Feminism and Misandry in Popular Culture Essay Example for Free

Feminism and Misandry in Popular Culture Essay Feminism is dead. What exactly do I mean? Feminism is meant to be about gender equality, but this is no longer true. Instead, feminism has become synonymous with misandry—the hatred of men. Men are society’s official scapegoats while women are portrayed as victims. Men are often penalized for the collective guilt of men throughout history, and women feel they deserve compensation for this perceived victimization in the past. While the early feminist movement ensured equal opportunity for women, it now serves women’s special interests. Popular opinion portrays men as violent and animalistic, while women are viewed as caring and matronly. This is a misnomer perpetuated by a gynocentric society. According to a 2003 study by the Domestic Violence Research Center, it is estimated that 6 million men are victims of domestic violence in Canada alone, accounting for nearly half of all instances of domestic violence. However, fewer than 100,000 cases of male domestic abuse were reported. While it is true that women make up a larger percentage of rape victims, one in thirty-three men is raped or attempted to be raped by a woman. Even more shocking is that less than 1% of all male rape cases are ever reported. Barbara Kay, a Canadian gender equalist, says that the disparity between the reported cases and estimated cases is†¦ â€Å"Due to cultural norms that require men to present a strong facade†¦ men are less likely to verbalize fear of any kind. † Further discrimination happens against fathers. It is commonly assumed that the best interests of the child coincide with the best interests of the mother, but this simply isn’t true. In the study conducted by Patrick Fagan and Dorothy Hanks published in The Child Abuse Crisis: The Disintegration of Marriage, Family, and the American Community, the most likely perpetrator of abuse to a child is the child’s mother. The father is the parent most likely to be the protector of children, and the same study found that the presence of a father greatly lessens the risk of child sexual abuse. Yet many child custody laws in Canada and the United States strongly favor women. Approximately 70% of all custody cases are awarded to women in Western culture, and this percentage drastically increases in America and in the South. Most significantly, though, is the guilt that men must endure. Masculine traits are considered shameful or low-brow, while feminine traits are viewed as refined or high-brow. Overt manliness is something likened to piggishness or idiocy. Male sexuality is depicted as lustful harassment, while female sexuality is flaunted as beautiful and elegant. The hatred of men has become so mainstream that even Hallmark—known for its politically correct sentiments—features cards reading â€Å"There are plenty of things easier than finding a good man†¦ Nailing Jell-O to a tree, for instance. † or â€Å"Men are scum†¦ Excuse me. For a second there, I was feeling generous. † Hallmark is not the only one making money off of popular prejudice: TV shows, books, comic strips and even the new media all pander to this sexist trend. Western culture is seen as the height of the civil rights movement. Great activists like Louisa G. Anderson and Susan B. Anthony revolutionized Britain, America and the rest of the world. Modern feminism, however, caters to the personal gain and special interests of women. Gender equality applies to men and women alike, despite efforts by feminist elitist to degrade and exclude the male gender. Men endure much of the same injustice as women. Misandry is of equal importance to misogyny, and should be treated with the same intolerance.

Desires for freedom :: essays research papers fc

Desire for Freedom and Desire for Limitations on Freedom   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  People have the desire for freedom as well as a desire for limitations on their freedom. Freedom and the limitations on freedom are both needed to live peacefully. Absolute freedom cannot be achieved because when you take away limitations you take away a freedom. With out rules governing our society, people would be able to do what they want to each other with out fear of punishment. An examination of the advantages and disadvantages of both arguments helps this become clearer. One of the major reasons freedom is so desirable is because many of the limitations on freedom are disallowing humans the right to have control over their bodies. Control of the human body is the only thing that people have power over. A large number of the prohibited freedoms are crimes where the criminal makes himself the victim. For example, the use of drugs, prostitution, suicide, vagrancy, minor in possession, dodging the draft, entering the country illegally, and disregard for the age limits set on the purchase of pornographic materials. All of these crimes are punishable under the law. These crimes are set apart from most others because the person willingly chooses to victimize themselves (An exception can be made sometimes in the case of prostitution if they are being forced to prostitute against there own will). What people choose to do to themselves, in my opinion, is the least of our worries as a country. The last thing the government should have control over is what you c hoose to do to yourself. As long as you are not directly harming anyone else in the process, the government should not waste their time and money on something that is so trivial in comparison to crimes involving a victim. In general, people do not agree with the government controlling what they can and cannot do to themselves. It should be no one's decision but the people if they want to be homeless, drug addicted, or a prostitute. As long as the only damage done affects the self. These laws only exist in response to popular demand. An immense amount of money, time and labor goes to waste dealing with these types of crimes. It would be a lot more productive and profitable to let people have rule over what they do to our bodies. There is no reason why we need to put this much energy into people who will rid of themselves for us.

