The Impacts Of Aids Essay Example for Free

The Impacts Of Aids Essay Although the AIDS epidemic has occurred in a period when social conservatives have been politically dominant in most Western societies increasing the stigma against homosexuals and homosexuality, it has also translated into much greater recognition of the homosexual community and a homosexual movement, in most Western democracies. As the 1980s progressed, the gay and lesbian community increasingly realized the devastating impact of AIDS on gay men. The complex of diseases called AIDS was first discovered among gay men in 1981. From the first moment the gay male community became aware of AIDS (which was first called GRID—gay-related immune deficiency), it responded politically. By the end of the summer in 1981, a group of gay men had already met at author Larry Kramers apartment in New York City and had established the Gay Mens Health Crisis (GMHC)—the largest AIDS organization in the country today. It is not, of course, homosexuals who are at risk for AIDS but rather those who practice certain forms of unsafe sex. This distinction between behavior and identity, which often seems academic, is in fact vital to a rational understanding of AIDS. Because the media and the public generally do not make these distinctions, gay and AIDS have become conflated, so that the public perception of homosexuality becomes largely indistinguishable from its perception of AIDS. This, in turn, has two consequences: (1) It causes unnecessary discrimination against all those who are identified as gay and lesbians, and (2) it also means that people who are not perceived (and do not perceive themselves) as engaging in high-risk behaviors can deny that they are at risk of HIV infection. As the gay movement matured in the 1970s, however, it made more concrete demands of governments, pressing for antidiscrimination ordinances and for financial support for gay organizations and activities. But, in large part, the gay movement retained an adversarial relationship with the government, a relationship made possible because of the movements emphasis on self-assertion (coming out) and challenging social stigma. All this changed with the appearance of AIDS. Demands for government-funded research were first made by New Yorks Gay Mens Health Crisis, the first community-based AIDS organization. And the demands have not stopped there: Governments are asked to support research, patient care, services, and education programs. Inevitably such demands involve gay participation in the processes of government—policy-making, membership on liaison committees, day-to-day contact with bureaucrats, and so forth. But the process has been two-way. Governments have understood that to research the disease, to provide the necessary services, and to bring about the behavioral changes (primary prevention) believed to be the most effective strategies against the spread of the disease, contact with the most affected groups is required. AIDS has thus forced governments to recognize organizations they had previously ignored, and this has resulted in strengthened gay organizations, often with the help of state resources. As a generalization, the response of gay groups and those working in local AIDS education and advocacy programs has been to stress large-scale education about primary prevention, while conservative medical, political, and religious figures have emphasized widespread testing for the HIV antibody and restrictive legislation. The issue of testing for HIV antibodies among high-risk populations has been a major debate in most Western countries. AIDS organizations have generally argued that large-scale testing is undesirable and that mandatory testing of high-risk groups will compel those infected with the AIDS virus go underground out of the mainstream of health care and education. As the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) argued: The experience of the gay community—the only group where significant prevention and risk-reduction programs have taken place—demonstrates that education and counseling, not testing, are critical to changing behavior. Not everyone needs or desires to know his/her antibody status. No one should be forced into that position, particularly given the potentially severe social, legal and economic ramifications of testing. The NGLTFs anti-testing position is further strengthened by the fact that test results often obtain false positives for the presence of HIV antibodies. It is easy to portray this dispute over testing as one that pits public health advocates against proponents of gay rights. In reality, the dispute centers on different conceptions of public health: Those who oppose mandatory testing are concerned that the fear of discrimination resulting from seropositive results will force those most at risk to avoid needed testing, counseling, and contact with support services. It is vital to understand the extent to which discrimination (real and perceived) against AIDS carriers is a factor, and how it is strengthened every time a politician or religious figure talks of quarantine or isolation. Certain sorts of discrimination are justified in the