that the Beatles “changed the world in the sixties”? Essay

It’s clear from any angle that The Beatles had an incredible impact on the world in the sixties, but I think it’s evident stating they â€Å"changed the world† is going too far, and in actual fact they merely reflected a changing world. Source 18 mentions the view that â€Å"The Beatles changed the world in the sixties†, and it references to some of the contemporary debates from the decade, which the four-man band had an influence on: â€Å"legalization of drugs, the war in Vietnam† and â€Å"traditional and alternate religions†. Ian Inglis also declares them as one of the â€Å"twentieth century’s more significant achievements† which is true to an extent – some of their views and actions on the decades disputes were eye-openers to society. Although, source 18 also makes the comment that the band are â€Å"innovators†, which is supported by source 17’s view they’re not the â€Å"architects† of the â€Å"new youth culture†. This shows it the counter argument: they voiced a shifting world and society. To say the Beatles â€Å"changed the world in the sixties† holds some truth – they were the first band to speak out about the Vietnam War, the first band to openly experiment with alternate religions and criticize other traditional faiths and the only band to publically call for the legalization of marijuana. So source 18’s view that the four men were â€Å"prominent across a wide range of categories† including â€Å"historical, sociological, cultural and musical† and that â€Å"their opinions were sought out, heard and acted on† is obviously evident – especially when relating to the bands protests against the Vietnam War. Perhaps one of the bands most famous demonstrations, in 1965, sent shock waves through the country – the Beatles were the first band to be honored with the nations highest award, but Lennon rejected his to protest against Britain’s involvement in the war with Vietnam. He also coined the renowned phrases â€Å"make love not war† and â€Å"give peace a chance†. It’s obviously apparent that the band voiced and shaped some of the strongest protests against the cruel war – they helped to expose to society how bad the situation was in Vietnam, giving the conflict details higher awareness than before. Without their high profile protests, it’s hard to say how the population would have reacted to the horrifying circumstances of the war, but the Beatles gave them a route to take, they used the population to support their view against conflict and unnecessary deaths, therefore this argues that the band changed the world to manipulate their opinions. Supporting this is the negativity in source 16,Lennon says â€Å"the same idiots are running everything† – his insulting words, aimed at the government, are acceptable considering the war is still current in 1971 when the statement is made, he’s angry at the pointless fighting and deaths- much like the rest of the population. The Beatles involvement with alternate religions made headlines and influenced a higher awareness in the world; therefore this could also argue the view that they changed the world. â€Å"Indian Mysticism† and â€Å"Transcendental Meditation† were two of the faiths they experimented with, however it was their dismissal of the Christian/Catholic belief that was the bigger impact – source 18 supports the idea they made â€Å"significant achievements† in the â€Å"cultural category†. George Harrison was the first member of the band to experiment with a new religion – Hinduism which he took interest in after being handed a book on reincarnation during the filming of â€Å"Help!† in 1965, the other members shortly followed suit. Their choices to explore other faiths and cultures became high profile and famous decisions – 65 reporters followed the four men when they travelled to India in February 1968, where they advanced in meditation classes and followed the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi religion. All of this was new and exciting or shocking to western civilization – no one of high status had done outrageous things like this and therefore it encouraged the more rebellious youth culture to change. Not only did their views on alternate religions make headlines, so did their opinions on traditional faiths. August 1964, the Beatles press officer said the band were â€Å"so anti-Christ they shock me which isn’t an easy thing† – this opinion is furthered by Lennon’s 1970 song â€Å"God† in which he sings â€Å"I don’t believe in Jesus† and â€Å"I don’t believe in Bible†. Also notice the lyrics his 1970 song Imagine, â€Å"imagine there’s no heaven†¦ no hell below us†¦ no religion too†. The sixties was still a time where traditional faith was strong, people went to church every Sunday and the contraceptive pill  was only legalized in 1961 – so for the four men to openly express they’re non-believers, it was shocking. New youth culture would have seen it as an escape to live life with more freedom, as the older and younger generation gap was wider than ever – young people looked up to