Crafty madness Essay

Hamlet’s situation in the play concerning family and love for Ophelia is obviously going to affect him, however the term madness has been questioned as too dramatic and perhaps a more accurate condition to describe Hamlet’s behaviour is melancholic behaviour. Melancholic behaviour is a condition causing emotional insanity accompanied by extreme depression. Many incidents and speeches of Hamlet are similar to melancholic behaviour: King: † Was not like madness. There’s something in his soul, O’er which his melancholy sits on brood.† (Act 3, Scene 1) Although this term is not commonly used these days, in the past and still in Shakespeare’s period melancholic behaviour was a recognised condition. Further support that melancholic behaviour was commonly termed in the 16th century comes from Timothy Bright’s: ‘Treatise of Melancholy’ (1586): † The perturbations of melancholy are for the most part sad and fearful†¦as distrust, doubt, diffidence or despair sometimes furious and sometimes merry in appearance, through a kind of sardonic and false laughter as the humour is disposed that procureth these diversions.† Therefore not only would Shakespeare be familiar with this behaviour but the audience of the time would also identify it. This condition could be identified by symptoms Hamlet shows for example, Hamlet with good reason displays suits of woe, he sighs and his: ‘dejected ‘haviour of the visage’ (Act 1, scene 2) In particular after Hamlet has spoken to his father’s ghost he begins to feel paranoid, he even distrusts the ghost at first not only that but the purity of Ophelia and his own inability to act. Other relevant symptoms include the fury towards his Mother because of her marriage and his sardonic joking with the players from ‘The Murder of Gonzago’ and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. The theory of melancholic behaviour is suggestible and rational especially as it was a recognised condition at the time the play was written, however, it doesn’t explain enough of Hamlet’s behaviour or the language, which is used to portray it. In some parts of the play Hamlet talks to other characters and appears to be ‘mad’ when he is obviously not. For example in Act 2, scene 2 Hamlet seems to patronize Polonius by answering his questions in a way he is clearly in control of: Polonius: â€Å"Do you know me my Lord?† Hamlet: â€Å"Excellent well, you are a fishmonger,† Hamlet obviously knows Polonius, but as Polonius has asked him this question as if he were mad Hamlet answers as if he were mad, but clearly just to humour him. This is supported by Hamlet’s statement as Polonius leaves the room: â€Å"These tedious old fools† (Line 219) Hamlet also taunts Rosencrantz and Guildenstern and leads them astray by what they realise as, â€Å"Crafty madness†. To add to this the way in which Hamlet expresses his feelings to his Mother all suggest his behaviour and the way he talks to people isn’t madness but excuse to act how he feels and speak his mind in a court where no one speaks the truth. This style of Hamlet’s is allusively presented in his language which also through his ‘madness’ is allowed to be more rich and creative rather than aristocratic like the other characters. Hamlet uses many proverbial sayings and puns in the play. The authenticity of Hamlet’s madness is a mystery that cannot be solved, this is perhaps why the play is enjoyed by the audience so much, the huge sense of mystery and uncertainty surrounding Hamlet’s madness is a main attraction of the play. It is possible that Hamlet is suffering from madness of some sort as my essay suggests perhaps ‘melancholic behaviour’, or the anger and jealousy Hamlet feels is just too much for him to conceal. However it is also possible that Hamlet’s behaviour is ‘madness’ put on by himself, there is evidence to support this theory as everyone in the play who states that Hamlet is mad has like himself got reason to imply this. Hamlet has stated that he would consider putting on an ‘antic disposition’ as a disguise to conceal his revenge plot against Claudius. It is also a very significant point that the play of Hamlet is not a true story and consequently Hamlet is not a real character/personality in real life, therefore Shakespeare was able to present him and make him seem however, he wished to. It is possible and likely that Shakespeare intended to present Hamlet’s madness in this ambiguous way giving almost equal reason for Hamlet to be genuinely mad as there is for him to be ‘acting mad.’

Eeoc V. Mims Distributing Company, Inc. Essay - 1691 Words

EEOC v. Mims Distributing Company, Inc., Civil Action No. 5:14-CV-00538 1. Who were the parties to the lawsuit? How were they related? The parties in this lawsuit are: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) (plaintiff) and Mims Distributing Company, Inc (defendant), the EEOC is the plaintiff on behalf of Christopher Alston (Lally, 2015). Christopher Alston was a potential employee of the Mims Distributing Company, Inc. 2. What was the nature of the issue in the suit? The nature of this case concerns Christopher Alston, who was practicing Rastafarian (Lally, 2015). Rastafarian is a religion that began in Jamaica in the 1920s and 30s, believing that Haile Selassie was an emperor, a direct descendant of King Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, whose death was a hoax and is still alive, living in protection awaiting the Day of Judgment (Rastafarianism). The Rastafarian’s hair is worn in dreadlocks, which is inspired by the Nazarites of the Bible and are symbolic to the Lion of Judah (Rastafarianism). Christopher applied for a job as a delivery driver for Mims Distributing Company in May 2014 (Lally, 2015). As a Rastafarian, Christopher was restricted from cutting his hair and hadn’t cut his hair since 2009 (Lally, 2015). Christopher was informed by Mims Distributing Company that he would have to cut his hair if he wanted the position (Lally, 2015). Because of his religious belief, he refused to cut his hair and the company was unable to hire him due to noncomplianceShow MoreRelatedEeoc V. Mims Distributing Company Essay1150 Words   |  5 Pagesin some cases of hairstyle based discrimination within the work place. Looking at the case of EEOC v. Mims Distributing Company, Inc., in regards to Christopher Alston, an African American man. This case was a hairstyle based discrimination, however it was based on the company not having a policy to addressed hairstyle as a religious practice. The outcome of this case ended with Mims Distributing Company paying $50,000 and adopting a formal religious accommodation policy that will address future issues