Greenmonkey Organic Baby Food Essay Example for Free

Greenmonkey Organic Baby Food Essay Background Christchurch, New Zealand was the home town of 100% organic baby food company, Green Monkey. Founded by sisters, Lizzie Dyer and Charlotte Rebbeck in 2002 (Green Monkey Ltd, 2013). The two sisters set out to create 100% organic baby food that was traceable and sourced from only certified New Zealand producers. No other baby food manufacturer within the New Zealand market could claim these same principles, creating a unique opportunity for Green Monkey (Bradley, 2011). Mission. Green Monkey uphold a strong mission, to see a sustainable way of producing their products without harm to the environment, but also to take the most of what the New Zealand pristine environment has to offer (Green Monkey Ltd, 2013). Allowing the customer to trace where the products primarily come from is key to Green Monkeys mission statement. Value Proposition Green Monkeys value proposition is to offer information about each part of the sold product, allowing customers from around the world to see what is in the product. Offering a product that is affordable and of a high standard for small children is one of Green Monkeys founding principles. Size Five employees make up the vital role of managing, marketing and maintaining the highest quality Green Monkey products. Production of Green Monkey is out sourced to a factory in Christchurch, New Zealand, due to high demand. Type of products Green Monkeys product range covers products such as growing up milk powder, meat and non-meat baby food pouches (Appendix 1). All of the products offered by Green Monkey are 100% Organic with no additives. Target customers. The target customers that Green Monkey focus on are in a niche market where parents are concerned about what is in their babies foods. Green Monkey uphold top customer relations to ensure the security within the niche market. Segmentation Base As Green Monkey cannot compete on price alone, their demographic has adapted to high to middle income families in Australia, China, Dubai and New Zealand (South, 2012). Green Monkey follow a differentiation focused strategy as they are in a niche market. According to VALS psychographics research innovators are more like to purchase organic foods (Strategic Business Insights, 2009-2012). Appendices Appendix 1: Example of Green Monkey products Sourced from business. newzealand. com: http://business. newzealand. com/vBY4ddA/media/1185202/GreenMonkey_Event. jpg ? Reference List Bradley, S. (2011). Green Monkey Organic Baby Foods Happy Planet – Happy Monkeys. Retrieved April 7, 2013. from Bord Bia Irish Food Board: http://www. bordbia. ie/industryservices/brandforum/CaseStudies/Green%20Monkey%20Organic%20Baby%20Foods. pdf South, G. (2012). Small Business: Making it in China Green Monkey. The New Zealand Herald, [online] 28th September. Retrieved from: http://www. nzherald. co. nz/business/news/article. cfm? c_id=3objectid=10837054 Ecofind. co. nz (2013). Green Monkey – organic baby food | ecofind. co. nz. [online] Retrieved from: http://www. ecofind. co. nz/food-drink/green-monkey-organic-baby-food/ Greenmonkey. co. nz (2002). Green Monkey | Organics born naturally. [online] Retrieved from: http://www. greenmonkey. co. nz/ Strategic Business Insights. (2009-2012). Sample demographic and behaviours. Retrieved April 7th, 2013. from Strategic Business Insights: http://www. strategicbusinessinsights. com/vals.