the band as idols. The famous four lead this contemporary debate more than other factors did – they helped to shape a new younger religious culture, supported by source 17, they made new religion and dismissal of the traditional â€Å"instantly chic for the millions of fans who looked to the group for guidance†. Furthermore, the Beatles drug use was constantly in the press during the sixties – a time where the world learnt more and more about different pills, inhalants and injections. Source 18 states that the Beatles opinions on the â€Å"legalization of drugs† were â€Å"sought out, heard and acted on† – particularly in 1967 when the four young men called for the ‘legalization of marijuana’ through an advertisement in The Times. This was a big thing – it was a fairly new drugs in UK and American culture, before the sixties tobacco and alcohol were the only widespread drugs. Although their plea didn’t work, the advertisement still created higher awareness of the hallucinogenic drug, which encouraged more people to try or use it. In 2004, Paul McCartney admitted they used drugs as an influence to most of their music – including â€Å"Got to Get You in my Life† which was about cannabis and confessed the infamous suspicion that â€Å"Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds† was about LSD. By the late sixties the band had managed to change how the youth spent their time – the younger generations now started to hang out in private open areas, listening to their psychedelic rock, growing their hair long, dressing in colourful clothes and taking mind-altering drugs – the hippie era had begun. Although, it seems to me, it’s more evident that the Beatles didn’t â€Å"change the world in the sixties†, but in fact they merely reflected a changing world – this opinion is supported by both source 17 and 18. It’s stated by Allan Kozinn in source 17 that â€Å"although they seemed to be the leaders of the new youth culture, they were by no means its architects† which is also supported in source 18 by the inclusion of the words â€Å"innovators† and â€Å"spokesperson† – these words infer that the four men were imitating original  views and opinions. Source 16 also agrees with this opinion to an extent – Lennon often had a controversial provenance when talking to the media or the press, in this instance he would be saying â€Å"it’s still the same society and world, yet the middle class people follow our stupid ways† which refers to the â€Å"it’s exactly the same†, â€Å"the bourgeois system† and â€Å"we dressed up† comments. Also with Lennon’s statement we have to consider that in 1971 the band had split – this is the same year as the statement was made; therefore it’s going to be negative. Source 17 states that the Beatles had the â€Å"ability to detect trends early† and made them â€Å"instantly chic for millions of fans† – I think it’s evident this was the case for their involvement in the protests against the Vietnam War. The four young men didn’t create the anti-war views and opinions, they already existed among millions of people considering the UK was only just getting better after World War 2, the men simply gave the ideas a louder voice, they catalyzed the protests into the media so larger amounts of people would see and agree. In an interview with Lennon and McCartney, in 1968, they were asked, â€Å"the US has been plagued by the Vietnam War, and the world has been concerned, what’s your views?† in which Lennon replied, â€Å"it’s another piece of insanity.† In the question we can understand that the rest of the world had the same views as the Beatles did, the four men are repeating the views to create higher awareness and support – evidence of media manipulation. Two years earlier, during a press conference in New York, George Harrison made a similar reply to a similar question: â€Å"it’s just war is wrong and it’s obvious it’s wrong† – using the word obvious shows that he knows it’s a widespread opinion. Through all of this we can see that the band weren’t alone on their views and opinions – in fact I think that most of their ideas they will have heard before from their elders. They use their popularity and status to showcase the concerns the public have had for many years, the issue of the Vietnam War is horrifying and disturbing to many of the younger and older generations – most people would want a stop to it straight away, source 18 supports this argument through the words â€Å"innovators† and â€Å"spokespersons†. Arguing this even further is their 1968 song â€Å"Revolution† which includes the lyrics: â€Å"we all want to change the world, you tell me that’s evolution’, this inclusion of the words â€Å"we† and  Ã¢â‚¬Å"you† makes it sound like their voicing the we as the population (including themselves) and the you is the government/constitutions. Musical influences and voices are used again by Lennon in 1971 in his song â€Å"Imagine†: â€Å"imagine there’s no countries†¦ nothing to kill or die for†¦ imagine all the people living in peace†. I don’t think it can be said the Beatles changed the world’s