ENDANGERED SPECIES

Should Zoos Keep Endangered Species?

Zoos, Abuse, Cruelty, and Endangered Species
According to the Endangered Species Act, the definition of an endangered species is any
species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Zoos are widely regarded as guardians of endangered species, so why do animal rights
activists claim the zoos are abusive and cruel?
Shouldnt We Protect Endangered Species?
Endangered species are an environmental issue, but not necessarily an animal rights issue.
From an environmental perspective, a blue whale is more deserving of protection than a cow
because blue whales are endangered and the loss of a single blue whale may impact the
survivability of the species. The ecosystem is a network of interdependent species, and when
a species becomes extinct, the loss of that species in the ecosystem could threaten other
species. But from an animal rights standpoint, a blue whale is no more or less deserving of
life and liberty than a cow because both are sentient individuals.
Blue whales should be protected because they are sentient beings, and not solely because
the species is endangered.
Why Do Some Animal Activists Oppose Keeping Endangered Species in Zoos?
Individual animals have sentience and therefore have rights. However, a species has no
sentience, so a species has no rights. Keeping endangered animalsin zoos infringes on
those individuals rights to freedom. Infringing the rights of individuals because it benefits the
species is wrong because a species is not an entity with its own rights.
Additionally, removing breeding individuals from the wild population further endangers the
wild population.
Endangered plants are kept similarly in captivity, but these programs are not controversial
because plants are widely believed not to be sentient. Endangered plants have no desire to
roam and frequently thrive in captivity, unlike their animal counterparts. Furthermore, plant
seeds can be kept in storage for hundreds of years into the future, for the purpose of
release back into the wild if their natural habitat ever recovers.
What About Zoo Breeding Programs?
Even if a zoo operates a breeding program for an endangered species, those programs do
not excuse the infringement on the rights of the individual animals to be free. The individual
animals are suffering in captivity for the good of the species - an entity which does not suffer
or have rights.
Zoo breeding programs produce the many baby animals that attract the public, but this leads
to surplus animals. Contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of zoo breeding programs do
not release individuals back into the wild. Instead, the individuals are destined to live their
lives in captivity. Some are even sold to circuses, to canned hunting facilities, or for
slaughter.
In 2008, an emaciated Asian elephant named Ned was confiscated from circus trainer Lance
Ramos and transferred to the Elephant Sanctuary in Tennessee. Asian elephants are
endangered, and Ned had been born at Busch Gardens, which is accredited by

the Association of Zoos and Aquariums. But neither the endangered status nor the zoo's
accreditation stopped Busch Gardens from selling Ned to a circus.
Do Zoo Breeding Programs Make up for Loss of Wild Habitat?
Many species are endangered because of loss of habitat. As human beings continue to
multiply, we destroy wild habitat. Many environmentalists and animal advocates believe that
habitat protection is the best way to protect endangered species.
If a zoo operates a breeding program for an endangered species while there is insufficient
habitat for that species in the wild, there is no hope that releasing individuals will replenish
the wild population. The programs are creating a situation where small breeding colonies will
exist in captivity without any benefit to the wild populations, which will continue to dwindle
until extinction. Despite the small populations in zoos, the species has been effectively
removed from the ecosystem, which defeats the purpose of protecting endangered species
from an environmental standpoint.
What if the Species Becomes Extinct in the Wild?
Extinction is a tragedy. It is a tragedy from an environmental standpoint because other
species may suffer and because it may indicate an environmental problem such as loss of
wild habitat orclimate change. It is also a tragedy from an animal rights standpoint because it
means that sentient individuals probably suffered and died untimely deaths.
However, from an animal rights standpoint, extinction in the wild is not an excuse to continue
keeping individuals in captivity. As explained above, the survival of the species does not
justify the loss of freedom for the individuals in captivity.

What Are Endangered Species?

Throughout the history of life on earth, species have appeared, evolved, given rise to
new species, and disappeared. This turnover of species is part of the natural process of life
and it is going on all the time. Extinction is an inevitable, expected part of the cycle. Yet today
we face a period of intensified extinction (some experts call it a mass extinction). And most of
these extinctions can be connected to the actions of just one species: human beings.
Humans have caused significant, widespread changes in natural environments around the
globe and have introduced a variety ofthreats to wildlife including habitat destruction, climate
change, disruption by invasive species, hunting, and poaching. As a result of these
pressures, many species around the world are experiencing drastic population declines.
Endangered Species Versus Threatened Species: Some Definitions
Scientists and conservationists who study the animal species that face a high risk of
extinction refer to such species as endangered species.
Here's a formal definition of the term endangered species:
An endangered species is a native species that faces a significant risk of extinction in the
near future throughout all or a significant portion of its range. Endangered species may be
declining in number due to threats such as habitat destruction, climate change, or pressure
from invasive species.
Another frequently used term is threatened species. In some instances, the terms threatened
species and endangered species are used interchangeably, but for clarity, it often helps to

define threatened species slightly differently. Here's a definition of the term threatened
species:
A threatened species is a native species that is at risk of becoming endangered in the near
future. A threatened species may have a declining population or be exceptionally rare. Like
endangered species, the cause of its rarity is variable, but may be due to threats such as
habitat destruction, climate change, or pressure from invasive species.
General and Regulatory Contexts: Some Important Differences
The term endangered species can be used either in a general or a regulatory context. When
used in a general context, the term describes a species that faces a risk of extinction but
does not necessarily indicate that the species is protected under any law. When used in a
regulatory context, the term refers to a species that is listed on the US Endangered Species
List and is defined as an animal or plant species in danger of extinction throughout all or a
significant portion of its range. Another regulatory context in which the term endangered
species is used is by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The
IUCN is an international organization that supports conservation and sustainable use of
natural resources. The IUCN maintains a comprehensive list of species called the IUCN Red
List. The Red list classifies animals into one of nine groups based on their conservation
status. These include:

Least concern - Species in this group face no immediate risk of extinction.

Near-threatened - Species in this group might become threatened in the near future.

Vulnerable - Species in this group face a high risk of extinction in the medium term.

Endangered - Species in this group face a very high risk of extinction in the near
future.

Critially endangered - Species in this group face an extremely high risk of extinction in
the immediate future.

Extinct in the wild - Species in this group survive in captivity only. There are no
natural, wild populations that remain.

Extinct - Species in this group are extinct in the wild and in captivity.

You might notice in the above list that there are several terms that the IUCN uses which
provide additional ways of describing endangered species (for example, threatened species,
vulnerable species, critically endangered species, and near-threatened species).
The number of different terms the IUCN uses to classify endangered species highlights the
varying degree to which species might be threatened at any point in time. This enables
scientists and conservationists to describe the degree to which a species is in danger of
going extinct and to focus their research and fine tune their conservation actions for a
particular species. It also allows scientists a way of flagging species that are slipping in the
wrong direction. For instance, the IUCN statuses enable scientists to flag species that
experiencing a decline, such as becoming near-threatened after previously being of least
concern.
Frequently Asked Questions
The following frequently asked questions provide you with additional information about
endangered species and some of the regulations that surround these rare species.

What is the US Endangered Species Act? The US Endangered Species Act (ESA)
was signed into law by President Nixon in December, 1973. The ESA protects plant
and animal species and is jointly administered by the US Fish & Wildlife Service and
NOAA Fisheries. Its aim is twofold: to provide protection for species that are in danger
of extinction and to conserve the habitats on which those species depend.

Where can I obtain a copy of the US Endangered Species Act? If you're

interested in reading the text of the ESA, you can obtain a PDF version of the US
Endangered Species Act from the US Fish & Wildlife Service website here.

How are rare animals added to the Endangered Species List? The US
Government uses a formal series of steps when considering requests for a species to
be added to the list of threatened or endangered species and protected under the
Endangered Species Act.

What animals are listed on the Endangered Species List? You can find the most
up-to-date information about endangered species listings at the Threatened and
Endangered Species System (TESS) website, maintained by the US Fish & Wildlife
Service and NOAA.

What endangered animals are in my state? It is always wise to support

conservation efforts close to home, so knowing what endangered species are in your
state is a vital step towards protecting the rare wildlife in your area. Most states have
their own endangered species acts and lists to support them, in addition to the
Federal list and law. So you may want to do a web search for your state's endangered
species legislation to find out more.

What can I do to help protect endangered species? In the midst of today's rapid
depletion of habitat and strain on wild populations of many groups of animals, we find
many species that are in threat of extinction. To find out more about what you can go,
see: Things You Can Do To Protect

FAVOURITE BOOK
Why I Fell in Love with The Great Gatsby
Everyone looks at The Great Gatsby as just another typical American novel thrown into the
high school curriculum. And trust me, I thought that more than anyone. While Ill always be
your average Harry Potter-loving, book-collecting closet nerd, Ive hated the classics for my
entire academic career. I could never understand why novels that were either so bland or so
overly melodramatic had become so popular, and especially why wed have to read them
when there are books just like itand written even betternowadays. But I have to say, The
Great Gatsby changed how I felt entirely. It's the first classic I've read that
actually deserves to be a classic.
When I heard The Great Gatsby was a love story, my natural inclination against classics and
romance novels had basically already made up my mind about the book for me. The last
thing I needed was to read another sappy Romeo and Juliet scene, where two people who
don't even know each other try to convince the reader that their infatuation and raging
hormones are really true love. I was ready, once again, to feel like I was betraying my own
kind as a lover of literature by hating classic novels.
But The Great Gatsby gave me a slap in the face.
It snapped me out of my cranky, cynical, preconceived notions and made me love it, not just
as a classic, but also as one of my favorite books. I was completely caught off guard.
The Great Gatsby is essentially a look into the upper class society of the nineteen-twenties,
and the scandals and dysfunction that took place underneath its glamorous surface. The best
part about it is that its still applicable to our lives today. It's narrated from a friends
perspective on a mans determination to steal back his first love from her mistake of a
marriage. Through failed affairs, ironic misunderstandings, and the dysfunction inside what
we call a happy family, The Great Gatsby is set apart from every other novel. It is so much
more than a love storyits about life. When I finished the end of the book, I was almost
confused: what point was F. Scott Fitzgerald trying to make? What was he saying, that true
love doesnt exist, that we can never retrieve what weve lost, that were doomed? What
message was he trying to send?
And thats when it hit me. That slap in the face.
The Great Gatsby is about the disillusionment of the American dream. It is every suburban
neighborhood in middle class America. It is every facade of a household, it is every hormoneridden adolescent bursting with teen angst and dreams of a bigger life, it is the drive that
keeps us going and tears us down at the same time. It is everything that has ever made you
lie awake thinking in your bed at night, and the fact that its able to be captured into an actual
work of literature immediately makes it the all time American classic. You know a book really
deserves to be a classic when even 80 years later, it can still make you question everything
about your life.
Whether or not youre a fan of classics or hate them with a burning passion like I did, I
recommend The Great Gatsby to anyone who appreciates good books. Its amazingly written
and subconsciously awakening, and definitely earns the title of a true American classic. Who
knows, keep an open mindit may become more than just your favorite classic, even
become your favorite book.
Do you love The Great Gatsby? Are you super excited about the upcoming Gatsby movie
starring Leo Dicaprio?

20 Reasons The Great Gatsby Is The Best Novel Ever

by Robert on January 30, 2015
You guys know I love The Great Gatsby. Its my favorite novel, and it currently sits #1 out of
the 76 novels Ive read during this project so far.
But I havent talked about the novel in a really long time, like two weeks maybe. So I thought
Id break down why Gatsby is so awesome in a fun Friday listicle.
Lets go! So why is The Great Gatsby the greatest novel ever?
1. Because Daisys voice was full of money, and thats such a great character descriptor.
2. Because Gatsby calls everybody old sport, and thats just the perfect, memorable
salutation for an old rich guy.
3. Because all the characters are miserable human beingsand what kind of a writer can
write such an amazing novel without one likeable character?
4. Because Fitzgerald writes paragraphs like this:
He smiled understandingly-much more than understandingly. It was one of those rare smiles
with a quality of eternal reassurance in it, that you may come across four or five times in life.
It facedor seemed to facethe whole eternal world for an instant, and then concentrated on
you with an irresistible prejudice in your favor. It understood you just as far as you wanted to
be understood, believed in you as you would like to believe in yourself, and assured you that
it had precisely the impression of you that, at your best, you hoped to convey.
5. Because this is the best closing line in literature:
So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.
6. Because Hunter S. Thompson thought The Great Gatsby was so amazing that he sat
down andrewrote the whole thing word for word. Why? Just to see what it felt like to write a
great novel.
7. Because of the green light.
8. Because this classic cover is pretty awesome (I think).
9. Because Fitzgerald creates a character in Gatsby that, despite his immense wealth and
immense misery, is so relatable.
10. Because an 8-bit style online video game was made about the novel, nearly 100 years
after it was published.
11. Because the novel is more identifiable with a specific time periodThe Roaring 20s
perhaps more than any other novel.
12. Because its a dark version of the classic love story. The foundation of the whole story is
based on pursuing and rediscovering an old love.
13. Because it represents the fragile, futile pursuit of The American Dream better than any
other novel. Gatsby has it all, but all of it still isnt enough.
14. Because the title is subtly ironic. Gatsby isnt great at all. In fact, hes just the opposite.
15. Because Tom Buchanan is such a wonderful, douchey bad guy. As much as you dislike
the other characters, you dislike Tom even more. That takes effort to write.

16. Because the novel will make you want to drink a mint julep, even if you dont drink.
17. Because I never have and never will strike a woman, but I kind of want to punch Daisy.
Again, thats all because of Fitzgeralds talent.
18. Because Fitzgeralds buttery prose is unlike anything else in literature. In my opinion, no
other writer is his equal.
19. Because Leo Dicaprio portrayed Gatsby and if Leo is taking part in your book-turnedmovie then it has to be really, really, really good.
20. Because its just an awesome novel, and I ran out of things after 19, so Im just putting
this here to make it an even 20.

FAVOURITE FILM
The Revenant has the simplest of plots: one man walks, walks some more, and then does a
bit more walking. And yet it makes for gripping cinema, writes Nicholas Barber.
Alejandro G Irritus last film, the Oscar-winning Birdman, was an energising, disorientating
and frankly exhausting rollercoaster ride and that was a comedy about a bunch of
narcissistic actors. Imagine then what the same director can do with a brutal western about a
frontiersman who is mauled by a bear, and then treks for miles through hellishly harsh
terrain, dodging vengeful natives and vicious soldiers along the way. Its hardly surprising
The Revenant won three major prizes at the Golden Globes on Sunday. Based on the
ordeals of a real 19th-Century fur-trapper, Hugh Glass, and adapted from a novel about him
by Michael Punke, Irritus revenge thriller is so intense and immersive that it makes you
wince, shudder and duck for cover. Towards the end, though, it might make you check your
watch a few times too.
The fight sequences make those in Irritus earlier films seem like playground scuffles
The opening minutes pack in more visceral shocks than most films do in their entirety. Glass
(Leonardo DiCaprio) is guiding a hunting party through a remote forest when they are
ambushed by Arikara warriors. The hunters make a desperate dash for their boat on the
Missouri river, as arrows slice through the air around them, but most of them are killed in a
heart-stopping, exquisitely choreographed sequence which should be on every future list of
cinemas greatest battle scenes. Glass then declares that the survivors should be safe if they
abandon their boat, and hike back to their distant encampment. But the Arikara arent the
only predators in the area. Alone in the misty woods, Glass points his rifle at two bear cubs,
only to be clawed, bitten and generally mutilated by their furious and gigantic mother. Its
another astonishing set piece. Irritu is a master at depicting violent melees, whether a spat
between an actor and a critic in Birdman or a fierce burst of dog-fighting in his 2000 debut,
Amores Perros. But this latest seamless blend of live-action and CGI makes those earlier
confrontations seem like playground scuffles.
Glass survives his grisly grizzly encounter, but only just. The expedition leader (Domhnall
Gleeson) assumes that he will die from his deep wounds in a matter of hours, so he orders
his men to continue their trek, leaving three of them behind to give Glass a decent burial
when the time comes: the disgruntled Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy), the callow Bridger (Will
Poulter), and Glasss own son, Hawk (Forrest Goodluck). But Fitzgerald doesnt fancy waiting
around for another Arikara onslaught. He stabs Hawk, leaves Glass for dead and sets off
through the wintry wilderness with the conflicted Bridger. Unfortunately for him, Glass
stubbornly refuses to die, and he is soon stumbling after them.
Long march
With its gutsy scenes of backwoods endurance and its sublime mountain vistas, The
Revenant is a cross between Werner Herzogs gruelling travelogues (Aguirre Wrath of God,
Rescue Dawn) and Terrence Malicks spiritual reveries (The New World, The Tree of Life).
This is no co-incidence. The films virtuoso cinematographer, Emmanuel Lubezki, has worked
with Malick several times, as well as on such game-changing films as Children of Men,
Gravity and Birdman, but he may well have excelled himself on The Revenant. If he doesnt
get another best cinematography Oscar to add to his collection, then Academy voters
deserve a bear attack of their own.
Having just won a Golden Globe, DiCaprio is being tipped for Oscar glory, too, although
thats largely due to the reports of what he suffered during production. Shot outdoors in sub-

zero Canada and Argentina, The Revenant compelled him to tumble down snowy hillsides,
swim in frozen rivers, crawl along mossy forest floors and sink his teeth into raw bison liver.
DiCaprios character is essentially a woolly-bearded Terminator
Its a committed, ferocious performance, and it would be no crime if it bagged DiCaprio an
Oscar but whether there is much range to his acting is another matter. The weakness of
The Revenant is that it has the simplest of plots: one man walks, walks some more, and then
does a bit more walking. And while a lot happens to him as he walks, nothing much actually
changes. Glass doesnt have to make any personal discoveries or difficult decisions on his
travels. He doesnt have to vary his strategy. He barely even says anything. He just keeps
trudging on. Irritu tries to humanise him with artful flashbacks, hallucinations and
memories of whispered slogans: As long as you can still grab a breath, you fight. But
DiCaprio sticks to angry determination from start to finish. Instead of being an individual you
can care about, Glass is essentially a woolly-bearded Terminator.
Despite the awe-inspiring scenery and the phenomenal action, the films one-note
protagonist may leave you all-too conscious of the numbing 156-minute running time. And
the various subplots dont help, either: interludes with the Arikara tribespeople, the
bedraggled hunting party and a rival French company are all surplus to requirements. The
only really intriguing person in The Revenant is Hardys twitchy, self-justifying Fitzgerald, not
least because he is the only one with a sense of humour. When he is talking about being
scalped, or improvising threats and arguments to get his own way, you may well feel that a
more complex, less predictable film would have focused on Fitzgerald and Bridgers journey,
rather than Glasss. As it is, youre bound to be impressed by what the actors went through,
but you wont be so bothered about the characters they play.

