Use of Rhetorical Strategies in Richard Wright’s Autobiography, Black Boy :: Wright Black Boy Essays

Use of Rhetorical Strategies in Richard Wrights Autobiography, Black BoyRichard Wright grew up in a bitterly racist America. In his autobiography Black Boy, he reveals his personal experience with the potency of language. Wright delineates the efficacious role language plays in forming ones identity and social word meaning with an ingenious use of various rhetorical strategies. Richards own identity as well as his personal identification of others is formed through language. For example, in Richards encounter with the Yankee, Richard used language to fill up the yawning, shameful gap. He uses personification to emphasize the awkwardness of their conversation. This awkwardness was a turn up of the Yankees probing questions. Richard described it as an unreal-natured conversation, but, paradoxically, he also admits, of course the conversation was real it dealt with my welfare. The Yankee man therefore tried to wish Richard a dollar, and spoke of the blatant hunger in Richards eyes. This made Richard feel degraded and ashamed. Wright uses syntax to appropriately place the conversation before reservation his point in his personal conclusions. In the analogy, A man will seek to express his relation to the starsthat loaf of bread is as important as the stars (loaf of bread being the metonymy for food), Wright concludes it is the little things of life that shape a Negros destiny. An interesting detail is how Richard refuses the Yankees pity he whispers it. From then on, Richard identified him as an enemy. Thus, through that short, succinct exchange of words, two identities were molded.Language is also pivotal in determining Richards social acceptance. For instance, Mr. Olin, a blanched man tries to probe Richard into fighting another black boy. Richard was disturbed. He uses contrast to show his disturbance, the eye glasseswere forgotten. My eyes were on Mr. Olins face. A certain(p) dramatic irony exists exists when Richard asks, Who was my friend, the white m an or the black boy? The reader knows it is the black boy. Wright uses detail such as Mr. Olins low, confidential, voice to construct an apocryphally amiable tone. If Richard complies with Mr. Olins deceiving language, he would gain the social acceptance of the white men. If not, he would be ostracized as a pariah. Wright uses a metaphor, my delicately balanced reality had tipped to show his confusion.

Necessary Physical Contant in D.H. Lawrences Women in Love and Platos

Necessary Physical Contant in D.H. Lawrences Women in Love and Platos SymposiumD.H. Lawrences novel, Women in Love, presents a complex model of female-male and male-male relationships. Lawrences model relies heavily on a similar model presented in Platos Symposium. The difference between the two works lies in the mode of realization that is, how one goes about achieving a perfect love relationship with either sex. Lawrence concentrates on corporal fulfillment, characterized in his recurring reference to obtaining a blood oath, while Plato concentrates on a mental, or divine bond. Lawrences concentration on corporal fulfillment of love only superficially differs from Platos concentration on the mind both(prenominal) infer to the same philosophy of bodily exchange as being a necessary component of relations with either sex.As Barry J. Scherr points out in his hold on the relationship between Women in Love and the Symposium, Excurse chapter 23 has been recognized by critics as a central chapter of Women in Love (210). The reason for this appraisal is that Excurse presents both a realization and articulation of Lawrences view of female-male relationships through the characters of Birkin and Ursula.The transmittance, or Excurse, comes through bodily exchange Ursula traced with her hands the line of his loins and thighs It was a patrician flood of electric passion she released from him, drew into herself. She established a rich new circuit released from the darkest poles of the body and established in perfect circuit (358). It is through sexual intercourse, or, in the very least, bodily contact, that the connection between Ursula and Birkin is established. Scherr states that This scene betwe... ...al connection to take place in order to establish a pregnant bond. These bonds, if properly achieved, are the ideal models of relations between the two sexes. Superficial differences between the two works philosophies manifest in a difference in importan ce Lawrence stresses the physical connection as paramount, while Plato describes that both physical and mental connections are necessary.Works CitedGriffith, Tom, trans. Symposium of Plato. Los Angeles University of California P, 1989.Hecht, Jamey. Platos Symposium Eros and the Human Predicament. New York Twayne, 1999.Lawrence, D.H. Women in Love. New York Random House, 1922.Scherr, Barry J. Lawrences Dark Flood A Platonic Interpretation of Excurse Paunch 64 (1990) 209-246.Strauss, Leo. On Platos Symposium. Ed. Seth Benardete. Chicago University of Chicago P, 2001.

Earlier Teen Years :: Personal Narrative Growing Up Essays

Earlier Teen Years My little sisters all grown up now, that shes only ten years old. She tints like a teenager. She thinks like a teenager. And you could say she acts like one because teenagers themselves are not very mature. She loves to settle around me, and she tries to persuade me to act more like a typical 18-year-old girl because she wants to be one herself. She begs me to take her shopping and let her do my hair. She wants to be just like me. At first, I thought it was because shes the youngest in the family, and she wanted to be like her big sister and brother. However, I realized I didnt look like the typical teen. In fact, she dresses more like a typical teenager than I do. Many of her friends are the oldest children in their families yet try to state the image of a teenager. They all seem to wish they were older. Girls these days just seem to want to, and do, grow up sooner and sooner. It seems the teenage years get changed, starting well before the age of thir teen. As I have said, my sister and her friends are prime examples of this change. For instance, they have sleep-overs and stay up till dawn. Their galore(postnominal) sleep-over activities include gossiping about boys and discussing fashions, painting nails, and experimenting with make-up. I never did such things at that age. My friends and I had to go to bed by one or deuce at the latest, and we played games and watched movies. My sister also thinks that she should have the same privileges that I do at age eighteen when shes only ten. She thinks she can stay up late, till ten or eleven oclock. I was in bed by eight when I was her age. Not only does she want to stay up late, but she also thinks that she can watch any movie she wants. Its hard to pick a movie the whole family will like thats rated PG these days, so many times we choose a PG-13 movie (sometimes even R) and let her watch with us. This has given her the idea that she is mature enough to watch anything she wants. She likes the TV show Friends, but at her age she doesnt completely understand the adult content in the show, nor does she need to.

Lord of the Flies :: essays papers

Lord of the Flies Golding uses many symbols in the novel, Lord of the Flies, to champion good and evil in society. He uses Simon to represent the peacefulness of animation and the kindness of a good heart, while Piggy represents the civilization on the island and the adult viewpoint of the children. The conch symbolizes order and also adult behavior. It is a symbol of energy and knowledge as well, as the evil of the beast represents the fear in the boys. All of these symbols change as the story goes on, some changes are less open-and-shut and are the result of the readers new perspective while others undergo dramatic, and quite obvious, change. Simon is a symbol of peace who sees only good in the world. The name Simon itself means, listener, and depicts Simons constituent well as he always listens instead of giving an alternative opinion. Although at times his opinion differs from the others, he never complains. Simons great sacrifice for the boys, death for their sin , is a trait of a martyr. Simons death results in a change of his affect on the boys and on the reader. Because he is killed by the other boys, he begins to represent the evil that has dominated over the good on the island. Piggy is another symbol for uprightness, however his goodness is not the same as Simons. Piggy represents the goodness that comes from adults and order. Piggys inability to see well makes him a perfect symbol for that of blind justice. Piggy not only thinks like an adult, but also is constantly upset(a) about how adults would view the society on the island, showing he is concerned with the order and justice of things and want to be civilized. Piggy is picked on a plenteousness by the other boys because of his weight and sight hindrance, but nonetheless he does not give up his share of the authority. Piggy is constantly saying, Ive got the conch, ( a mansion house of authority and a sign that all should listen to the person with the conch. Piggys deat h symbolizes the destruction of society and civilization on the island, and the rise of savage behavior. It also shows the expiry of order and the rise of the devil.

Literature and the Industrial Revolution :: essays research papers

In the Industrial Revolution poetry advanced and romance began.romanticistism started in the 18th century and was said to be influenced by the french and Industrial Revolution. People decided to rebel against the political and social rules of their cadence and started a new trend of art. It conveyed dramatic subjects perceived with strong feelings and imagination.William Blake was a poet commonly connected with Romanticism. He led strong beliefs that were occasionally mentioned in his work. peerless was that e preciseone is equal and is mentioned in All Religions Are One As all men are alike (tho infinitely various) He based most of his works in the hyphen of Romanticism - Blake wrote from the heart, he let his thoughts and beliefs take over.Some of Blake?s poems include ?London? and ?The Lamb?William Wordsworth, like Blake, was linked with Romanticism. In fact, he was one of the very founders of Romanticism. He wrote poems are about nature, freedom and emotion. He was open abou t how he felt about life and what his life was like. Also, Wordsworth wrote poems about the events going on around him ? for instance the French Revolution. Mainly, Wordsworth wrote about nature, however, rarely used simple descriptions in his work. Instead, Wordsworth wrote complexly, for example in his poem ?Daffodils?.Percy Bysshe Shelley, John Keats, George Gordon Byron and Samuel Taylor Coleridge were all poets in the Romantic era. They all had a love of their country and wrote about nature and revolution in some of their poems.Shelley wrote many plays, some of which were Romantic and some about the French Revolution (as Shelley had experienced the French Revolution in his lifetime). This allowed him to state deep,

Literature and the Industrial Revolution :: essays research papers

In the Industrial revolution poetry advanced and Romanticism began.Romanticism started in the 18th speed of light and was said to be influenced by the French and Industrial Revolution. People decided to rebel against the political and social rules of their time and started a new trend of art. It conveyed outstanding subjects perceived with strong feelings and imagination.William Blake was a poet commonly connected with Romanticism. He led strong beliefs that were occasionally mentioned in his work. One was that everyone is equal and is mentioned in All Religions Are One As all men are alike (tho infinitely various) He based most of his works in the style of Romanticism - Blake wrote from the heart, he let his thoughts and beliefs feign over.Some of Blake?s poems include ?London? and ?The Lamb?William Wordsworth, like Blake, was linked with Romanticism. In fact, he was one of the very founders of Romanticism. He wrote poems are some nature, freedom and emotion. He was open abou t how he felt about life and what his life was like. Also, Wordsworth wrote poems about the events going on around him ? for instance the French Revolution. Mainly, Wordsworth wrote about nature, however, rarely used simple descriptions in his work. Instead, Wordsworth wrote complexly, for example in his poem ?Daffodils?.Percy Bysshe Shelley, John Keats, George Gordon Byron and Samuel Taylor Coleridge were all poets in the Romantic era. They all had a love of their country and wrote about nature and revolution in some of their poems.Shelley wrote many plays, some of which were Romantic and some about the French Revolution (as Shelley had experienced the French Revolution in his lifetime). This allowed him to state deep,

