Power and Inequality in a Cultural and Linguistic Anthropolistic View Essay Example for Free

Power and Inequality in a Cultural and Linguistic Anthropolistic View Essay Centuries have passed and the different relationships of power and inequality are still present. Power and inequality have always been an issue and a topic of discussion among many different people in different cultures. Although much has changed throughout history, the struggle between power and inequality is still inevitable. There are many different types of power and inequalities ranging from gender to race and culture. Anthropologists can investigate issues surrounding power and inequality by submerging into different cultures and studying how power and inequality play a role in their society. Power and inequality still play a role in modern human cultures as seen by different struggles of cultures as well as the differentiation of linguistics. Cultural anthropologists can investigate issues surrounding power and inequality in modern human populations as they immerse themselves into understanding the different circumstances of different cultures of today and of the past as well. Throughout the years, there has been a struggle of power and inequality between many, including gender and race. Gender has been an issue in many different cultures, and continues to be a struggle even today. In the past, gender issues have resulted in many problems. For example, after China passed the one child law, many parents wanted to have sons rather than daughters because of the thought that sons were more worthy. This however, has resulted in an imbalance of the male and female ratio as it has reached 144:100, in the rural areas of China (Peters-Golden, 2012). In modern society, it is evident that in most cultures, the male is still the dominant gender. In some cultures, including some in the Middle East, women are looked down upon, mistreated and are not treated as equals. Even in the modern Western culture, there is still evidence that the women are at a disadvantage compared to the men (Feminist Economics, 2003). Along with gender, race has also been a reoccurring issue of as well. Previously, the Western worlds perceived themselves as having more power and were more superior to any other culture. Culture today, according to cultural anthropologists, is learned and is subject to modification meaning that the modern population can adapt to new races and cultures as well as their own. Different societies should be subject to his or her own culture rather than perceiving that one race or culture as superior to any other. Cultural anthropologists believe that â€Å"how people have been accepted and treated of a given society of culture has a direct impact on how they perform in that society† (American Anthropology Association, 1998). Thus concluding that not everybody can see themselves as superior, as it affects the society as a whole as well. The United States is an example of many different cultural prejudices, and its affects are apparent in their everyday lives including the media. Cultural anthropologists have been studying different cultures of the world, and many of them have different opinions of power and inequality as can be seen by the ways the cultures interact. In the modern world, there are many pieces of evidence that power and inequality are still present and is still an issue in modern human populations. Power and inequality have much to do with cultural studies, but can also be interpreted in a linguistic anthropological view as well. Linguistic anthropology studies how language influences social society in cultures. Although not necessarily seen as inequality, many different languages have different words categorising between gender, age, and status among others. Linguistics is also an important part of cultural anthropology as well. In many different languages, the use of words reflects the cultures status on both power and inequality (University of Washington, 2004). For example, in many languages, including French, Spanish, and Persian, noun classification is sorted by gender. In Thai, there are around 13 ways to say the pronoun â€Å"I† each one used in different circumstances, depending on who and what is being said. In both cases, the use of language is separated by power and could be thought of as a social inequality because different people are referred to by their gender or social status. As well as words that play a role in cultures, the different languages does as well. According to Mary Bucholtz and Kira Hall (1995), linguistic anthropologists, they say that power is linked with markedness. Markedness is a process where â€Å"some social categories gain a special, default status that contrasts with the identities of other groups, which are usually highly recognisable† and is evident in some countries (Bucholtz Hall, 1995, p. 372). An example of this is in Zambia, a country that speaks a total of 73 languages, however, only around 7 are considered the ‘dominant’ language as they are positioned above the others, while English is the official language that is unmarked, and considered to be the most important (Spitulnik, 1998). Linguistic anthropology is an important part when studying the different power and inequalities of cultures. Linguistics can show how cultures can interact by languages and determine who is ‘dominant’ or can differentiate people by status or gender. In modern human populations, the existence of power and inequality is still present. Anthropologists, both linguistic and cultural, investigate the presence in struggle of balancing power and inequality. Different times represent different mindsets, however, both power and inequality have been present for basically all of human existence. Prejudice is inevitable in both the past and current human population, ranging from race, gender, different individuals, and cultures, among others. Anthropologists can investigate issues surrounding power and inequality by submerging into different cultures and studying how power and inequality play a role in their society. Studying the language of other cultures by linguistic anthropologists can also determine many aspects of power and inequality in not only the different cultures of today, but also of the past as well.