10 Reasons To Believe The Revenant Could Be The Best Film Of 2015

With 2015 now into its fourth quarter, it might seem foolish to single out one upcoming film
and predict that its the one to come out on top this year. After all, now is the time when we
start heading into awards season, and all the movies that have been saved for this particular
stretch will be released in the coming weeks and months, as they vie for entry into next
years Oscars.
Coming up we still have Steve Jobs, Bridge of Spies, The Hateful Eight, The Big Short,The
Danish Girl and Joy, as well as lower-profile efforts like Anomalisa and Carol, which are all
bound to wow critics and feature in next years Oscar race. Still, even amongst that lot,
theres one movie that stands out as the one that could top the year: Alejandro Gonzlez
Irritus The Revenant.
Released on Christmas day, The Revenant would be one of the most anticipated movies of
2015 based on the talent involved alone. All anyones seen of it so far is a couple of trailers
and some official stills, but what the studio promises is something powerfully unique an
existentialist survival western made on big studio money.
Here, then, are ten reasons to believe it could very well be the best film of the year.
10) The Story Is Incredible (And True)
Despite a film adaptation having already been made prior to now (1971s Richard Harrisstarring Man In The Wilderness), not many people have heard the story of Hugh Glass, the
fur trapper who embarked on a revenge rampage after he was mauled by a bear and left for

dead in 1820s South Dakota. Its an incredible story, ripe for a 21st century cinematic update
and one that might be taken as pure fiction if it didnt also happen to be true.
Yes, an actual Hugh Glass was in 1823 left in the wilds to die by two comrades, after a bear
left him with a broken leg and his ribs exposed. Glass then picked himself up and traveled
alone for hundreds of treacherous miles filled with enemy natives, with the intention of
confronting his former brothers-in-arms over their betrayal.
Seriously, the filmmakers must have been counting their blessings when they came across
this story.
9) Its A Mixture Of Intense Survival Drama And Silent Movie
With recent releases like The Martian, The Walk and Everest, 2015 has been feeling like the
year of movies in which man tests his own limits against insane odds. Really, its part of a
wider current trend of survival stories in cinema, with other recent examples
like Gravity and All Is Lost representing the peak of the newly flourishing sub-genre.
Now, The Revenant is set to join them, as one of the greatest true survival stories of all-time
is put to film by one of the finest creative teams assembled this year.
Not only is The Revenant part of a recent trend of great survival cinema, but its also set to
become a part of the minor yet significant silent movie revival. Recent efforts like The
Artist, Tabu, and All Is Lost have taken advantage of the opportunities offered by largely
dialogue-free tales, and according to Leonardo DiCaprio (he apparently says almost
nothing in the film) The Revenant will surely follow suit.
8) Emmanuel Lubezki Is The Best Cinematographer In The World Right Now
As The Revenant is set to be largely dialogue-free, it needs to be visually strong to work.
Thankfully, with two-time Oscar-winner Emmanuel Lubezki as DoP, the odds are good that
this one will be very, very strong in the visual storytelling department. Not only is Lubezki
arguably the best working cinematographer on the planet (see as evidence:Gravity, The Tree
Of Life, Birdman), but hes one of the most ambitious, too.
The preview footage from The Revenant reveals what looks like some of Lubezkis most
striking work yet. According to reports from the set, he would only shoot in natural light,
meaning some of his trademark continuous takes would take days to get right.
Judging by the beautiful, grandiose, haunting shots weve seen so far, Lubezkis desire to get
the perfect shot at all costs was most definitely worth it.
7) The Battle Scenes Look Astoundingly Visceral
Its not just pretty framing that Lubezki appears to excelling at with his Revenantphotography
it would seem as though hes going all-out in the action stakes, too. The story of Hugh
Glass cross-country trek doesnt exactly scream action-packed (bear mauling aside),
but The Revenant appears to be also exploring Glass life previous to the attack. And these,
as you can see from the trailer, involved lots of battling with local Indian tribes.
Apparently utilizing Lubezkis penchant for extended tracking shots, the action set-pieces
glimpsed in the Revenant trailers are disarmingly visceral. The human settlements feel livedin, while the natural environments are gorgeously alive, and they offer a perfect background
for the muddy, gore-filled fights glimpsed in preview footage.

You can practically feel the arrows whistling past your head, and smell the gun powder of
rifles desperately trying to hold back the attacking horde.
6) Leonardo DiCaprios On The Hunt For An Oscar
Looking back, shouldnt it really have been Leonardo DiCaprio who won the Oscar for Best
Actor in 2014?
Having steadily improved role on role over the years, in The Wolf Of Wall
Street DiCaprio was the best hed ever been, proving hes only ever in a state of getting
better. Now, for his next film, the actor has been more dedicated than ever in a bid to finally
win that Oscar.
For one, he grew the hair, beard, and belly over months before production even began to
play Hugh Glass, while on-set he went a bit method and ate a bisons liver for one scene
despite being a vegetarian.
The dialogue-free nature of the part could harm his Oscar chances somewhat
(Academy voters tend to prefer actors who give emotive, wordy performances), but
regardless, even on an off day DiCaprio is compelling. And met with a challenge like this,
hes likely to be on peak form.
5) Tom Hardy Is One Of Best Actors Working Right Now
Leonardo DiCaprio may be one of the best star actors around, but his Revenant co-lead is
hands-down one of the best all-round, most chameolonic thesps in the world. Tom Hardy
has, since breaking out in Bronson, been consistently terrific, even in bad movies,
transforming himself with ease for each role he takes on. Every film fan is always on the
lookout for the next Brando or De Niro, and with Hardy, we have it.
So while DiCaprios Oscar chances for The Revenant are good, no one should discount
Hardy at this point, either. With average directors hes great, but with great directors
likeIrritu hes one of the best there is.
As the man who betrayed Hugh Glass, Hardy will have the chance to get his chops around
yet another foreign accent and play his first true villain since Bane. Expect something very
special.
4) The Rest Of The Cast Isnt Too Shabby, Either
With all the talk of Hardy dropping out of Suicide Squad to do The Revenant, and whether or
not DiCaprio will finally win an Oscar for the movie, talk of the rest of The Revenant cast has
been somewhat muted.
Among some quality lesser-known international and domestic actors, Domhnall Gleeson, Will
Poulter, and Lukas Haas will also star alongside the formidable duo of DiCaprio and Hardy
in The Revenant.
Haas, of course, has been doing solid work for years ever since breaking out in Witnessas a
child star and giving memorable turns in Brick and Inception, while Poulter is a BAFTAwinning rising talent. Gleeson, meanwhile, is fast becoming one of the most astute
performers
when
it
comes
to
picking
solid
material
(see Frank, Ex
Machina,Calvary, Dredd, True Grit).
And theyve apparently been no less dedicated in preparing for The Revenant than Hardy
and DiCaprio in particular, check out the impressive beard growth on Haas.

3) This Is Ryuichi Sakamotos First Hollywood Score In Almost A Decade

Ryuichi Sakamoto, Oscar-winning composer behind themes for The Last Emperor andMerry
Christmas Mr. Lawrence, doesnt do Hollywood much these days. Hes never really done that
much movie composing full-stop, but lately weve heard very little from this Japanese master.
His last score for a Hollywood movie came nearly a decade ago, for Silk, a film which critics
wereunkind to.
Even in that film, however, Sakamotos work was still typically moving and profound.
Thankfully, hes returning to the Hollywood fold this year to work with talent that matches his
own, for a movie that in its state of being near-silent dialogue-wise will put the sound of
Sakamoto front-and-center. After years away, heres hoping Sakamoto is returning fresh with
the ideas to elevate The Revenant into being something more than just the next survival
movie.
2)Irritu Is On A Roll
Irritu has from Amores Perros to 21 Grams to Babel to Biutiful never really made
himself a bad film. There are some who argue Babel isnt up to much, and others who
dismiss Biutiful as mere poverty porn, but theyre wrong. And besides, you could discount
everything else Inarritu has made, because all you need as evidence of what a great
filmmaker he is is his last movie: the pretty much universally-adored Birdman.
Irritu
Its a movie which provesIrritu is currently on an upswing, having taken his first real steps
into Hollywood moviemaking and found hes a better fit there even than in international
cinema. Birdman saw Irritu reinvent himself, and he looks set to do the same again with a
type of movie hes never tried before: an action-orientated thriller-survival flick.
1) An Enormous Amount Of Time And Money Has Been Spent On Getting It Right
The Revenant began filming in October 2014. It wrapped in August 2015. Thats ten months
of shooting spent in Canada and when Canada stopped being snowy enough southern
Argentina.
The shoot should have finished in April, but days, weeks, months went by as Lubezki and
Inarritu attempted to get certain shots right in their short daily window of appropriate natural
light. Crew members came and went as Irritu dismissed those he considered out of tune.
CGI was out of the question, too this is the rare period piece in which everything was done
in-camera.
Naturally, the films price tag ballooned from an original $60 million to a now-estimated $135
million, as Irritu and team searched for perfection. So what you have now is a film made by
a group of people who, with their high standards, wanted to make the best film theyd ever
made.
For some insane reason, Hollywood execs thought they were onto enough of a winner to
give them the money to do it. Now all we have to do is wait and see the result.

PETS, ZOOS
How Owning a Dog or Cat Can Reduce Stress
The Health Benefits of Pet Ownership
By Elizabeth Scott, MS - Reviewed by a board-certified physician.
Updated March 27, 2016
When
thinking
of
ways
to
reduce
stress
in
life,
usually
techniques
like meditation,yoga and journaling come to mind. These are great techniques, to be sure.
But getting a new best friend can also have many stress relieving and health benefits.
While human friends provide great social support and come with some fabulous benefits, this
article focuses on the benefits of furry friends: cats and dogs!
Research shows that, unless youre someone who really dislikes animals or is absolutely too
busy to care for one properly, pets can provide excellent social support, stress relief and
other health benefitsperhaps more than people! The following are more health benefits of
pets.
Pets Can Improve Your Mood
For those who love animals, its virtually impossible to stay in a bad mood when a pair of
loving puppy eyes meets yours, or when a super-soft cat rubs up against your hand.
Research supports the mood-enhancing benefits of pets. A recent study found that men with
AIDS were less likely to suffer from depression if they owned a pet.
Pets Control Blood Pressure Better Than Drugs
Yes, its true. While ACE inhibiting drugs can generally reduce blood pressure, they arent as
effective on controlling spikes in blood pressure due to stress and tension. However, in
a study on pets and blood pressure, groups of hypertensive New York stockbrokers who got
dogs or cats were found to have lower blood pressure andheart rates than those who didnt
get pets.
When they heard of the results, most of those in the non-pet group went out and got pets!
Pets Encourage You To Get Out And Exercise
Whether we walk our dogs because they need it, or are more likely to enjoy a walk when we
have companionship, dog owners do spend more time walking than non-pet owners, at least
if we live in an urban setting.
Because exercise is good for stress management and overall health, owning a dog can be
credited with increasing these benefits.
Pets Can Help With Social Support
When were out walking, having a dog with us can make us more approachable and give
people a reason to stop and talk, thereby increasing the number of people we meet, giving
us an opportunity to increase our network of friends and acquaintances, which also has great
stress management benefits.
Pets Stave Off Loneliness and Provide Unconditional Love
Pets can be there for you in ways that people cant. They can offer love and companionship,
and can also enjoy comfortable silences, keep secrets and are excellent snugglers. And they

could be the best antidote to loneliness. In fact, one study found that nursing home residents
reported less loneliness when visited by dogs alone than when they spent time with dogs and
other people! All these benefits can reduce the amount of stress people experience in
response to feelings of social isolation and lack of social support from people.
Pets Can Reduce StressSometimes More Than People
While we all know the power of talking about your problems with a good friend whos also
a good listener, research shows that spending time with a pet may be even better! One
study showed that, when conducting a task thats stressful, people actually experienced less
stress when their pets were with them than when a supportive friend or even their spouse
was present! (This may be partially due to the fact that pets dont judge us; they just love us.)
Its important to realize that owning a pet isnt for everyone. Pets do come withadditional work
and responsibility, which can bring its own stress. However, for most people, the benefits of
having a pet outweigh the drawbacks. Having a furry best friend can reduce stress in your life
and bring you support when times get tough.

Arguments For and Against Zoos

Not all animal rights activists love animals. Some respect them because they understand
animals have a place in the world. Zoos, especially the ones that are doing everything right,
present a special challenge to the animal-loving advocates because they would like to see
and interact with the animals.
Zoo advocates present the argument that they save endangered species and educate the
public, but animal rights activistsbelieve the costs outweigh the benefits, and the violation of
the rights of the individual animals is unjustifiable.
Roadside zoos, petting zoos, and smaller animal exhibitors tend to offer inadequate space
for the animals, keeping them in pens or cages. Sometimes, barren concrete and metal bars
are all a tiger or bear will know for their entire lives. Larger, accredited zoos try to distance
themselves from these operations by touting how well the animals are treated, but to animal
rights activists, the issue not how well the animals are treated, but whether we have a right to
confine them for our amusement or "education."
Arguments For Zoos

By bringing people and animals together, zoos educate the public and foster an
appreciation of the animals. This exposure and education motivates people to protect
the animals.

Zoos save endangered species by bringing them into a safe environment, where they
are protected from poachers, habitat loss, starvation and predators.

Many zoos also have breeding programs for endangered species. In the wild, these
individuals might have trouble finding mates and breeding.

Reputable zoos are accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums and are
held to high standards for the treatment of the animals. According to the AZA,
accreditation means, "official recognition and approval of a zoo or aquarium by a
group of experts."

A good zoo provides an enriched habitat in which the animals are never bored, are
well cared-for, and have plenty of space.

Zoos are a tradition, and a visit to a zoo is a wholesome, family activity.

Seeing an animal in person is a much more personal and more memorable

experience than seeing that animal in a nature documentary.

Some would argue that humans have little, if any duty to non-human animals
because humans are more important, and if keeping animals in zoos serves any
educational or entertainment purposes, it serves a purpose to the humans, even if
that purpose is not beneficial for the animals.

Some zoos help rehabilitate wildlife and take in exotic pets that people no longer want
or are no longer able to care for.

Both accredited and unaccredited animal exhibitors are regulated by the

federal Animal Welfare Act, which establishes standards for care.

Arguments Against Zoos

From an animal rights standpoint, we do not have a right to breed, capture and
confine other animals, even if they are endangered. Being a member of an
endangered species doesn't mean the individual animals have fewer rights.

Animals in captivity suffer from stress, boredom and confinement. Intergenerational

bonds are broken when individuals get sold or traded to other zoos, and no pen or
even drive-through safari can compare to the freedom of the wild.

Baby animals bring in visitors and money, but this incentive to breed new baby
animals leads to overpopulation. Surplus animals are sold not only to other zoos, but
also to circuses, canned hunting facilities, and even for slaughter.

Some zoos just kill their surplus animal outright.

The vast majority of captive breeding programs do not release animals back into the
wild. The offspring are forever part of the chain of zoos, circuses, petting zoos,
and exotic pet trade that buy, sell and barter animals among themselves and exploit
animals. Ned the Asian elephant was born at an accredited zoo, but later
confiscated from an abusive circus trainer and finally sent to a sanctuary.

Removing individuals from the wild will further endanger the wild population because
the remaining individuals will be less genetically diverse and will have more difficulty
finding mates.

If people want to see wild animals in real life, they can observe wildlife in the wild or
visit a sanctuary. A true sanctuary does not buy, sell, or breed animals, but takes in
unwanted exotic pets, surplus animals from zoos or injured wildlife that can no longer
survive in the wild.

If zoos are teaching children anything, it's that imprisoning animals for our own
entertainment is acceptable.

The argument that children will have more compassion animals they can see live
does not hold water. Not one of today's children has ever seen a dinosaur, yet kids
are crazy about them.

At least one study has shown that elephants kept in zoos do not live as long as
elephants in the wild.

The federal Animal Welfare Act establishes only the most minimal standards for cage
size, shelter, health care, ventilation, fencing, food and water. For
example, enclosures must provide "sufficient space to allow each animal to make
normal postural and social adjustments with adequate freedom of movement.
Inadequate space may be indicated by evidence of malnutrition, poor condition,
debility, stress, or abnormal behavior patterns." Violations often result in a slap on the
wrist and the exhibitor is given a deadline to correct the violation. Even a long history
of inadequate care and AWA violations, such as the history of Tony the Truck Stop
Tiger, will not free the animals.

Sanctuaries also rehabilitate wildlife and take in unwanted exotic pets, without
breeding, buying and selling animals like zoos do.

