Feminist/women Perspectives from 50's to today

From the beginning, women were always struggling to gain admiration, status and rights in their society. According to the Oxford dictionary:"Feminism is the idea of equality of the sexes, giving an equality of rights and position in society, it is based on social, political and economical equality for women." The movie Monalisa Smile is important to begin a discover and analyses on feminism since the 50's to our days. Another significant fact of the matter is Betty Friedan. She was one of the most influential women in the history of the feminist movement and her ideas were revolutionary for that epoch.

Set in 1953, the movie Mona Lisa Smile tells the story of Katherine Watson (Julia Roberts), a young art history professor in an all-female campus with a prestigious reputation for academic excellence. She broke taboos, because tradition told women they would be wives and she supported her students to be more than that. Feminine women did not want things like an education, career or independence. She changed their thoughts that finding a husband and having a family was the only option and more important than other things such as a great education. Katherine Watson found the girls very intelligent, but she realized they were only attending school until they found someone to get married. The movie showed how Miss Watson encouraged the girls to go to school, she had a voice. Miss Watson found that having an open mind about the ways of society isn't the way a lot of people thought. The school administration thought that the only way to teach was to follow the books rigorously. Her best student, played by Julia Stiles, has been accepted into Yale Law School, yet decides to get married and forget about a legal career. Can a brilliant woman be happy solely as a wife and mother?

"A woman has got to be able to say, and not feel guilty, who am I, and what do I want out of life?'"-The Feminist Mystique, written by Betty Friedan, who recognized that women needed an outlet for their intellect and their education. In the book, Friedan defines women's unhappiness as ‘‘the problem that has no name”. She blames the idealized image of femininity, which she calls the feminine mystique. According to Friedan, women have been encouraged to confine themselves to a very narrow definition of “true” womanhood, forsaking education and career aspirations in the process by experts who wrote books, columns and books that told women during that era that their greatest role on the planet was to be wives and mothers.

If a woman had a problem in the 1950s and 1960s, she knew that something must be wrong with her marriage. Just what was this problem that has no name? Women were felling incomplete, empty, like they didn't exist. Emptiness was inside those women and they started to realize that something was wrong. They thought the trouble was a crisis in marriage, but the problem was logic, they did not have any challenge, and in life people need something to fight for, a goal. Without an object, there is nothing to accomplish, and this was the dilemma surrounding all these ladies. The wrong part of the life that those women were having was to be accustomed with the household life, and be satisfied with that. If they get together with other housewife’s, the subject was superficial, only relationships and emotions. They had no great and new experiences to exchange. Those women had to look for achieving power, energy, influence and most of all they needed ambition, that is a good thing if the objective is to obtain success and prosperity in life.

They were frightened that too much culture would be a barrier in their life, and they would not be able to concern for the kitchen. This typical housewife life was considered the only normal path for a woman to follow. Betty Friedan's Problem That Has No Name describes what women were feed as what should be done and how to do it: Over and over Women heard in voices of tradition that they could desire no greater destiny then to glory in their own femininity. The problem was an idealized image of femininity.


The movie “his girl Friday” is an illustration of how it was for woman. They were sure that they had to decide between having an occupation and a career, or a family life. The schools instructors and gentlemen’s supported that idea, and the women had to accept that and be all right. Hildy Johnson was a very intelligent and classy woman that helped to save a criminal guy life, because she wanted an interview. She was going to settle down with a husband and turn out to be like all other women, but she had principals of morality, and she took the right conduct, following her ideals. Hildy would agree with the women that wanted something else, because she had substance. His Girl Friday marked the transition from working women for ends other than marriage to statements regarding money.

With the start of the twentieth century, more and more women carry the desire to have a career outside the home. Men frequently represented women as unworthy of a more active role in society. While today's young women have the independence and opportunities that previous generation could only dream of, some don't seem all interested in have them. Paris Hilton is an example that scares me. My generation has her as an icon and idol. Should anyone have a role model like that? Celebrity culture has entered the collective consciousness of modern society to an extent that the phenomenon of celebrity is not earned by any personal talent. For me an example of woman would be someone with at least a degree. Someone who could speak, showing intelligence and knowledge about any subject, someone with values of perseverance, integrity and devotion in life.