Performance Orientation

The spot to which a collective encourages and rewards (and should encourage and reward) group members for performance improvement and excellence. Assertiveness. The degree to which individuals are (and should be) assertive, confrontational, and aggressive in their relationships with others. Future Orientation. The extent to which individuals engage (and should engage) in future-oriented behaviors such as delaying gratification, planning, and investing in the future.Organizations in countries with full(prenominal) future oriented practices like Singapore and Switzerland slope to have longer term horizons and more systematic planning processes, but they race to be averse to risk taking and opportunistic decision making. gentle Orientation. The degree to which a collective encourages and rewards ( and should encourage and reward) individuals for being fair, altruistic, generous, caring, and kind to others. Countries like Egypt and Malaysia rank very high on this cultural practice I nstitutional Collectivism.The degree to which organizational and societal institutional practices encourage and reward (and should encourage and reward) collective distribution of resources and collective action Organizations in collectivistic countries like Singapore and Sweden tend to emphasize group performance and rewards In-Group Collectivism. The degree to which individuals express (and should express) feel, loyalty, and cohesiveness in their organizations or families. Societies like Egypt and Russia take pride in their families and also take pride in the organizations that employ them.Gender Egalitarianism. The degree to which a collective minimizes (and should minimize) gender inequality. Egypt and South Korea were among the most male dominated societies in GLOBE. Organizations not operating in gender egalitarian societies tend to discourage tolerance for diversity of ideas and individual. Power Distance. The degree to which members of a collective expect (and should expect ) power to be distributed equally. A high power distance score reflects unequal power distribution in a society.Countries that scored high on this cultural practice are more ranked economically, socially, and politically those in positions of authority expect, and receive, obedience. Uncertainty Avoidance. The extent to which a society, organization, or group relies (and should rely) on social norms, rules, and procedures to alleviate unpredictability of future events. The greater the zest to avoid uncertainty, the more people seek orderliness, consistency, structure, formal procedures and laws to cover situations in their daily lives.

Personal Statement. The programme of Translation and Interpretation

Some people consider interlingual rendition as a potpourri of jobs only just now for me, it is a meaningful form of pagan communication. Therefore, I would like to apply to your university for the program of Translation and Interpretation in order to get out my dream comes true. Having majored in Translation and Interpretation as an undergraduate, it brings me unfermented perspectives about translation that it not only translates from one language to another, but also the culture. This makes translation a real challenge. Nevertheless, I dare to embrace challenges and I find fulfillment after completing various translation assignments. Also, I have a passion for it.However, my skills in translation and interpretation are uttermost from good. Therefore, I would love to further my knowledge of language and develop skills in translation by dint of this programme, and I could take my enthusiasm and turn it into my further study. On the other hand, when compare with other colleges , your college is not only focus on practical skills but also theories of translation. I think this is better as theories attend us to identify translation problems and justify strategies in order to have better translations. Therefore, I would like to apply to your college for this programme instead of others.Since I am studying Higher Diploma in Translation and Interpretation, I have learnt some sanctioned techniques and theories of how to translate. Besides, I practice all these skills and theories by applying them into assignments and projects. As a result, I will be more able to master this subject than others. Learning modern languages is one of my interests . I learnt Japanese and Korean when I was in form three. Now, I am taking a course for learning Spanish and I think these are relevant to this programme. Just like colored Wendell Holmes has said Language is the blood of the soul into which thoughts run and out of which they grow.As language provides an brainwave into all aspects of a countries culture and this is what translation is about, the ability to discourse in different languages helps me to study this programme in a more effective room than others. By undertaking this programme, I expect to see myself perplex a well-trained specialist in this field as my future career, who can make some meaningful contributions to translation and interpretation. Therefore, I have much appreciated being able to achieve my goal by getting into your college for studying this programme.Personal Statement. The programme of Translation and InterpretationSome people consider translation as a kind of jobs only but for me, it is a meaningful form of cultural communication. Therefore, I would like to apply to your university for the programme of Translation and Interpretation in order to make my dream comes true. Having majored in Translation and Interpretation as an undergraduate, it brings me new perspectives about translation that it not only translates fr om one language to another, but also the culture. This makes translation a real challenge. Nevertheless, I dare to embrace challenges and I find fulfillment after completing various translation assignments. Also, I have a passion for it.However, my skills in translation and interpretation are far from good. Therefore, I would love to further my knowledge of language and develop skills in translation through this programme, and I could take my enthusiasm and turn it into my further study. On the other hand, when compare with other colleges, your college is not only focus on practical skills but also theories of translation. I think this is better as theories help us to identify translation problems and justify strategies in order to have better translations. Therefore, I would like to apply to your college for this programme instead of others.Since I am studying Higher Diploma in Translation and Interpretation, I have learnt some basic techniques and theories of how to translate. Bes ides, I practice all these skills and theories by applying them into assignments and projects. As a result, I will be more able to master this subject than others. Learning new languages is one of my interests . I learnt Japanese and Korean when I was in form three. Now, I am taking a course for learning Spanish and I think these are relevant to this programme. Just like liver Wendell Holmes has said Language is the blood of the soul into which thoughts run and out of which they grow.As language provides an insight into all aspects of a countries culture and this is what translation is about, the ability to speak in different languages helps me to study this programme in a more effective way than others. By undertaking this programme, I expect to see myself become a well-trained specialist in this field as my future career, who can make many meaningful contributions to translation and interpretation. Therefore, I have much appreciated being able to achieve my goal by getting into yo ur college for studying this programme.

Banks and Credit System of Exchange Essay

Definition of buzzwordscoin jargons ar financial institutions that help people to hold back and borrow coin.In a growing economy, the depones help to create a new pool of money to be ised for other economic activities.They complement the money or cash system of exchange with the system of credit.History of Banking in the FilipinosDuring the pre-colonial period, Filipinos also saved and borrowed money, but usually this was done by families, relatives of tribal leaders.The oldest written souvenir of our precolonial past is the famous Laguna Copperplate inscriptin (LCI), which contains a record of a debt net profitment in 900A.D.It proves that we have a longt tradition of honoring our debts in our culture. current shoreing, as we whop it, really began with the coming of the Europeans. The first credit organizations were the Obras Pias(pious work), created by the Spanish colonial government starting in the 16th century. It is interesting to know that the early Catholics in the Philippines were taught how to tithe(give 10 percent of income to the church).Thus, thye early church in the Philippines was able to collect a fund od money, and its growth and not bad(predicate) whole caboodle increased tremendously.The first general assert in Southeast Asia was the Banco Espaol-Filipino (now known as Bank of the Philippine Islands), which opened in 1851.It was given authority to step up bank notes.Soon, other banks were opened.The Catholic Church anf their trustees owned and operated most banks during the Spanish colonial period. During the American period, more banks began operations. In 1906, the government established postal savings banks all over the country to bring banking closer to the people.This Promoted the habit of thrift and savings among low-income groups. Now Americans, Chinese and Filipinos also entered the picture. In 1916 the philippine National Bank was organized. Other banks which followed were the China Banking Corporation and the Philippin e Bank of Commerce.Before World War II there were 17 banks in the country.The PNB and Postal banks were owned by the Catholic Church and religious organizations, and two by Filipinos and others. The Japanese m,ilitary occupation in 1941-45 briefly restructed Philippine banking. Only Japanese and their Filipino sympathizers were allowed to operate banks. In 1946, afterward independence, the otigins of our modern banking system were established. Prewar banks were re-opened and resumed operations. The Central Banking Act was passed in 1948. Today, there are thousands of banks all over the country, and some Filipino banks have opened branches abroad. Tyhe loudness of banking services has also increased, as more and more services are being offered. Among these services are car loans, time deposits, automatic tellers, dreive-in windows, night depository, right deposit boxes, payroll handling, automatic debits, and many more.KINDS OF BANKSThere are different kinds of banks as follows1. Rural banks-These are located mostly in the countryside. The government encourages the arrangement of these small banks in order to bring asavings and banking closer to people in the provinces. For example, a group may set up a outlandish bank with P20 billion capital outside of metro manila or cities but p50 million is needed for a bank in the city. The main reason for rural banks is to help farmers with agricultural loans. In 1994, the Pagsanjan Rural Bank founded by Victor Zaide cabreza and Soledad Benitez Cabreza, won the award fo Outstanding Rural Bank in he Philippines 2. Savings and loan associationThese small banks gather savings and invest them in long term securities, such as housing loans. A good example is the Monte de Piedad Bank. 3.Special government banksThe Philippine government established several bnks to handle specific duties involving its financial projects.For example, after the war, the Rehabilitation and Finance Corporation (RFC) was created to discover p ostwar reconstuction funds ang give financial aid to the war-damaged economy.The RFG eventually beame the Development bank of the Philippines (DBP). The Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) helps the government implement the land reform program. The Philippine Amanah Bank was organized in 1970s to cater for the growing economic needs of Muslim Filpinos. The government may also operate postal banks indoors selected post iffides around the country. Many small savers and children like to use postal banks because it is closer and more familiar to them. 4.Commercial banksThese make up the biggest banking group, and comprises nearly 50% of the tally banking resources in the country.The main function of this type is to supply the circulating capital for the economy in the form of short-term loans.Example are the Philippine National Bank, Metrobank, BPI, FarEast Bank and Trust Company and others. 6.Universal Bank- Also known as a ful-service bank, a universal bank provides more servies than a commercial bank. Banks which have reached a capitalixation of P50 million or more can apply for a universal banking liscence. A universal bank can make more investments and lending.It can act as an investment house, a savings bank etc. It can invest directlyin private companies. Several banks are iniversal banks, starting with the Philipine National Bank, republic Planters Bank, United Cocunot Planters Bank, affiliate Bank, PCIB, BPI, Far East Bank and Trust Company, and Metrobank.6. international banksAs the name says international banks have operations in more than one country. Some Filipino bamks have branches in other countries, e.e. PNB, FEBTC, etc. Similarly, some foreign banks have branches in the Philippines, e.g. Hongkong ang Shanghai Chartered Bank, Citibank, Australia New Zealand, etc. Apart from the private banks, thee are government-owned banks, such as the International Bank for Reconstrucyion and Development (IBRD or World Bank) ased in Washington, D.C. the Asian Development Bank (ABD) based in Metro Manila the Bank of International Settkements (BIS) based in Basle, Switzerland.The Uses or Function of Banks The services of banks are1.To occupy aand guard deposits of money.People go to a bank because they trust that their money allow for not be stolen inside.ThePhilippine Deposit Insurace Corporation (PDIC) encures each depositors money up to a limit. In case the bank closes doen or is robbed, the depositor will still get their money bacl up to a fixed limit. In turn, the bank keeps a written list of the deposit in a savings book, a monthly statement or a certificate . For the right to use the money, the banks pay interest. 2. to lend money. Banks led money to qualified clients. in this way, the bank earns interest and profits. loans are ofdifferent kinds are short-term. Loans may also be typedaccording to purpose( car loan, housing loan, business loan etc.) This may be a property title, which the bank can get in case the loan is not paid. Next, bigl loans must have a co- signer or one who will guarantee to pay the loan if the borrower defaults 9faiks to pay).3.To remit and collect money. Banks als transfer or collect money for clients. for example, overseas contract workers can send their remittances to family through a bank to be picked up in Manila by the relative. A businesman can pay for a supply ordered from abroad through a topical anesthetic bank which send the payment to the foreign supplier. Usually, a bank has a correspondent bank abroad in case it does not have branches ther. Banks accept checks, bank dreafts or telegraphic transfers from other banks, according to certain conditions.4..To perform legal roles like supervising a business, managing a private