interests of public health, and reasonable people can disagree about the balance—as was true in the protracted debate in San Francisco concerning the gay bathhouses. But few diseases in recent history have led to as many stringent proposals to restrict the rights of those affected, and even fewer have led to claims for discrimination against all members of high-risk groups, whether or not they were actually ill or contagious. Fear of AIDS has elicited a welter of irrational reactions based on the stereotyping of homosexuals. The U.S. Justice Department has ruled that persons with AIDS may be dismissed from their jobs because of fear of transmission, even where such fears are not medically supported; some state courts and legislatures, however, have taken an opposite position. Fear of AIDS was invoked by the state of Georgia in its successful defense of its antisodomy law before the Supreme Court in 1986. A number of governments (including the United States) have sought to make evidence of HIV-antibody-free (noncarrier) status a requirement for immigration or even entry; in West Germany this provision has led to a bitter dispute between the Interior and Health ministries. Fear of and hostility toward those with AIDS most clearly overlaps with more generalized homophobia in the attempts by some politicians and a number of fundamentalists to use the epidemic to argue against homosexual rights. In the eyes of the religious right, AIDS is literally viewed as a God-given opportunity to reverse social attitudes toward homosexuality, which have grown more tolerant over the past decade; in English-speaking countries particularly, fundamentalists have invoked fire-and-brimstone rhetoric to argue that AIDS is evidence of Gods wrath. Gay groups have quickly learned which aspects of the political system are most amenable to pressure; in the United States, at a national level, this has involved working through the courts (a vast number of AIDS-related cases are already working their way through the judicial system) and, especially, sympathetic members of Congress. Among the groups most affected by AIDS, only the homosexuals have been able to mobilize and articulate political demands. The publics perception of the disease therefore continues to be more closely linked with homosexuals than its epidemiology suggests. In the United States this is further complicated by racial divisions and intravenous drug use, as a far higher proportion of AIDS cases that are not sexually transmitted are found among blacks and Hispanics than among whites. Even now one feature of AIDS organizations is the under representation of people of color, including homosexuals. Even in countries where this is not a problem, the dominance of AIDS as an issue makes the gap between gay women and men increasingly more difficult to bridge; although many lesbians are heavily involved in AIDS work, most gay women cannot identify with AIDS as a central issue in the way true for many gay men. AIDS has mobilized more gay men into political and community organizations, although not into specific demonstrations and marches, than any other event in the short history of the gay movement. In every major city of the United States, Canada, Australasia, and most of northern Europe, the appearance of AIDS has led thousands of gay men (and others) to volunteer in programs of care, support, counseling, and education. But this in turn creates several problems: It reinforces the publics misperception of the causal link between AIDS and homosexuality; it forces other issues off the gay movements agenda and monopolizes its attention; and it creates new tensions as dependence on government and the emergence of a new class of AIDS experts leads to growing strains within the movement. One could in fact posit that AIDS has created a shift in the leadership of the gay movement, accentuating the trend toward leaders who can claim professional expertise instead of activist credentials—a move already under way during the late 1970s. This has been most obvious in the rise to prominence of openly gay medical doctors, who have been able to use their professional skills and sexual identity to claim a certain legitimacy in the eyes of government; groups like the American Physicians for Human Rights have become prominent within the gay movement largely because of the epidemic. But the new leadership also includes those skilled in legislative and bureaucratic lobbying, and one consequence of this shift has been to reduce the representativeness of leadership in terms of class, race, and age. Observing the gay movement, AIDS has changed the movement in ways none of us could have anticipated in the much headier days of the 1970s. Obviously the stakes are higher: However important law reform was, it does not compare with the urgent need to respond to an epidemic that in some cities (New York, San Francisco, Houston, Copenhagen, Sydney) was striking nearly every gay man. In response, new people have come into the movement; many gay men who had hitherto regarded gay politics as irrelevant, have become the front-line activists because of AIDS. But many experienced activists have found that AIDS