In brief, those entire women in 1950 and earlier 60s had no responsibility for taking those choices, it seemed right for them; they could tell that they were born just for that. They had no examples of very powerful women to follow. The typical model of the perfect family doubtless did not work for so long because the emptiness of a life for others was evident, and everybody needs to nourish the mind with information, and only having a degree or a career they would percept the essentials of living, being independent and having moments for their own as well.

It is very important for a female to educate herself and to have a career. If women keep fighting for what they want some day all people will be treated equally no matter what their gender is. Women of the past fought long and hard for equal rights and we have to appreciate that. Before, their only purpose was to procreate and serve men. We can find ourselves overwhelmed by our many responsibilities. In today's society, a woman has the opportunity to perceiver in whatever she chooses to do, whether it be a housewife or the CEO of a major corporation. The impact of feminism on today's society is amazing, because more women are working outside the home than ever before. Women have more opportunities to go to college, and to better jobs than any other time in history. Today I see a large proportion of women in many countries that are as well qualified as any man. Unfortunately, today, women are still paid less than men are, even when they do similar work and have similar education, skills and experience.

Women can't retreat to a life of raising children and cooking meals just because of the society pressure. How can a lady enjoy any liberty if she lacks knowledge? Women have now emerged from laundry rooms and kitchens across the country and changed the demographics of the American workforce.
Even in some of the most male dominated industries the female’s perspectives are increasing. Women got to work for reasons that are every bit as particular as men's. Also, work provides individuals sense of dignity and self-worth.

The media has prejudices and stereotypes through its representation of women and has impact on everyone, everywhere. The magnitude of the problem varies from country to country, but the inequality between men and women is caused by stereotypes. American culture has devoted them to a mass communications lifestyle in which they base most of their well being upon. It is very unfortunate that the media influences American society to the point that it defines the "ideal woman". Society and culture are what influence a person’s view on beauty. The media has the greatest influence on western society. The more technology that is created, the more unrealistic our ideas of the "perfect" woman become.

For businesses, having women leaders isn’t about being politically correct. It’s about survival, says Joyce Gioia, co-author of How to Become an Employer of Choice. "Women will lead the corporations of the future, and if you don’t have women leaders you might not be in business in the future," she declares.

Although, females as a whole remain at a distant disadvantage in many aspects of life, they have still gone a long way from the days of the kitchen. The ideology is dominant throughout western history and what is believed as 'normal' to the society. Most women today are seeing themselves through different eyes. The women's movement started decades ago but still many women choose one or the other, family or career. We must learn from our history or we will repeat it. For women of all economic status, capacities, races, ideologies and abilities to become equal in this society they need to earn equal pay for equal work and have acceptance from the "machos" in the workplace.

Immigration in the United States

Immigration in the United States can be a controversial issue; many people say this phenomenon is irreversible. Millions of people are tempt to leave their homeland and cross national borders to improve their quality of life. Unauthorized immigration has been a major political issue in the U.S. Many of these immigrants come here with nothing more than their bodies. The truth is America has always struggled with the issue of immigration, both legal and illegal. Americans claim that the immigrants are destroying the American culture, way of life, and are responsible for a big part of crimes and drug trafficking. This issue has a bad impact in the education, business, social services and poverty but also has some advantages. The low paying labor jobs case is an example, Americans refuse to do it. Would Americans fill these jobs, at a higher wage, if foreigners were not available? Honestly, there are many different perspectives of the American Dream and the point is whether to treat illegal immigrants as victims, criminals, or as potential U.S. citizens.

They generally know the language less well and are less familiar with the culture. They often work harder and for longer hours. The argument is that the illegal immigrants are taking jobs away from American workers, hurting the economy. In many parts of the United States native-born workers still do the jobs. When employers say immigrants "take jobs Americans don't want," they really mean that immigrants "take jobs Americans don't want at the wages I want to pay." Policing the places where immigrants work can reduce the number of illegal immigrant living in the United States, because it can reduce the number of jobs open to them and also eliminate a principal reason for coming. Despite government efforts to control immigration, the United States population includes millions of illegal immigrants who choose to turn a blind eye to the law and become U.S. residents without official permission.