Forward the Foundation Chapter 14

21Gleb Andorin gazed at Namarti through half-closed eyes. He never desire the man, notwith stand up there were times when he akind him less than he usu altogethery did and this was cardinal of those times. Why should Andorin, a Wyan of royal birth (thats what it amounted to, after all) pass on to work with this parvenu, this near-psychotic paranoid?Andorin knew why and he had to endure, withal when Namarti was once again in the process of give nonice (of)ing the story of how he had built up the movement during a period of ten years to its preface pitch of perfection. Did he tell this to every unity(a), oer and over? Or was it just Andorin who was his chosen vessel?Namartis face soak upmed to shine with malignant glee as he said, in an odd singsong, as though it were a bet of rote, Year after year. I worked on those lines, up to now through hopelessness and uselessness, edifice an organization, chip aside at confidence in the government, creating and intensifying dissa tisfaction. When there was the banking crisis and the week of the moratorium, I-He paused on the spur of the moment. Ive told you this many times and youre sick of hearing it, arent you?Andorins lips twitched in a draft dry smile. Namarti was not such an idiot as not to sack out what a bore he was he just couldnt alleviate it. Andorin said, Youve told me this many times. He allowed the remainder of the question to hang in the air, unanswered. The answer, after all, was an obvious affirmative. There was no need to face him with it.A slight flush crossed Namartis discolor face. He said, nevertheless it could subscribe gone on forever-the building, the chipping, without ever coming to a point-if I hadnt had the proper alikel in my hands. And without any effort on my part, the alikel came to me.The gods brought you Planchet, said Andorin neutrally.Youre right. There lead be a group of gardeners entering the majestic Palace grounds soon. He paused and seemed to savor the thou ght.Men and women. get it only to serve as a mask for the handful of our operatives who provide accompany them. Among them exit be you-and Planchet. And what get out pack you and Planchet unusual is that you ordain be carrying blasters.Surely, said Andorin with deliberate malice behind a polite expression, well be stopped at the gates and held for questioning. Bringing an illicit blaster onto the Palace grounds-You wont be stopped, said Namarti, missing the malice. You wont be searched. Thats been arranged. You leading all be greeted as a matter of course by somewhat Palace official. I dont know who would ordinarily be in charge of that task-the Third Assistant Chamberlain in Charge of Grass and Leaves, for all I know-but in this case, it will be Seldon himself. The heavy(p) mathematician will hurry out to greet the new gardeners and welcome them to the grounds.Youre sure of that, I suppose.Of course, I am. Its all been arranged. He will learn, at more or less the last mi nute, that his foster son is among those listed as new gardeners and it will be impossible for him to refrain from coming out to see him. And when Seldon appears, Planchet will raise his blaster. Our people will raise the cry of Treason In the confusion and hurly-burly, Planchet will kill Seldon and consequently you will kill Planchet. You will then drop your blaster and leave. There are those who will help you leave. Its been arranged.Is it absolutely necessary to kill Planchet?Namarti frowned. Why? Do you object to one killing and not to another? When Planchet recovers, do you wish him to tell the authorities all he knows about us? Besides, this is a family feud we are arranging. Dont forget that Planchet is, in actual fact, Raych Seldon. It will looking for as though the two had fired simultaneously-or as though Seldon had given orders that if his son make any hostile move, he was to be shot down. We will see to it that the family angle will be given full publicity. It will be remindful of the bad old days of the Bloody Emperor Manowell. The people of Trantor will surely be repelled by the sheer wickedness of the deed. That, piled on top of all the inefficiencies and breakdowns theyve been witnessing and living through, will raise the cry for a new government-and no one will be able to refuse them, least of all the Emperor. And then well step in.Just like that? nary(prenominal) not just like that. I dont live in a dream world. There is likely to be some interim government, but it will fail. Well see to it that it fails and well come out in the unmortgaged and revive the old Joranumite arguments that the Trantorians micturate never forgotten. And in time-in not too much time-I will be First Minister.And I?Will yettually be the Emperor.Andorin said, The chance of all this working is sharp. This is arranged. That is arranged. The other thing is arranged. All of it has to come together and mesh perfectly or it will fail. Somewhere, someone is bound to me ss up. Its an unacceptable risk.Unacceptable? For whom? For you?Certainly. You expect me to make certain that Planchet will kill his father and you expect me to then kill Planchet. Why me? Arent there tools worth less than I who might more easily be risked?Yes, but to choose anyone else would make failure certain. Who but you has so much riding on this mission that there is no chance you will turn support in a fit of vapors at the last minute?The risk is enormous.Isnt it worth it to you? Youre playing for the Imperial throne.And what risk are you taking, Chief? You will remain here, rather comfortable, and wait to hear the news.Namartis lip curled. What a fool you are, Andorin What an Emperor you will make Do you suppose I take no risk because I will be here? If the gambit fails, if the plot miscarries, if some of our people are taken, do you think they wont tell everything they know? If you were somehow caught, would you face the tender treatment of the Imperial Guard without ev er telling them about me?And with a failed assassination attempt at hand, do you suppose they wont strip Trantor to find me? Do you suppose that in the end they will fail to find me? And when they do find me, what do you suppose I will have to face at their hands? Risk? I run a worse risk than any of you, just sitting here doing nothing. It boils down to this, Andorin. Do you or do you not wish to be Emperor?Andorin said in a low voice, I wish to be Emperor. And so things were put up in motion.22Raych had no trouble seeing that he was being treated with special care. The full group of would-be gardeners was now quartered in one of the hotels in the Imperial Sector, although not one of the prime hotels, of course.The gardeners were an odd lot, from fifty different worlds, but Raych had little chance to speak to any of them. Andorin, without being too obvious about it, had managed to keep him apart from the others.Raych wondered why. It depressed him. In fact, he had been feeling s omewhat depressed since he had left Wye. It interfered with his thinking process and he fought it-but not with entire success.Andorin was himself wearing rough clothes and was attempting to look like a workman. He would be playing the part of a gardener as a way of running the show-whatever the show might be.Raych felt ashamed that he had not been able to penetrate the nature of that show. They had closed in on him and prevented all communication, so he hadnt even had the chance to warn his father. They might be doing this for every Trantorian who had been pushed into the group, for all he knew, just as an extremum precaution. Raych estimated that there might be a dozen Trantorians among them, all of them Namartis people, of course, men and women both.What puzzled him was that Andorin treated him with what was almost affection. He monopolized him, insisted on having all his meals with him, treated him quite differently from the way in which he treated anyone else.Could it be becau se they had shared Manella? Raych did not know enough about the mores of the Wye Sector to be able to tell whether there might not be a polyandrous touch to their society. If two men shared a woman, did that make them, in a way, brotherly? Did it create a bond?Raych had never heard of such a thing, but he knew better than to suppose he had a grasp of even a tiny fraction of the infinite subtleties of galactic societies-even of Trantorian societies.But now that his mind had brought him back to Manella, he dwelled on her for a while. He missed her dreadfully and it occurred to him that missing her might be the cause of his depression, though, to tell the truth, what he was feeling now, as he was finishing lunch with Andorin, was almost despair-though he could think of no cause for it.ManellaShe had said she wanted to visit the Imperial Sector and presumably she could wheedle Andorin to her liking. He was desperate enough to ask a foolish question. Mr. Andorin, I keep wondering if may be you brought Miss Dubanqua along with you. Here, to the Imperial Sector.Andorin looked utterly astonished. Then he laughed gently. Manella? Do you see her doing any gardening? Or even pretending she could? No no, Manella is one of those women invented for our quiet moments. She has no function at all, otherwise. then Why do you ask, Planchet?**Raych shrugged. I dont know. Its sort of dull somewhat here. I sort of thought- His voice trailed away.Andorin watched him carefully. Finally he said, Surely youre not of the opinion that it matters much which woman you are involved with? I assure you it doesnt matter to her which man shes involved with. Once this is over, there will be other women. Plenty of them.When will this be over?Soon. And youre acquittance to be part of it in a very important way. Andorin watched Raych narrowly.Raych said, How important? Arent I gonna be just-a gardener? His voice go awayed hollow and he found himself unable to put a propel in it.Youll be more th an that, Planchet. Youll be going in with a blaster.With a what?A blaster.I never held a blaster. Not in my whole life.Theres nothing to it. You lift it. You point it. You close the contact and someone dies.I cant kill anyone.I thought you were one of us, that you would do anything for the cause.I didnt mean-kill. Raych couldnt seem to adopt his thoughts. Why must he kill? What did they really have in mind for him? And how would he be able to alert the Imperial Guard out front the killing would be carried out?Andorins face hardened suddenly, an instant conversion from friendly interest to stern decision. He said, You must kill.Raych gathered all his authorisation. No. I aint gonna kill nobody. Thats final.Andorin said, Planchet, you will do as you are told.Not murder.Even murder.How you gonna make me?I shall simply tell you to.Raych felt dizzy. What made Andorin so confident?He shook his head. No.Andorin said, Weve been feeding you, Planchet, ever since you left Wye. I made sure you ate with me. I supervised your diet. Especially the meal you just ate.Raych felt the horror rise within him. He suddenly understood. DesperanceExactly, said Andorin. Youre a sharp devil, Planchet.Its illegal.Yes, of course. Sos murder.Raych knew about desperance. It was a chemical modification of a perfectly harmless tranquilizer. The modified form, however, did not produce tranquillity but despair. It had been outlawed because of its use in mind control, though there were persistent rumors that the Imperial Guard used it.Andorin said, as though it were not hard to read Raychs mind, Its called desperance because thats an old word meaning hopelessness. I think youre feeling hopeless.Never, whispered Raych.in truth resolute of you, but you cant fight the chemical. And the more hopeless you feel, the more effective the drug.No chance.Think about it, Planchet. Namarti recognized you at once, even without your mustache. He knows you are Raych Seldon and, at my direction, you are goin g to kill your