Indigenous Australians

Indigenous Australians Introduction Indigenous Australians are scattered across the nation. As of 2006, there are around 517,000 indigenous Australians living in the country out of a total population of around 21 million (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2006). Because of the variety of climate, vegetation and availability of resources in various parts of Australia, indigenous Australians usually move about in bands for protection and mobility. According to the Encyclopedia Brittanica (1980, p.428) this pattern of nomadic existence basically did not change until the arrival of European settlers beginning in 1788. The subsequent interaction and eventual conflict between the two cultures caused major changes in the indigenous Australians culture. Their social organisations were eroded primarily due to population shifts and the attempt to assimilate them into Western society. The latter include the controversial adoption methods when thousands of indigenous Australian children were taken away from their families to be edu cated in Western style schools during the 19th century. Aborigines were also forced to flee constant European influx into their homelands, marked by clashes during the â€Å"pacification campaign† of the 1880s. (Encyclopedia Brittanica 1980, p.429) Beginning in 1965, the Australian government eventually changed this policy to integration in a multi-ethnic commonwealth. This was in response to protests by human rights activists and the indigenous Australians themselves complaining against centuries-long discrimination by European settlers. From the 1970s onwards, the Australian government had given Aborigines more self determination rights in governing their affairs especially those among living in indigenous communities. However, despite the granting of more rights to indigenous Aborigines, many experts pointed that social problems such as unemployment, alcoholism and suicide rates still remain a primary concern among the indigenous Australians. This is connected to the fact that many indigenous Australians have migrated to cities especially since the 1970s to look for job opportunities Taylor (2006, p3). General concept of kinship Indigenous Australians, either from both inland and coastal areas have three main features characterizing their social organizations and culture: food gathering tribes are small and mostly depend on gathering-hunting activities, b) members must cooperate with each other for survival and c.) religion plays an important role in the lives of indigenous Australians (Encyclopedia Brittanica 1980, p.424). It is generally agreed upon by anthropologists that at the macro-level, the social structure of indigenous Australians, before the coming of Europeans, was based on the following in descending order: tribe, moieties, semi-moieties, sections, sub-sections, and clans. Anthropological studies have concluded that indigenous Australians use this distinction of tribes into sub-groups as a means to govern marriage and social interaction. At the micro-level, indigenous Aborigines classify themselves into local descent groups and hordes which each indigenous Australian identified himself with at the local level. Descent groups are formed by a grouping of individuals claiming patrilineal descent from a common ancestor and practicing exogamous marriages, Hordes, on the other hand, are formed by individuals who gather together for a specific â€Å"business† purpose (Encyclopedia Britannica 1980, 428). Kinship has been defined in various ways by anthropologists. Goudelier, (1998 as cited in Dousett 2001) termed kinship is a â€Å"huge field of social and mental realities stretching between two poles.† In between, Goudelier added, kinship covers abstract and concrete concepts: the abstract aspect covers the various rules and regulations covering interpersonal relationships. As for the concrete aspect, kinship covers the titles used in referring to persons connected to kinship relationships. Meanwhile, Stone (1997 as cited in Dousett 2001) describes kinship as the â€Å"recognition of relationships† between persons according to descent or marriage. Tonkinson (1991 as cited in Dousett 2001) finds kinship as a wide network of relationships, no two of which are related to each other. Dousett (2002) termed kinship as the â€Å"set of norms, rules, institutions and cognitive recognitions† used in referring to inborn or future social relationships of a person and is ad dressed through a specific â€Å"biological idiom† Unlike in the Western concept, kinship among indigenous Australians extends beyond an individuals connection with blood relatives. Tonkinson (1991 cited in Dousett (2001) added that kinship is important in small societies such as those of the indigenous Australians because it defines interpersonal behavior among individuals, compliance of which is essential for a groups survival. Kinship networks also play a role in resource sharing among indigenous Australians. There is an inherent tradition among them that each individual have to share their resources with each other especially in times of need. Schwab and Liddle (1997) pointed out that this is quantified by limitations on when an individual may share or may refuse to share depending on the sharers capacity to give. But both the sharer and the receiver must keep in mind the social implications of their actions on their clans kinship ties, Schwab and Liddle added (1997). Dousett (2002) also mentioned that Aboriginal concept of kinsh ip is different from the Western concept. While the â€Å"Euro-American† concept of