Animals sometimes escape their enclosures, endangering themselves as well as

people. There have even been incidents of zoo animals eating other zoo animals.

In the case of zoos, both sides will argue that their side saves animals. Where there is
money to be made by the exploitation of animals, zoo proponents conveniently do not
believe in animal rights, so many of the arguments against zoos are not persuasive to them,
while other arguments may seem to apply only to inferior zoos, such as roadside zoos and
petting zoos.

STEREOTYPES
Stereotypes explain a commonly held thought about a group of people in general or a
specific type of person. Such commonly held stereotypes, regardless of accuracy, include
obese people eat too much, all Asians are adept at martial arts, or many homeless are lazy
who also have alcohol or drug addictions. Although positive stereotypes do exist, they almost
always generate negative associations.
Stereotypes may seem laughable at first, yet they are difficult to ignore. Even worse, they
slowly influence people. Over a long period of time, stereotypes become viewed as normal or
typical, which then leads to prejudice and unfair treatment. People targeted by stereotypes
may be unable to overcome these negative views. Society may also prevent them from
succeeding in school or work.
Stereotyping is defined as an "oversimplified, usually pejorative, attitude people hold toward
those outside one's own experience who are different. They are a result of incomplete or
distored information accepted as fact without question"(8). A stereotype is simply a widely
held belief that an individual is a member of a certain group based on charcteristics. Due to
the process of overgeneralization within social perception, stereotyping leads to a great deal
of inaccuracy in social perception.
Sex, race, age, sexual orentation, religion and physical ability are various catagories which
exist in stereotyping. The most prevalent and controversial forms are sex and race.
The Williams and Best gender study from 1992 found that within 30 different countries, males
were typically characterized as adventurous, powerful, domineering and independent.
Females, on the other hand, were characterized as sentimental, submissive and
superstitious (5). Racial studies have found that descriptions such as Jews are shrewd and
ambitious, African-Americans have special musical and athletic ability and Germans are
methodical and efficent, are commonly used to label these ethnic groups.
Slowly, society has been making a slight transition away from stereotyping. Unfortunately it is
a difficult process, especially since we rely on second-hand sources for our information for
the majority of our knowledge. The main outlet of second-hand information is the mass
media(7). As a result of depending largely on the second-hand source of mass media, mass
media in turn plays a major role in determining the content of our culture. Stereotyping is a
product of culture, therefore, mass media have a strong influence in supporting and tearing
down stereotypical characteristics.
So why do Stereotypes persist?
Three key factors
1. Stereotypes are functional: As audience members we are bombarded with much more
information than we can process. Our tendency is to reduce complexity to simplicity. We
trade-off for simplification, which can lead to inaccuracy and we are often unaware of this
deduction (2).
2. Stereotypes are results of selectivity in social perception: We tend to see what we
expect to see, and we have a tendency to twist and distort the characteristics of others until it
fits our stereotype of that particular group(2).
3. Prejudice: This is the most influential factor in stereotyping. Our perceptions are highly
subjective, and many people subscribe to derogatory descriptions of ethnic groups.
Unfortunately the selectivity of a person's perception result in people seeing what they expect

to see when they come in contact with members of an ethnic group they view with
prejudice(2).
Feisty. Seductive. Intelligent. Used to describe individuals, these adjectives pose no
particular problem. Used to describe groups of people, however, these adjectives may
constitute stereotypes. What is a stereotype? Stereotypes are qualities assigned to groups of
people related to their race, nationality and sexual orientation, to name a few. Because they
generalize groups of people in manners that lead to discrimination and ignore the diversity
within groups, stereotypes should be avoided.
Stereotypes vs. Generalizations
While all stereotypes are generalizations, not all generalizations are stereotypes.
Stereotypes are oversimplifications of people groups widely circulated in certain societies. In
the United States, racial groups have been linked to stereotypes such as being good at math,
athletics and dancing. These stereotypes are so well-known that the average American
wouldnt hesitate if asked to identify which racial group in this country has a reputation for
excelling in basketball.
In short, when one stereotypes, one repeats the cultural mythology already present in a
particular society.
On the other hand, a person can make a generalization about an ethnic group that hasnt
been perpetuated in society. Say a woman encounters individuals from a particular ethnic
group and finds them to be excellent parents. Based on her encounters with these folks, she
may oversimplify and conclude that anyone from this ethnic group must be an excellent
parent. In this instance, she would be guilty of generalizing, but an observer might think twice
about calling her conclusion a stereotype since no group in the U.S. has the distinction of
being known as excellent parents.
Stereotypes Can Be Complicated
While stereotypes may refer to a specific sex, race, religion or country, often they link various
aspects of identity together. A stereotype about black gay men, for example, would involve
race, sex and sexual orientation. Although such a stereotype targets a specific segment of
African Americans rather than blacks generally, its still problematic to insinuate that black
gay men are all a certain way. Too many other factors make up any one black gay mans
identity to ascribe a set list of characteristics to him.
Stereotypes are also complicated because when they factor in race and sex, members of the
same group may be pegged very differently. Certain stereotypes apply to Asian Americans
generally, but when the Asian-American population is broken down by sex, one finds that
stereotypes of Asian-American men and Asian-American women differ. Stereotypes involving
race and gender may peg the women of a racial group as attractive and the men as the exact
opposite or vice versa.
Even stereotypes applied to a racial group become inconsistent when members of that group
are broken down by national origin. A case in point is that stereotypes about black Americans
differ from those about blacks from the Caribbean or blacks from African nations. Such
discrepancies indicate that stereotypes make little sense and arent useful tools by which to
judge others.
Can Stereotypes Ever Be Good?

Both negative and positive stereotypes exist, but even the latter do harm. Thats because all
stereotypes are limiting and leave little to no room for individuality. Perhaps a child belongs to
a racial group known for being highly intelligent. This particular child, however, suffers from a
learning disability and struggles to keep up with his classmates in school. Because his
teacher buys into the stereotype that this child is supposed to excel in class because his
people are highly intelligent, she might assume that his poor marks are because hes lazy
and never do the investigative work needed to discover his learning disability, saving him
from years of struggle in school.
Is There Truth in Stereotypes?
Its oft said that stereotypes are rooted in truth, but is this a valid statement? People who
make this argument often want to justify their use of stereotypes. The problem with
stereotypes is that they suggest that groups of people are inherently prone to certain
behaviors. Arabs are naturally one way. Hispanics are naturally another. The fact
is, science doesnt back up these kinds of assertions. If groups of people have historically
excelled at certain activities, social factors no doubt contributed to this phenomenon.
Perhaps a society barred a group of people from practicing certain professions but welcomed
them in others. Over the years, members of the group became associated with the
professions they were actually allowed to practice. This came about not because of any
inherent talent in these fields but because they were the professions that allowed them to
survive. Those who spread stereotypes ignore social factors and make links between groups
of people and certain skills, activities or behaviors where none inherently exist.
Wrapping Up
The next time youre tempted to stereotype a group of people, think about the groups to
which you belong. List the stereotypes linked to those groups. Does each of those
stereotypes apply to you? More than likely youd disagree that all of the qualities commonly
attributed to those of your gender, racial group and sexual orientation describe you. Thats
why its important to judge specific individuals rather than the groups of which theyre part.

HOBBIES
The Importance of Hobbies For Stress Relief
By Elizabeth Scott, MS - Reviewed by aboard-certified physician.
Updated May 06, 2016
Hobbies are often thought of as activities for people who lead quiet, relaxed lives. However,
people with full, busy, even stressful lives may need hobbies more than the average person,
and benefit greatly from having hobbies in their lives. Hobbies bring many benefits that
usually make them more than worth the time they require. Here are some of the advantages
of having hobbies.
Take A Break
Hobbies provide a slice of work-free and responsibility-free time in your schedule.
This can be especially welcome for people who feel overwhelmed by all that they have to do,
and need to recharge their batteries by doing something they enjoy. For those who feel
overwhelmed by responsibility, it may be difficult to find the time or give themselves
permission to take a break from a busy schedule and just sit and relax. Engaging in hobbies,
however, can provide a break with a purpose, which can help people feel that theyre not just
sitting around, but are using their down time for something productive. Either way, hobbies
provide a nice break in a busy week.
Eustress
For those who arent overly stressed, and may actually be under-stimulated, hobbies provide
a nice source of eustress, the healthy kind of stress that we all need to remain feeling excited
about life. If the rest of your life is somewhat dull or uninspiring, hobbies can provide
meaning and fun, and can break up a boring schedule, without feeling like work.
In other words, hobbies can provide just the right amount of challenge.
Social Outlet
Many hobbies lend themselves to group activities: golfing rotations, knitting circles, and
creative writing groups are good examples. Hobbies that connect you with others can bring
the added benefit of social support, which can bring stress reliefand meaning to life in a fun
way.
The friends you have fun with can become some of your best friends, so hobbies that bring
you closer to others are well worth your time.
Pleasures
Positive psychology, a relatively new branch of psychology that studies what makes life
worthwhile, has discovered that pleasuresactivities that bring fun to lifecan be wonderful
for relaxation and enjoyment of the moment. Pleasures can bring a lift to your mood.
Because hobbies generally incorporate pleasures into your life, maintaining hobbies can be
good for your overall sense of joy in life.
Gratifications
Also from positive psychology, gratifications are important activities that bring meaning and
fun to life. Gratifications present the kind of challenge that requires us to use some of our
best personal skills, and engages us in a sense of flow, which can put us in a near-meditative

state where we lose track of time and feel removed from the stressors of life, and fully
engage in what we are doing. Gratifications can lead to a reduction in stress and a sense of
well-being, and hobbies are usually experienced as gratifications.
If you want more happiness and fewer stress experiences in your life, hobbies provide a
direct route to gratifications that can lead to this.
Stave Off Burnout
Hobbies bring a sense of fun and freedom to life that can help to minimize theimpact of
chronic stress. Those who feel overwhelmed at a job, for example, can benefit from hobbies
because they provide an outlet for stress and something to look forward to after a hard day
(or week) at a stressful job. Some research shows that those who are in stressful jobs that
normally contribute to burnout (low-control, high-demand jobs, for example) feel less of a
need to recover from their day at bedtime if they have more physical or social leisure
activities that arent work-relatedmore hobbies. (In this study, those who had a need to
recover at bedtime were more likely to suffer from negative health and wellness outcomes
like psychosomatic complaints and fatigue.) In other words, hobbies can help buffer the
effects of a stressful job, and mitigate factors that contribute to burnout.
Health Benefits of Hobbies
One study found that those who engage in physical leisure activities for at least 20 minutes
once a week are less susceptible to fatigue. Other research found that enjoyable activities
performed during leisure time were associated with lower blood pressure, total cortisol, waist
circumference, and body mass index, and perceptions of better physical function. Such
activities were also correlated with higher levels of positive psychosocial states and lower
levels of depression and negative affect.
Resources for Hobbies
If you've been wanting to get around to enjoying a favorite hobby but haven't found the time,
perhaps hobbies are more important than you thought, and making time is more easily done
than you think. If you're looking for hobbies to add to your life, the following resources can
give you ideas.

Teens and Hobbies

4 Reasons Your Teen Needs a Hobby
By Denise Witmer
Updated June 23, 2014
Encouraging your teen to develop a hobby will take some time and effort on your part. Youll
need to find different interests to give him some choices and allow your teen to decide which
hobby really interests him. Then, youll have to help your teen find all of the necessary
resources to enjoy his new hobby. While, this may be hard to do in your busy parenting
schedule, here are four great reasons to work it in:
1. Hobbies help build your teens confidence. By finding an area of interest, a teen
can build competence and skill. This leads to positive results and builds your
teenagers confidence. This will lead to more competence and skill a brilliant catch22.

2. A hobby helps your teen have a sense of his identity. Our likes and dislikes help
define who we are as people. One of the main jobs of the life stage of adolescence is
scoping out our personal definition of who we are more professionally know as
developing our identity. Hobbies help by sending a signal, I like doing this. This
makes me feel good about me. Therefore, this is a part of who I am.
3. Hobbies keep your teen from getting bored. Boredom is like the plague to a teen
and it can have the same type of devastating effects. Bored teens look for things to
do and are more apt to get involved with negative peers. Helping teens develop a
hobby is helping them stay out of trouble.
1. Hobbies will give you a reason to praise your teen. When your teen is involved in
a hobby, you have easy access to something to praise him about. You can use your
teenagers hobby to keep balance in your communication with your teen when things
have been tough or to just increase positive interaction with your teen.

GENETICAL ENGINEERING
What Are Genetically Modified Foods?
Genetically modified foods could be safe to eat - or not
The debate over genetically modified foods has divided scientists against theologians,
environmentalists against agribusiness, and food marketers against consumers who aren't
being told the truth about what they're buying.
Before you engage in any food fights -- and before you go grocery shopping -- arm yourself
with some basic facts about the development and safety of genetically modified foods.
What Are Genetically Modified Foods?
Genetically modified foods, also known as genetically engineered foods or GMO foods, are
any food item that is wholly or partially made from a genetically modified organism, or GMO.
A GMO is a plant or animal whose genetic material was changed when researchers added a
gene from a different plant or animal -- these living organisms are sometimes called
"transgenic" plants or animals.
In one early example of a transgenic species, a gene from a winter flounder (a fish that lives
in very cold water) was added to the DNA of a tomato plant.
Genetic engineers hoped that this gene would help the tomato plant resist an early frost or
other cold temperatures.
In field experiments, however, the transgenic tomato plant didn't fare so well in cold weather,
and the "fish tomato" experiment was dropped. Many other genetically engineered foods,
however, have been successfully grown and are now cultivated, distributed and consumed all
over the world.
If you live in America, or many other countries, you've probably been eating genetically
modified food for years without knowing it. Researchers estimate that up to 80% of
processed foods contain at least some GMO ingredients.
Why Grow Genetically Modified Foods?
Over 250 million acres of genetically modified crops were planted in 2006, and over half of
those were in the United States, according to the Human Genome Project. The greatest area
of growth for GMO crops, however, is in developing countries. Why are so many private
companies and governments investing billions in genetically modified foods?
If your first guess was "Money," you're probably right.
Genetically modified plants and animals that grow and mature faster with greater disease
resistance and bigger yields are a compelling argument in favor of GMO cultivation. That's
why some of the world's largest agribusinesses -- like Coca-Cola, Monsanto, PepsiCo, Dole,
Kraft, General Mills and Archer Daniels Midland -- are heavily invested in the research and
development of genetically modified foods.
How Green Are Genetically Modified Foods?
There are some significant environmental benefits to genetically modified crops, too. Some
GMO plants, for example, can be "designed" with a built-in resistance to insect pests, so
these plants need fewer pesticides, making them a somewhat greener choice for farmers
than non-GMO crops that require lots of toxic pesticides.

Plants and animals can also be genetically developed to grow in poorer soils, colder
temperatures, drier climates and other less-than-favorable conditions. These GMO crops can
have more nutrients while needing less-intensive industrial processing. These are important
benefits in a world where more than 7 billion people now need to be fed.
Critics argue, however, that social and environmental concerns are secondary to profit. For
example, many of the plants now being engineered are designed to be resistant to pesticides
likeRoundup (manufactured by GMO giant Monsanto). This allows farmers to spray large
amounts of Roundup or other toxic pesticides on their fields without regard for how it will
affect their crops -- or the environment.
One major concern is keeping genetically modified crops from entering the environment,
where their DNA could mingle with the DNA of other plants. The effect that their genetically
engineered DNA could have on other plants is unknown: The effect could be negligible, or it
could produce a catastrophic loss of plant and animal life.
Are Genetically Modified Foods Safe?
Nobody's completely sure about the safety of genetically modified foods and other GMOs,
which have only been in existence since the 1970s. Some have argued that by taking DNA
from one species and inserting it into the DNA of another species -- creating what critics call
"Frankenfood" -- we are tinkering recklessly with the fundamental building blocks of life itself.
On a more practical level, there may be some potential for these GMO crops to create
allergens that would affect the health of humans and other animals. Genetically modified
foods could also transfer antibiotic resistance to people, which can promote the growth of
"superbugs" and bacterial diseases for which we have no effective medicine.
A report published in the February 2012 issue of Critical Reviews in Food Science and
Nutritionstated that "Animal feeding studies have demonstrated that a minor amount of
fragmented dietary DNA may resist the digestive process. Mammals have been shown to
take up dietary DNA from the GIT [gastrointestinal tract], but stable integration and
expression of internalized DNA has not been demonstrated."
What this means is that some genetically engineered DNA may be absorbed when a person
eats genetically modified food, but there's no evidence yet that this can cause any health
problems.
Other critics have noted that genetically modified plants and animals can become the
property of the developer, putting some companies like Monsanto in the enviable position of
"owning" a life form -- and a very profitable one at that.
Genetically Modified Foods: Laws and Labels
Perhaps the most potent criticism of genetically modified foods is their labeling -- or lack
thereof. In Europe and many countries around the world, no GMO foods can be sold without
labels identifying them as such. The European Union also has the world's toughest standards
regarding the cultivation and sale of genetically modified foods.
The United States, however, has some of the loosest GMO regulations in the world;
genetically modified foods can and are sold in grocery stores and restaurants nationwide,
and no labels are needed, so consumers have no idea whether the food they're buying and
eating has been genetically engineered. Industry critics charge that much of this
regulatory laissez-faire is due to the overwhelming influence that agribusiness has over the
U.S. Congress and regulatory bodies like the USDA and the FDA.

(One exception is USDA-certified organic foods, which cannot contain more than trace
amounts of genetically modified ingredients.)
Concern over the proliferation and potential risks of GMO crops has caught the attention of
some government officials -- including Congressman Dennis Kucinich -- and there is
increased pressure to regulate the industry in the United States. Most of these regulatory
efforts are focused not on eliminating all GMOs, but on labeling genetically modified foods as
such, and on containing and securing those GMO crops that are now grown in open-air
environments, where their pollen could easily spread into other fields and into the natural
environment with unknown consequences.