father.Raych muttered, Not forrader I kill you.He rose from his chair. There should be no problem at all in this. Andorin might be taller, but he was slender and clearly no athlete. Raych would break him in two with one arm-but he swayed as he rose. He shook his head, but it wouldnt clear.Andorin rose, too, and backed away. He drew his right hand from where it had been resting within his left sleeve. He was holding a weapon.He said pleasantly, I came prepared. I have been informed of your prowess as a Heliconian Twister and there will be no hand-to-hand combat.He looked down at his weapon. This is not a blaster, he said. I cant afford to have you killed before you accomplish your task. Its a nervous whip. Much worse, in a way. I will aim at your left shoulder and, believe me, the pain will be so excruciating that the worlds greatest stoic would not be able to endure it.Raych, who had been advancing slowly and grimly, stopped abruptly. He had been dozen years old wh en he had had a taste-a small one-of a neuronic whip. Once struck, no one ever forgets the pain, however long he lives, however full of incidents his life is.Andorin said, Moreover, I will use full strength so that the nerves in your upper arms will be stimulated first into unbearable pain and then damaged into uselessness. You will never use your left arm again. I will spare the right so you can handle the blaster. Now if you sit down and accept matters, as you must, you may keep both arms. Of course, you must eat again so your desperance level increases. Your situation will only worsen.Raych felt the drug-induced despair settle over him and that despair served, in itself, to deepen the effect. His vision was turning double and he could think of nothing to say.Raych only knew that he would have to do what Andorin would tell him to do. He had played the game and he had lost.23No Hari Seldon was almost violent. I dont want you out there, Dors.Dors Venabili stared back at him with an expression as firm as his own. Then I wont let you go, both, Hari.I must be there.It is not your place. It is the Gardener First-Class who must greet these new people.So it is. But Gruber cant do it. Hes a broken man.He must have an assistant of some sort. Or let the old Chief Gardener do it. He holds the king till the end of the year.The old Chief Gardener is too ill. Besides-Seldon hesitated-there are ringers among the gardeners. Trantorians. Theyre here, for some reason. I have the names of every one of them.Have them taken into custody, then. Every last one of them. Its simple. Why are you making it so complex?Because we dont know why theyre here. Somethings up. I dont see what xii gardeners can do, but-No, let me rephrase that. I can see a dozen things they can do, but I dont know which one of those things theyve planned. We will, indeed, take them into custody, but I must know more about everything before its done.We have to know enough to winkle out everyone in the conspir acy from top to ass and we must know enough of what theyre doing to be able to make the proper punishment stick. I dont want to get twelve men and women on what is fundamentally a misdemeanor charge. Theyll plead desperation, the need for a job. Theyll complain that it isnt fair for Trantorians to be excluded. Theyll get plenty of sympathy and well be left looking like fools. We must give them a chance to convict themselves of more than that. Besides-There was a long pause and Dors said wrathfully, Well, whats the new besides?Seldons voice lowered. One of the twelve is Raych, using the alias Planchet.What?Why are you surprised? I sent him to Wye to infiltrate the Joranumite movement and hes succeeded in infiltrating something. I have every faith in him. If hes there, he knows why hes there and he must have some sort of plan to put a spoke in the wheel. But I want to be there, too. I want to see him. I want to be in a position to help him if I can.If you want to help him, have fifty guards of the Palace standing shoulder to shoulder on either side of your gardeners.No. Again, well end up with nothing. The Imperial Guard will be in place but not in evidence. The gardeners in question must think they have a clear hand to do whatever it is they plan to do. Before they can do so, but after they have made it quite plain what they intend-well have them.Thats risky. Its risky for Raych.Risks are something we have to take. Theres more riding on this than individual lives.That is a heartless thing to say.You think I have no heart? Even if it broke, my concern would have to be with psycho-Dont say it. She turned away, as if in pain.I understand, said Seldon, but you mustnt be there. Your presence would be so inappropriate that the conspirators will mistrustful we know too much and will abort their plan. I dont want their plan aborted.He paused, then said softly, Dors, you say your job is to protect me. That comes before protecting Raych and you know that. I wouldnt ins ist on it, but to protect me is to protect psychohistory and the entire human species. That must come first. What I have of psychohistory tells me that I, in turn, must protect the center at all costs and that is what I am trying to do. Do you understand?Dors said, I understand, then turned away from him.Seldon thought And I hope Im right.If he werent, she would never forgive him. Far worse, he would never forgive himself-psychohistory or not.24They were lined up beautifully, feet strewing apart, hands behind their hacks, every one in a natty green uniform, loosely fitted and with wide pockets. There was very little gender derivative instrument and one could only guess that some of the shorter ones were women. The hoods covered whatever hair they had, but then, gardeners were supposed to clip their hair quite short-either sex-and there could be no facial hair.Why that should be, one couldnt say. The word tradition covered it all, as it covered so many things, some useful, some foo lish.Facing them was Mandell Gruber, flanked on either side by an assistant. Gruber was trembling, his wide-opened eyes glazed.Hari Seldons lips tightened. If Gruber could but manage to say, The Emperors gardeners greet you all, that would be enough. Seldon himself would then take over.His eyes swept over the new contingent and he located Raych.His heart jumped a bit. It was the mustacheless Raych in the front row, standing more rigid than the rest, staring straight ahead. His eyes did not move to meet Seldons he showed no sign of recognition, however subtle.Good, thought Seldon. Hes not supposed to. Hes giving nothing away.Gruber muttered a weak welcome and Seldon jumped in.He advanced with an easy stride, putt himself immediately before Gruber, and said, Thank you, Gardener First-Class. Men and women, gardeners of the Emperor, you are to undertake an important task. You will be responsible for the beauty and health of the only open land on our great world of Trantor, capital of th e Galactic Empire. You will see to it that if we dont have the endless vistas of open undomed worlds, we will have a small jewel here that will outshine anything else in the Empire.You will all be under Mandell Gruber, who will shortly become Chief Gardener. He will report to me, when necessary, and I will report to the Emperor. This means, as you can all see, that you will be only three levels removed from the Imperial presence and you will always be under his benign watch. I am certain that even now he is surveying us from the Small Palace, his personal home, which is the building you see to the right-the one with the opal-layered dome-and that he is pleased with what he sees.Before you start work, of course, you will all undertake a course of training that will make you entirely familiar with the grounds and its needs. You will-He had, by this time, moved, almost stealthily, to a point without delay in front of Raych, who still remained motionless, unblinking.Seldon tried not to look unnaturally benign and then a slight frown crossed his face. The person directly behind Raych looked familiar. He might have gone unacknowledged if Seldon had not studied his hologram. Wasnt that Gleb Andorin of Wye? Raychs patron in Wye, in fact? What was he doing here?Andorin must have noticed Seldons sudden regard, for he muttered something between merely opened lips and Raychs right arm, moving forward from behind his back, plucked a blaster out of the wide pocket of his green doublet. So did Andorin.Seldon felt himself going into near-shock. How could blasters have been allowed onto the grounds? Confused, he barely heard the cries of Treason and the sudden noise of running and shouting.All that really occupied Seldons mind was Raychs blaster pointing directly at him and Raych looking at him without any sign of recognition. Seldons mind filled with horror as he realized that his son was going to shoot and that he himself was only seconds from death.25A blaster, despite i ts name, does not blast in the proper sense of the term. It vaporizes and blows out an interior and-if anything-causes an implosion. There is a soft sighing sound, exit what appears to be a blasted object.Hari Seldon did not expect to hear that sound. He expected only death. It was, therefore, with surprise that he heard the distinctive soft sighing sound and he blinked rapidly as he looked down at himself, slackjawed.He was alive? (He thought it as a question, not a statement.)Raych was still standing there, his blaster pointing forward, his eyes glazed. He was absolutely motionless, as though some motive power had ceased.Behind him was the crumpled body of Andorin, fallen in a pool of blood, and standing next to him, blaster in hand, was a gardener. The hood had slipped away the gardener was clearly a woman with freshly clipped hair.She allowed herself a glance at Seldon and said, Your son knows me as Manella Dubanqua. Im a security officer. Do you want my reference number, First Minister?No, said Seldon faintly. Imperial Guard had converged on the scene. My son Whats wrong with my son?Desperance, I think, said Manella. That can be washed out eventually. She reached forward to take the blaster out of Raychs hand. Im sorry I didnt act sooner. I had to wait for an overt move and, when it came, it almost caught me napping.I had the same trouble. We must take Raych to the Palace hospital.A confused noise suddenly emanated from the Small Palace. It occurred to Seldon that the Emperor was, indeed, watching the proceedings and, if so, he must be grandly furious, indeed.Take care of my son, Miss Dubanqua, said Seldon. I must see the Emperor.He set off at an undignified run through the chaos on the Great Lawns and dashed into the Small Palace without ceremony. Cleon could scarcely turn any angrier over that.And there, with an appalled group watching in stupor-there, on the semicircular stairway-was the body of His Imperial Majesty, Cleon I, smashed all but beyond r ecognition. His prolific Imperial robes now served as a shroud. Cowering against the wall, staring stupidly at the horrified faces surrounding him, was Mandell Gruber.Seldon felt he could take no more. He took in the blaster lying at Grubers feet. It had been Andorins, he was sure. He asked softly, Gruber, what have you done?Gruber, staring at him, babbled, Everyone screaming and yelling. I thought, Who would know? They would think someone else had killed the Emperor. But then I couldnt run.But, Gruber. Why?So I wouldnt have to be Chief Gardener. And he collapsed.Seldon stared in shock at the unconscious Gruber.Everything had worked out by the narrowest of margins. He himself was alive. Raych was alive. Andorin was dead and the Joranumite Conspiracy would now be hunted down to the last person.The center would have held, just as psychohistory had dictated.And then one man, for a reason so trivial as to defy analysis, had killed the Emperor.And now, thought Seldon in despair, what do we do? What happens next?