kinship is based on direct lineage of an individual to other persons within his community, by contrast indigenous Australians consider kinship also covers relationships based on business transactions. In addition, indigenous Australian kinship serves also as a social control because it also defines how an individual plays a role in society in relation with other members even those who are not of his same lineage. In fact, familial terms (â€Å"father,† â€Å"mother†) can also refer to other older members of the descent group, or clan which an individual may belong. However, kinship terms serves not only as titles for respect but also serves as â€Å"behavioral signals which mark what an individual can or cannot do with regard to personal relationships and expectations of sexual access. This means kinship terms are a vital part in determining the marriage and socialization of ind ividual young members In addition these terms also signify which person can be considered as a spouse or affine (a relative by marriage). Doulett cites Henry Lewis Morgan, an American lawyer-anthropologist, explanation on how indigenous Australian societies kinship systems work. Morgan (1877, 1871 in Doulett 2000) had earlier described in the 19th century that indigenous Australian kinship systems are classificatory. This is because Australian Aborigines consider all persons within a community as related to each other in various ways. Morgan also said that the Australian Aborigines kinship system reflects the initial stages of evolution changes in human society. From the banding together of two or more individuals, this eventually grew into a tribal organization where intermarriage was common, toward the eventual development of a city state. In this evolutionary phase, the Aboriginal kinship system was in the second stage. Socialization, social control: Anthropologists have mentioned that kinship restriction and rules are already visible even during childhood socialization. Aborigine parents train children to socialize with fellow age-group members, and at the same time train them already in the ways of the tribe (e.g. food gathering and hunting.) Young girls went with their mothers to collect food, while young boys were compelled to learn hunting by their own. However, there are certain restrictions in how the children interact with other persons. For instance, brothers and sisters would play separately from each other, while â€Å"mothers-in-law† and â€Å"sons in law† would not play together. (the latter would apply when a young man groomed to marry a female is compelled to live in the camp of his pairs family. ) (Encyclopedia Brittanica 1980, p.426). In terms of authority, leadership is based on the scope of an elders kinship network. Hence, for more complex matters, such as arbitration in disputes, elders of a clan gather together to discuss and reach a consensus over these issues. (Encyclopedia Brittanica 1980, p.427). However, kinship systems do not restrict social mobility when it comes to social classes or strata. While there is a hierarchy where young Aborigines have to pass as they learn various skills, indigenous Australian society as a whole allows individuals to excel in religious and economic affairs primarily through their own efforts and skills. (Encyclopedia Brittanica 1980, p.427). Kinship and marriage Marriage among indigenous Australians cements the role of kinship as more than just linking personal relationships between and among members of a moietie, clan or tribe. It serves also as a kind of social negotiation between one unit with another on virtually all social matters ranging from arranging future marriages between the clans members and transaction of barter trades. Marriage between two individuals also reaffirms ties between groups which already have preordained tasks and obligations even before the marriage is consummated formally. Indigenous Australians have also used marriage to compel the other clan to provide spouses for future marriages. This may explain why the practice in some moiety to compel its members to marry a member from another particular moiety. Houseman (2007) had said in his study that â€Å"Marriage is a product of social constructs.† To elaborate further, marriage is also linking other individuals together by virtue of linking the bride and the groom in a socially sanctified wedding ritual. These individuals, because they are related either to the bride and groom, are by implication, now related also through affinity. This linkage is based on what anthropologists have enunciated as the intertwining of kinship ties and marriage ties. With regard to this remark on marriage, Houseman explored in his study how indigenous Australians construct and maintain marriage networks as a form of promoting social stability among themselves. In his study, Houseman theorized that indigenous Australians practice marriage as a confluence of various social and personal factors and that marriages are interlinked through a circular pattern from core marriages to outer marriages. He also distinguishes some marriage determinants, which include: â€Å"deliminated marriage network,† â€Å"core of deliminated marriage network,† â€Å"matrimonial community,† and â€Å"connobium.