Leslie Annexstein & Eileen Ordover Essay Example for Free

Leslie Annexstein Eileen Ordover Essay The issue of equity is one that remains and will continue to be relevant to organization managers. This has been particular challenging in industries that have been associated with particular genders, cultures or demographics which has increased the factors affecting individual performance and participation in organizations (Reeve, 2005). As shown in the article for the study, the issue has shown a great sensitivity to developing issues while at the same remains as an effective benchmark of changes in social perspectives. The sentiment expressed highlights not only the role of management in equal employment opportunities. Leslie Annexstein, Eileen Ordover, Levon Esters, Blannie Bowen and Edward Reeve are given credit in particularly for their efforts in the empowerment of women, the disabled as well as bridging social disparities. However, there is also acknowledgement that even with such advancement in research, legislation and social policies, equalitarian ideals are still far from being realized. It is troubling to think that despite legislation and popular acknowledgement of the need and value of diversity and equal opportunity that such disparities would persist. Therefore, the challenge is one that has to be taken up not only in the interest of social responsibility but as a means of ensuring one’s own welfare in the future (pp. 5-6). How can there be real sensitivity for diversity, in particular for language, cultural and social differences? Are current standards and measures able to accommodate for developing needs? What is the long term consequence of the inability to address issues? How the issues impact individual members of society? Reference Reeve, Johnmarshall (2005). Understanding Motivation and Emotion. New York: John Wiley SonsMook, D. G.

Metaphor Analysis of Lord of the Flies :: essays research papers

Metaphor Analysis Beast: The beast, the Lord of the Flies, is seen as a real object on the island which frightens the boys. Actually the beast is something internal, the Lord of the Flies is in soul and mind of the boys, leading them to the natural chaos of a society with no reasoning adults. Only Simon understands what the real beast is, but is killed when he tries to tell the boys about the Lord of the Flies. Conch: The conch shell symbolizes the law and order of the old adult world which Piggy tries so desperately to protect. The conch represents all the authority which the boys are so used to obeying. When Jack destroys the conch, anarchy quickly ensues because any hope of strong, central leadership has been abandoned. The island society collapses into chaos. Facepaint: This is the excuse many of the boys use for living as hunting savages, instead of civilized English citizens. The paint symbolizes the smoke-screen the beast uses to infiltrate the boys’ souls. Fire/Smoke: The smoke of the signal fire symbolizes the last best hope of the boys being rescued. To Piggy and Ralph, the fire represents the moral influence of their old life in England. When the fire goes out, Ralph loses his bearings, unsure of his next move. The fire is diatonically opposed to hunting, the activity of anarchy on the island. Island: Golding purposefully picked an island to be the landing place of the crashed plane because an island is isolated from the rest of society. The boys have no contact with the outside world and must look to themselves to solve the problems of their own micro-society. In this way, the island, which symbolizes isolation, serves as a perfect backdrop for the frailties of human nature which eventually surface. Glasses: The glasses symbolize the voice of reason and logic among the boys. Piggy defends his glasses even more than the conch. Piggy, who represents the superego of the boys’ (and society’s) collective personality, uses his glasses to find solutions to the boys’ problems.

Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious Essay

As Antonia Peacocke quotes in her essay, â€Å"The show Family Guy is one of the first in history that has been canceled not just once, but twice† (300-301). The show was brought back in August 2000 and again in July 2001 when fans could not get enough of the adult cartoon. As well as being a fan favorite, Family Guy is also a controversial topic for critics all over the world. In the essay, â€Å"Family Guy and Freud: Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious†, Antonia Peacocke analyzes the show and gives her reasons why it is not all negative and crude humor. Antonia Peacocke is a student at Harvard University. She is also a National Merit Scholar, and has won awards such as the Catherine Fairfax MacRae prize for Excellence in both English and Mathematics. She was asked to write this essay specifically for the book They Say, I say: with readings. The Peacocke’s main point of her entire essay is that she wants to let readers know why Family Guy is not a bad show, in her and others opinions, but one that has been criticized for solely bringing entertainment. Peacocke does a successful job in portraying this, but it is not completely clear until the end, where her thesis can be found. The very last sentence of the essay is her thesis: â€Å"While I love Family Guy as much as any fan, it’s important not to lose sight of what’s truly unfunny in real life – even as we appreciate what is hilarious in fiction† (Peacocke 308). Peacocke’s thesis could be a little more clear throughout her essay, therefore, I do not feel it is as effective as it could be, but the author clearly states her argument and presents her case. Peacocke starts the essay of by saying, â€Å" Before I was such a devotee, however, I was adamantly opposed to the program for its particular brand of humor† (Peacocke 300). She makes it clear her feelings about the show in the very beginning. Although she is a fan, she at one time disliked the show. She quotes Stephen Dubner, co-author of Freakonomics, as saying â€Å"a cartoon comedy that packs more gags per minute about race, sex, incest, bestiality, etc. than any other show [he] can think of† (Peacocke 300). She backs up her one time opinions by saying â€Å"It will come as no surprise that I was not alone in this view; many still denounce Family Guy as bigoted and crude† (Peacocke 300). Although the show is currently very successful, she says â€Å"It must be one of the few shows in television history that has been canceled not only once, but twice†¦ The show ran until August 2000, but was besieged by so many complaints†¦that Fox shelved it until July 2001† (Peacocke 300). Also, she says, â€Å"I must admit, I can see how parts of the show might seem offensive if taken at face value† (Peacocke 302). At one point Peacocke realized, â€Å" [I found myself] forced to give Family Guy a chance. It was simply everywhere â€Å" (Peacocke 302). One of Peacocke’s main points is that Family Guy has gained much positive attention. On Facebook, as Peacocke explains, â€Å"there are 23 universal separate Family Guy groups with a combined membership of 1,669 people (compared with only 6 groups protesting against Family Guy, with 105 members total). Users of the well-respected Internet Movie Database rate the show 8.8 out of 10† (Peacocke 303). As you can see, â€Å"among the public and within the industry, the show receives fantastic acclaim; it has won eight awards, including three primetime Emmys† (Peacocke 303). Also, when the show was on the brink of cancellation, â€Å" fans provided the brute source necessary to get it back on the air† (Peacocke 303). The more she was around the show, the more positively she viewed it. Peacocke then goes on to say that those who do not often watch the show, â€Å"could easily come to think that the cartoon takes pleasure in controversial humor just for its own s ake† Peacocke 303). The next main point that Peacocke claims is that viewers who â€Å"pay more attention and think about the creators’ intentions can see that Family Guy intelligently satirizes some aspects of American culture† (Peacocke 304). The next paragraph is a segment from an episode in season 4, which shows Stewie reading a book only because it was on the Oprah reading list. Peacocke says â€Å" [Brian and] Stewie demonstrate insightfully and comically how Americans are willing to follow the instructions of a celebrity blindly – and less willing to admit that they are doing so† (Peacocke 304). The jokes that Family Guy is known for, â€Å"attract a different kind of viewer. Such viewers are†¦conscious and critical viewers† (Peacocke 304). In my opinion, the very last sentence is the most powerful in the whole essay. Peacocke states â€Å"They are not – and I cannot stress this enough, self serving as it may seem – immoral or easily manipula ted people† (304). Peacocke says that it sheds light on, and allows viewers â€Å" the ability to analyze what they are watching, the creators of Family Guy point out the weaknesses and defects of U.S. society in a mocking and sometimes intolerant way† (Peacocke 305). A good example of this is the segment from the episode â€Å"I Am Peter, Hear Me Roar.† In this episode, â€Å"the ‘instructional video’ quoted above becomes not only funny but also insightful. In its satire, viewers can recognize the sickly sweet and falsely sensitive sexism of the 1950s in observing just how conveniently self-serving the speaker of the video appears. The message of the clips denounces and ridicules sexism rather than condoning it† (Peacocke 305). The last main point that Peacocke makes is that â€Å"Family Guy does not aim to hurt, and its creators take certain measures to keep it from hitting too hard†¦ Seth MacFarlane plainly states that there are certain jokes too upsetting to certain groups to go on the air† (Peacocke 307). Also, Peacocke states that â€Å"I believe Family Guy has its intelligent points, and some of its seemingly ‘coarse’ scenes often have hidden merit† (Peacocke 308). In the next sentence Peacocke does admit that â€Å"sometimes the creators do seem cross – or, perhaps, eagerly race past – the line of indecency† (Peacocke 308). In her closing paragraph, Peacocke questions the fact that â€Å"while Family Guy can provide a sort of relief by breaking down taboos, we must still wonder whether or not these taboos exist for a reason† (Peacocke 308). All three main points that the author makes are valid, and as seen in quotes, each main topic is backed up by main points. The first main point is that Family Guy is gaining positive attention. Although this is a valid point, as seen by the popularity, and the awards, this isn’t reason enough to call the show ‘good.’ As the author states, at one point she was not a fan of the show but it later turned onto it by exposure. The content of the show did not change for her opinion to change, she just gave the show a chance and realized she liked the humor. The second main point is that the show makes intellectual references to American culture. This is a valid point as to why the show is good. Any show with a little bit of substance makes references to the past and current topics. It tells what is going on in the world, and explains topics everybody should be aware of. The last main point is that Family Guy breaks rules that no other major TV program or network has been able to break. Although many critics believe these are rules that shouldn’t be broken, the creators believe it needs to be done. This makes it a ‘good’ because it crosses boundaries that others are afraid to cross. Conclusion will link back to first comparison to Freud. Work Cited Peacocke, Antonia. â€Å"Family Guy and Freud: Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious.† They Say, I Say: with readings. Ed. Cathy Birkenstein, Russel Durst, and Gerald Graff. New York: W.W. Norton, 2012. 300-308. Print.