opinion on the Vietnam war – here it’s evident that they all have the same view and they simply gave it media coverage and a larger voice due to their popularity. Again, the argument is strengthened by the fact the Beatles religious views didn’t become widespread, nor did they introduce them to the UK in the first place – their alternate religions and the high profile reports about these different faiths were not the initial introduction of them into British society. Since amendments were made to the ‘British Nationality law’ in the 1940s, people from the commonwealth islands (including India) had been immigrating to the UK for nearly 20 years – this meant that people of the Hindu and other religions had already introduced these faiths into British society and the world was already changing to be more cultural before the Beatles choice to follow them. The band only created higher popularity for these faiths amongst the population. Also their views on Christianity and Catholicism weren’t widely accepted; 1966 John Lennon made the statement the Beatles were â€Å"more popular than Jesus† which created uproar in America, especially in the south that are strong Catholics. Younger generations burned all their merchandise and refused to accept the band as role models again. There was no change here taken place, only rejection of the new – which opposes sources 17 and 18. However source 16 does support this: â€Å"the whole bourgeois system is exactly the same†, Lennon recognizes that they didn’t change the world due to religious or other issues. Despite this, the view that they reflected a changing world is once more reinforced by their drug use mentioned in source 18, which before seemed to be solely created by them – but according to Paul McCartney, they were introduced to drugs, before they became famous, whilst they were in Hamburg. He stated, in 2004, that they â€Å"felt everyone was doing them† and they were â€Å"told to inhale this, but it did nothing for me† when talking about  Benzedrine. This tells us that it wasn’t the Beatles who initiated drug use, but in fact others introduced them to it. Also, relating back to the ‘legalization of marijuana’ advertisement, we have to consider that it also had signatures from sixty-four other celebrities, including the Rolling Stones who were infamous for their drug and alcohol use, which suggests it was a widespread movement not a singular band who lead the way into the psychedelic era. The wheels of the hippie period had started turning, originating in America in the early sixties, a long time before the Beatles arrived on the drug scene. Seemingly America influenced the Beatles into taking the harder drugs, such as LSD, not visa versa, just the bands music, media coverage and opinions expressed the issue with hallucinogenic drugs more than they’d been dealt with before. All in all, I think although it could be argued that the Beatles changed the world in the sixties – they created leading protests against the Vietnam War, they introduced new religions to the younger generations, they were brave enough to announce their dis-belief in the tradition faiths and created the start of the psychedelic era – all of which received great support from the new youth culture. Source 18 supports this thoroughly: â€Å"the Beatles changed the world in the sixties†¦ twentieth century significant achievement†, source 17 also upkeeps the argument: â€Å"instantly chic for millions of fans who looked to the group for guidance†. But, it’s evident that the four men’s involvement with the Vietnam War protests were only echoing the public’s opinions, that drug use was popular before the band became famous and their religious views didn’t have an affect on the world – the Beatles only followed the crowd and their status expressed the issues. Which is again supported through both source 17 and 18: â€Å"although they seemed to be the leaders of the new youth culture, they were by no means its architects†, â€Å"innovators† and â€Å"spokespersons†. In conclusion I think you can see the shifting world influenced the Beatles views and opinions and it was their famous status that seemed to express new ideas to the youth and society – they gathered their anti-war, alternate religions and drug use by things they experienced happening in the moving world of the sixties. Source 16 also disagrees with the statement that the Beatles â€Å"changed the world in the sixties†, Lennon says, â€Å"nothing happened†, that the world was  Ã¢â‚¬Å"exactly the same† and the band â€Å"dressed up†. Despite it seems he’s recognizing no change, he does notice the four men had a slight influence – â€Å"middle-class with long hair†, their trademark look was popular which they had adopted from the late 50s ‘mod’ fashion and the changing ‘hippie’ fashions. In conclusion, I don’t think the Beatles changed the world in the sixties, I think it’s evident that the band merely reflected the changing world, giving it a louder voice due to their famous status.

15 Misconceptions Kids (And Adults) Have About Insects