According to the Wikipedia, "Most illegal immigrants live in families where the adults are undocumented, but the children are U.S. born. An estimated 13.9 million people, including 4.7 million children, live in families in which the head of household or the spouse is an unauthorized immigrant". The children of these immigrants will soon enter the labor force and begin paying taxes, supporting their kids' education.

Americans are less opposed about immigration than they have been before, according to a new poll by NPR, the Kaiser Family Foundation and Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. People may just want a fresh start, why deny them of that?

Illegal immigration is an on-going issue, which is of much importance in the United States today. There are people on the U.S. side who speak no English, read no U.S. newspapers, and watch no U.S. television. Perhaps the most telling way to assess the immigrant contribution is to ask what would happen if the influx stopped or if those already here left the country. How does illegal immigration affect U.S economy? Immigrants increase the supply of labor in the economy, and for a change America provides them with a higher income and quality of life.

What do American citizens feel about illegal immigration? In Washington State, the Elway Poll showed that Washington voter’s biggest concern was that illegal immigrants use services, yet do not pay for taxes. Is not possible to predict the role of immigration in America’s future but if this tax problem doesn't reach an end, the economy is going to suffer a decline soon.

An advantage about immigrants, according to the site http://www.newsbatch.com/immigration.htm, is that "Studies have indicated that because most immigrants occupy low-paying, low-skill jobs, their presence is complementary. Because of their contributions, the overall economy is stronger and the wage level and standard of living of most native workers is higher than would exist if they were not present. In particular, the high concentration of undocumented workers in the agricultural industry keeps food prices relatively low." This is something considerable, the immigrants in this case can complete what people really need, low prices on food.

According to the site http://www.nytimes.com, the fast food business has spread all over the nation and is now served at restaurants and drive-through, at stadiums, airports, zoos, high schools, elementary schools, universities, on cruise ships, trains, and airplanes, at K-Marts, Wall-Marts, gas stations, and even at hospital cafeterias. Eric Schlosser wrote the book "Fast Food Nation" and according to him, Americans spent more than $110 billion a year on the fast food. Americans today spend more money of fast food than in higher education. This growth of the fast food industry demanded workers, and the people that want to take these jobs are immigrants. "McJob, a low-pay, low-prestige job that requires few skills and offers very little chance of intercompany advancement." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McJob). McDonalds makes billions and billions of dollars every year by selling things for such a low price and making a very large profit. Eric Schlosser, presents the harsh realities of the unfair labor practices of the fast food industry. Fast food corporations employ more people than other corporations in the world. They prefer unskilled workers that have absolutely no experience. Americans think that Non-English speaking workers take jobs away from American people because they will work for cheaper wages. When Americans prevent immigrants from taking those jobs, producers and consumers suffer the consequences.

Especially since the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001, Americans have attempt to find a elixir for the immigration issue. Visa process has become so hard to attain in order to visit, study, and work in the United States. Most international arrivals to the U.S are expected delays because of the immigration process they have to go through.

International borders have always been centers of conflict, and the U.S.-Mexican border is no exception. One of the most controversial political issues of today is that of illegal immigrants from Mexico. Americans need to recognize that migration from Mexico to the United States is here to stay. So they need to realize, as Wayne Cornelius expressed in the LA newspaper on Mexican immigration "These migrants pay into the Social Security trust fund millions of dollars that they will never collect, as well as state income taxes, and even property taxes for which they will receive relatively few benefits." This is a point of view that many Americans don't know about it. When they are trying to exterminate Mexicans, they should think concerning the benefits.

The United States takes on most of the deficits that illegal immigration causes; having to deal with the abuse of social services by non-citizens. The United States had long been the world’s chief receiving nation for immigrants. The continued influx of illegal immigrants promotes disrespect for the law. Also population increase which results in the overcrowding of cities.

United States had witnessed the transformation from American Indian to a rich array of ethnic and racial population. Immigrants give America the chance to know the culture of many countries. They bring in their religion, culture and ideology.
Without any restrictions the country would be overflowing with immigrants, but if completely prohibited the country would lose its diversity and much of its low-income work force.