has turned them into professionals; the people who run the large organizations, such as GMHC, the Terence Higgins Trust, the San Francisco AIDS Foundation, the AIDS Council of New South Wales, and so forth, spend much of their time now dealing with government bureaucrats, health-system managers, and various authorities whom they had once denounced as the enemy. Unconsciously, certain forms of co-optation inevitably take place; governments fund jobs, trips, and conferences, and those who take part begin to see things differently. Thus, a new tension develops within the rank-and-file, many of whom came into AIDS work as volunteers concerned to look directly after the sick and dying, who feel estranged from the new bureaucrats their own movement seems to have spawned. It is difficult to speak of the impact of AIDS without speaking of the changing perceptions of homosexuals, so intertwined are the two in the public imagination. AIDS seems to have heightened both the stigma and the respectability of homosexuals; in unraveling this apparent contradiction, we can come to terms with certain crucial social changes. The common assumption is that AIDS has been responsible for reversing, or at least halting, a gradual social acceptance of homosexuality as an alternate life-style, an acceptance that had grown out of changes in sexual mores and the commercialization of sexuality during the 1970s. It is not hard to point to the hostile rhetoric, increased antigay violence, and the quite considerable discrimination directly linked to AIDS. Evidence of increased violence directed against homosexuals, much of it linked to AIDS, was recognized by a special congressional hearing in late 1986.The reality may well be that the response to AIDS thus far has largely been a reflection of the extent to which preceding gay-rights struggles had achieved a place in the political process for gay organizations; AIDS has thus highlighted a process already under way. The point has often been made that the epidemiology of AIDS would have been very different in most Western countries had it not been for the expansion of gay sexual networks in the 1970s. Equally, the response of governments would have been very different—and almost certainly slower and more repressive—if this expansion had not also been accompanied by the growth of gay political organizations that provided a basis for the development of community-based groups in response to the epidemic. At the level of conventional liberal political analysis, the case of AIDS bears out the adage that the squeaky wheel gets the oil. AIDS has brought issues of central concern to the gay movement onto the mainstream political agenda: at an enormous price the gay movement has become a recognized actor in the politics of health policymaking. Political will and mobilization can have a large effect on the social impact of the disease. The growing impact of AIDS on the American population forced activists to broaden their constituency. Some of the groups were also socially stigmatized and had even fewer resources than the gay community. Occasionally, they had segments who voiced their discomfort with or disapproval of homosexuality. When it came to matters of strategy, AIDS activists even had increasing conflicts with gay and lesbian political elites within the community over political priorities. The politics of AIDS activism forced gay and lesbian activists to have increased interaction with federal, state, and local governments, thereby transforming the lesbian and gay communitys relation with the state. Community-based organizations received government funding and participated in policymaking to a much greater extent than ever before. The AIDS movement has had a significant impact on government research, public health policies, and government funding of treatment, care, and education. This government funding has created large-scale institutions with jobs and career possibilities that did not exist in the lesbian and gay communities before the epidemic. These economic and institutional developments have had two major effects on the gay and lesbian communities. First, they have encouraged lesbian and gay political institutions to engage more with other communities, governmental agencies, and mainstream institutions. Second, they have transformed the class structure of gay and lesbian leadership. The new jobs and career possibilities attracted a generation of leaders who were upwardly mobile and educated at elite universities and colleges. In the past, gay men such as this might have pursued conventional careers. Now, though, many of them were infected with the virus that causes AIDS and took up AIDS activism to fight for their lives. The older generation of leaders had chosen gay political life as an alternative to mainstream careers. Very early on in the epidemic, however, AIDS devastated the founding generation both physically and emotionally. A new generation soon displaced the older one. AIDS had decimated the gay male community, had forced it to reach out to other communities, and had seriously undermined its economic and cultural self-sufficiency. The countervailing pressures of gay and