† Houseman (2007) defines deliminated marriage network as a web of relationships extracted from a larger grouping and is formed by the confluence of tribe-and clan-based perspectives on marriage. This means that from a particular community or clan, there is a specific network from which all persons related to the couple to be married are connected in some way. On the other hand, â€Å"core of deliminated marriage networks comprises of genealogical circuits of the â€Å"reconnected marriage,† meaning these are lineages among individuals which have been re-linked with the marriage of two individual Aborigines. The determinant â€Å"matrimonial community pertains to the set of non- intermarrying individuals who are related to each other through core marriages. Springing from this concept is the connobium which refers to the connection of non-intermarrying individuals to each other through multiple core marriages. However, Aboriginal moieties and clans do not intermarry just because they have to maintain close ties with each other Houseman (2007). Evidence suggested by previous research suggest that moieties and clans intermarry with other tribal sub-units because that these groups can be relied upon in maintaining the land, guarding it from intrusion by other groups, are able to share knowledge about the land, and that they can perform certain rituals according to specific occasions. Kinship after colonization; contemporary times The onslaught of modern ideas due to colonization and Westernization has wrought major changes in indigenous Australians culture. Experts noted that the destruction or even at least alteration of kinship networks has left many individual Aborigines grappling with culture shock Those who may not have been able to adjust well to the realities of modern Australian life have resorted to alcoholism, and suicide as desperate attempts to escape their problems, studies have shown. Studies by Daly and Smith (1997) and Hunter and Gray(1999) cited figures showing that indigenous Australians suffer higher rates of poverty and at the lower end of the income gap with non-Aboriginal Australians even as recent as the 1990s. One factor which affected the kinship systems of Australian indigenous peoples is the fact that many if not most of them already been intermixed with European blood. In addition they may have been heavily influenced by the Western culture that they encounter in the cities. As mentioned early in this essay, beginning in the 19th century many Aborigines have either moved from their homelands in search of jobs or were forced to flee European incursion into their lands. In fact until the 1990s, many Australian cities saw continued influx of indigenous Australians even as these cities also reported net migration losses.(Taylor, 2006 p.63) Hence many of the indigenous Australians were either the products of interracial marriage or had intermarried into European families (as in the case of African-Americans in the United States during the slave trade-era.). In addition as the indigenous Australians moved in the cities they had to deal with a different culture system where the emphasis is on individual excellence. But since they are away from their ancestral lands, they also lacked support systems, both in terms of providing material and emotional assistance, whenever they encounter problems in finding jobs, places to live. etc. Another more profound determinant in the alteration of Aborigine social systems is the compelled enrollment of Aborigine children to schools (especially the ones who were adopted by White families). Because the curriculum of these schools are centered on European culture, many Aborigine children tend to be assimilated by intensely studying European-style subjects and the English language. As a result, they have to uproot themselves from the traditional way of life and culture that they had experienced in their tribes. A Portrait of Life and Self Destruction Layton (2007) revealed many aspects on modern-day problems at the end of the 20th century in his review of the book Aboriginal Suicide is Different: A Portrait of Life and Self Destruction. While reviewing the 2005 book by Colin Tatz, Layton discussed some factors behind Aborigines suicides even though medical research concluded that there were no considerable patterns of mental illnesses among them distinctive from Australias general population. Layton added that overall rates for unemployment, drug abuse, and alcoholism were similar for both Aboriginal and non Aboriginal populations, so this would not factor likely as the root cause behind the suicide rates among Aborigines. He said that this may be explained by the fact that during the 1980s, the social organization of many Aboriginal tribes and clans had been destroyed by the intrusion of modern culture and also by government policies of allowing Aborigines to depend on state sponsored welfare. Layton, quoting Tatz as suggesting that Aborigines be given more literacy training, â€Å"personal empowerment,† highlighting positive roles of Aborigines in community development etc . Meanwhile Wooten (2002, p. 78) believed that the reason behind continued poverty among Aborigines is that the policy of self-determination, enunciated in the 1980s, has only worsened the dependency of many indigenous Australians on the federal and state governments. He recommends that the government instead concentrate on training Aborigines in adjusting to the realities and problems of modern living. To explain his point, Wooten used the metaphor of prison camp to highlight Australias situation on Aborigines According to the anthropology professor, while the prisoners were supposed to have been freed since they federal government grant self determination to them in the 1980s, the policy may have proved to be a motivation for many â€Å"prisoners (ie Aborigines) to remain inside the â€Å"prison.† What he suggests is that he government train the Aborigines to eventually get out of the â€Å"prison.