What Is a GMO?
The use of genetically modified organisms has some critics alarmed
Genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, are living plants or animals whose DNA has
been altered through genetic engineering.
In most cases, a GMO has its genetic code changed by splicing in a gene from a different
plant or animal -- these animals or plants are often referred to as "transgenic" organisms.
As a well-known example of a transgenic species, first consider a spider web, made of spider
silk. GMO researchers took a gene for making silk from a spider and spliced it into
the DNA of a goat.
The goats then produce a protein for making spider silk in their goat milk. Medical
researchers harvest the silk protein and create super-strong, lightweight spider silk, which
has a number of medical and industrial uses.
But Who Needs a GMO?
In some ways, genetically modified organisms are simply carrying on the work that plant and
animal breeders have been doing for centuries, i.e., enhancing traits like a racehorse's speed
or a cow's milk production, while also eliminating bad traits like susceptibility to disease.
Traditional breeding, however, is a slow process that's fraught with error. In addition to being
relatively fast and easy to develop, no breeder can create transgenic GMO species like the
aforementioned fish tomato.
By far the greatest application of GMOs has been in agriculture, to create genetically
modified foods.
Plants are genetically modified for disease resistance, for drought tolerance, for resistance to
hot or cold temperatures, for added nutrition, and for resistance to insect pests. By
genetically introducing pest resistance, scientists hope to reduce the use of chemical
pesticides.
GMOs have also developed for pharmaceutical uses, and for "phytoremediation," the use of
plants to clean up toxins and other hazardous materials from contaminated soil and water.
Some trees, for example, have been genetically engineered to pull dangerous heavy metals
out of contaminated soil.
But other GMOs are not as environmentally friendly: Herbicide resistance can also be
genetically induced, and crops plants that have a tolerance to herbicides can survive even
when nearby plants -- specifically, weeds -- are sprayed with a deadly herbicide.

Monsanto Company, for example, has developed a soybean plant that's resistant to
Monsanto's popular herbicide Roundup. This example of factory farming lets farmers spray
their soybean fields with Roundup, kill all the weeds and other plants, and leave only the
soybean plants.
How Safe are GMOs?
The issue of safety has swirled around GMOs since genetic researchers first introduced
them in the 1970s. While proponents have heralded the almost-limitless potential of GMOs to
fight disease, improve crop yields and safeguard the environment, critics have decried the
development of genetically tweaked "Frankenfoods" that could spread from agricultural fields
into the rest of the environment, with potentially catastrophic ecological results.
Among the critics' most serious charges are GMOs' potential to stimulate the rise
of antibiotic-resistant "superbugs" and pesticide-resistant "superweeds" that require the use
of increasingly powerful drugs and hazardous chemicals. There's also some evidence that
GMOs are largely used to increase profits for agribusiness interests at the expense of
smaller farmers who do not use GMO crops.
GMO Use and Regulation Worldwide
Because of the safety concerns associated with GMOs, the European Union has instituted
the world's strictest measures to limit the use of GMOs throughout Europe, and only a few
GMO crops are raised there. Europe also has strict labeling requirements, and all GMO
products available there must be labeled as containing genetically modified contents.
Other countries like Canada, China and Australia have some regulations in place regarding
the use and labeling of GMOs. Other countries are developing regulations as GMOs become
more widely used.
But in the United States, where the vast majority of GMOs are developed and grown,
regulations regarding the development, use and labeling of GMOs are lax at best. According
to a series of reports in The New York Times, both the FDA and the USDA -- under heavy
pressure from agribusiness -- "will not require any of these products, or foods containing
them, to be labeled as genetically engineered, because they dont want to 'suggest or imply'
that these foods are 'different.'"
The political and scientific controversy over genetically modified organisms isn't likely to end
anytime soon, and advocates for consumer rights and environmental health will continue to
do battle with GMO industry giants like Monsanto, Archer Daniels Midland, Coca-Cola,
DuPont, General Mills and other companies with huge financial ties to agribusiness and
pharmaceutical research.

GENERATION GAP
Looking at the Generation Gap
Identifying Generational Differences and Their Causes
Many grandparents grew up in an era of angry confrontations between the generations. As
they ease into the role of family patriarchs and matriarchs, they may wonder: What happened
to the generation gap? Is it gone or just on hiatus? Or it is still present but mostly
underground?
Definition of the Generation Gap
A generation gap is commonly perceived to refer to differences between generations that
cause conflict and complicate communication, creating a "gap." Word maven William Safire
provides this more positive definition: "Generation gap can be a frustrating lack of
communication between young and old, or a useful stretch of time that separates cultures
within a society, allowing them to develop their own character."
From their position in the family, and with more life experience than younger family members,
grandparents are uniquely poised to see that differences between generations can be
positive for all those concerned.
History of the Generation Gap
Although there have always been differences between the generations, the drastic
differences that the term implies were not much in evidence until the twentieth century.
Before that time, society was not very mobile. Young people typically lived near their
extended families, worshiped in their childhood churches and often worked on the family
farm or in a family business.
With the advent of television and movies, young people were exposed to cultural influences
alien to their own families and cultures. Performers like Frank Sinatra, Elvis Presley and
James Dean won adulation from the younger generation but were often met with derogation
from the older generation. Then came the the 1960s, and civil rights and the Vietnam War
exposed a more serious chasm between young and old
The Generation Gap Today
The generation gap that was so in evidence during the 60s has resurfaced, but it is not the
disruptive force that it was during the Vietnam era, a 2009 study suggests. The Pew
Research Center study found that 79% of Americans see major differences between younger
and older adults in the way they look at the world. In 1969, a Gallup Poll found that a smaller
percentage, 74%, perceived major differences.
Today, however, although more Americans see generational differences, most do not see
them as divisive. That is partly because of the areas of difference. The top areas of
disagreement between young and old, according to the Pew Research Study, are use of
technology and taste in music. Grandparents are likely to have observed these differences in
their grandchildren who are tweens,teens and young adults.
Slightly behind these areas of difference are listed the following:

Work ethic

Moral values

Respect for others

Political views

Attitudes toward different races and groups

Religious beliefs.

Differences But Little Division

If large differences between the generations exist, why don't they spawn conflict? The
answer is twofold.
First, the two largest areas of difference--technology and music--are less emotionally
charged than political issues. The older generation is likely to be proud of the younger
generation's prowess in technology rather than to view it as a problem. As for the musical
differences, each generation wants its own style of music, and the older generation generally
can relate to that desire.
Second, in the other areas of difference, the younger generation tends to regard the older
generation as superior to their own generation--clearly a difference from the 1960s with its
rallying cry of "Don't trust anyone over thirty." According to the Pew study, all generations
regard older Americans as superior in moral values, work ethic and respect for others.
In one area those surveyed did regard the younger generation as superior -- in tolerance for
different races and groups. A different survey by the Pew Research Center identifies
"increasing acceptance of gays and lesbians" as a particular area of difference, with almost
half of those up to age 49 seeing it as a good thing, but only 37% of those aged 50 to 64
agreeing and only 21% of those 65+.

How to Bridge the Generation Gap

Overcoming Differences With Children and Grandchildren
You love your grandchildren but hate the music they listen to. Your grandchildren love you
but snicker about some of your old-fashioned ways. There is still a generation gap, but it's a
less divisive gap than it used to be. And that makes the generation gap easier to bridge.
Research by the Pew Institute shows that the current issues on which the generations differ
frequently aren't ideological issues. More often they are simply variations in how the different
generations live their lives. Here are some easy ways to get closer to children and
grandchildren, as well as some that may not be so easy but may still be worth the effort.
Bridging the Technology Gap
The greatest difference perceived between the generations is the way that they use
technology. In a 2009 survey, when asked whether the world has been improved by
technological advances such as cell phones, the Internet, social networking sites and email,
the pattern was clear: Those aged 18 to 49 were more likely to respond in the affirmative
than those aged 50+.
Still, technology can be a real boon to grandparents, especially grandparents of tweens and
teensand long-distance grandparents.
A savvy grandparent can use technology to stay connected. Here's how:

Family Blogs

Facebook

Four Post-Facebook Apps

How to Skype

How to Use FaceTime

It's probably best not to try to learn everything that the younger generation knows,
technologically speaking. The best strategy is to zero in on a few things that you would like to
learn to do, such as managing photos online or downloading music, and enlist your children
or grandchildren to teach you how to do them. The time together can be enjoyable, and you'll
get props for being more open to technology than some of your peers.
Bridging the Music Gap
Another area in which young and old are reported to differ is their taste in music. Although
young people love having their own kind of music, they also often enjoy sharing their musical
tastes with others. Ask your children and grandchildren to play some of their favorite music
for you and explain why they like it. You may be surprised to find that you like it as well.
If you don't wish to hear explicit language, state that up front. You may also find that your
children and grandchildren are big fans of your music. Rock is still the favored genre for all
groups up to age 65. The Beatles, the Rolling Stones and Jimi Hendrix are popular among all
age groups. So while Coldplay may leave you cold, you may still be able to find some areas
of agreement in the oldies category.
Improving Social Tolerance
Correctly or incorrectly, older people are perceived as being less tolerant of races and groups
that are different from themselves. Many of the older generation grew up in segregated
schools. They may attend traditional churches that are unlikely to have minority members.
They may have had only casual contact, through work or neighborhoods, with people
belonging to different races and groups. If that is true of you, it's not too late to broaden your
circle of friends. If your children and grandchildren have friends of different races and groups,
ask to be introduced to them. The younger generation will appreciate your efforts, and your
world may become more interesting.
Another area in which grandparents lag behind is in acceptance of gay men and lesbians, an
issue that is of real importance to many young people. It's an especially crucial issue for
grandparents of gay and lesbian grandchildren. (Of course, lest we forget, there are also gay
and lesbian grandparents.)
Avoiding Hypocrisy
Older people who pretend to be morally superior may alienate the younger generation,
according to one generation gap expert. In an speech in 1969, anthropologist Margaret
Mead, who wrote a book about the generation gap, said that "the young feel we're all
hypocrites--every one of us. Parents set themselves up as models even if they aren't. It's as
true in a New Guinea headhunters' village as here."
According to Mead, the older generation probably used to get away with their act, until the
modern press came along. The question of how many of our foibles and transgressions
should be revealed to younger generations is an intriguing one. Reveal too little, and you risk

being seen as one of those hypocrites Mead mentions. Tell too much, and you risk losing any
moral authority that you possess.
More often than not, however, young people don't need to know that their parents and
grandparents have feet of clay. It's not so much a matter of what they want to hear as what
they don't want to hear. They don't want to hear that people of the older generation always
respected their elders, obeyed authority and were perfect citizens. The younger generation is
smart enough to know that that's not true. To avoid being seen as hypocritical, don't paint the
older generation as perfect and the younger generation as going to the dogs. The truth is
always more complex than that.

SUPERSTITIONS
Not So Crazy - Sports Superstitions Give Athletes A Winning Edge
The power of the mind helps explain some crazy sports superstitions and rituals
By Elizabeth Quinn
Updated May 18, 2016
We've all seen athletes performing ritual movements before competition and have heard
stories about the baseball player with his lucky socks or the hockey player with his favorite
stick. To the onlooker, it may seem silly and strange, but in sports, superstition and ritual is
widespread and a fairly common practice. In fact, for some players these patterns may
actually influence their success on the field.
The
Power
of
Rituals
in
Sports
A ritual is a certain behavior or action that an athlete performs with the belief that these
behaviors have a specific purpose, or power, to influence their performance. Many athletes
believe that performing a specific ritual before competition improves their performance.
These rituals range from the clothes they wear to the foods they eat or drink; the warm up
they perform or even the music they listen to.
The
Power
of
Superstition
in
Sports
Superstition is generally something that is initially developed in hindsight, almost by accident
and then required in future events. A superstition arises when an athlete has a particularly
good (or bad) performance and then tries to establish "cause and effect" by reviewing the
facts of the day. They will notice things like what they ate or wore and they'll notice anything
unusual that happened such as getting a haircut, receiving a gift or hearing a certain song.
If they have a great performance they attribute their success to that unusual circumstance
and attempt to recreate it before every competition.
The Value of Superstition and Ritual in Sports
When you consider what it takes for an athlete to develop the skill and ability to excel at a
given sports, it's not hard to see how any ritual or superstition could develop.
And really, what's the difference between a ritual and a physical movement pattern? Learning
any new skillwhether throwing a baseball, skiing down an icy mountain or learning to ride a
bikerequires the development of new neural pathways and new patterns of muscle
contraction, agility and coordination. Because rituals often take on physical movement
patterns, some could be created as a part of hours upon hours of physical practice.
Perhaps the major difference between a ritual and a sports skill is that a ritual often happens
prior to competition, so it may or may not directly affect the sport as it's being played. Still, in
the big picture, the ritual does impact the belief system of the athlete, and this belief stays
with the athlete during the game.
One key finding of researchers who study superstition in sports has to do with how an athlete
explains their success and failure. Those athletes who have a strong internal locus of
control (that is they believe they are responsible for their performance) have fewer
superstitions than athletes who attribute their success and failures to external influences.
For athletes who feel the outcome of a competition is unpredictable, superstitions provide a
way for an athlete to gain a bit more control.

Perhaps the real value in all athletic superstition and ritual is this boost of confidence and the
sense of control that they provide an athlete. If you believe that doing a specific action or
behavior will make you perform better, then you probably will perform better. This is the
foundation of sports psychology. Many athletes use rituals such as visualization or guided
imagery, to recreate a particularly successful race and experience the feelings they had then
as though they are happening now. This recall and visualization prepares them both mentally
and physically for competition.

What is Superstition?
Question: What is superstition?
Answer: Broadly defined, superstition is a belief in the supernatural which is to say, a
belief in the existence of forces or entities that do not conform to the laws of nature or a
scientific understanding of the universe.
Examples of superstitions include belief in magic (e.g., spells and curses), belief in omens
(good or bad), belief in good luck charms and rituals (a lucky penny, throwing salt over one's
shoulder to avoid the "bad luck" incurred by spilling same), belief in divination (fortune telling
and prophecy), belief in astrology (i.e., that our fates are determined by the positions of the
stars and planets), and belief in ghosts or a spirit world beyond what can be explained by
science. One of the best known superstitions of the western world is the belief that Friday the
13th is unlucky. It's instructive to note that there are other cultures in which the number 13
isn't regarded as especially foreboding, and where the numbers 4 or 7 or 17 might be
considered unlucky.
Etymology
The word superstition comes from the Latin super-stare, usually translated as "to stand over,"
but there is some disagreement over how to properly interpret its intended meaning. Some
argue that it originally connoted "standing over" something in amazement, but it has also
been suggested that it meant "surviving" or "persisting," as in the persistence of irrational
beliefs. Still others say it meant something like overzealousness or extremism in one's
religious beliefs or practices.
Several Roman authors, including Livy, Ovid and Cicero, used the term in the latter sense,
distinguishing it from religio, meaning a proper or reasonable religious belief. A similar
distinction has been employed in modern times by writers such as Raymond Lamont Brown,
who wrote, "Superstition is a belief, or system of beliefs, by which almost religious veneration
is attached to things mostly secular; a parody of religious faith in which there is belief in an
occult or magic connection."
Magic vs. religion
Other thinkers categorize religion itself as a type of superstitious belief. "One of the meanings
of superstition in the Oxford English dictionary is a belief that is unfounded or irrational,"
biologistJerry Coyne has said. "Since I see all religious belief as unfounded and irrational, I
consider religion to be superstition. Its certainly the most widespread form of superstition
because the vast majority of people on Earth are believers."
The word "irrational" is often applied to superstitious beliefs, but there are certain conditions
under which superstition and rationality may not be so incompatible. What's rational or
reasonable for a person to believe can only be decided within the framework of the

knowledge available to them, which may, in point of fact, be insufficient to provide a scientific
alternative to supernatural explanations. This is a point science fiction author Arthur C. Clarke
touched on when he wrote, "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from
magic."