Frederick Douglass Influence on the Anti-Slavery Movement Essay

Frederick Douglass' Influence on the Anti-Slavery Movement Frederick Douglass was one of the most influential men of the anti-slavery movement. He stood up for what he believed in, fought hard to get where he got and never let someone tell him he could not do something. Frederick Douglass made a change in this country that will always be remembered. Born Frederick Baily, Frederick Douglass was a slave, his birthday is not pin pointed but known to be in February of 1818. He was born on Holmes Hill Farm, near the town of Easton, Maryland. Harriet Baily was Frederick's mother. She worked the cornfields surrounding Holmes Hill. As a boy, he knew little of his father except that the man was white. As a child, he had heard rumors that the master, Aaron Anthony was his father. Frederick's mother was required to work long hours in the fields, so he lived with his grandmother, Betsey Baily. Betsy Baily lived in a cabin a short distance from Holmes Hill Farm. Her job was to look after Harriet's children until they were old enough to work. "Frederick's mother visited him when she could, but he had only a hazy memory of her." He did not think he was a slave during the years with his grandmother. When Frederick was six he was put to work on the Lloyd Plantation. This was the last he saw of his grandmother as he realized that he was now a slave. He learned that the master, Aaron Anthony, would beat his slaves if they did not obey order. Luckily for Frederick he was picked to be Daniel Lloyd's friend, the youngest son of the plantation's owner. Frederick also found a friend in Lucretia Auld, the master's daughter. One day in 1826 Lucretia told Frederick that he was being sent to live with her brother-in-law, Hugh Auld, who managed a ship building company in Baltimore. When Frederick got to the Auld home his only duties were to run errands and care for the Auld's infant son, Tommy. Frederick liked the work and grew to love the child. Sophia Auld was the master's wife, she often read the bible to her son and Frederick. She started to teach Frederick to read and write but soon after the master learned of this and forbid it. Frederick only learned the abhalbit and some words. So he learned the rest by himself. Soon Frederick bought a local paper and learned about abolitionist. This changed his views on many things but was soon sent back to work on a plan... ...ass was given the ceremonial position of marshal for Washington, DC. He enjoyed this post that had a large staff responsible for the overseeing the criminal justice system in Washington D.C. As he got older Douglass settled down doing fewer speeches each year and concentrated on being Marshall. This was until he was appointed to the post of recorder of deeds for Washington, D.C., after the election of 1880. He held the job for 5 years over seeing the department that made records of property sales for the capital. This job left him time to write. He was with his wife until she died in August of 1882. He married again in 1884 to Helen Pitts who was 20 years younger than him. They remained together for 9 years, that was until his sudden death of a heart attack on February 20, 1895. He was 77. Frederick Douglass was laid to rest in Rochester, New York. All of the black public schools closed for the day that he died. Frederick Douglass was a man that touched the hearts of millions and spoke out when no one else would. He fought for the freedom of the black man and stride for the basic human rights they deserved. Frederick Douglass was truly a great man who cried out for freedom.