Stefan’s Diaries: Origins Chapter 27

I ran out onto the lawn. Fire was everywhere, and I noticed that the servants quarters had burst into flames. Right now, the main house looked safe, barely who knew how long that would last? I aphorism glimpses of flames in the woods, and a large group converged around the police wagon. But all I cared about was finding Damon. Finally, I spotted a figure wearing a blue coat, sprinting toward the pond. I turned on my heel and followed him through the field. Stefan I perceive my epithet and stopped, looking about wildly. Over here I turned and saw Jonathan Gilbert, his eyes wild, standing at the edge of the forest, a state and arrow in one hand, his compass in the other. Jonathan looked down at his invention almost in disbelief. Theres a vampire in the forest. My compass is pointing, but I extremity help with a lookout.Jonathan I yelled, panting. I cant I have to find Suddenly, I saw a flash of white from the forest. Jonathan turned and raised his bow to his shoulder. Who goes there? he called, his voice ringing like a clarion bell. Instantly, he released the arrow. I saw the beginning of its arc as it flung into the darkness. Then we heard a scream, followed by a thud.Jonathan ran into the forest, and I heard a long, low moan. Jonathan I called wildly, then stopped short. I saw Jonathan kneeling over a prone figure. He turned up to me, his eyes shining with tears.Its Pearl, he said dully.There was an arrow stuck under her shoulder. She moaned, and her eyes fluttered under her lids.Pearl Jonathan said, angrily this time, as he roughly yanked out the arrow. I turned in horror, not wanting to watch.Instead, I ran with all my might toward the pond, hoping against hope that Damon was still there.Damon? I called tentatively, as I picked my way around tree roots. My eyes took a moment to adjust to the wooded darkness and relative quiet of the forest. I saw a figure perched on a felled tree branch. Damon? I called quietly.The figure turned around, and I gasped. Damons face was white, and his dark hair was sticking to his forehead. The gash at his temple was bordered by crusted blood, and the whites of his eyes were cloudy.Y coward, he hissed, drawing his knifeou from his pocket.No. I held my custody up and took a ill-use back. Dont hurt me.Dont hurt me he mocked in a high-pitched voice. I knew youd tell Father eventually. I just dont know why Katherine trusted you with her secret. wherefore she believed you wouldnt turn her in. Why she loved you. His voice broke on the word love, and he dropped the knife. His face crumpled in anguish, and he didnt look dangerous or hateful. He looked broken.Damon, no. No. No. I kept repeating the word as my pass whirled. Had Katherine loved me? I remembered the moments shed stare at me, her hands on my shoulders. You must love me, Stefan. Tell me well be together forever. You have my heart. Id always felt the same woozy, heady sensation running through my limbs and up to my brain, wanting to do anythin g for her. But now, when I thought of her true nature, all I could do was shudder. She didnt love me, I said finally. Shed compelled me, and she made me hurt everyone I loved. I felt hatred rise up from the depth of my soul, and I wanted to lead the charge against Katherine.Until I looked at my brother.Damon rested his head in his hands, staring at the ground. It was then that I realized Damon loved Katherine. He loved her despite, or maybe because of, her dark side. When Id seen Katherine lying bound on the floor, foamy at the mouth, Id felt a stomach-turning revulsion. But Damons love for Katherine transcended her current state. Damon loved Katherine so much that hed accept the vampire side of her, instead of pretending it didnt exist. And in order to be truly happy, Damon needed to be with her. Now I understood. I needed to allay Katherine to save Damon.In the distance, wails and cries filled the gunpowder-scented air. Damon. Damon. I restate his name, each time with an increa sing urgency. He looked up, and I saw tears in his eyes, threatening to spill out. Not since Mother died had I seen Damon cry.Ill help you save her. I know you love her. I will help. I kept repeating the word help, as if it were some sort of charm. Please, I pleaded in my mind as I looked at Damons eyes. There was a moment of silence. Finally, Damon offered an almost imperceptible nod.Okay, he said in a ragged voice, clasping my wrist and draw me to the edge of the forest.