FASHION
Fashion Trends Impact On Society
Defining trends nowadays is not an easy task. Trends are in essence very complex
mechanisms that mirror changes in the economic and political landscapes.
Fashion itself is a reflection of social, economic, political and cultural changes. It expresses
modernity, symbolising the spirit of the times.
In the last thirty years the luxury industry has been completely focused on profitability, and
quality has become a secondary objective for the luxury tycoons. The production of the finest
merchandise is no longer their main objective. The focus has shifted from what the product is
to what the product represents. To achieve this, big luxury corporations have intensively
promoted the heritage of a brand, hiring a young designer to give it a modern edge and
splashing the logo on everything, from handbags to bikinis. The product itself is not in the
spotlight anymore: it is the brand that speaks.
Using a promising young designers talent and enthusiasm to refresh a legendary brand is
a clever marketing tool. Far from supporting new ideas, it is part of a considered strategy for
boosting sales and expanding the X, Y or Z luxury empire. A key example of this is
Balenciaga, whose former creative director Nicolas Ghesquire left the brand this year,
claiming he was being sucked dry. He has stated, they wanted to steal my identity while
trying to homogenise things. It just wasnt fulfilling anymore. It all became so dehumanised.
Everything became an asset for the brand, trying to make it ever more corporate it was all
about branding.
Speaking to The Business of Fashion, Ghesquire said that he was often told his style is so
Balenciaga now, its no longer Nicolas Ghesquire, its Balenciagas style. With this in mind,
it is hard not to question whether todays trends really are a natural evolution of fashion, or
just the rules of big luxury brands, trying to increase their profit and presence. Many so-called
trends are just old pieces, minimally reinterpreted in order to have more commercial appeal.
In this context its essential to mention that the trend is not what it used to be. Many savvy
consumers now follow their own fashion rules, inspired by what they see on the fashionanimated streets, the internet, and in the live-streamed fashion shows that are becoming a
staple channel for fashion lovers.
Interestingly, Robert Burke, a consultant for luxury brands and previous fashion director of
Bergdorf Goodman, amplifies this point: As little as a decade ago, we would gather at the
Ritz in Paris to come up with trend stories, which would then be translated into shop windows
and advertising. Forty or fifty of us held the keys to that secret information. Now, anyone
with a curiosity for fashion and access to the internet and television can draw his/her own
conclusions. The trend story is pass, Mr. Burke told The New York Times.
Nonetheless, trends are still analysed and followed by many consumers and manufacturers,
who use them as a way of establishing an order in the chaotic world of fashion. Trend
forecasting companies use advanced technologies and professional experts to predict what
will sell in the future, and fast fashion brands are using the huge number of trends in demand
at any one moment to make and sell more clothes.
By utilising information and communication technologies, and through their efficient, flexible
production and distribution systems, fast fashion brands are able to respond to changing
trends quicker than ever before. This quick turnover of trends puts money in the brands
pocket, but doesnt benefit the consumer - who really needs a new wardrobe three times a

week, paying a low price for low quality products, produced at a price ten times lower than
the actual selling price?
These fast fashion brands, known for bringing democracy to the once elite world of fashion,
have created a following of consumers who practice impulsive shopping, being blinded by
the thrill of possessing something new as often as they can. They choose quantity over
quality, without asking too many questions about the origin of the clothes they buy.
While fast fashion retailers masterfully imitate catwalk trends in their designs, providing
cheaper versions of high-end trends in their stores at the speed of light, it seems that luxury
retailers have learned from fast fashion companies too. Luxury retailers, feeling the threat of
fast fashion giants, have started adopting similar strategies, trying to provide merchandise
faster and in bigger quantities by providing secondary lines, immediately available to
purchase.
In this chaotic landscape, there is an obvious need for identity and innovation, to shift the
focus to where it should be - on quality and individuality. And where better to find uniqueness
and innovation than in the fresh and free voices of young emerging designers?
Without being influenced and limited by rules set by big corporations, emerging fashion
designers such as Arjan B, Damien Ravn, Matija Cop and 2014 Hyres finalist Marit Ilison to
name only a few, are speaking about a different type of trend. This is a type of trend that
customers are happy to embrace - not because everybody else does, but because it makes
them look and feel distinctive. Through their innovative designs, emerging designers create
the feeling that you buy a piece with meaning and personality, rather than a garment
produced in a third world country which gained value only when a logo was splashed on it.
Many retailers and specialists acknowledge that the appetite for niche labels has started to
grow, to the detriment of brands such as Gucci, Louis Vuitton or Giorgio Armani. Now more
than ever, we as consumers need to inform ourselves better about how fast fashion retailers
produce their merchandise, focusing on issues such as sustainability and ethics. For these
reasons, young designers are becoming more valued by both consumers and investors, and

MIGRATIONS
What is Human Migration?
Migration (human) is the movement of people from one place in the world to another for the
purpose of taking up permanent or semipermanent residence, usually across a political
boundary. An example of "semipermanent residence" would be the seasonal movements of
migrant farm laborers. People can either choose to move ("voluntary migration") or be forced
to move ("involuntary migration").
Migrations have occurred throughout human history, beginning with the movements of the
first human groups from their origins in East Africa to their current location in the world.
Migration occurs at a variety of scales: intercontinental (between continents), intracontinental
(between countries on a given continent), and interregional (within countries). One of the
most significant migration patterns has been rural to urban migrationthe movement of
people from the countryside to cities in search of opportunities.
Types of Migration
Internal Migration: Moving to a new home within a state, country, or continent.
External Migration: Moving to a new home in a different state, country, or continent.
Emigration: Leaving one country to move to another (e.g., the Pilgrims emigrated from
England).
Immigration: Moving into a new country (e.g., the Pilgrims immigrated to America).
Population Transfer: When a government forces a large group of people out of a region,
usually based on ethnicity or religion. This is also known as an involuntary or forced
migration.
Impelled Migration (also called "reluctant" or "imposed" migration): Individuals are not forced
out of their country, but leave because of unfavorable situations such as warfare, political
problems, or religious persecution.
Step Migration: A series of shorter, less extreme migrations from a person's place of origin to
final destinationsuch as moving from a farm, to a village, to a town, and finally to a city.
Chain Migration: A series of migrations within a family or defined group of people. A chain
migration often begins with one family member who sends money to bring other family
members to the new location. Chain migration results in migration fieldsthe clustering of
people from a specific region into certain neighborhoods or small towns.
Return Migration: The voluntary movements of immigrants back to their place of origin. This
is also known as circular migration.
Seasonal Migration: The process of moving for a period of time in response to labor or
climate conditions (e.g., farm workers following crop harvests or working in cities off-season;
"snowbirds" moving to the southern and southwestern United States during winter).
People Who Migrate
Emigrant: A person who is leaving a country to reside in another.
Immigrant: A person who is entering a country from another to take up new residence.

Refugee: A person who is residing outside the country of his or her origin due to fear of
persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group,
or political opinion.
Internally Displaced Person (IDP): A person who is forced to leave his or her home region
because of unfavorable conditions (political, social, environmental, etc.) but does not cross
any boundaries.
Migration Stream: A group migration from a particular country, region, or city to a certain
destination.
Why Do People Migrate?
People move for a variety of reasons. They consider the advantages and disadvantages of
staying versus moving, as well as factors such as distance, travel costs, travel time, modes
of transportation, terrain, and cultural barriers.
Push Factors: Reasons for emigrating (leaving a place) because of a difficulty (such as a
food shortage, war, flood, etc.).
Pull Factors: Reasons for immigrating (moving into a place) because of something desirable
(such as a nicer climate, better food supply, freedom, etc.).
Several types of push and pull factors may influence people in their movements (sometimes
at the same time), including:
1. Environmental (e.g., climate, natural disasters)
2. Political (e.g., war)
3. Economic (e.g., work)
4. Cultural (e.g., religious freedom, education)
Place Utility: The desirability of a place based on its social, economic, or environmental
situation, often used to compare the value of living in different locations. An individuals idea
of place utility may or may not reflect the actual conditions of that location.
Intervening Opportunities: Opportunities nearby are usually considered more attractive than
equal or slightly better opportunities farther away, so migrants tend to settle in a location
closer to their point of origin if other factors are equal.
Distance Decay: As distance from a given location increases, understanding of that location
decreases. People are more likely to settle in a (closer) place about which they have more
knowledge than in a (farther) place about which they know and understand little.
Laws of Migration
Geographer E.G. Ravenstein developed a series of migration 'laws' in the 1880s that form
the basis for modern migration theory. In simple language, these principles state:
Most migrants travel only a short distance.
Migrants traveling long distances usually settle in urban areas.
Most migration occurs in steps.
Most migration is rural to urban.
Each migration flow produces a movement in the opposite direction ("counterflow").

 Most migrants are adults.

Most international migrants are young males, while more internal migrants are female.
Impacts of Migration
Human migration affects population patterns and characteristics, social and cultural patterns
and processes, economies, and physical environments. As people move, their cultural traits
and ideas diffuse along with them, creating and modifying cultural landscapes.
Diffusion: The process through which certain characteristics (e.g., cultural traits, ideas,
disease) spread over space and through time.
Relocation Diffusion: Ideas, cultural traits, etc. that move with people from one place to
another and do not remain in the point of origin.
Expansion Diffusion: Ideas, cultural traits, etc., that move with people from one place to
another but are not lost at the point of origin, such as language.
Cultural markers: Structures or artifacts (e.g., buildings, spiritual places, architectural styles,
signs, etc.) that reflect the cultures and histories of those who constructed or occupy them.
Measuring Migration
In-migration: people moving into one place from another place within a nation (internal
migration).
Out-migration: people moving out of one place to another place within a nation (internal
migration).
Gross migration: total number of in-migrants and out-migrants (internal migration).
Net internal migration: the difference between in-migration and out-migration.
Movers from abroad: people coming into a nation from another country or part of the world.
Net migration: the difference between net internal migration and movers from abroad.

Migrant crisis: Migration to Europe explained in seven charts

More than a million migrants and refugees crossed into Europe in 2015, sparking a
crisis as countries struggled to cope with the influx, and creating division in the EU
over how best to deal with resettling people.
The vast majority arrived by sea but some migrants have made their way over land,
principally via Turkey and Albania.
Winter has not stemmed the flow of people - with 135,711 people reaching Europe by sea
since the start of 2016, according to the UNHCR.
1. Which countries are migrants from?
The conflict in Syria continues to be by far the biggest driver of migration. But the ongoing
violence in Afghanistan and Iraq, abuses in Eritrea, as well as poverty in Kosovo, are also
leading people to look for new lives elsewhere.
2. Where are migrants going?

Although not all of those arriving in Europe choose to claim asylum, many do. Germany
received the highest number of new asylum applications in 2015, with more than 476,000.
But far more people have arrived in the country - German officials said more than a
millionhad been counted in Germany's "EASY" system for counting and distributing people
before they make asylum claims.
Hungary moved into second place for asylum applications, as more migrants made the
journey overland through Greece and the Western Balkans. It had 177,130 applications by
the end of December.
3. How do migrants get to Europe?
The
International
Organization
for
Migration
(IOM)
estimates
than 1,011,700migrants arrived by sea in 2015, and almost 34,900 by land.

that

more

This compares with 280,000 arrivals by land and sea for the whole of 2014. The figures do
not include those who got in undetected.
The EU's external border force, Frontex, monitors the different routes migrants use and
numbers arriving at Europe's borders and put the figure crossing into Europe in 2015 at more
than 1,800,000.
Most of those heading for Greece take the relatively short voyage from Turkey to the islands
of Kos, Chios, Lesvos and Samos - often in flimsy rubber dinghies or small wooden boats.
4. How dangerous is the journey?
According to the IOM, more than 3,770 migrants were reported to have died trying to cross
the Mediterranean in 2015.
Most died on the crossing from north Africa to Italy, and more than 800 died in the Aegean
crossing from Turkey to Greece.
The summer months are usually when most fatalities occur as it is the busiest time for
migrants attempting to reach Europe.
But in 2015, the deadliest month for migrants was April, which saw a boat carrying about 800
people capsize in the sea off Libya. Overcrowding is thought to have been one of the
reasons for the disaster.
5. Which European countries are most affected?
Although Germany has had the most asylum applications in 2015, Hungary had the highest
in proportion to its population, despite having closed its border with Croatia in an attempt to
stop the flow in October. Nearly 1,800 refugees per 100,000 of Hungary's local population
claimed asylum in 2015.
Sweden followed close behind with 1,667 per 100,000.
The figure for Germany was 587 and for the UK it was 60 applications for every 100,000
residents. The EU average was 260.
6. How has Europe responded?
Tensions in the EU have been rising because of the disproportionate burden faced by some
countries, particularly the countries where the majority of migrants have been arriving:
Greece, Italy and Hungary.

In September, EU ministers voted by a majority to relocate 160,000 refugees EU-wide, but

for now the plan will only apply to those who are in Italy and Greece.
Another 54,000 were to be moved from Hungary, but the Hungarian government rejected
this plan and will instead receive more migrants from Italy and Greece as part of the
relocation scheme.
The UK has opted out of any plans for a quota system but, according to Home Office figures,
1,000 Syrian refugees were resettled under the Vulnerable Persons Relocation scheme in
2015. Prime Minister David Cameron has said the UK will accept up to 20,000 refugees from
Syria over the next five years.
7. How many asylum claims are approved?
Although huge numbers have been applying for asylum, the number of people being given
asylum is far lower.
In 2015, EU countries offered asylum to 292,540 refugees. In the same year, more than a
million migrants applied for asylum - although applying for asylum can be a lengthy
procedure so many of those given refugee status may have applied in previous years.

NEGATIVE CONSEQUENCES OF TOURISM

Negative effects of tourism

Tourism can have a negative environmental impact. This is at a range

of
scales.
The
increase
in
air
travel
has
contributed
towards
increased carbon dioxide emissions. On a local level natural features
that attract tourists are themselves under threat due to human
actions.

Often local people are employed

unsatisfactory working conditions

Travel agents, airline companies and hoteliers benefit more

companies
when
holidays
are
booked
to
destinations
companies based in MEDCs set up luxury hotels in LEDCs.
usually return to MEDCs. They also create more competition
run guest houses

Help destroy local culture and traditions

in

low

skill,

poorly

paid

work

in

than local
in
LEDCs
The profits
for locally

EXTREME SPORTS
Summer's just around the corner, encouraging some to dust off the tennis racket or rummage
round the cupboard for the cricket bat. But for some in Britain traditional outdoor pursuits are
just not enough. So how do extreme sports devotees get their kicks?
Extreme sports are about exhilaration, skill and danger. They do not normally involve teams
and there are very few rules. People who take part use their skills and experience to control
the risks. That control is what makes them sports and not just dangerous behaviour.
Here are just some of the extreme sports which are popular in Britain:
Kitesurfing: a growing band of enthusiasts have been discovering the thrilling combination
of kite, board and waves. These kites can be up to 17 metres long. Catch a gust and
you're motoring - up, down and across the surf. British Ladies kitesurfing champion Jo
Wilson says: "It's always an adrenalin rush. It's unpredictable. You could jump 5ft or 35ft.
You never know if you're going to go up in the air, and your heart is just going boom, boom,
boom all the time."
Coasteering: this is exploring the coastline without worrying about a coastal path or finding a
rocky cliffy cove blocking your route. You climb, dive, swim and clamber from A to B. There
are about 15 operators in the UK offering coasteering.
Sky diving: traditional parachuting just doesn't sound risky enough, does it? So now
skydiving is the name for jumping from a plane and listening to your heart pounding as
youhurtle towards earth before you open your parachute at the last moment. Once you've
got a few jumps under your parachute you can throw in some extra risks, for example try
a 'hook turn'. Dean Dunbar is a participant of extremedreams.com and his first sky dive was
in 1998. Since then he's been hooked on the buzz of the extreme, saying: "Every so often I
have to go out and do something scary."
Mountain biking: it's been around so long that bikers are no longer satisfied with just going up
and down a mountain. Nowadays thrill seeking mountain bikers want a big slope to go
down very, very fast. "It's pure mad, downhill," according to Dean Dunbar. "People go to old
ski resorts, take the chair lift to the top then bomb down - amazingly not killing themselves."

Vocabulary
get
their
get a strong feeling of excitement or pleasure

kicks

exhilaration
extreme excitement
kite
a paper- or cloth-covered frame flown in the air at the end of a long string using the power of
the wind
motoring
moving
surf
the foam formed by waves on the sea when they come in towards a shore

an
adrenalin
a strong feeling of excitement mixed with fear

rush

coastline
the shape of the land on the edge of the sea
cove
a small sheltered opening in the coastline, a bay
clamber
climb with difficulty, using both the feet and hands
pounding
beating heavily
hurtle
move very fast
throw
add

in

'hook
a fast turn close to the ground used to land at high speed
hooked
on
the
buzz
addicted to the excitement of doing extreme sports
thrill
looking for excitement
bomb
go down with great speed

turn'
of

the

extreme
seeking
down

THE ROARING TWENTIES

The 1920s were an age of dramatic social and political change. For the first time, more
Americans lived in cities than on farms. The nations total wealth more than doubled between
1920 and 1929, and this economic growth swept many Americans into an affluent but
unfamiliar consumer society. People from coast to coast bought the same goods (thanks to
nationwide advertising and the spread of chain stores), listened to the same music, did the
same dances and even used the same slang! Many Americans were uncomfortable with this
new, urban, sometimes racy mass culture; in fact, for manyeven mostpeople in the
United States, the 1920s brought more conflict than celebration. However, for a small handful
of young people in the nations big cities, the 1920s were roaring indeed.
THE NEW WOMAN
The most familiar symbol of the Roaring Twenties is probably the flapper: a young woman
with bobbed hair and short skirts who drank, smoked and said what might be termed
unladylike things, in addition to being more sexually free than previous generations. In
reality, most young women in the 1920s did none of these things (though many did adopt a
fashionable flapper wardrobe), but even those women who were not flappers gained some
unprecedented freedoms. They could vote at last: The 19th Amendment to the Constitution
had guaranteed that right in 1920. Millions of women worked in white-collar jobs (as
stenographers, for example) and could afford to participate in the burgeoning consumer
economy. The increased availability of birth-control devices such as the diaphragm made it
possible for women to have fewer children. And new machines and technologies like the
washing machine and the vacuum cleaner eliminated some of the drudgery of household
work.
Did You Know?
Because the 18th Amendment and the Volstead Act did not make it illegal to drink alcohol,
only to manufacture and sell it, many people stockpiled liquor before the ban went into effect.
Rumor had it that the Yale Club in New York City had a 14-year supply of booze in its
basement.
THE BIRTH OF MASS CULTURE
During the 1920s, many Americans had extra money to spend, and they spent it on
consumer goods such as ready-to-wear clothes and home appliances like electric
refrigerators. In particular, they bought radios. The first commercial radio station in the U.S.,
Pittsburghs KDKA, hit the airwaves in 1920; three years later there were more than 500
stations in the nation. By the end of the 1920s, there were radios in more than 12 million
households. People also went to the movies: Historians estimate that, by the end of the
decades, three-quarters of the American population visited a movie theater every week.
But the most important consumer product of the 1920s was the automobile. Low prices (the
Ford Model Tcost just $260 in 1924) and generous credit made cars affordable luxuries at
the beginning of the decade; by the end, they were practically necessities. In 1929 there was
one car on the road for every five Americans. Meanwhile, an economy of automobiles was
born: Businesses like service stations and motels sprang up to meet drivers needs.
THE JAZZ AGE
Cars also gave young people the freedom to go where they pleased and do what they
wanted. (Some pundits called them bedrooms on wheels.) What many young people
wanted to do was dance: the Charleston, the cake walk, the black bottom, the flea hop. Jazz