† In addition, he commented that organizations founded by the government and private sector to help alleviate the widespread poverty among Aborigines should a.) be judged according to their performance and not because no indigenous Australians were reportedly sitting inside; while b) their shortcomings in supporting the indigenous Australians should not be overseen With renewed attempts among many Aborigines to reclaim their heritage, aside from seeking damages due to the â€Å"assimilation† policy,† there also arises the need for Aborigines to once again study their clan or tribes kinship systems. Doulet (2002) also mentioned that there is a need for indigenous Australians to know more about the kinship systems of their particular tribe or clan (whatever may be the case), especially if they want to regain ancestral land which were seized by European settlers during the 19th century. This is because modern legal jurisprudence demands that claimants must know about the size and legal details of the property in dispute for them to be able to back up their claims stronger. Based from the findings of these three anthropology experts, this writer opines that a) European colonisation and the subsequent implementation of the â€Å"assimilation† policy did considerably damage the indigenous Australians kinship systems Because each tribes kinship system had a relatively small scope covering only certain number of moieties, groups, clans, these were not able to withstand changes wrought by the arrival of the Europeans: population losses, expulsion from ancestral lands, introduction of new kinds of work, Europeanization. As we have seen, the indigenous Australians kinship system relies mainly on personalistic ties between clans, as shown in the use of marriage to bind two separate groups. On the other hand, it is to the credit of the Australian government that major policy changes have been made with regard to indigenous Australians. From the 1965 decree allowing Aborigines to choose if they want to be assimilated to the 1980s order giving self determination among them until the present day system of training them for capacity development through government funded organizations, the federal and state governments have been trying to make up for two centuries of racial discrimination. This writer agrees, however, that the Aborigines themselves must also help themselves in integrating into Australian society. They may actively participate in the abovementioned training programs in order to develop their skills. Or they eventually join the organisations running those programs so that they can have a greater voice in decision-making processes which concern their welfare. But it is important also that the Aborigines, especially the educated ones, should revisit the kinship networks of their clans to see if they can still be readjusted in line with contemporary developments. This is because while the indigenous Australians are, theoretically, integrated into a multi-ethnic society, still they have a unique culture which they cannot discard in the name of cosmopolitanism. Conclusion This essay has shown the various factors influencing indigenous Australians kinship systems, how the latter affect the social and economic aspects of daily living and how these has changed in the past centuries This essay has also pointed out that both the federal government and the indigenous Australians play important roles in mitigating damages caused by colonisation on indigenous Australian kinship networks. Primary References: 1.Book 1980 Australian Aboriginal Cultures chapter in Encyclopedia Brittanica, pp.424-429 2.Journals Layton, R., 2007. Aboriginal Suicide is Different: A Portrait of Life and Self Destruction. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, vol.13. Houseman, M.1997. Marriage Networks among Australian Aboriginal Populations Australian Aboriginal Studies, vol.1997. Wooten H. 2002. Indigenous Futures: Choices and Development for Aboriginer and Islander Australian Aboriginal Studies, vol. 2002, p.78. Websites Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2009 Population Distribution, Aboriginal and Torres Straits Islanders Australians [Online] Available at: http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[emailprotected]/ProductsbyCatalogue/14E7A4A075D53A6CCA2569450007E46C?OpenDocument [Accessed 25 July 2009]. Daly, A. Smith, D 1997 Indigenous sole parents: Invisible and disadvantaged [Online] Available at: http://www.anu.edu.au/caepr/Publications/DP/1997DP134.php [Accessed 26 July 2009]. Dousset, L. 2002 Introduction to Australian Indigenous Social Organizations (Hitting the headlines article). [Online] Available at: http://www.ausanthrop.net/research/kinship/kinship2.php[Accessed 25 July 2009]. Dousset, L. 2001 What is Kinship?: A collection of quotes (Hitting the headlines article). [Online] Available at: http://www.ausanthrop.net/research/kinship/kinship2.php[Accessed 25 July 2009]. Hunter, B., Gray, M 1999 Income fluctuations over the lifecycle: A cohort analysis of indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians, 1986-96 [Online] Available at: http://www.anu.edu.au/caepr/Publications/DP/1999DP183.php [Accessed 26 July 2009]. Schwab, J., Liddle, L (ed.)1997 Principles and Implications of Aboriginal Sharing [Online] Available at: http://www.anu.edu.au/caepr/Publications/briefs/1997IB17.php [Accessed 26 July 2009]. Taylor, J. 2006 Population and diversity: Policy implications of emerging indigenous demographic trends [Online] Available at: http://www.anu.edu.au/caepr/Publications/DP/2006DP283.php [Accessed 26 July 2009].