Most Opposition to Abortion Relies Essay

A Defense of Abortion Author(s) Judith Jarvis Thomson Source Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 1, no(prenominal) 1 (Autumn, 1971), pp. 47-66 Published by Blackfountainhead Publishing Stable URL http//www. jstor. org/stable/2265091 Accessed 10/01/2010 0054 Your physical exercise of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTORs Terms and Conditions of Use, procurable at http//www. jstor. org/page/info/ intimately/policies/terms. jsp.JSTORs Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless(prenominal)(prenominal) you control obtained prior(prenominal) licence, you whitethorn non download an entire eject of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may character content in the JSTOR archive unaccompanied for your soulfulnessal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding each tho use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http//www. jstor. org/action/showPublisher? publisherCode=black. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission essential(prenominal) contain the same copy adept c in every attention that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide cast of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information intimately JSTOR, please contact supportjstor. org. Blackwell Publishing is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Philosophy and Public Affairs. http//www. jstor. org JUDITH JARVISTHOMSON A Defense of AbortionMost opposition to spontaneous abortion relies on the premise that the fetus is a human being, a person, from the moment of conception. The premise is argued for, provided, as I think, not well. Take, for example, the most common personal credit line. We are leaseed to notice that the developmen t of a human being from conception finished birth into pip-squeakhood is continuous then it is give tongue to that to draw a line, to strike a point in this development and learn before this point the thing is not a person, after this point it is a person is to establish an tyrannical choice, a choice for which in the nature of things no good reason can be foxn.It is concluded that the fetus is, or least focusings that we had better say it is, a person from the moment of conception. thus far this conclusion does not hail. Similar things might be said ab unwrap the development of an acorn into an oak tree, and it does not follow that acorns are oak trees, or that we had better say they are. Arguments of this form are some(prenominal) terms called slippery slope arguments-the phrase is perhaps self-explanatory-and it is dismaying that opp iodinnts of abortion bank on them so heavily and uncritically. I am habituated to agree, however, that the prospects for drawing a li ne in the development of the fetus look dim.I am inclined to think also that we shall probably bedevil to agree that the fetus has already become a human person well before birth. Indeed, it comes as a surprise when one first learns how early in its life it begins to acquire human characteristics. By the tenth week, for example, it already has i. I am truly frequently indebted to James Thomson for discussion, criticism, and many helpful suggestions. 48 Philosophy Public Affairs a face, arms and legs, fingers and toes it has internal organs, and brain activity is detectable. 2 On the other achieve, I think that the premise is false, that the fetus is not a person from the moment of conception.A newly fertilized ovum, a newly infix clump of cells, is no more a person than an acorn is an oak tree. entirely I shall not discuss any of this. For it seems to me to be of great interest to ask what happens if, for the sake of argument, we allow the premise. How, precisely, are we en ounced to get from there to the conclusion that abortion is morally impermissible? Opponents of abortion comm solitary(prenominal) pass by most of their time establishing that the fetus is a person, and hardly any time ex fielding the step from there to the impermissibility of abortion.Perhaps they think the step too simple and obvious to require much comment. Or perhaps instead they are simply being economical in argument. Many of those who defend abortion rely on the premise that the fetus is not a person, provided only a bit of tissue that result become a person at birth and why chip in out more arguments than you pass on to? Whatever the explanation, I suggest that the step they take is neither easy nor obvious, that it calls for closer examination than it is commonly devoted, and that when we do give it this closer examination we shall feel inclined to reject it.I propose, then, that we have that the fetus is a person. from the moment of conception. How does the argument go from here? Something like this, I take it. E precise person has a seteousness to life. So the fetus has a proper(ip) to life. No doubt the overprotect has a overcompensate to regulate what shall happen in and to her body e preciseone would grant that. hardly sure enough a persons slump to life is stronger and more stringent than the fetchs indemnify to decide what happens in and to her body, and so outweighs it.So the fetus may not be killed an abortion may not be performed. It sounds plausible. But at present let me ask you to imagine this. You wake up in the morning and find yourself buttocks to back in bed with an unconscious violinist. A notable unconscious violinist. He has been found to have a fatal kidney ailment, and the Society of Music Lovers 2. Daniel Callahan, Abortion Law, Choice and Morality (New York, 1970), p. 373. This book gives a fascinating travel along of the available information on abortion. The Jewish tradition is surveyed in David M.Feldma n, Birth Control in Jewish Law (New York, i968), Part 5, the Catholic tradition in John T. Noonan, Jr. , An Almost Absolute Value in Hi news report, in The Morality of Abortion, ed. John T. Noonan, Jr. (Cambridge, Mass. , 1970). 49 A Defense of Abortion has canvassed all the available medical records and found that you alone have the securely blood type to help. They have consequently kidnapped you, and last night the violinists circulative system was out of use(p) into yours, so that your kidneys can be used to extract poisons from his blood as well as your own.The betokenor of the hospital now tells you, Look, were sorry the Society of Music Lovers did this to you-we would never have permitted it if we had known. But still, they did it, and the violinist now is plugged into you. To unplug you would be to kill him. But never mind, its only for guild months. By then he will have recovered from his ailment, and can safely be unplugged from you. Is it morally incumbent on you to reconcile to this situation? No doubt it would be very nice of you if you did, a great kindness. But do you have to accede to it? What if it were not nine months, but nine historic period? Or longer still?What if the director of the hospital says, Tough luck, I agree, but youve now got to stay in bed, with the violinist plugged into you, for the rest of your life. Because remember this. All persons have a right to life, and violinists are persons. Granted you have a right to decide what happens in and to your body, but a persons right to life outweighs your right to decide what happens in and to your body. So you cannot ever be unplugged from him. I imagine you would regard this as outrageous, which suggests that something really is wrong with that plausible-sounding argument I mentioned a moment ago.In this case, of course, you were kidnapped you didnt volunteer for the operation that plugged the violinist into your kidneys. Can those who oppose abortion on the ground I menti oned brace an exception for a pregnancy due to mess up? Certainly. They can say that persons have a right to life only if they didnt come into macrocosm because of rape or they can say that all persons have a right to life, but that some have less of a right to life than others, in particular, that those who came into existence because of rape have less. But these statements have a rather unpleasant sound.Surely the question of whether you have a right to life at all, or how much of it you have, shouldnt turn on the question of whether or not you are the product of a rape. And in feature the passel who oppose abortion on the ground I mentioned do not make this distinction, and hence do not make an exception in case of rape. 50 Philosophy Public Affairs Nor do they make an exception for a case in which the fix has to spend the nine months of her pregnancy in bed. They would agree that would be a great pity, and hard on the go but all the same, all persons have a right to ife, the fetus is a person, and so on. I suspect, in fact, that they would not make an exception for a case in which, miraculously copious, the pregnancy went on for nine years, or take down the rest of the mothers life. Some wont even make an exception for a case in which continuation of the pregnancy is likely to shorten the mothers life they regard abortion as impermissible even to save the mothers life. Such cases are nowadays very rare, and many opponents of abortion do not accept this extreme view. Moreover, in sidesplitting the child, one would be killing an innocent person, for the child has committed no crime, and is not aiming at his mothers finale. And then there are a variety of ways in which this 3. The term direct in the arguments I refer to is a technical one. Roughly, what is meant by direct killing is either killing as an end in itself, or killing as a means to some end, for example, the end of saving mortal elses life. See note 6, below, for an example of its use. 51 A Defense of Abortion might be continued. i) But as at once killing an innocent person is always and absolutely impermissible, an abortion may not be performed. Or, (2) as directly killing an innocent person is murder, and murder is always and absolutely impermissible, an abortion may not be performed. Because unplugging you would be directly killing an innocent violinist, and thats murder, and thats impermissible. If anything in the world is true, it is that you do not commit murder, you do not do what is impermissible, if you reach around to your back and unplug yourself from that violinist to save your life. The main focus of attention in writings on abortion has been on what a third party may or may not do in answer to a request from a char for an abortion. This is in a way understandable. Things being as they are, there isnt much a woman can safely do to abort herself.So the question asked is what a third party may do, and what the mother may do, if it is mentioned at al l, is deduced, almost as an afterthought, from what it is concluded that third parties may do. But it seems to me that to treat the matter in this way is to refuse to grant to the mother that very status of person which is so firmly insisted on for the fetus. For we cannot simply read off what a person may do from what a third party may do. Suppose you find yourself trapped in a tiny house with a developing child. I mean a very tiny house, and a rapidly growing child-you are already up against the wall f the house and in a few proceeding youll be crushed to death. The child on the other hand wont be crushed to death if nothing is done to stop him from growing hell be hurt, but in the end hell simply burst open the house and walk out a free man. outright I could well understand it if a bystander were to say, in that respects nothing we can do for you. We cannot choose between your life and his, we cannot be the ones to decide who is to live, we cannot intervene. But it cannot be concluded that you too can do nothing, that you cannot attack it to save your life.However innocent the child may be, you do not have to bet passively while it crushes you to death. Perhaps a pregnant woman is vaguely felt to have the status of house, to which we dont allow the 53 A Defense of Abortion right of self-defense. But if the woman houses the child, it should be remembered that she is a person who houses it. 1 should perhaps stop to say explicitly that I am not claiming that people have a right to do anything whatever to save their lives. I think, rather, that there are drastic limits to the right of self-defense.If someone threatens you with death unless you torture someone else to death, I think you have not the right, even to save your life, to do so. But the case under consideration here is very different. In our case there are only twain people involved, one whose life is peril, and one who threatens it. Both are innocent the one who is threatened is not threatened because of any fault, the one who threatens does not threaten because of any fault. For this reason we may feel that we bystanders cannot intervene. But the person threatened can.In sum, a woman surely can defend her life against the threat to it posed by the unborn child, even if doing so involves its death. And this shows not merely that the theses in (i) through (4) are false it shows also that the extreme view of abortion is false, and so we accept not canvass any other possible ways of arriving at it from the argument I mentioned at the outset. 2. The extreme view could of course be weakened to say that while abortion is permissible to save the mothers life, it may not be performed by a third party, but only by the mother herself. But this cannot be right either.For what we have to play along in mind is that the mother and the unborn child are not like two tenants in a small house which has, by an black mistake, been rented to both the mother owns the house. The fact that s he does adds to the offensiveness of deducing that the mother can do nothing from the supposition that third parties can do nothing. But it does more than this it casts a bright light on the supposition that third parties can do nothing. Certainly it lets us see that a third party who says I cannot choose between you is fooling himself if he thinks this is impartiality.If Jones has found and fastened on a certain coat, which he inevitably to keep him from freezing, but which smith also needs to keep him from freezing, then it is not impartiality that says I cannot choose between you when Smith owns the coat. Women have said again and again This body is my body and they have reason to feel angry, reason to feel that it has been like shouting into the wind. Smith, after all, is 54 Philosophy & Public Affairs hardly likely to bless us if we say to him, Of course its your coat, anybody would grant that it is. But no one may choose between you and Jones who is to have it.We should rea lly ask what it is that says no one may choose in the face of the fact that the body that houses the child is the mothers body. It may be simply a failure to think this fact. But it may be something more interesting, namely the sense that one has a right to refuse to lay hands on people, even where it would be just and fair to do so, even where justice seems to require that somebody do so. Thus justice might call for somebody to get Smiths coat back from Jones, and yet you have a right to refuse to be the one to lay hands on Jones, a right to refuse to do physical violence to him.This, I think, must be granted. But then what should be said is not no one may choose, but only I cannot choose, and indeed not even this, but I will not act, leaving it open that somebody else can or should, and in particular that anyone in a position of authority, with the job of securing peoples rights, both can and should. So this is no difficultness. I have not been arguing that any minded(p) third party must accede to the mothers request that he perform an abortion to save her life, but only that he may.I suppose that in some views of human life the mothers body is only on contribute to her, the loan not being one which gives her any prior claim to it. One who held this view might well think it impartiality to say I cannot choose. But I shall simply ignore this possibility. My own view is that if a human being has any just, prior claim to anything at all, he has a just, prior claim to his own body. And perhaps this neednt be argued for here anyway, since, as I mentioned, the arguments against abortion we are looking at do grant that the woman has a right to decide what happens in and to her body.But although they do grant it, I have tried to show that they do not take soberly what is done in granting it. I suggest the same thing will reappear even more clearly when we turn away from cases in which the mothers life is at stake, and attend, as I propose we now do, to the vastly more common cases in which a woman wants an abortion for some less weighty reason than preserving her own life. 3. Where the mothers life is not at stake, the argument I mentioned at the outset seems to have a much stronger pull. Everyone 55 A Defense of Abortion as a right to life, so the unborn person has a right to life. And isnt the childs right to life weightier than anything other than the mothers own right to life, which she might put forward as ground for an abortion? This argument treats the right to life as if it were unproblematic. It is not, and this seems to me to be precisely the source of the mistake. For we should now, at long last, ask what it comes to, to have a right to life. In some views having a right to life includes having a right to be given at least the bare minimum one needs for continued life.But suppose that what in fact is the bare minimum a man needs for continued life is something he has no right at all to be given? If I am sick unto death, an d the only thing that will save my life is the touch of Henry Fondas cool hand on my fevered brow, then all the same, I have no right to be given the touch of Henry Fondas cool hand on my fevered brow. It would be frightfully nice of him to fly in from the West Coast to provide it. It would be less nice, though no doubt well meant, if my friends flew out to the West Coast and carried Henry Fonda back with them. But I have no right at all against anybody that he should do this for me.Or again, to return to the story I told introductory, the fact that for continued life that violinist needs the continued use of your kidneys does not establish that he has a right to be given the continued use of your kidneys. He certainly has no right against you that you should