bands played at dance halls like the Savoy inNew York City and the Aragon in Chicago; radio
stations and phonograph records (100 million of which were sold in 1927 alone) carried their
tunes to listeners across the nation. Some older people objected to jazz musics vulgarity
and depravity (and the moral disasters it supposedly inspired), but many in the younger
generation loved the freedom they felt on the dance floor.
PROHIBITION
During the 1920s, some freedoms were expanded while others were curtailed. The 18th
Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1919, had banned the manufacture and sale of
intoxicating liquors, and at 12 A.M. on January 16, 1920, the federal Volstead Act closed
every tavern, bar and saloon in the United States. From then on, it was illegal to sell any
intoxication beverages with more than 0.5% alcohol. This drove the liquor trade
undergroundnow, people simply went to nominally illegal speakeasies instead of ordinary
barswhere it was controlled by bootleggers, racketeers and other organized-crime figures
such as Chicago gangster Al Capone. (Capone reportedly had 1,000 gunmen and half of
Chicagos police force on his payroll.)
To many middle-class white Americans, Prohibition was a way to assert some control over
the unruly immigrant masses who crowded the nations cities. For instance, to the so-called
Drys, beer was known as Kaiser brew. Drinking was a symbol of all they disliked about the
modern city, and eliminating alcohol would, they believed, turn back the clock to an earlier
and more comfortable time.
THE CULTURAL CIVIL WAR
Prohibition was not the only source of social tension during the 1920s. The Great Migration of
African Americans from the Southern countryside to Northern cities and the increasing
visibility of black culturejazz and blues music, for example, and the literary movement
known as the Harlem Renaissancediscomfited some white Americans. Millions of people in
places like Indiana and Illinois joined the Ku Klux Klan in the 1920s. To them, the Klan
represented a return to all the values that the fast-paced, city-slicker Roaring Twenties were
trampling.
Likewise, an anti-Communist Red Scare in 1919 and 1920 encouraged a widespread
nativist, or anti-immigrant, hysteria. This led to the passage of an extremely restrictive
immigration law, the National Origins Act of 1924, which set immigration quotas that excluded
some people (Eastern Europeans and Asians) in favor of others (Northern Europeans and
people from Great Britain, for example).
These conflictswhat one historian has called a cultural Civil War between city-dwellers and
small-town residents, Protestants and Catholics, blacks and whites, New Women and
advocates of old-fashioned family valuesare perhaps the most important part of the story of
the Roaring Twenties.

IMPACT OF THE INTERNET IN OUR LIFE

Internet !!! What is internet? In simple language internet is one such medium that allows any
person to access the world, it is one such powerful weapon with which one can do almost
everything. There is internet for everything from shopping, to doing homework, to order food,
to access banking facilities, to booking tickets, to purchasing insurance, everything can be
done in just one click. In fact, today internet has such a major impact on everybody that one
totally becomes handicapped if he/she is unable to access it even for a day. I think internet is
no less than a drug which has made everyone addicted to it.
Teenagers Affected By Internet and Social Networks
Internet has it's own pros and cons, it can be very helpful to us and at the same time it can
be used to destroy/harm someone also. Internet has given rise to cyber crime of which
mostly teenagers and youngsters become the victim. We all hear in our day to day life about
these cases for eg. Leaking someone's private clips or pictures on internet just for the sake
of jealousy or taking revenge or for hacking. But Internet is not bad in all sense as it gives us
the access to the world. With internet one can see and talk to the person in the other corner
of the world. Also we get the access to many things which makes our life so much easier like,
we can order food or grocery or shop or chat or send emails which was not possible without
internet. Internet is now our lifeline and it is very difficult to imagine our life without it.
Internet as a Communication Tool
It is one of the largest sector and contributor to the economy and generates a huge number
of jobs. Internet has a great impact on everybody' s life. From a child to an old age person,
internet has a impact on all of their lives. Apps like whatsapp and facebook are the most
famous and socially acceptable form of internet and most used also. Internet allows us to
know what's happening in the world and gives us the access to it, for eg through internet only
everyone got to know about this essay competition.
Internet if used in the correct and careful manner then it is the most powerful and useful thing
one can have.
As we know, most software costs us quite a lot, if we buy it legally. Free software as well as
free music is available on the Internet, which again attracts us. One just has to download the
program file, the mp3-file or any other file available and that's it. Why would anyone like to
pay more when you can get it for free? Also, Special websites are also created these days
just to give us the new and cheap and useful programs.
Uses of Internet in Various Fields
If we talk about the offices these days whether government or private, computers and
Internet play a major role in it. Almost every work in offices requires access to Internet and it
is very hard to do work without it.
Internet has changed our lives in every manner and there is no doubt about it. There are tons
of advantages of the Internet that shows us the importance of this new and useful medium.
But it comes with a lot of disadvantages also, and if we are able to overcome those
disadvantages then Internet can be the best thing ever.
It's a famous quote for internet which says that "YOU NAME IT AND YOU HAVE IT" and this
is absolutely true.

ADDICTIONS
What is Addiction?
A drug or alcohol addiction has two basic qualities. 1) You sometimes use more than you
would like to use. 2) You continue to use despite negative consequences.
People use drugs or alcohol to escape, relax, or to reward themselves. But over time, drugs
and alcohol make you believe that you cant cope without them, or that you cant enjoy life
without using. The greatest damage is to your self-esteem.
What is the Medical Definition of Addiction?
An addiction must meet at least 3 of the following criteria. This is based on the criteria of the
American Psychiatric Association (DSM-IV) and World Health Organization (ICD-10).(1)
1. Tolerance. Do
you
use
more
alcohol
or
drugs
over
time?
2. Withdrawal. Have you experienced physical or emotional withdrawal when you have
stopped using? Have you experienced anxiety, irritability, shakes, sweats, nausea, or
vomiting? Emotional withdrawal is just as significant as physical withdrawal.
3. Limited control. Do you sometimes drink or use drugs more than you would like? Do you
sometimes drink to get drunk? Does one drink lead to more drinks sometimes? Do you ever
regret
how
much
you
used
the
day
before?
4. Negative consequences. Have you continued to use even though there have been
negative consequences to your mood, self-esteem, health, job, or family?
5. Neglected or postponed activities. Have you ever put off or reduced social, recreational,
work,
or
household
activities
because
of
your
use?
6. Significant time or energy spent. Have you spent a significant amount of time obtaining,
using, concealing, planning, or recovering from your use? Have you spend a lot of time
thinking about using? Have you ever concealed or minimized your use? Have you ever
thought
of
schemes
to
avoid
getting
caught?
7. Desire to cut down. Have you sometimes thought about cutting down or controlling your
use? Have you ever made unsuccessful attempts to cut down or control your use?
How Common is Drug or Alcohol Addiction?
Approximately 10% of any population is addicted to drugs or alcohol. Addiction is more
common than diabetes, which occurs in approximately 7% of the population.
Addiction crosses all socio-economic boundaries. 10% of teachers, 10% of plumbers, and
10% of CEOs have an addiction.
The terms alcohol addiction, alcoholism, and alcohol dependence are all equivalent. The
same
is
true
for
the
terms
drug
addiction
and
drug
dependence.
(Reference: www.AddictionsAndRecovery.org.)
How Does Addiction Feel?
An addictive substance feels good because it stimulates the pleasure center of the brain
through neurotransmitters such as dopamine and GABA. If you have a genetic
predisposition, addictive substances dont just feel good. They feel so good that you will want
to chase after them.
This is where addiction comes in. If you have a genetic predisposition, addictive substances
feel so good that you are willing to suffer negative consequences in order to get more and to
continue to feel the high.

Addictive substances feel different inside an addicts brain than they do to a nonaddict. This is why the two sides have difficulty understanding each other. In someone who
is not addicted, drugs and alcohol only produce a mild high. Therefore a non-addict cannot
understand why the addict would go to such lengths, when it is clearly destroying their life.
Denial is a big part of addiction. Because addictive substances feel good, an addict will
initially deny that they have a problem. In the long-run addiction isolates you from the people
and activities and that mean the most to you.
The Cost of Addiction
The dollars and cents cost of addiction is mind boggling. At least twice as many people die
from alcoholism in the US every year as die from motor vehicle accidents.(2)
Alcohol intoxication is associated with 40-50% of traffic fatalities, 25-35% of nonfatal motor
vehicle injuries, and 64% of fires. Alcohol is present in nearly 50% of homicides, either in the
victim or the perpetrator.(3)
Alcohol intoxication is involved in 31% of fatal injuries, and 23% of completed suicides.(4)
One study found that 86 % of homicide offenders, 37 % of assault offenders, and 57 % of
men and 27 % of women involved in marital violence were drinking at the time of their
offense.(5)
The Consequences of Addiction
People only stop using drugs and alcohol when they have suffered enough negative
consequences. When you've suffered enough pain and enough regret you are ready to
stop.
You are ready to stop when the two sides of addiction collide. On the one hand, addiction
feels so good that you want to use more. On the other hand, addiction leads to negative
consequences. After a while, something has got to give.
You don't have to hit rock bottom. The purpose of websites like this is to show you the
potential negative consequences of addiction so that you will be ready to quit before you've
lost everything. You can imagine what it would be like to hit rock bottom. And that can help
motivate you.
The most important consequences of addiction are social, emotional, and
psychological. People usually think of the physical and economic consequences of
addiction. "I don't have a serious addiction because my health is fine, and I haven't lost my
job." But those are very late stage consequences.
As far as work is concerned that's usually the last thing to suffer. You need your work in order
to pay your bills, so that you can continue your addiction. When your work begins to suffer,
you've slipped from being a functioning addict to a non-functioning addict.
The damage addiction does to your relationships and self-esteem is far deeper and takes
longer to repair. You've hurt friends and family. You've disappointed yourself. You've traded
important things in your life so that you could make more time to use. You've lived a double
life. You've seen the hurt in your family's eyes, and the disappointment in your children's
faces. Those are the consequences that can motivate you to begin recovery.

MODERN ARCHITECTURE
modern architecture, new architectural style that emerged in many Western countries in the
decade after World War I. It was based on the "rational" use of modern materials, the
principles of functionalist planning, and the rejection of historical precedent and ornament.
This style has been generally designated as modern, although the labels International
style, Neue Sachlichkeit,and functionalism have also been used.
Development of the Style
Since the mid-19th cent. there had been repeated attempts to assimilate modern technology
in practice and theory and to formulate a modern style of architecture suitable to its age. A
functionalist approach eventually replaced the formerly eclectic approach to design.
Technical progress in the use of iron and glass made possible the construction of Sir
Joseph Paxton's celebrated Crystal Palace in London (1851), in which a remarkable delicacy
was achieved. In the ensuing years iron, steel, and glass enabled architects and engineers to
enclose the vast interior spaces of train sheds, department stores, and market halls, but
often the structural forms were clothed with irrelevant ornament.
As late as 1889 the exposed, iron skeleton of the newly erected Eiffel Tower in Paris was met
with public outrage. In Chicago, William Le Baron Jenney pioneered the use of a complete
steel skeleton for the urban skyscraper in his Home Insurance Building (188385). His
contemporary, Louis Henry Sullivan, first articulated the theory of functionalism
(seefunctionalism), which he demonstrated in his numerous commercial designs. In addition,
experiments in concrete construction were being carried out in France by Franois
Hennebique and Auguste Perret, and in the United States by Ernest Ransome.
As a result of these advances, the formal conception of architecture was also undergoing a
profound transformation. Frank Lloyd Wright, a pupil of Sullivan, experimented with the
interpenetration of interior and exterior spaces in his residential designs. In Holland, where
Wright's work was widely admired, the architects of de Stijl sought to organize building
elements into new combinations of overlapping and hovering rectangular planes.
Form and Materials
By 1920 there was an increasingly wide understanding that building forms must be
determined by their functions and materials if they were to achieve intrinsic significance or
beauty in contemporary terms, without resorting to traditional ornament. Instead of viewing a
building as a heavy mass made of ponderous materials, the leading innovators of modern
architecture considered it as a volume of space enclosed by light, thin curtain walls and
resting on slender piers. The visual aesthetic of modern architecture was largely inspired by
the machine and by abstract painting and sculpture.
In giving form and coherence to modern architecture, Le Corbusier's book Vers une
architecture(1923, tr. 1927) played an important role, as did the writings of the Dutch
architect J. J. P. Oudand the German architect Walter Gropius, who also headed
the Bauhaus in Dessau. Other early leaders of the modern movement included Ludwig Mies
van der Rohe, Marcel Breuer, and Ernst May in Germany and Raymond Hood, Albert Kahn,
Richard J. Neutra, William Lescaze, and George Howe in the United States.
In 1932 the label "International style" was applied to modern architecture by the Museum of
Modern Art, New York City, anticipating its growing acceptance around the world. The United
States became a stronghold of modern architecture after the emigration of Gropius, Mies,
and Breuer from Germany during the 1930s. By the mid-20th cent. modern architecture had
become an effective instrument for dealing with the increasingly complex building needs of a

global society. Large architectural firms such as Harrison and Abramovitz and Skidmore,
Owings, and Merrill did much to popularize modern architecture around the world after World
War
II.
At the same time new technological developments continued to influence architects' designs,
particularly in the realm of prefabricated construction, as seen in the works of R.
BuckminsterFuller and Moshe Safdie. The development of sophisticated air conditioning and
heating systems also allowed modern architecture to spread from the temperate climates of
Europe and North America to countries with extremely varied weather conditions.
The Style Evolves
Increasingly, during the 1950s, modern architecture was criticized for its sterility, its
"institutional" anonymity, and its disregard for regional building traditions. More varied and
individual, as well as regionalist, modes of expression were sought by architects of the next
generation, although the basic emphasis on structure and materials continued. This tendency
was evident in the works of Louis Kahn, Edward Durell Stone, and Philip
Cortelyou Johnson in the United States, and the architects of the so-called New Brutalism
movement in England. A dynamic sculptural unity distinguished the buildings of
Eero Saarinen and the late works of Le Corbusier. Other leading architects of this generation
include Alvar Aalto of Finland, the Italians Pier Luigi Nervi and Paolo Soleri, and in Central
and South America, Lcio Costa, OscarNiemeyer, Juan O'Gorman, and Felix Candela.
Development of Postmodernism
After 1960, a less evolutionary and more revolutionary critical reaction to modern
architecture, first articulated in the writings of Robert Venturi, began to form. Architects have
become more concerned with context and tradition. Ornament, once banished by
modernism, has returned, often in the form of overtly historical revivalism, although it has just
as often been reinterpreted in high-tech materials. This has resulted in a stylistic eclecticism
on the contemporary scene. Prominent architects working in the postmodern mode include
Philip Johnson in his later projects, Michael Graves, Ricardo Bofill, and Aldo Rossi.