Observing the Positive Side of the Medical Profession Essay -- Medical

People who decide to become medical doctors need to make several sacrifices. The training to become a doctor is long and difficult. Furthermore, it does not end with school because doctors are required to learn about new problems and advances in the field of medical science for the rest of their lives. However, there is a positive side in becoming a doctor. It is not just about learning complicated procedures and going through rigorous training. Being a doctor means that a person is required to nurture the positive fundamental characteristics of the human mind. Doctors have to be truthful, both to their patients and their patients' relatives. They need to be above discrimination. If a doctor practices medicine with a correct attitude and respect towards the oaths taken, that person has an opportunity to develop all positive qualities of a human being and improve people's living standards without sacrificing their own. Becoming an expert in the field of medicine is a long process that will turn away most people, particularly because doctors gain their abilities exclusively by practicing on other people. â€Å"The moral burden of practicing on people is always with us, but for the most part unspoken† (Gawade, 2003). Besides the moral burden that is created by practicing on others, when their lives might depend on the doctor's skills, doctors need to constantly keep up with the advances in the field. In addition, they need to adapt to different patients constantly. Even if there are no advances in the medical field, the doctor must always remain flexible and accept that something unexpected might happen at any given moment. Atul Gawade (2003) states that the incredible pace of advances in medicine do not always keep up with the advances... ...cause no other field is so closely connected to human well-being and life. However, according to Carola Eisenberg (1986), â€Å"What we do as doctors, most of the time, is deeply gratifying, whatever the mix of patient care, research, and teaching in our individual careers. I cannot imagine a more satisfying calling. Let us make sure out students hear that message from us†. In the final part of the UCLA medical oath, the doctor states, â€Å"In being true to this oath, I will preserve the finest traditions of medicine and science, and enjoy and conduct my life, my profession, and my art to the fullest† (Robinson & Parker, 1995). Doctors do not give up their lives to help others. Doctors swear that they will live their life and art to the fullest. And there is no greater satisfaction in life other than when a person lives both his professional and personal life to the fullest.

Abortion should be illegal :: essays research papers

Abortion should be Illegal The words of an unborn baby are ones that almost no one ever thinks of, or hears. One of this country's most controversial topics is abortion. However, if one sees the constitutional infringement to women by the restriction of abortion; the torment to the unwanted child; and the anguish society has to sustain, then this topic would not be so debatable. Too many people do not see the effect that abortions cause. It is a very dangerous offence that affects the mother, father, the community, and most importantly, the fetus, and that is why abortion should be illegal in Canada. First, abortion is against God’s law in many Holy books such as the Bible and the Quran. Secondly, abortion does not only affect the individual, but the community as a whole, and the rights of those people are infringed on. However, abortion does nothing in the cases of rape, or women’s rights, which is the constant argument people in favour of abortion argue. And lastly, abortion should be seen for what it is, murder. What gives us the right to decide who should live and who should die? That is God's decision. The fetus, the innocent human life whose only protection in the world is its mother's womb can no longer feel protected because even its very own mother could have it murdered. Yet that baby did nothing to deserve to have its life snatched away so suddenly. How can a tiny baby who can feel, breathe, and move be condemned to die without ever saying or doing anything wrong? In our constitution, we are all given the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Why is it that a baby is not given these rights as well?