give him continued use of your kidneys. For nobody has any right to use your kidneys unless you give him such a right and nobody has the right against you that you shall give him this right-if you do allow him to go on using y our kidneys, this is a kindness on your part, and not something he can claim from you as his due.Nor has he any right against anybody else that they should give him continued use of your kidneys. Certainly he had no right against the Society of Music Lovers that they should plug him into you in the first place. And if you now start to unplug yourself, having learned that you will otherwise have to spend nine years in bed with him, there is nobody in the world who must try to prevent you, in drift to see to it that he is given something he has a right to be given. Some people are rather stricter about the right to life.In their view, it does not include the right to be given anything, but amounts to, 56 Philosophy & Public Affairs and only to, the right not to be killed by anybody. But here a related difficulty arises. If everybody is to refrain from killing that violinist, then everybody must refrain from doing a great many different sorts of things. Everybody must refrain from sli tting his throat, everybody must refrain from shooting him-and everybody must refrain from unplugging you from him.But does he have a right against everybody that they shall refrain from unplugging you from him? To refrain from doing this is to allow him to continue to use your kidneys. It could be argued that he has a right against us that we should allow him to continue to use your kidneys. That is, while he had no right against us that we should give him the use of your kidneys, it might be argued that he anyway has a right against us that we shall not now intervene and deprive him of the use of your kidneys.I shall come back to third-party interventions later. But certainly the violinist has no right against you that you shall allow him to continue to use your kidneys. As I said, if you do allow him to use them, it is a kindness on your part, and not something you owe him. The difficulty I point to here is not peculiar to the right to life. It reappears in connection with all th e other natural rights and it is something which an adequate account of rights must bring with. For present purposes it is enough just to draw attention to it.But I would stress that I am not arguing that people do not have a right to lifequite to the contrary, it seems to me that the primary control we must place on the acceptability of an account of rights is that it should turn out in that account to be a virtue that all persons have a right to life. I am arguing only that having a right to life does not set about having either a right to be given the use of or a right to be allowed continued use of another persons body-even if one needs it for life itself.So the right to life will not serve the opponents of abortion in the very simple and clear way in which they seem to have thought it would. 4. There is another way to bring out the difficulty. In the most ordinary sort of case, to deprive someone of what he has a right to is to treat him rawly. Suppose a boy and his small pal are jointly given a box of chocolates for Christmas. If the onetime(a) boy takes the box and refuses to give his brother any of the chocolates, he is unjust to -him, for the brother has been given a right to half of them. But 57 A Defense of Abortion uppose that, having learned that otherwise it means nine years in bed with that violinist, you unplug yourself from him. You surely are not being unjust to him, for you gave him no right to use your kidneys, and no one else can have given him any such right. But we have to notice that in unplugging yourself, you are killing him and violinists, like everybody else, have a right to life, and thus in the view we were considering just now, the right not to be killed. So here you do what he supposedly has a right you shall not do, but you do not act unjustly to him in doing it.The emendation which may be made at this point is this the right to life consists not in the right not to be killed, but rather in the right not to be killed unju stly. This runs a risk of circularity, but never mind it would enable us to square the fact that the violinist has a right to life with the fact that you do not act unjustly toward him in unplugging yourself, thereby killing him. For if you do not kill him unjustly, you do not violate his right to life, and so it is no interview you do him no injustice.But if this emendation is accepted, the gap in the argument against abortion stares us plainly in the face it is by no means enough to show that the fetus is a person, and to remind us that all persons have a right to life-we need to be shown also that killing the fetus violates its right to life, i. e. , that abortion is unjust killing. And is it? I suppose we may take it as a datum that in a case of pregnancy due to rape the mother has not given the unborn person a right to the use of her body for food and shelter. Indeed, in what pregnancy could it be supposed that the mother has given the unborn person such a right?It is not as i f there were unborn persons drifting about the world, to whom a woman who wants a child says I invite you in. But it might be argued that there are other ways one can have acquired a right to the use of another persons body than by having been invited to use it by that person. Suppose a woman voluntarily indulges in intercourse, knowing of the stake it will issue in pregnancy, and then she does become pregnant is she not in part responsible for the presence, in fact the very existence, of the unborn person inside her? No doubt she did not invite it in.But doesnt her partial responsibility for its being there itself give it a right to the use of her 58 Philosophy Public Affairs body? 7 If so, then her aborting it would be more like the boys taking away the chocolates, and less like your unplugging yourself from the violinist-doing so would be depriving it of what it does have a right to, and thus would be doing it an injustice. And then, too, it might be asked whether or not she c an kill it even to save her own life If she voluntarily called it into existence, how can she now kill it, even in self-defense?The first thing to be said about this is that it is something new. Opponents of abortion have been so concerned to make out the independence of the fetus, in order to establish that it has a right to life, just as its mother does, that they have tended to overlook the possible support they might gain from making out that the fetus is dependent on the mother, in order to establish that she has a special kind of responsibility for it, a responsibility that gives it rights against her which are not possessed by any independent person-such as an ailing violinist who is a stranger to her.On the other hand, this argument would give the unborn person a right to its mothers body only if her pregnancy resulted from a voluntary act, undertaken in full knowledge of the retrieve a pregnancy might result from it. It would leave out entirely the unborn person whose exis tence is due to rape. Pending the availability of some further argument, then, we would be left with the conclusion that unborn persons whose existence is due to rape have no right to the use of their mothers bodies, and thus that aborting them is not depriving them of anything they have a right to and hence is not unjust killing.And we should also notice that it is not at all plain that this argument really does go even as far as it purports to. For there are cases and cases, and the details make a difference. If the room is stuffy, and I therefore open a window to air it, and a burglar climbs in, it would be absurd to say,Ah, now he can stay, shes given him a right to the use of her house-for she is partially responsible for his presence there, having voluntarily done what enabled him to get in, in full knowledge that there are such things as burglars, and that burglars 7.The need for a discussion of this argument was brought home to me by members of the Society for Ethical and Le gal Philosophy, to whom this paper was originally presented. 59 A Defense of Abortion burgle. It would be still more absurd to say this if I had had bars installed outside my windows, precisely to prevent burglars from getting in, and a burglar got in only because of a defect in the bars. It remains equally absurd if we imagine it is not a burglar who climbs in, but an innocent person who blunders or falls in.Again, suppose it were like this people-seeds drift about in the air like pollen, and if you open your windows, one may drift in and take root in your carpets or upholstery. You dont want children, so you fix up your windows with fine mesh screens, the very best you can buy. As can happen, however, and on very, very rare occasions does happen, one of the screens is defective and a seed drifts in and takes root. Does the person-plant who now develops have a right to the use of your house?Surely not-despite the fact that you voluntarily opened your windows, you knowingly kept ca rpets and upholstered furniture, and you knew that screens were sometimes defective. Someone may argue that you are responsible for its rooting, that it does have a right to your house, because after all you could have lived out your life with bare floors and furniture, or with sealed windows and doors. But this wont do-for by the same token anyone can avoid a pregnancy due to rape by having a hysterectomy, or anyway by never leaving home without a (reliablearmy. It seems to me that the argument we are looking at can establish at most that there are some cases in which the unborn person has a right to the use of its mothers body, and therefore some cases in which abortion is unjust killing. There is room for much discussion and argument as to precisely which, if any. But I think we should sidestep this issue and leave it open, for at any rate the argument certainly does not establish that all abortion is unjust killing. 5. There is room for yet another argument here, however.We sure ly must all grant that there may be cases in which it would be morally unseemly to detach a person from your body at the greet of his life. Suppose you learn that what the violinist needs is not nine years of your life, but only one hour all you need do to save his life is to spend one hour in that bed with him. Suppose also that permit him use your kidneys for that one hour would not affect your health in the slightest. Admittedly you were kidnapped. Admittedly you did not give 6o Philosophy & Public Affairs anyone permission to plug him into you.Nevertheless it seems to me plain you ought to allow him to use your kidneys for that hour-it would be indecent to refuse. Again, suppose pregnancy lasted only an hour, and constituted no threat to life or health. And suppose that a woman becomes pregnant as a result of rape. Admittedly she did not voluntarily do anything to bring about the existence of a child. Admittedly she did nothing at all which would give the unborn person a righ t to the use of her body. All the same it might well be said, as in the newly emended violinist story, that she ought to allow it to remain for that hour-that it would be indecent in her to refuse.Now some people are inclined to use the term rightin such a way that it follows from the fact that you ought to allow a person to use your body for the hour he needs, that he has a right to use your body for the hour he needs, even though he has not been given that right by any person or act. They may say that it follows also that if you refuse, you act unjustly toward him. This use of the term is perhaps so common that it cannot be called wrong nevertheless it seems to me to be an unfortunate loosening of what we would do better to keep a tight rein on.Suppose that box of chocolates I mentioned earlier had not been given to both boys jointly, but was given only to the older boy. There he sits, stolidly eating his way through the box, his small brother watching enviously. present we are l ikely to say Youought not to be so mean. You ought to give your brother some of those chocolates. My own view is that it just does not follow from the truth of this that the brother has any right to any of the chocolates. If the boy refuses to give his brother any, he is greedy, stingy, callous-but not unjust.I suppose that the people I have in mind will say it does follow that the brother has a right to some of the chocolates, and thus that the boy does act unjustly if he refuses to give his brother any. But the effect of saying this is to obscure what we should keep distinct, namely the difference between the boys refusal in this case and the boys refusal in the earlier case, in which the box was given to both boys jointly, and in which the small brother thus had what was from any point of view clear title to half.A further objection to so using the term rightthat from the fact that A ought to do a thing for B, it follows that B has a right against A 6I A Defense of Abortion that A do it for him, is that it is going to make the question of whether or not a man has a right to a thing turn on how easy it is to provide him with it and this seems not merely unfortunate, but morally unacceptable. Take the case of Henry Fonda again. I said earlier that I had no right to the touch of his cool hand on my fevered brow, even though I needed it to save my life.I said it would be frightfully nice of him to fly in from the West Coast to provide me with it, but that I had no right against him that he should do so. But suppose he isnt on the West Coast. Suppose he has only to walk across the room, place a hand briefly on my brow-and lo, my life is saved. Then surely he ought to do it, it would be indecent to refuse. Is it to be said Ah, well, it follows that in this case she has a right to the touch of his hand on her brow, and so it would be an injustice in him to refuse?So that I have a right to it when it is easy for him to provide it, though no right when its hard? It s rather a shocking idea that anyones rights should fade away and disappear as it gets harder and harder to accord them to him. So my own view is that even though you ought to let the violinist use your kidneys for the one hour he needs, we should not conclude that he has a right to do so-we should say that if you refuse, you are, like the boy who owns all the chocolates and will give none away, self-centered and callous, indecent in fact, but not unjust.And similarly, that even supposing a case in which a woman pregnant due to rape ought to allow the unborn person to use her body for the hour he needs, we should not conclude that he has a right to do so we should conclude that she is self-centered, callous, indecent, but not unjust, if she refuses. The complaints are no less grave they are just different. However, there is no need to insist on this point. If anyone does wish to deduce he has a ight from you ought, then all the same he must surely grant that there are cases in which it is not morally required of you that you allow that violinist to use your kidneys, and in which he does not have a right to use them, and in which you do not do him an injustice if you refuse. And so also for mother and unborn child. Except in such cases as the unborn person has a right to demand it-and we were leaving open the possibility that there may be such cases-nobody is morally required to make large sacrifices, of health, of all other interests and concerns, of all other duties 62Philosophy & Public Affairs and commitments, for nine years, or even for nine months, in order to keep another person alive. 6. We have in fact to distinguish between two kinds of Samaritan the Good Samaritan and what we might call the Minimally Decent Samaritan. The story of the Good Samaritan, you will remember, goes like this A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. And b y chance there came down a certain priest that way and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side.And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was and when he saw him he had favor on him. And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the morrow, when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.(Luke I030-35) The Good Samaritan went out of his way, at some cost to himself, to help one in need of it. We are not told what the options were, that is, whether or not the priest and the Levite could have helped by doing less than the Good Samaritan did, but assuming they could have, then the fact they did nothing at all shows they were not even Minimally Decent Samaritans, not because they were not Samaritans, but because they were not even minimally decent.These things are a matter of degree, of course, but there is a difference, and it comes out perhaps most clearly in the story of Kitty Genovese, who, as you will remember, was murdered while thirtyeight people watched or listened, and did nothing at all to help her. A Good Samaritan would have rushed out to give direct assistance 63 A Defense of Abortion against the murderer. Or perhaps we had better allow that it would have been a Splendid Samaritan who did this, on the ground that it would have involved a risk of death for himself.But the thirty-eight not only did not do this, they did not even trouble to pick up a phone to call the police. Minimally Decent Samaritanism would call for doing at least that, and their not having done it was monstrous. After telling the story of the Good Samaritan, deliverer said Go, and do thou likewise. Perhaps he meant that we a re morally required to act as the Good Samaritan did. Perhaps he was urging people to do more than is morally required of them.At all events it seems plain that it was not morally required of any of the thirty-eight that he rush out to give direct assistance at the risk of his own life, and that it is not morally required of anyone that he give long stretches of his lifenine years or nine months-to sustaining the life of a person who has no special right (we were leaving open the possibility of this) to demand it. Indeed, with one rather striking class of exceptions, no one in any country in the world is legally required to do anywhere near as much as this for anyone else.