Immigrants help build this country, the government must make sure that the rights of the immigrants are respected, in order to improve not only their lives but also the economy of the whole country. A diverse population with countless ethnicities, races and creeds is what makes America special.....immigration statistics must be studied by both sides in order to reach a decision most beneficial to American nation. International migration is a practical element of modern societies, rich and poor, that resolves the uneven distribution of people and opportunities.

Euthanasia - Artificial Life or Natural Death?

Euthanasia has to do with the quality of life, dependency, personal beliefs, suffering, morality, and death itself. The practice of euthanasia is illegal in most countries. According to the site http://members.tripod.com, there are three basic types of euthanasia: voluntary, non-voluntary and involuntary active or passive. Everyone deserves respect and the power to control their own destiny. There are medical, religious and ethical arguments about euthanasia.

The issue of euthanasia has been on the media's forefront for several years. There are several pros and cons to this issue. With an assisted suicide a person and his or her family can be relieved of the agony of the illness. According to the Newsweek magazine from last January, some people have suggested that we legalize physician-assisted suicide in California. They argue that we should find death before it finds us, and that the right to die is the right-to-choose. On the other hand, if killing sick people began legal, then people may die simply because they have become a burden. One of the very important things about euthanasia is that it keeps people from suffering like family members, and also the person. If they are choosing euthanasia is because they are experiencing a lot of painful and traumatic illnesses and is it is better to practice euthanasia when there is no cure for them.

It bothers me just to think that someone would kill his or her loved ones, but sometimes is the only way when dead is the one which is extended, and life is hidden with machines making terminally ill patients into prisoners of technology. People should have the right to take their lives if they are totally dependent on others or machines. I feel a person is entitled to
that choice.

Supporters of euthanasia hold autonomy, individuality, and self-determination as their highest values. I think that voluntary euthanasia should be permitted and unnatural death should not be considered unethical or suicide. A person's life and body are their own business. I think we should legalize Euthanasia. We live in a democratic society where we are free to make these decisions.

The assistance by a doctor is not euthanasia, but a relief of pain administered by a doctor. There is an injection to make the patient comatose, followed by a second injection to stop the heart (www.euthanasia.org/dutch.html). This circumstance is obviously one in which the patient is destined to death and is in pain. Euthanasia affects not only the person who dies, but other family, friends and those doctors or individuals who help make that decision.

In the Non-Voluntary Euthanasia cases, the decision is not made by the person who is going to die. The patient must be an infant, very old, mentally impaired, very ill physically and mentally, unconscious, or not competent to make such decision. Is euthanasia ethical? According to religious organizations, some fear that the act will be the first step to a society who will kill elderly or disabled people against their will. If voluntary euthanasia were to become legal, it would not be long before involuntary euthanasia would start to happen. But only the voluntary should be legalized.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in an entry last updated on Feb. 19, 2007, defines voluntary euthanasia in the following way:"Those instances of euthanasia in which a clearly competent person makes a voluntary and enduring request to be helped to die." Should voluntary euthanasia be legalized? If the lack of money or health insurance exists, why not? Having to lay in bed twenty-four hours a day is no way to live a life. Voluntary euthanasia is when the patient requests that he wants to die by the drug. Someone argue that euthanasia can release pain of patients and it is a mercy way for those who are near death. Should people have the choice to end their own life? The main reason for euthanasia would have to reside upon the unbearable pain of the patient. I believe people should never take the fast way to end their lives, but should be their decision in a extreme case. Some people can just commit suicide without any help. If is legalized, they can say good bye to the loved ones. Let people die in peace, rather than suffering to the end. I am talking about a terminally ill patient’s life that should be ended at his /her request. People shouldn't just give up on life; they should live it out to the end, but when they are sure that the end is very near, why not evict the worst phase of life? Death is an unavoidable event and happens to everyone.

Passive euthanasia, on the other hand, is rarely debated and usually never enters the mind's eye because it is typically looked at as letting someone die naturally. There are many cases in which euthanasia is acceptable. Brain death is one situation. Not one person should have to suffer from a disease that is incurable and leads inevitably to death. Death in dignity is a very important part of life. Euthanasia allows this to happen.