Cuban Missle Crisis Essay -- History Cuba Weapons Essays Cold War

Cuban Missle Crisis Many agree that the Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest the world ever came to nuclear war; but exactly how close did it come? The Crisis was ultimately a showdown between the United States and the Soviet Union from October 16 to October 28, 1962. During those thirteen stressful days, the world’s two biggest superpowers stood on the brink of a nuclear catastrophe. The Crisis started as a result of both the Soviet Union’s fear of losing the arms race, and Cuba’s fear of US invasion. The Soviet Premier, Nikita Khrushchev, thought that both problems could easily be solved by placing Soviet medium range missiles in Cuba. This deployment would double the Soviet arsenal and protect Cuba from US invasion. Khrushchev proposed this idea to Cuban Premier, Fidel Castro, who, like Khrushchev, saw the strategic advantage. The two premiers worked together in secrecy throughout the late-summer and early-fall of 1962. The Soviets shipped sixty medium-range ballistic missiles (M RBMs) along with their warheads, launch equipment, and necessary operating personnel to Cuba. When United States President, John F. Kennedy discovered the presence of these offensive weapons, he immediately organized EX-COMM, a group of his twelve most important advisors. They spent the next couple of days discussing different possible plans of action and finally decided to remove the US missiles from Turkey and promise not to invade Cuba in exchange for the removal of all offensive weapons in Cuba. On October 28, Khrushchev sent Kennedy a letter stating that he agreed to the terms Kennedy stated, and the crisis ended. The Cuban Missile Crisis can be blamed on the insecurity of Cuba and the Soviet Union. After the United States’ unsuccessful attempt to overthrow Castro and end communism in Cuba at the Bay of Pigs in 1961, Castro was fearful of another US invasion. The US Armed Forces conducted a mock invasion and drafted a plan to invade Cuba to keep Castro nervous. As a result, Castro thought the US was serious, and he was desperate to find protection. This protection came in the form of sixty Soviet medium-range ballistic missiles. (Detzer 30-32, 39, 55, 68, 87) During his presidential campaign, Kennedy repeatedly stated that the US had less missiles than the Soviets, contradicting the Pentagon’s claim that the opposite was true. However, during the summer of 1961, when... ...on of aerial and naval reconnaissance flights in Cuban airspace and waters; (5) and the return of Guantanamo Naval Base to Cuba. Eventually, with the help of the UN, Castro backed down and all sides reached an agreement. A UN inspection team was assigned to monitor the removal of the missiles and the demolition of the missile bases in Cuba. Then, the Soviet Navy shipped the missiles back to the USSR. The missiles were sent back on the decks of the ships so that American reconnaissance planes could count the missiles and make sure that all had been removed. Nine months after the crisis ended, Kennedy and Khrushchev signed an agreement to ban nuclear testing in the atmosphere. This marked the beginning of what seemed to be a new willingness to cooperate and communicate. However, on November 22, 1963, President Kennedy was assasinated in Dallas, Texas. Eleven months later, Premier Khrushchev was removed from office by communist "hard liners." (Brugioni 572-574) One can’t help but wonder what would have happened if these two men had stayed in power. Maybe the same two people who brought us so close to nuclear war, now changed by the experience, could have brought us far from it.