MODERN ART
What is Modern Art? (Definition)
There is no precise definition of the term "Modern Art": it remains an elastic term, which can
accomodate a variety of meanings. This is not too surprising, since we are constantly moving
forward in time, and what is considered "modern painting" or "modern sculpture" today, may
not be seen as modern in fifty years time. Even so, it is traditional to say that "Modern Art"
means works produced during the approximate period 1870-1970. This "Modern era"
followed a long period of domination by Renaissance-inspired academic art, promoted by the
network of European Academies of Fine Art. And is itself followed by "Contemporary Art"
(1970 onwards), the more avant-garde of which is also called "Postmodern Art". This
chronology accords with the view of many art critics and institutions, but not all. Both the Tate
Modern in London, and the Musee National d'Art Moderne at the Pompidou Centre in Paris,
for instance, take 1900 as the starting point for "Modern Art". Also, neither they, nor the
Museum of Modern Art in New York, make any distinction between "modernist" and
"postmodernist" works: instead, they see both as phases of "Modern Art".
Incidentally, when trying to understand the history of art it's important to recognize that art
does not change overnight, but rather reflects wider (and slower) changes taking place in
society. It also reflects the outlook of the artist. Thus, for example, a work of art produced as
early as 1958 might be decidedly "postmodernist" (if the artist has a very avant-garde outlook
- a good example is Yves Klein's Nouveau Realisme); while another work, created by a
conservative artist in 1980, might be seen as a throw-back to the time of "Modern Art" rather
than an example of "Contemporary Art". In fact, it's probably true to say that several different
strands of art - meaning several sets of aesthetics, some hypermodern, some old-fashioned may co-exist at any one time. Also, it's worth remembering that many of these terms (like
"Modern Art") are only invented after the event, from the vantage point of hindsight.
NOTE: The 1960s is generally seen as the decade when artistic values gradually changed,
from "modernist" to "postmodernist". This means that for a period of time both sets of values
co-existed with each other.
For important dates, see: History of Art Timeline ( 2.5 million BCE on)
What were the Origins of Modern Art?
To understand how "modern art" began, a little historical background is useful. The 19th
century was a time of significant and rapidly increasing change. As a result of the Industrial
Revolution (c.1760-1860) enormous changes in manufacturing, transport, and technology
began to affect how people lived, worked, and travelled, throughout Europe and America.
Towns and cities swelled and prospered as people left the land to populate urban factories.
These industry-inspired social changes led to greater prosperity but also cramped and
crowded living conditions for most workers. In turn, this led to: more demand for urban
architecture; more demand for applied art and design - see, for instance the Bauhaus School
- and the emergence of a new class of wealthy entrepreneurs who became art collectors and
patrons. Many of the world's best art museums were founded by these 19th century tycoons.
In addition, two other developments had a direct effect on fine art of the period. First, in 1841,
the American painter John Rand (18011873) invented the collapsible tin paint tube. Second,
major advances were made in photography, allowing artists to photograph scenes which
could then be painted in the studio at a later date. Both these developments would greatly
benefit a new style of painting known, disparagingly, as "Impressionism", which would have a

radical effect on how artists painted the world around them, and would in the process
become the first major school of modernist art.
As well as affecting how artists created art, 19th century social changes also inspired artists
to explore new themes. Instead of slavishly following the Hierarchy of the Genres and being
content with academic subjects involving religion and Greek mythology, interspersed with
portraits and 'meaningful' landscapes - all subjects that were designed to elevate and instruct
the spectator - artists began to make art about people, places, or ideas that interested them.
The cities - with their new railway stations and new slums - were obvious choices and
triggered a new class of genre painting and urban landscape. Other subjects were the
suburban villages and holiday spots served by the new rail networks, which would inspire
new forms of landscape painting by Monet, Matisse and others. The genre of history painting
also changed, thanks to Benjamin West (1738-1820) who painted The Death of General
Wolfe (1770, National Gallery of Art, Ottowa), the first 'contemporary' history painting, and
Goya (1746-1828) whose Third of May, 1808 (1814, Prado, Madrid) introduced a groundbreaking, non-heroic idiom.
The 19th century also witnessed a number of philosophical developments which would have
a significant effect on art. The growth of political thought, for instance, led Courbet and others
to promote a socially conscious form of Realist painting - see also Realism to
Impressionism). Also, the publication of The Interpretation of Dreams (1899) by Sigmund
Freud, popularized the notion of the "subconscious mind", causing artists to explore
Symbolism and later Surrealism. The new self-consciousness which Freud promoted, led to
(or at least coincided with) the emergence of German Expressionism, as artists turned to
expressing their subjective feelings and experiences.
When Did Modern Art Begin?
The date most commonly cited as marking the birth of "modern art" is 1863 - the year that
Edouard Manet (1832-83) exhibited his shocking and irreverent painting Le Dejeuner sur
l'herbe in the Salon des Refuses in Paris. Despite Manet's respect for the French Academy,
and the fact it was modelled on a Renaissance work by Raphael, it was considered to be one
of the most scandalous pictures of the period.
But this was merely a symbol of wider changes that were taking place in various types of art,
both in France and elsewhere in Europe. A new generation of "Modern Artists" were fed up
with following the traditional academic art forms of the 18th and early 19th century, and were
starting to create a range of "Modern Paintings" based on new themes, new materials, and
bold new methods. Sculpture and architecture were also affected - and in time their changes
would be even more revolutionary - but fine art painting proved to be the first major
battleground between the conservatives and the new "Moderns".
What is the Main Characteristic of Modern Art?
What we call "Modern Art" lasted for an entire century and involved dozens of different art
movements, embracing almost everything from pure abstraction to hyperrealism; from antiart schools like Dada and Fluxus to classical painting and sculpture; from Art Nouveau to
Bauhaus and Pop Art. So great was the diversity that it is difficult to think of any unifying
characteristic which defines the era. But if there is anything that separates modern artists
from both the earlier traditionalists and later postmodernists, it is their belief that art mattered.
To them, art had real value. By contrast, their precedessors simply assumed it had value.
After all they had lived in an era governed by Christian value systems and had simply
"followed the rules." And those who came after the Modern period (1970 onwards), the socalled "postmodernists", largely rejected the idea that art (or life) has any intrinsic value.

In What Ways was Modern Art Different? (Characteristics)

Although there is no single defining feature of "Modern Art", it was noted for a number of
important characteristics, as follows:
(1) New Types of Art
Modern artists were the first to develop collage art, assorted forms of assemblage, a variety
of kinetic art (inc mobiles), several genres of photography, animation (drawing plus
photography) land art or earthworks, and performance art.
(2) Use of New Materials
Modern painters affixed objects to their canvases, such as fragments of newspaper and other
items. Sculptors used "found objects", like the "readymades" of Marcel Duchamp, from which
they created works of Junk art. Assemblages were created out of the most ordinary everyday
items, like cars, clocks, suitcases, wooden boxes and other items.
(3) Expressive Use of Colour
Movements of modern art like Fauvism, Expressionism and Colour Field painting were the
first to exploit colour in a major way.
(4) New Techniques
Chromolithography was invented by the poster artist Jules Cheret, automatic drawing was
developed by surrealist painters, as was Frottage and Decalcomania. Gesturalist painters
invented Action Painting. Pop artists introduced "Benday dots", and silkscreen printing into
fine art. Other movements and schools of modern art which introduced new painting
techniques, included: Neo-Impressionism, the Macchiaioli, Synthetism, Cloisonnism,
Gesturalism, Tachisme, Kinetic Art, Neo-Dada and Op-Art.

Modern Photographic Art

One of the most important and influential new media which came to prominence during the
"Modern Era" is photography. Four genres in particular have become established. They
include: Portrait Photography, a genre that has largely replaced painted portraits; Pictorialism
(fl.1885-1915) a type of camera art in which the photographer manipulates a regular photo in
order to create an "artistic" image; Fashion Photography (1880-present) a type of
photography devoted to the promotion of clothing, shoes, perfume and other branded goods;
Documentary Photography (1860-present), a type of sharp-focus camerawork that captures
a moment of reality, so as to present a message about what is happening in the world; and
Street Photography (1900-present), the art of capturing chance interactions of human activity
in urban areas. Practiced by many of the world's greatest photographers, these genres have
made a major contribution to modern art of the 20th century.
Modern Architecture
Modernism in architecture is a more convoluted affair. The word "modernism" in building
design was first used in America during the 1880s to describe skyscrapers designed by the
Chicago School of Architecture (1880-1910), such as The Montauk Building (1882-83)
designed by Burnham and Root; the Home Insurance Building (1884) designed by William Le
Baron Jenney; and the Marshall Field Warehouse (1885-7) designed by Henry Hobson
Richardson. In the 20th century, a new type of design emerged, known as the International
Style of Modern Architecture (c.1920-70). Beginning in Germany, Holland and France, in the

hands of Le Corbusier (1887-1965), Walter Gropius (1883-1969) and others, it spread to

America where it became the dominant idiom for commercial skyscrapers, thanks to the
efforts of Mies van der Rohe (1886-1969), formerly director of the Bauhaus School. Later, the
centre of modern building design was established permanently in the United States, mainly
due to the advent of supertall skyscraper architecture, which was then exported around the
globe.
When Did Modern Art End? What Replaced it?
Modernism didn't just stop, it was gradually overtaken by events during the late 1960s - a
period which coincided with the rise of mass pop-culture and also with the rise of antiauthoritarian challenges (in social and political areas as well as the arts) to the existing
orthodoxies. A key year was 1968, which witnessed the Tet Offensive, the assassinations of
Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy, and street demonstrations throughout the capitals of
Europe. As Modernism began to look increasingly old-fashioned, it gave way to what is
known as "Contemporary Art" - meaning "art of the present era". The term "Contemporary
Art" is neutral as to the progressiveness of the art in question, and so another phrase "postmodernism" - is often used to denote recent avant-garde art. Schools of "postmodernist
art" advocate a new set of aesthetics characterized by a greater focus on medium and style.
For instance, they emphasize style over substance (eg. not 'what' but 'how'; not 'art for art's
sake', but 'style for style's sake'), and place much greater importance on artistcommunication with the audience.
What are the Most Important Movements of Modern Art?
The most influential movements of "modern art" are (1) Impressionism; (2) Fauvism; (3)
Cubism; (4) Futurism; (5) Expressionism; (6) Dada; (7) Surrealism; (8) Abstract
Expressionism; and (9) Pop Art.
(1) Impressionism (1870s, 1880s)
Exemplified by the landscape paintings of Claude Monet (1840-1926), Impressionism
focused on the almost impossible task of capturing fleeting moments of light and colour.
Introduced non-naturalist colour schemes, and loose - often highly textured - brushwork.
Close-up many Impressionist paintings were unrecognizable. Highly unpopular with the
general public and the arts authorities, although highly rated by other modern artists, dealers
and collectors. Eventually became the world's most famous painting movement. See:
Characteristics of Impressionist Painting (1870-1910). The main contribution of
Impressionism to "modern art" was to legitimize the use of non-naturalist colours, thus paving
the way for the wholly non-naturalist abstract art of the 20th century.
(2) Fauvism (1905-7)
Short-lived, dramatic and highly influential, Led by Henri Matisse (1869-1954), Fauvism was
'the' fashionable style during the mid-1900s in Paris. The new style was launched at the
Salon d'Automne, and became instantly famous for its vivid, garish, non-naturalist colours
that made Impressionism appear almost monochrome! A key precursor of expressionism.
See: History of Expressionist Painting (1880-1930). The main contribution of Fauvism to
"modern art" was to demonstrate the independent power of colour. This highly subjective
approach to art was in contrast to the classical content-oriented outlook of the academies.
(3) Cubism (fl.1908-14)
An austere and challenging style of painting, Cubism introduced a compositional system of
flat splintered planes as an alternative to Renaissance-inspired linear perspective and

rounded volumes. Developed by Pablo Picasso (1881-1973) and Georges Braque (18821963) in two variants - Analytical Cubism and later Synthetic Cubism - it influenced abstract
art for the next 50 years, although its popular appeal has been limited. The main contribution
of Cubism to "modern art" was to offer a whole new alternative to conventional perspective,
based on the inescapable fact of the flat picture plane.
(4) Futurism (fl.1909-14)
Founded by Filippo Tommaso Marinetti (1876-1944), Futurist art glorified speed, technology,
the automobile, the airplane and scientific achievement. Although very influential, it borrowed
heavily from Neo-Impressionism and Italian Divisionism, as well as Cubism, especially its
fragmented forms and multiple viewpoints. The main contribution of Futurism to "modern art"
was to introduce movement into the canvas, and to link beauty with scientific advancement.
(5) Expressionism (from 1905)
Although anticipated by artists like JMW Turner (Interior at Petworth, 1837), Van Gogh
(Wheat Field with Crows, 1890) and Paul Gauguin (Anna The Javanese, 1893),
expressionism was made famous by two groups in pre-war Germany: Die Brucke
(Dresden/Berlin) and Der Blaue Reiter (Munich), led by Ernst Ludwig Kirchner (1880-1938)
and Wassily Kandinsky (1866-1944) respectively. In sculpture, the forms of the Duisburgborn artist Wilhelm Lehmbruck (1881-1919) were (and still are) sublime. The main
contribution of expressionism to "modern art" was to popularize the idea of subjectivity in
painting and sculpture, and to show that representational art may legitimately include
subjective distortion.
(6) Dada (1916-24)
The first anti-art movement, Dada was a revolt against the system which had allowed the
carnage of The First World War (1914-18). It rapidly became an anarchistic tendency whose
aim was to subvert the arts establishment. Launched in neutral Switzerland in 1916, its
leaders were in their early twenties, and most had "opted out", avoiding conscription in the
shelter of neutral cities such as New York, Zurich and Barcelona. Founders included the
sculptor Jean Arp (1887-1966) and the Romanian poet and demonic activist Tristan Tzara
(1896-1963). The main contribution of Dada was to shake up the arts world and to widen the
concept of "modern art", by embracing totally new types of creativity (performance art and
readymades) as well as new materials (junk art) and themes. Its seditious sense of humour
endured in the Surrealist movement.
(7) Surrealism (from 1924)
Founded in Paris by writer Andre Breton (1896-1966), Surrealism was 'the' fashionable art
movement of the inter-war years, although the style is still seen today. Composed of abstract
and figurative wings, it evolved out of the nihilistic Dada movement, most of whose members
metamorphosed into surrealists, but unlike Dada it was neither anti-art nor political. Surrealist
painters used various methods - including dreams, hallucinations, automatic or random
image generation - to circumvent rational thought processes in creating works of art. (For
more, please see Automatism in Art.) The main contribution of Surrealism to "modern art"
was to generate a refreshingly new set of images. Whether these images were uniquely nonrational is doubtful. But Surrealist art is definitely fun!
(8) Abstract Expressionism (1948-60)
A broad style of abstract painting, developed in New York just after World War II, hence it is
also called the New York School. Spearheaded by American artists - themselves strongly

influenced by European expatriates - it consisted of two main styles: a highly animated form
of gestural painting, popularized by Jackson Pollock (1912-56), and a much more passive
mood-oriented style known as Colour Field painting, championed by Mark Rothko (1903-70).
The main contribution of abstract expressionism to "modern art" was to popularize
abstraction. In Pollock's case, by inventing a new style known as "action painting" - see
photos by text; in Rothko's case, by demonstrating the emotional impact of large areas of
colour.
(9) Pop Art (Late-1950s, 1960s)
A style of art whose images reflected the popular culture and mass consumerism of 1960s
America. First emerging in New York and London during the late 1950s, it became the
dominant avant-garde style until the late 1960s. Using bold, easy to recognize imagery, and
vibrant block colours, Pop artists like Andy Warhol (1928-87) created an iconography based
on photos of popular celebrities like film-stars, advertisements, posters, consumer product
packaging, and comic strips - material that helped to narrow the divide between the
commercial arts and the fine arts. The main contribution of abstract expressionism to
"modern art" was to show that good art could be low-brow, and could be made of anything.
See: Andy Warhol's Pop Art (c.1959-73).

SCHOOL SYSTEM
Global grade: How do U.S. students compare?
How do U.S. students compare to students in other countries? It's not as bad as some say,
but there is room for improvement.
The United States may be a superpower but in education we lag behind. In a recent
comparison of academic performance in 57 countries, students in Finland came out on top
overall. Finnish 15-year-olds did the best in science and came in second in math. Other topperforming countries were: Hong Kong, Canada, Taiwan, Estonia, Japan and Korea.
How did the U.S. do?
Students in the United States performed near the middle of the pack. On average 16 other
industrialized countries scored above the United States in science, and 23 scored above us
in math. The reading scores for the United States had to be tossed due to a printing error.
Experts noted that the United States scores remained about the same in math between 2003
and 2006, the two most recent years the test the Programme for International Student
Assessment (PISA) was given. Meanwhile, many other nations, Estonia and Poland being
two, improved their scores and moved past the U.S.
Researchers also made note of the fact that while the United States has one of the biggest
gaps between high- and low-performing students in an industrialized nation, Finland has one
of the smallest. Students in Finland perform remarkably well, regardless of the school they
attend.
What makes Finland so hot?
Finlands stellar performance has drawn the attention of education and government officials
around the world. These experts have uncovered many attributes of the Finnish educational
system that are distinctive and contribute to the success of Finnish students. Some of these
features are:
ADVERTISEMENT

The Finnish school system uses the same curriculum for all students (which may be
one reason why Finnish scores varied so little from school to school).

Students have light homework loads.

Finnish schools do not have classes for gifted students.

Finland uses very little standardized testing.

Children do not start school until age 7.

Finland has a comprehensive preschool program that emphasizes self-reflection

and socializing, not academics.

Grades are not given until high school, and even then, class rankings are not
compiled.

Teachers must have masters degrees.

Becoming a teacher in Finland is highly competitive. Just 10% of Finnish college

graduates are accepted into the teacher training program; as a result, teaching is a

high-status profession. (Teacher salaries are similar to teacher salaries in the U.S.,
however.)

Students are separated into academic and vocational tracks during the last three
years of high school. About 50% go into each track.

Diagnostic testing of students is used early and frequently. If a student is in need of

extra help, intensive intervention is provided.

Groups of teachers visit each others classes to observe their colleagues at work.
Teachers also get one afternoon per week for professional development.

School funding is higher for the middle school years, the years when children are
most in danger of dropping out.

College is free in Finland.

Says Professor Jouni Vlijrvi of the Institute for Educational Research at the University of
Jyvskyl, and Project Manager of PISA for Finland, In light of the PISA data, Finnish
schools manage to activate learning among the whole age cohort more effectively than any
other country. Students are not sorted into different groups or schools but different types of
learners are learning together. In this kind of setting high achieving students seem to serve
as positive models for their less advanced classmates. The pedagogy differs from that
applied in systems characterized by tracking and streaming. Efforts are made to provide
instruction to cater to the needs of different learners in terms of their skills and interests.
Preschool education a relatively new addition to the Finnish toolkit has been part of
their educational system for the past 10 years. According to Vlijrvi, Preschools are
nonacademic in the sense that no clear academic targets are set. Socialization into school
culture and learning to work together with children is the central role. Preschool is not
compulsory in Finland, but 96-97% of the children go to it.
Is it fair to compare the U.S. to tiny Finland or other homogeneous nations?
Finnish educational practices may provide clues to improvement for the United States, but
taken together they do not constitute a magical pill that will cure our educational blues. For
one thing, Finland has a vastly more homogeneous population than the United States. Very
few students in Finland speak a language at home other than Finnish. In the U.S., on the
other hand, 8% of children are English language learners, according to the U.S. Department
of Education.
Neither major nations such as those belonging to the G7 or G8 group (the main economic
competitors of the U.S.), nor the vast majority of nations participating in international
education surveys, have populations as diverse as the U.S., says Erling E. Boe, Professor
of Education and Co-Director of the Center for Research and Evaluation in Social Policy at
the University of Pennsylvania. Only the U.S. collects survey data for the race/ethnicity of
students in the study samples. Canada, for example, has a substantial minority group (East
Asians), but no data on such Asians as compared with Caucasians. The U.S. has sizable
minority groups of Black and Hispanic students that do poorly in international comparisons
and lower overall average scores for the U.S., while East Asians generally perform at a high
level in math and science achievement. Therefore, it is possible that the overall scores for
Canada are enhanced by its East Asian minority population.
Another area where Finland is homogeneous is in school funding. All of Finlands schools
receive the same per-pupil funding, in contrast to the United States where school funding is

based upon a complex formula that uses a local-funding component and creates inequities
between affluent and poor communities.
Vlijrvi believes that some educational choices can produce results regardless of the
demographics of a country. During the last 20 to 30 years most of the industrialized
countries have invested huge amounts of money and intelligence on external evaluations
and standardized tests. Finland has not. Finland has invested in teacher education, he says.
I dare to say that the profit of the Finnish investments has been greater.
New trends in international comparisons
One of the most interesting new trends in international comparisons is the effort by some
policy groups to compare individual states rather than the United States as a whole
with other countries. This is seen as a way to pressure state governments to improve
education. It also highlights the discrepancy in education that exists within the U.S.
The National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve,
an education advocacy organization, are researching ways to compare states with other
countries to tease out information on best practices and global competitiveness.
The first such study linked the U.S. National Educational Assessment of Progress (NAEP)
results with TIMSS results and produced suchinteresting comparisons as:

Students in Massachusetts, one of the highest performing states, are on par with
students in Japan in math.