Active euthanasia is a cowardly thing to do because it is like giving up on life as soon as something goes wrong. Is it not better to attempt to keep them alive and they still die a natural death than to not try and give up all hope on our loved ones? My argument is that the person can be sick for twenty years, lying in the hospital bed coupled to machines. After time, this won't be the person that you knew and loved.

Dr. Neil Campbell, author of "A Problem for the Idea of Voluntary Euthanasia," questions whether there can be a such thing as voluntary euthanasia. Euthanasia, or physician-assisted suicide, is the intentional termination of life by another at the explicit request of the person who dies. Dr. Campbell's main argument is that "if the pain and suffering are by definition unbearable, then it seems clear enough that the decision to die is not freely chosen but is compelled by the pain." Dr. Campbell, a Seasonal Instructor in the Department of Philosophy at the University of Calgary, believes there is no clear cut way to differentiate between "voluntary" and "involuntary" euthanasia under certain conditions. Involuntary euthanasia is when the person who is killed made an expressed wish to the contrary. This is really hard, but some cases such as coma or in a very young baby case, is necessary to make the decision.

Somebody said to me once that euthanasia was bad because it messes with God's will, and I argued that if that were true then keeping people alive with machines was also messing with God's will, and is just as unnatural. People who have experienced this case say that euthanasia is the best option for the patient and the family. People should have the right to end one’s life in a peaceful, dignified manner.

One of the biggest controversies of this decade is euthanasia, is a struggle that involves different points of view. I strongly believe that everyone has the right to choose how to die, if the person is very sick. There are so many different arguments possible on each side of the case; such as it's the people right to choose to pass on or it’s ethically wrong to do this. In either case, active or passive, the victim will die.

Miley cyrus

The Walt Disney Corporation was not a bit of outraged when its billion dollar child star Miley Cyrus appeared in Vanity Fair wearing only a bed sheet, as shown in the leftmost image above. The last cover of Vanity Fair magazine brought a considerable reaction on the American nation. People are concerned, especially parents of young children, they think the picture was very inappropriate for a kid of her age, fifteen years, and that children should not be portrayed as sexual beings. In the cover you can see Miley Cyrus, which is a singing and acting sensation known to her legions of teenage fans from the Disney Channel series "Hannah Montana."

There are pictures where she appears with her dad, but the one that is generating “embarrassment” is the picture where she is half nude. The photo, and subsequently released behind-the-scenes photos, shows Cyrus without a top, her bare back exposed but her front covered with a bed sheet. The Cyrus family was completely involved in the shoot, maybe which is why she looks natural, and pretty. It is art. Compare these photographs to other scandals and you can see is not that bad, the problem is that she is a young woman and a role model to younger girls.

According to the newspaper L.A Times the Vanity Fair site crashed because of high traffic Monday April 28, 2008, the day the photos were published online. The Vanity Fair shoot could have been an attempt to rebrand Cyrus as an artist in her own right, paving the way for a post-Hannah Montana career. Vanity Fair defended the shoot, reminding people that the young actress father also posed in the session.

In an interview with USA Today, Cyrus was quoted as saying her faith is "the main thing" and is the reason why she works in Hollywood. A Disney Channel spokesperson says: "Unfortunately, as the article suggests, a situation was created to deliberately manipulate a fifteen year old in order to sell magazines." Miley should not be blamed for the picture because she is too young to see herself in a sexy way, and probably the parents didn't think the picture would be taken that seriously. At the same time, she is growing up and singing her own music, with a more distinct personality, talking about relationships but in an appropriate way for her age. In the site www.metrolyrics.com, is possible to find the lyrics from the songs she is singing at the moment and being recognized for, such as the hit "see you again", which has this chorus "I knew you were something special, when you spoke my name, now I can't wait, to see you again". Her music sounds cheese, obviously sentimental, but is not infantilized nor too sexually advanced. In a couple years Miley is going to change her image from innocence to sexy when her fan base become teenagers.