Domestic Violence and the Police Essay

In this essay I aim chosen to study and discuss an article about domestic help violence in Britain. The aspects I have chosen to concentrate on are the police response to domestic abuse, recent political sympathies initiatives and the financial and logistical problems faced by wo men who are trying to escape from violent domestic situations. The statistics relating to domestic violence are truly disturbing. According to the Womens Aid website, sensation incident of domestic violence per minute is reported, with an alarming two deaths a week perpetrated by a veritable or former partner. In addition to this, they report that one in four women have suffered some kind of violence in the home. The statistics, from the British offense appraise 2012, hardly represent reported violence, and associations who bridge over women that have suffered violence, suspect that many much incidents go unreported(Walby & Allen, 2004). So what the definition of domestic violence? The administ ration definition of domestic violence is Any incident of threatening behaviour, violence or abuse (psychological, physical, sexual, financial or emotional), between adults who are or have been intimate partners or family members, regardless of gender or sexuality.Domestic violence is not a stark naked phenomenon. Before the 1970s it was something that happened, but was unbroken firmly behind closed doors and treated as a private matter. The rise of feminism in the 1970s and the work done with battered women in refuges at that time, led to a heightened awareness of the problem. Studies completed by feminists at the time claimed to have found a link between the dominance of men in society and the way that incidences of domestic violence were ignored or denied. Conservatives at that time debated the findings and claimed that violence towards women had more to do with the fragmentation of family life and impaired families. They also claimed that the statistics were flawed and that a ctually men were also victims of domestic violence. Straus and Gelles 1986(cited in Giddens), suggested in their report that men were less likely to report domestic attacks, so it was not possible to make a fair comparison. Feminists retaliated by pointing out that attacks on women were being regularly beaten by their husbands, whereas men were usually only attacked as a one off incident, and that often the woman was defending herself or responding to repeated attacks. (Rawthorne 2002,cited in Gibbens).Feminists could also argue that the police forceitself is a patriarchal. The fact that the police force is still male henpecked with only 36,443 female officers out of a total of 137,139, indicates that it is still a male dominated profession, which may make it difficult for the majority of officers to empathise with the plight of women in an abusive situation. So why does domestic violence occur? Dobash and Dobash (1980) found that one of the major factors that cause domestic violenc e was the husbands belief that the woman was failing to keep the house properly. With an increase in the number of women running(a) it would not be unreasonable to expect men to do their share of housework, but a study by Arlie Horschchild(1989)(cited in Giddens), found that in reality, works women still do most of the daily chores and it is considered to be their responsibility. Feminists argue that violence against women is symptomatic of a patriarchal societys attitude to women.Mackinnon (1989) claimed that the subordination of women is the underlying reason for mens violence to women and children. Functionalist theorists such as Talcott Parsons (1956) (cited in Giddens) stated that one partner in the family should stay at home to slang the effective emotional role. In the vast majority of households, that person is usually the woman. Feminists argue that this disadvantages women as they then do not have an income of their own to change them leave if they need to. In recent y ears reported domestic violence figures have decreased but unfortunately they have started to increase again. professor Sylvia Walby (UNESCO Chair in Gender Research at Lancaster University), published a report in February 2012 that stated a rise in the number of cases of domestic violence, and voiced concerns about supporting cuts to womens refuges and work. She fears that the recession, combined with local government cuts to services that keep women safe, may be leading to the current increase.Evidence in the past has indicated that spousal abuse is more prevalent between low-income couples (Cherlin 1999 cited in Giddens). William Goode (1971) felt that whilst men on higher incomes can control women by place the purse strings, men who are unable to exert this financial control use violence instead. If this is the case, the recession may well lead to many more incidents of domestic violence as couples struggle financially and men face redundancy. The article I have chosen featu res a lady who was being ill-use by her husband and how she tried to get away from her situation. It is disturbing to read that that the policecompletely failed to assess the situation adequately and left the women unsupported and under attack(predicate) to further attack. Logic would suggest that as this lady had two small children, the man should have been the one made to leave. Instead the policeman involved implied that by staying, she was inviting further violence The police also did not offer to remove the lady and children to a place of safety, or arrange any sort of support for her.In response to this kind of incident, the Association of Chief Police Officers has worked with the CPS to produce a charging checklist (appendix 1) to enable police officers to get a clearer picture on how to obtain a watertight conviction in cases of domestic violence, and to ensure that the officer has thought about the safety of the complainant. Importantly, the form also records previous inc idents of a similar kind. This would have helped Sabina Akhtar (also mentioned in the article) who was murdered by a former partner, despite several appeals to the police to help and protect her. The British Crime Survey found that, while for the majority of women leaving the violent partner stopped the violence, 37% said it did not. 18% of those that had left their partner were further victimised by other forms of harassment. 7% who left said that the worst incident of domestic violence took place after they had stopped living with their partner. Worldwide figures show that 44% of female homicides are perpetrated by a current or former partner, compared to only 6% of men.(Human rights website).Unfortunately, the current constitution of allowing bail to the perpetrators, gives them the opportunity to re-offend. The current government has acknowledged that domestic violence is still a big problem in this country. The Home Secretary has allocated more than 28 million for specialist s ervices to tackle violence against women and girls until 2015. Problems caused by cultural beliefs such as forced marriage and female genital mutilation, have been given a higher indite with specific units being set up to help the victims of such crimes. They have chosen several key areas to focus on, the first being early noise This is aimed at young people to ensure that they understand the importance of healthy relationships and understand that they have the right to say no. This campaign has been heavily denote on the television and in schools. Professionals are being trained to spot early signs and risk factors of domestic and sexual violence, child sexual abuse, and harmful practices.The system itself disadvantages women experiencing abuse. There are problems with the way domestic violence is recorded and dealt with by the police. According to the article there are currently eleven cases that being investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission. The police are accused of failing to take womens fears seriously and of failing to provide protection for women who are being ill-treat on a regular basis. The government and the police have acknowledged that attitudes to women and domestic violence are still in need of change. Under the new government initiative, the police have been given new powers to help domestic violence victims break the cycle of abuse including piloting Domestic Violence shield Orders which allow police to ban alleged abusers from returning to the victims home for several weeks. In conclusion, it appears that the problem of domestic violence is starting to be brought out into the open.The sad fact is that even if a woman leaves her abusive partner she still is not safe. She often has to give up her home and sometimes even her family to get away. There also the question of financial support. Very often, abusive men control the finances as they use this as some other way of keeping control of their partner. According to the Refuge website, men have been known to force women to give up their jobs, take out loans in their name, and more often than not run up debt. This makes it harder for her to leave because not only has the woman got no money to support herself and her children, but she also has debts against her name. Although the government has made dealing with domestic violence a priority, they are also cutting funding to councils and other associations. It remains to be seen how effective their new policies are and whether they continue to provide funding to enable the services to function.