Comparing and Contrasting the Two Major American Political Parties

In the United States there exists largely a dichotomy with respect to parties of political affiliation, and while other parties can and do exist, most people refer to the US as it is now as a â€Å"two-party state. † The two parties, the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, have existed in our country for over one hundred fifty-three years each, and the struggle for power in which they both partake has been no small matter, becoming more and more hotly contested as time goes on.While both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party (GOP herein) seem starkly opposite at surface level, the two often have similar goals, aspirations and plans for our country, with the main point of contention being the methods by which such things are brought about. Fiscally, the Democrats and GOP both want a free economy with as little national debt as sustainably possible, but, for the most part, the Democrats favor government action, and the GOP favors private action. With respect to so cial policy, the Democrats favor more progressive legislation, and the GOP favors more traditional legislation.As the US stands currently, in a recession, no American could disagree that everyone’s goal for the economy is to get out of the recession. The real question is â€Å"How do we do it? † Republicans say that we should cut spending, cut taxes and allow those cuts in taxes to promote job creation in the private sector: jobs come from businesses, and when the people who own the businesses have more money, they can hire more people to do more work, which would raise GDP and reduce the national debt.Democrats say that we should raise taxes to increase revenue, and use the increased revenue to sponsor various economic stimuli to promote greater productivity and job creation. This sort of top-down/bottom-up perspective has led many Americans to believe the motivations of the two parties to be a conflict of social classes, with Republicans representing largely the rich , and Democrats representing largely the poor.Undoubtedly, the largest differences between the two major parties exist in the social platforms of each. The GOP is composed mostly of those who are socially conservative, the Democratic Party, of those who are socially liberal, but there are certainly those within each party whose beliefs vary. The Democratic Party generally supports legislation promoting social tolerance, i. e. policies which limit the government’s ability to tell any person what to do, provided that they not infringe upon the rights of others.This amounts to policies in favor of things gay marriage and marijuana legalization and policies opposed to abortion restrictions, welfare drugs tests and public funding of religious institutions and schools. The GOP generally supports social legislation which maintains the status quo, protecting the foundation of America which those before us have provided. In this manner, the GOP usually favors legislation that protects the sanctity of marriage (i. e. ne man, one woman), prevents drug addicts from receiving welfare and prevents people from harming themselves with drug use, and the GOP generally opposes legislation that would allow any of the previous things to occur. Interestingly, however, the GOP strongly supports the exercise of the Second Amendment to its fullest capacity, opposing almost any gun control law, while the Democrats generally favor gun control with respect to some of the more dangerously liable guns such as assault rifles or even some semi-automatic rifles.In terms of demographics and geography, the Democrats and Republicans are quite contrasting. By and large, the Republican Party is most powerful in the South and Midwest, while the Democratic Party gains its power mostly from the North and the West coast. Republicans are more likely to be older, more wealthy, more religious and white (though this obviously does not mean all Republicans are white). Democrats are more likely to be younger, more educated and more ethnically varied than the Republican Party.These snapshots into the average Democrat or the average Republican must be taken with a grain of salt, however, as demographics and geographic are not causes of the party composition, but merely correlations which have been concluded. While the Democrats and Republicans have long been considered bitter rivals, and for the most part it is true, the two major parties in America are not quite as disparate and incongruous as many would think.They both have the same major goals for the economy, but only the methodology differs. They have different ideas for social policy, stemming from the more religious and more secular worldviews which most Republicans and most Democrats respectively hold. With the differences aside from both, the Democrats and Republicans in political offices do come together to prevent the one which they fear most: the success of any third party. Both parties will stop at nothing to maintai n whatever power they each have.