How to Conjugate the Verb Aspettare in Italian

Some definitions of â€Å"aspettare† include: To wait forTo expectTo lie ahead of What to Know About â€Å"Aspettare It’s a regular verb, so it follows the typical -are verb ending pattern.It’s a transitive verb, so it takes a direct object.The infinito is â€Å"aspettare†.The participio passato is â€Å"aspettato†.The gerund form is â€Å"aspettando†.The past gerund form is â€Å"avendo aspettato†. INDICATIVO/INDICATIVE Il presente io aspetto                           noi aspettiamo tu aspetti                             voi aspettate lui, lei, Lei aspetta        essi, Loro aspettano   Esempi: Ti aspetto, amore mio! - I’ll wait for you, my love!Aspettatemi, sto arrivando! - Wait for me, I’m on my way! Il passato prossimo io ho aspettato                           noi abbiamo aspettato tu hai aspettato                        voi avete aspettato lui, lei, Lei, ha aspettato     essi, Loro hanno aspettato Esempi: L’ha aspettato per ore ed ore, perà ² alla fine le ha dato buca! - She waited for him for hours and hours, but in the end he stood her up.Rachel e Silvia hanno aspettato il traghetto a Porto Azzurro. - Rachel and Silvia waited for the ferry-boat at Porto Azzurro. L’imperfetto io aspettavo                       Ã‚  noi aspettavamo tu aspettavi                          voi aspettavate lui, lei, Lei aspettava     essi, Loro aspettavano Esempi: Che cosa aspettavi? - What have you been waiting for?Mi aspettavo un trattamento diverso! - I expected to be treated differently! Il trapassato prossimo io avevo aspettato                       Ã‚  noi avevamo aspettato tu avevi aspettato                          voi avevate aspettato lui, lei, Lei aveva aspettato     essi, Loro avevano aspettato Esempi: Avevamo aspettato fin troppo. - We had waited for too long. Il passato remoto io aspettai                                   noi aspettammo tu aspettasti                              voi aspettaste lui, lei, Lei aspettà ²Ã‚                 essi, Loro aspettarono Esempi: Aspettai solo cinque minuti, ma mi sembrarono una vita! - I waited just for five minutes, but it seemed like a lifetime! Il trapassato remoto io ebbi aspettato                                   noi avemmo aspettato tu avesti aspettato                             Ã‚  voi aveste aspettato lui, lei, Lei ebbe aspettato              essi, Loro ebbero aspettato TIP: This tense is rarely used, so don’t worry too much about mastering it. You’ll find it in very sophisticated writing. Il futuro semplice io aspetterà ²Ã‚                                   noi aspetteremo tu aspetterai                                   voi aspetterete lui, lei, Lei aspetterà  Ã‚                 essi, Loro aspetteranno Esempi: Vi aspetterà   al bar, va bene? - He’ll wait for you all at the bar, okay?Ti aspetterà ² per sempre, sei la donna della mia vita Anna! - I’ll wait for you forever, you’re the woman of my life, Anna! Il futuro anteriore io avrà ² aspettato                             Ã‚  noi avremo aspettato tu avrai aspettato                             Ã‚  voi avrete aspettato lui, lei, Lei avrà   aspettato            essi, Loro avranno aspettato Esempi: Avremo aspettato circa quattro ore, non ricordo. - We must have waited for about four hours, I don’t remember. CONGIUNTIVO/SUBJUNCTIVE Il presente che io aspetti                             Ã‚  che noi aspettiamo che tu aspetti                              che voi aspettiate che lui, lei, Lei aspetti           che essi, Loro aspettino Esempi: Penso che Mario si aspetti un regalo. - I think Mario expects a gift. Il passato io abbia aspettato                           Ã‚  noi abbiamo aspettato tu abbia aspettato                           Ã‚  voi abbiate aspettato lui, lei, egli abbia aspettato     Ã‚  essi, Loro abbiano aspettato Esempi: Immagino che lui abbia aspettato pià ¹ tempo di lei. - I imagine that he waited longer than her. L’imperfetto io aspettassi                             noi aspettassimo tu aspettassi                             voi aspettaste lui, lei, egli aspettasse     Ã‚  essi, Loro aspettassero Esempi: Immagino che lui si aspettasse qualcosa di pià ¹ da lei! - I imagine he expected something more from her. Il trapassato prossimo io avessi aspettato                             Ã‚  noi avessimo aspettato tu avessi aspettato                             Ã‚  voi aveste aspettato lui, lei, Lei avesse aspettato        Ã‚  essi, Loro avessero aspettato Esempi: Se aveste aspettato al ristorante, avreste potuto mangiare con noi. - If you all had waited at the restaurant, you could have eaten with us. CONDIZIONALE/CONDITIONAL Il presente io  aspetterei                                      noi aspetteremmo tu  aspetteresti                                Ã‚  voi aspettereste lui, lei, Lei aspetterebbe        Ã‚  essi, Loro aspetterebbero​ Aspetterei per trenta minuti, e se lui non arriva, partirei. - I would wait for 30 minutes, and if he doesn’t get there, I would leave. Esempi: Il passato io avrei aspettato                                   Ã‚  noi avremmo aspettato tu avresti aspettato                                voi avreste aspettato lui, lei, egli avrebbe aspettato        essi, Loro avrebbero aspettato Se fossero arrivati puntuali, li avrei aspettati. - If they had come on time, I would have waited for them. Cosa ti saresti aspettato dopo esserti comportato cosà ¬ male? - What would you have expected when you acted so poorly?