In science, students in Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, North

Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont and Wisconsin are behind students in Singapore and
Taiwan only, but are equal to or ahead of students in the other 45 countries in the
TIMSS.

Students in the District of Columbia had the lowest math scores in the U.S., putting
them behind students in 29 countries, but ahead of 14 countries.

Students in Alabama, a low-performing state, do better in math and science than

students in most foreign countries.

The study analyzed the scores of eighth-grade American students in standardized tests given
by the U.S. Department of Education in 2005 and 2007, and compared them with their peers
in 45 countries. The foreign students scores came from TIMSS administered worldwide in
2003.
Although the report warns that the U.S. is falling behind in preparing future generations to be
globally competitive, the subtitle is 8th Graders in Most U.S. States Performing Better in
Math and Science than Students in Most Foreign Countries.
Were still #1 in global competitiveness
The World Economic Forum ranks the United States as number one out of 131 nations in
global competitiveness, using primary and higher education as part of its calculations. While
its true that other nations are challenging our position for example, India with its economic
ascension in recent years the United States is stronger in primary and secondary
education than many of these countries. The United States attempts to deliver an adequate
and equal education through high school to all of its citizens. India, although it produces
many scientists and engineers, provides a low-quality primary and secondary education to
much of its population. Just 40% of children in India enter high school.

GAP YEAR
You can do a lot on a gap year - but be aware of the downsides, too.
Between school or college and university is a good time to take time out, whether it's to earn
some money for your studies, get work experience, travel the world or volunteer. You don't
even have to worry about applying to university at the end of the year: you can apply before
your gap year and take 'deferred entry', which means you have an offer but it's postponed for
a year.
But gap years aren't for everyone, and you need to think carefully about the upsides and
downsides before making a decision.
Pros and cons of taking a gap year
Advantages

The experiences you gain can make you better prepared for university, both
academically and socially

Its probably the longest 'holiday' you will ever be able to take in your life - taking long
breaks will be harder once your career starts

You can use some or all of the time to earn money for university, taking the pressure
of your finances

You can learn new skills

You get the chance to experience life away from home before starting university

Volunteering gives you the opportunity to help people

Both volunteering and working will provide valuable work experience

If you're feeling dedicated, you can get ahead on preparations for your course

If you didn't get the grades in one of your A-levels, you can retake it and reapply while
using the rest of your time to do something else

Disadvantages

If you want to travel or take part in an organized gap year programme, it could be
expensive

There may be changes to your course or your student finance packageduring your
year off

If your friends from home are all going to uni, your social life could dry up

Unless you revise, you can forget a lot in a year that would be useful to your course

If you've got a university offer and haven't already agreed to defer your place, you
could be putting your place at risk

If you dont get organised, you may end up spending your gap doing nothing but
watching TV. Not great for the CV!

CHARITY
Be Smart About Charity
The year-end holidays are when the interests of donors and charities are most in sync.
However, after several disturbing news reports, I decided it was time to revisit how to give
away money. With a bit of digging and diligence, you can make your generosity more
effective and efficient.
First, the bad news: A few months ago, we discussed why the Red Cross had moved
to naughty from niceon my list of charities. Due to its performance after Hurricane Sandy -- a
result of incompetence and an utter lack of transparency (Pro Publica has all the details) -- I
consider it off-limits.
Then there was the pre-Thanksgiving story of Savers Thrift Stores, which was accused by
the Minnesota attorney general of pocketing more than $1 million that should have gone to
charities, the New York Times reported.
Its almost enough to turn a generous person into a Scrooge. But dont let a few mismanaged
(or worse) charities dissuade you from giving. In addition to the help you
provide, studies show it's one the best things you can do for your personal satisfaction.
Money can buy you happiness -- all you need to figure out is how to give it away intelligently.
But nothing these days is easy. What should be a simple process -- helping a worthy cause
or people in need -- has become confusing and challenging, rife with incompetence and
fraud. (Why does that sort of behavior sound so familiar?)
We are here to help.
Let's start with why you give: In addition to the aforementioned happiness quotient and the
obvious spiritual reasons, for many people the main goal is to try to make the world a better
place. The best way to do that is to make sure your money goes to the intended cause.
Some charities are more efficient -- often, much more -- in delivering dollars where they are
most needed. The worst charities have overhead costs that can approach 90 percent of
donations. In other words, for every dollar you give, one thin dime makes it to the intended
beneficiaries. That doesnt seem either efficient or charitable. These are charities in name
only, managed by people who take advantage of the generosity of others.
The best defense is to become informed about the organizations that are deserving
recipients of your contributions. Toward that end, let me suggest two websites that have done
an excellent job in helping to separate worthy charities from the unworthy.
The first is Give Well. Its approach is to find evidence-backed, thoroughly vetted,
underfunded charities for individual donors to support. If you want to make sure your money
is going to have an impact, this is a good place to start.
The second site is Charity Navigator. It rates thousands of charities based on factors that
include accountability, transparency, efficiency, financial health and administrative overhead
-- including executive compensation. I also like their list of the 10 best practices of savvy
donors.
A few other points to consider:

Matching programs: Does your employer or any other organization you are a
member of have a matching holiday-gift program? If so, then you can increase the
size of your donation.

Donating time: I have a friend in private equity who for the past 20 years has been
serving meals at a church-run soup kitchen. It costs her nothing but her time. She can
certainly write a big check, but she says this is the most fulfilling work she does all
year.

Don't give to phone solicitors: The people who call you seeking donations usually
are not volunteers; they are commission-based telemarketers. They keep much of
whatever you donate. No thank you.

Avoid giving cash: Cash is always at risk of sticky fingers.

Understand cash-register donation programs: It seems that every supermarket

and big-box store these days asks for a charitable contribution. Unless you are
familiar with the program and know that is efficient and effective, take a pass.

This is the time of year when our natural impulse is to share our blessings with others. With a
little research and thought, you can make sure that anything you give has the greatest
impact.

BEAUTY (IDOLS)
The Disturbing Effect Our Beauty Standards Have on Women Across the World
"We're losing bodies as fast as we're losing languages," says prominent British
psychotherapist Susie Orbach in the upcoming documentary The Illusionists. "Just as
English has become the lingua franca of the world, so the white, blondified, small-nosed,
pert-breasted, long-legged body is coming to stand in for the great variety of human bodies
that there are."
The documentary is the latest from 35-year-old Italian filmmaker Elena Rossini, who traveled
to eight countries throughout North America, Europe, the Middle East and Asia over the
course of seven years to explore the ways Western ideals of beauty including, but not
limited to, thinness are commodified and scattered throughout the globe.
"Western beauty ideals actually, man-made Western beauty ideals have spread to the
rest of the world through globalization and are now being upheld as models even in places
like India and Japan," Rossini told Mic. "And they have very dangerous consequences."
It may be National Eating Disorders Awareness Week, but we often forget that eating
disorders as well as the forces that may trigger them are a problem well beyond
confines of the U.S. In fact, rigid Western ideals are increasingly permeating cultures all over
the globe, introducing damaging standards of thinness in particular where they may never
before have existed.
"We're losing bodies as fast as we're losing languages."
Rossini was moved to make The Illusionists by what she saw as a cross-generation epidemic
of body dissatisfaction, which has manifested in similarly distressing ways across diverse
cultures.
Japan, for example, has historically maintained beauty standards distinct from Western
ideals, according to the documentary, with curvy figures long-associated with positive values
like wealth and fertility. Yet today, about 30% of Japanese women in their 20s are categorized
as underweight a proportion that has rapidly increased since the 1980s, as Dr. Tetsuya
Ando of the National Institute of Mental Health states in the film.
The problem remains largely unrecognized: According to an article by writer Georgia Hanias
in Marie Claire, only one professor specialized in eating disorders across all 80 Japanese
medical schools in 2012.
"Japanese women are under incredible pressure to have an ideal body," states one woman
interviewed on the streets of Tokyo in the film.
Jason Karlin, author of Idols & Celebrity in Japanese Media Culture, notes in the
documentary that this increasing importance placed on thinness can be attributed in part to a
Western media influence. Japanese women, he notes, try to "cultivate that body image that
they see in women's magazines, which are women's bodies that are very thin, with very long
legs and with many of the characteristics we associate with this kind of global culture of
beauty that is circulating throughout the world."
Rossini echoes Karlin's conclusion: "What many sociologists have observed is that
globalization and the way American media has been exported to the rest of the world
has had a profound effect in the way people all over the world perceive beauty ideals," she
told Mic.

Lebanon is another country explored in the film that appears to have been negatively
affected by Western ideals. It's the country with the most plastic surgery procedures per
capita, and about 1 in 3 Lebanese women has had a plastic surgery procedure, according to
the film. One Lebanese student interviewed in the documentary sums up what this reality
looks like: "If you walk around the streets of Lebanon, I think you'd realize that most people
look the same, specifically people from a certain social class that have the money to have
this many surgeries," she says.
"What many sociologists have observed is that globalization and the way American media
has been exported to the rest of the world has had a profound effect in the way people all
over the world perceive beauty ideals."
Lebanese culture was not always this way. "In the past 15 years, the beauty ideal changed in
Lebanon," makeup artist Hala Ajam says in The Illusionists. She roots this change in
globalized economic forces, noting that the infiltration of Western celebrity culture has
created an association between this idealized aesthetic and wealth itself. "All over the world,
stars make money like crazy," she observes. "[People think] if they look like them it's a
shortcut to being rich."
There's evidence that this rigid standard of beauty has been thoroughly embedded in
Lebanon's economy on multiple levels. Classified ads for jobs for women, for example, state
that women "must be beautiful," Nadine Moawad of the Nasawiya Feminist Collective says in
the film.
In order to meet such standards, special bank loans have been established solely for this
purpose. Lebanon's First National Bank even lends individuals up to $5,000 for these
procedures, according to CNN.
Ultimately, meeting a rigid, Western standard of beauty is equated not only with wealth, but
also with happiness. Lebanese people have come to normalize this standard as "important
for their improvement, for their career, in their life to build up friends, to become more
successful," Maher
Whereas eating disorders were "negligent" in Indian culture as recently as the 1990s, Indian
psychiatrists have noted that in the past decade, the number of Indian women suffering from
anorexia nervosa has increased between five and 10 times and it is impacting women at
younger ages, according to The Times of India. Indian psychiatrist Rajesh Sagar points to the
rise of Westernized media as a major contributing factor.
Ruchi Anand, American Graduate School professor of International Relations, agrees. He
says inThe Illustionists: "Now what we're seeing is a trend toward an imitation of the
Westernized body image. These girls literally are fighting for the size zero, which was never
known as beautiful in India."
Author, filmmaker and activist Jean Kilbourne observes in the film that countries that once
valued voluptuous female figures, like India, see changing norms once Western media
proliferates within their borders. "Wherever American popular culture goes, the public health
problems that are associated with it follow," she states in the documentary.
How to fight back: While it's crucial to remember that negative body image is partially
rooted in the global process of capitalism, individuals still have the power to fight back. "If
tomorrow women all over the world looked in the mirror and if they liked what they saw
reflected back at them, then we would have to reshape capitalism as we know it," says
professor and activist Gail Dines in the film. "If you take away that self-loathing that women
have, then you will see industries all over the globe go bankrupt." She adds that we could

end the system that exploits, manipulates and seduces women into hating themselves "as a
way to generate astronomical profits that keep a very few very wealthy."
"If tomorrow women all over the world looked in the mirror and if they liked what they saw
reflected back at them, then we would have to reshape capitalism as we know it."
Rossini notes that in order to combat these forces, individuals can both limit mainstream
media consumption and take to more democratized platforms, like social media. "Over the
last few years, I've noticed a positive sea change in the way these issues are tackled," she
told Mic. "Nowadays, a 14-year-old blogger can have a voice as loud as that of the CEO of a
Fortune 500 company. A single tweet or blog post can go viral, provoking changes at the top
in a matter of hours." But ultimately, she says, she would love to see "advertisers embracing
empowerment as a selling tool instead of insecurity."
Hopefully that day will come soon. In the meantime, it's important to complicate the
conversation we have about women and their bodies and work to remind the world that we
are allowed to love our bodies the way they are.

VIOLENCE
All about violence
Violence is something that causes harm, or fear of harm. It comes in many forms,
and happens for a number of different reasons. Drugs and alcohol often make it
worse, however, there are things you can do to deal with violence.
This could be for you if:

You get angry often, or know someone who does

You're a victim of violence

You want to stop violence

You want to be less angry

What counts as violence?

Violence is basically anything that hurts other people or makes them afraid of being hurt. It
comes in different forms, like:

Physical violence: making someone feel physically intimidated, including sexual

assault.

Emotional violence: making threats, putting someone down, frightening them

verbally or blackmailing them.

Social violence: this kind of violence often happens alongside other types. Teasing
someone, isolating them or making fun of them as a group are all kinds of social
violence.

Spiritual violence: not allowing someone to have their own beliefs, opinions or
values.

Where does violence come from?

There are many factors that can make a person violent. People can be violent because:

They're frustrated, angry or pissed-off

They want to control someone

They're repeating patterns they were taught

If you're prone to violence, there are ways that you can manage your anger and behaviour so
that it's not violent. Remember that violence is not okay, and in most cases is actually illegal.
Stopping Violence
At the end of the day, if you're being violent the only person that can stop you is yourself, and
the only violence you can definitely put a stop is your own. To help put a stop to violent
behaviour you should try to:

Work out what makes you violent or angry. Knowing the triggers will make it easier to
avoid them.

Look around to see if your violence is hurting people and damaging relationships. If it
is, work on reversing or undoing this.

Talk to someone. It's hard to deal with anger and violence on your own. Talking to
someone like a counsellor, mental health worker, nurse, doctor or psychologist can
help you.

It's also important to note, that if you're exhibiting violent behaviour drugs and alcohol can
make it worse as they reduce your inhibitions. You can get help with drug and alcohol
problems so they don't result in violence. A doctor, nurse, counsellor or psychologist can help
you with this. You can even find professionals who specialise in drug and alcohol issues.

HISTORY
Reasons Why It is Important to Study History ...
I remember that so many kids in high school would complain about history class, but they
clearly did not understand all of the important reasons to study history.
They did not understand what a big impact our history can have on us today.
And they certainly did not understand how learning history can help us shape our future.
1. UNDERSTAND SOCIETY
Of all of the reasons to study history, this one might be the most important.
How can we being to understand society today without understand what created it?
The events and people that shaped who we are today are incredibly important.
2. UNDERSTAND CHANGE
Going along with understanding society, studying history allows us a #look into what causes
change.
The events leading up to both World Wars help us understand how a small event can set off
a large series of changes.
History gives us the opportunity to see how daily life has changed over the years, and what
goes into the fostering that change.
3. PROVIDES SENSE OF IDENTITY
It is no wonder that websites like Ancestry.com are so popular.
People are intrigued to know where they came from.
What blood runs in their veins?
Is there any interesting family history?
Knowing the history of your family is very important to some people in finding a sense of
identity.
4. PRESERVES STORIES
It is important we hear the stories of those before us.
I find talking to my grandmother fascinating because she tells me so many stories of what it
was like growing up in her #time.
I think it is important to hear what those before us have to say.
We need to hear their stories, preserve them, and pass them down to those after us.
5. INSPIRE US
Hearing the stories of those before us can inspire us to take action in our own lives.
Knowing that my ancestors came to this country and worked their hardest for a better life,
inspires me to work my hardest of provide for my future family.
Our past can have a huge impact on our future and we need that inspiration to teach us that.

6. TEACH US WARNING SIGNS

In the Jewish community, we pray that another Holocaust will never happen to any group of
people every again.
But because of our suffering, we have learned the warning signs leading up to such a horror.
Society has been able to take these warning #signs and fight against them when they seem
them in the present day.
Knowing what events led up to a large occasion helps up better predict and influence our
future.
7. HELP US BE BETTER PEOPLE
Some people view history as a boring and unimportant subject, but one of the most important
reasons to study history is that is will make you a better person.
You will have a better understanding of the world and what shaped it into the world it is today.
You will understand the suffering, joy, and chaos that were necessary for the present day to
happen.
Some people think history is very boring, and I never understood those people.
It is a giant story that leads up to you.
It tells you about the lives of #people who lived hundreds of years before you.
And it can help you understand and mold the #worldaround you.
What did you think of my reasons to study history?
What are some reasons you think it is important to study history?
Did you enjoy studying history in school?