The Plant History of the Marvelous Soybean

Soybean (Glycine max) is believed to have been domesticated from its wild relative Glycine soja, in China between 6,000 and 9,000 years ago, although the specific region is unclear. The problem is, the current geographic range of wild soybeans is throughout East Asia and extending into neighboring regions such as the Russian far east, the Korean peninsula and Japan. Scholars suggest that, as with many other domesticated plants, the process of soybean domestication was a slow one, perhaps taking place over a period of between 1,000-2,000 years. Domesticated and Wild Traits Wild soybeans grow in the form of creepers with many lateral branches, and it has a comparatively longer growing season than the domesticated version, flowering later than cultivated soybean. Wild soybean produces tiny black seeds rather than large yellow ones, and its pods shatter easily, promoting long-distance seed dispersal, which farmers generally disapprove of. Domestic landraces are smaller, bushier plants with upright stems; cultivars such as that for edamame have erect and compact stem architecture, high harvest percentages and high seed yield. Other traits bred in by ancient farmers include pest and disease resistance, increased yield, improved quality, male sterility, and fertility restoration; but wild beans are still more adaptive to a wider range of natural environments and are resistant to drought and salt stress. History of Use and Development To date, the earliest documented evidence for the use of Glycine of any kind comes from charred plant remains of wild soybean recovered from Jiahu in Henan province China, a Neolithic site occupied between 9000 and 7800 calendar years ago (cal bp). DNA-based evidence for soybeans has been recovered from the early Jomon component levels of Sannai Maruyama, Japan (ca. 4800 to 3000 BC). Beans from Torihama in the Fukui prefecture of Japan were AMS dated to 5000 cal bp: those beans are plenty large enough to represent the domestic version. The Middle Jomon [3000-2000 BC) site of Shimoyakebe had soybeans, one of which was AMS dated to between 4890-4960 cal BP. It is considered domestic based on size; soybean impressions on Middle Jomon pots are also significantly larger than wild soybeans. Bottlenecks and the Lack of Genetic Diversity The genome of wild soybeans was reported in 2010 (Kim et al). While most scholars agree that DNA supports a single point of origin, the effect of that domestication has created some unusual characteristics. One readily visible, the keen difference between wild and domestic soybean exists: the domestic version has about half the nucleotide diversity than that which is found in wild soybean--the percentage of loss varies from cultivar to cultivar. A study published in 2015 (Zhao et al.) suggests that genetic diversity was reduced by 37.5% in the early domestication process, and then another 8.3% in later genetic improvements. According to Guo et al., that might well have been related to Glycines ability to self-pollinate. Historical Documentation The earliest historical evidence for soybean use comes from Shang dynasty reports, written sometime between 1700 to 1100 BC. Whole beans were cooked or fermented into a paste and used in various dishes. By the Song Dynasty (960 to 1280 AD), soybeans had an explosion of uses; and in the 16th century AD, the beans spread throughout southeast Asia. The first recorded soybean in Europe was in Carolus Linnaeuss Hortus Cliffortianus, compiled in 1737. Soybeans were first grown for ornamental purposes in England and France; in 1804 Yugoslavia, they were grown as a supplement in animal feed. The first documented use in the US was in 1765, in Georgia. In 1917, it was discovered that heating soybean meal made it suitable as livestock feed, which led to the growth of the soybean processing industry. One of the American proponents was Henry Ford, who was interested in both nutritional and industrial use of soybeans. Soy was used to make plastic parts for Fords Model T automobile. By the 1970s, the US supplied 2/3 of the worlds soybeans, and in 2006, the US, Brazil, and Argentina grew 81% of the world production. Most of the USA and Chinese crops are used domestically, those in South America are exported to China. Modern Uses Soybeans contain 18% oil and 38% protein: they are unique among plants in that they supply protein equal in quality to animal protein. Today, the main use (about 95%) is as edible oils with the rest for industrial products from cosmetics and hygiene products to paint removers and plastics. The high protein makes it useful for livestock and aquaculture feeds. A smaller percentage is used to make soy flour and protein for human consumption, and an even smaller percentage is used as edamame. In Asia, soybeans are used in a variety of edible forms, including tofu, soymilk, tempeh, natto, soy sauce, bean sprouts, edamame, and many others. The creation of cultivars continues, with new versions suitable for growing in different climates (Australia, Africa, Scandinavian countries) and or for developing different traits making soybean suitable for human use as grains or beans, animal consumption as forage or supplements, or industrial uses in the production of soy textiles and papers. Visit the SoyInfoCenter website to learn more about that. Sources Anderson JA. 2012. Evaluation of soybean recombinant inbred lines for yield potential and resistance to Sudden Death Syndrome. Carbondale: Southern Illinois UniversityCrawford GW. 2011. Advances in Understanding Early Agriculture in Japan. Current Anthropology 52(S4):S331-S345.Devine TE, and Card A. 2013. Forage soybeans. In: Rubiales D, editor. Legume Perspectives: Soybean: A Dawn to the Legume World.Dong D, Fu X, Yuan F, Chen P, Zhu S, Li B, Yang Q, Yu X, and Zhu D. 2014. Genetic diversity and population structure of vegetable soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) in China as revealed by SSR markers. Genetic Resources and Crop Evolution 61(1):173-183.Guo J, Wang Y, Song C, Zhou J, Qiu L, Huang H, and Wang Y. 2010. A single origin and moderate bottleneck during domestication of soybean (Glycine max): implications from microsatellites and nucleotide sequences. Annals of Botany 106(3):505-514.Hartman GL, West ED, and Herman TK. 2011. Crops that feed the World 2. Soybean—worldwide pr oduction, use, and constraints caused by pathogens and pests. Food Security 3(1):5-17.Kim MY, Lee S, Van K, Kim T-H, Jeong S-C, Choi I-Y, Kim D-S, Lee Y-S, Park D, Ma J et al. 2010. Whole-genome sequencing and intensive analysis of the undomesticated soybean (Glycine soja Sieb. and Zucc.) genome. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107(51):22032-22037.Li Y-h, Zhao S-c, Ma J-x, Li D, Yan L, Li J, Qi X-t, Guo X-s, Zhang L, He W-m et al. 2013. Molecular footprints of domestication and improvement in soybean revealed by whole genome re-sequencing. BMC Genomics 14(1):1-12.Zhao S, Zheng F, He W, Wu H, Pan S, and Lam H-M. 2015. Impacts of nucleotide fixation during soybean domestication and improvement. BMC Plant Biology 15(1):1-12.Zhao Z. 2011. New Archaeobotanic Data for the Study of the Origins of Agriculture in China. Current Anthropology 52(S4):S295-S306.