Perspectives on Divorce

There are many parts of the brain that effect the way we live and act every single day. There is the frontal lobe which controls planning, organizing, coordinating and controls movements, reasoning and the overall thinking process. I have used my frontal lobe today when I decided to write this essay, and how I was going to set it up. There is the temporal lobe which controls hearing. I used this today when I listened to my Ipod in the halls. There is the cerebellum which controls balance, movement, and coordination. I used this today when I tried to dance during lunch (key word tried†¦.. ). There is also the occipital lobe which controls vision. I used this today when I read a book during English. The possibly most important part of the brain is the medulla, which controls vital functions. I used this today when I had to go from the first floor to the third floor, and I had to catch my breath. When people say â€Å"your eyes don't see, your nose doesn't smell, your tongue doesn't taste, your ears don't hear, and your skin doesn't touch; your brain does it all† they are saying although we associate all of those senses with their respective body part really we cant see, touch, taste and so on without our brain first processing it and telling our bodies what is going on. 2) The psychoanalytical perspective says someone may get a divorce because their parents had gotten a divorce, so that's what the have seen is normal. This perspective says that many behaviors are based on childhood experiences. If someone grew up with divorced parents, they would see that that is an acceptable way to live their life and not see a problem with it. Also, the psychoanalytical perspective looks at the impulses and desires of a person, someone might get a divorce because their ID tells them they want to have multiple partners, and not want to be in a committed relationship. The behavioristic perspective is based on rewards and punishments. Based on this theory someone may get a divorce because they might be punished by staying in of the relationship. Their parents may not be a fan of their spouse, and may threaten to cut them off communications and write them out of the will if they stay in the relationship. The person may find this a deal they cant turn down, so they would divorce their partner in order to stay in the good graces of their family. The biological perspective looks at the brain as the reason people make decisions. They would say that there is a chemical imbalance in the brain, therefore the person cannot stay happily in their marriage. They could also say that the person has depression, due to an imbalance of serotonin, and could not be happy with their spouse, so they would need to get treated, or continue perusing the divorce. The cognitive perspective believes that divorce would be based on the individuals unique thinking process. The person may have unclear thoughts on their spouse, and cannot figure out what they want in their marriage. The cognitive perspective would not blame any external forces, they would simply say their brain told them to, so they did. They might also say their brain does not make good judgment, and at the time of the marriage there was a lapse in judgment. The humanistic perspective would say the person needed personal growth, and was tied down in the marriage. The person would see themselves happier without being with their spouse. They would say that the person simply wanted to get a divorce, so they did, and wouldn't add much more to it than that. The sociocultural perspective would say that the divorce rate in America is 51%, so the person sees it culturally acceptable to get a divorce. They would say they have seen so many of their peers getting divorced, it seems normal. So they might not work to work out their problems, they just get a divorce because that's what over half of America is doing. Eclecticism is an approach that uses more than one theory to explain how or why something happens. This idea would be beneficial to describing human behavior because there are many contributing factors in peoples decision making. They might do something for multiple reasons, using divorce as an example, a person might have grown up in a divorced home, but they also might have a cheating spouse, and a chemical imbalance in the brain. Their reason for divorce can't simply be explained by the psychoanalytic, behavioristic, or biological perspective. But when you use all of the perspectives together you can get a clear understanding of why they got a divorce. Human behavior cannot be explained with only one perspective because there are many contributing factors to the decisions people make.

Negative effects of video games Essay

The US video game market reached nearly $ 21 billion in sales in 2008. On an average an adolescent spends about 10-13 hours per week playing video games. The cause may be attributed to the fact that video games today have become a necessity more than a luxury. They are a unique form of entertainment because they encourage players to become a part of the game. However, video games have both positive and negative impacts on players. While some of them are fun and entertaining, others have drastic effects on children. On one hand, video games are a source of leisure. People play video games because they want to get away from their everyday stressful life since these games are fun and interesting way to spend time. Another major advantage of playing video games includes improving children’s computer literacy since most of the games nowadays require internet. Also research studies show that video games tend to increase one’s hand eye coordination as well as their ability to make quick and reasonable judgements. Educational games provide practice in problem solving and logic and are thus becoming more prevalent as teaching tools for youth in primary and secondary schools. However this is just one side of the coin. Video Games with violent content have far reaching effects on children. Research studies suggest that violent video games increase aggressive behavior among youth. Since violent acts are often rewarded and continually repeated in a game, it highly influences them. Children who see a lot of violence are more likely to view violence as an effective way of settling conflicts and are more likely to assume that violence is acceptable behavior. Also, if one buys an intriguing game, he may get addicted to it, which may lead to drastic consequences. An addiction may lead to physical problems like obesity, headaches, damage to eye, decline in schoolwork productivity, spending problems and confusion between real and unreal. Over dependence on video games could also foster social isolation, as they are often played alone.