There has been a lot of controversy surrounding Miley Cyrus Vanity Fair photo that everyone from Cyrus to photographer Annie Leibovitz are apologizing and backtracking on the entire incident. This photographer is the same person that took the picture of Lebron James and Gisele, which also created a situation of controversy. The reality is Annie Liebovitz is the most iconic photographer of her generation. She is not culpable because probably there is a team of experts on images, professionals that are ready to look attentively and give their view on the circumstance. As stated by Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, since 1983, Leibovitz has worked as a featured portrait photographer for Vanity Fair, and I think she has personal experience to know the power of this magazine influence. The wikipidia display a statement that Leibovitz released saying:"I'm sorry that my portrait of Miley has been misinterpreted". Responding to all the media expressions and feelings, Cyrus apologizes: " took part in a photo shoot that was supposed to be ‘artistic’ and now, seeing the photographs and reading the story, I feel so embarrassed. I never intended for any of this to happen and I apologize to my fans that I care so deeply about." Hannah has expressed embarrassment about the pose. I'm sure she didn't have any problems with the pictures until she got some negative feedback. This is wrong, a fifteen year old girl perhaps don't relate with sexuality, and since she doesn't have the mental capacity to make adult decisions, her manager or parents have. They were all there to analyze the cover situation and concord with that. It is undeniable, that she is getting older and changing her manners. But she still a kid and can be manipulated, the adults involved need to be held responsible for her next moves, pay attention to not bring this kind of exposition again. She needs to focus on her career.

Magazines and internet are a vital source from which many Americans receive information. Both the publication and the singer Hannah Montana can help. Vanity Fair can start a campaign to achieve opportunity for poor kids. Poverty is something that not only effects adults, but children as well and is a growing problem every day. Also children maltreatment and abuse should be explored and communicated for all the readers. Miley Cyrus could get the money earned for the cover and voluntarily engage her in various sorts of children charity, doing an effort to help the disadvantaged kids, for example providing funds to financially support education for them. The Disney Channel should offer concerts with a charity purpose more often, since Miley is very well known person, her popularity can be intend to the benefit of helping people.

Of the many atrocities committed against the innocent youth of the world, the commercial sexual exploitation of children is perhaps the most abominable. Everybody worried with the Miley Cyrus cover should be preoccupied with real problems like child prostitution. According to UNICEF, one million children will enter the sex tourism industry next year. An estimated 1.2 million children were trafficked last year and exploited for various types of labor, including prostitution. A child deserves to be respected and safe. The quality of schools attended is important but for the children without access to education is important to have parents at least try to give expectations.

Some of the most preventable diseases known to humans are hate and gender differences. Instead of perturbation about the cover of Vanity Fair, those unoccupied have to bother about hunger children. Due to insufficient resources some families don't have food. This is also a disorder.

I think we have allowed the media to determine what is moral for us. In general, are they infecting our young people with these negative self-images as exploitation? People lately seem to see something perverted in everything they look at. Michele Combs, a spokesperson for Christian Coalition of America, told Usmagazine.com that “Disney should reprimand her.” I agree that young girls need positive role models, but this is a artistic image that should not be viewed at sexually, but rather artistically. It seems like people jump at any excuse to criticize, She is a teen and child symbol. The picture can be considered a transformation of a child to a young woman.

In this case there is no difference between a blanket and a dress. I don’t see the huge deal with this picture, is just showing her back, that picture is hardly exposing, would it be worst if she was wearing a small bikini.

The New York Times originally published a sensational front cover with the headline “A Topless Photo Threatens a Major Disney Franchise.” They are overreacting. Maybe the problem isn’t so much sexual promotion, but rather commercialization. The Times should go after the alcohol and tobacco industries, which is influential in a bad way and inadequate for children.

In conclusion, I must remind everyone that there is not one single consumer in the Hanna Montana universe who reads Vanity Fair, if children are too young to understand these pictures, and then they are probably too young to be reading Vanity Fair. From my perspective, there is nothing wrong with the picture, she was not exploited. I don't blame her at all. If there was a responsible should be the parents and her representatives. Now if a parent does not want their children idolizing Cyrus only because the picture is a little unsuitable, it is up to them to tell their children that is pornography, which do not qualifies. A little overexposed? Yes. Not indecent. Although I'm not too much of a fan with the music and shows, I am aware of the Disney image she's obtained and with or without these photos she is an icon for the next teenager generation.