lesbian identity politics and of AIDS activism produced a political situation that required a new perspective—one that conceived of identity as stable, but also recognized the incredible diversity within the community. The perspective needed to account for the kinship of all sexual minorities and the range of possible gender roles, ethnic, and racial identities. Works Cited Adam, B. D. The rise of a gay and lesbian movement. New York: Twayne Publishers.1995. Bell, G. AIDS in Australia, Sydney Bulletin , 17 March 1987 Bullough, Vern L. Before Stonewall: Activists for Gay and Lesbian Rights in Historical Context. Harrington Park Press, 2002. Cante, Richard C. Gay Men and the Forms of Contemporary US Culture. London: Ashgate Publishing. March 2008 ISBN 0 7546 7230 1. Dynes, Wayne R. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Homosexuality. New York and London, Garland Publishing, 1990 Frighten and be Fired, The Economist , 28 June 1986. Epstein, S. Gay and lesbian movements in the United States: Dilemmas of identity, diversity, and political strategy. In B. Adam, J. Duyvendak, A. Krouwel (Eds.), The global emergence of gay and lesbian politics: National imprints of a worldwide movement, pp. 30-90. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.1999. Gawenda, AIDS: Reaping Responsibility, The Age (Melbourne), 2 May 1987. Goldstein, R. The Hidden Epidemic: AIDS and Race, Village Voice , 10 March 1987. Johansson, Warren Percy, William A. Outing: Shattering the Conspiracy of Silence. Harrington Park Press, 1994. Katz, Jonathan. Gay American History: Lesbians and Gay Men in the U.S.A. (New York: Harper, 1976) ISBN 006091211 Kitsuse, J. Coming out all over: Deviants and the politics of social problems. Social Problems, 28, 1-13.1980. McCombie, S.The Cultural Impact of the AIDS Test, Social Science and Medicine 23 (1986): 455-459. National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, news release, Washington, D.C., 5 February 1987.Somerville, M. Rubin, G. Thinking sex: Notes for a radical theory of the politics of sexuality. In R. Parker, P. Aggleton (Eds.), Culture, society sexuality, pp. 143-178. New York: Routledge.1998. Schroedel, J. R., Fiber, P. Lesbian and gay policy priorities: Commonality and difference. In C. A. Rimmerman, K. D. Wald, C. Wilcox (Eds.), The politics of gay rights, pp. 97-120. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (2000). Seidman, S. From identity to queer politics: Shifts in normative heterosexuality and the meaning of citizenship. Citizenship Studies, 5, 321-328. (2001). Structuring the Legal and Ethical Issues Raised by AIDS, in AIDS : Social Policy , Ethics and the Law (Monash: Monash University Centre for Human Bioethics, 1986). Surgeon General s Report on AIDS (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Public Health Service, 1986), 30. Tatchell, P.AIDS : A Guide to Survival (London: Gay Mens Press, 1986), 97-101 Thompson, Mark, editor. Long Road to Freedom: The Advocate History of the Gay and Lesbian Movement. New York: St. Martins Press, 1994. ISBN 0-312-09536-8 Timmons, Stuart. The Trouble with Harry Hay: Founder of the Modern Gay Movement. Boston: Alyson Publications, 1990.

Religious Tradition in Shirley Jacksons The Lottery Essay -- jackson

Religious Tradition in Shirley Jackson's The Lottery   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  While 'The Lottery' is a fictitious story it can be argued that it mirrors the attitude of American culture in how it addresses religious tradition in its major holidays and celebrations.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Two of the biggest holidays in the United States are Christmas and Easter. Both of which are derived from Christian beliefs. Even though 'The Lottery' is apparently a pagan ritual, violent and horrific, it is appropriate, only by the fact that the participants no longer remember, or seem to care, what the original intent of the ritual or the significance of its traditions.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  When we are introduced to the lottery, we see the traditions that are currently observed. These include the townspeople gathering in the square, the children gathering rocks and making piles of them. A black box is the current receptacle for the lots to be drawn: 'The original paraphernalia for the lottery had been lost long ago, and the black box now resting on the stool had been put to use even before Old Man Warner, the oldest man in town, was born.' (Jackson 367).   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The story belies the villagers respect for tradition. The lottery official was said to have spoken ?frequently to the villagers about making a new box, but no one liked to upset even as much tradition as was represented by the black box.? (Jackson 367) We know that the black box was not the original vessel for the lottery. Many changes and omissions from lotteries past also, speak of the villagers? apathy for tradition.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Some changes were out of necessity, ?slips of paper substituted for the chips of wood that were used for generations? (Jackson 367) due to the fact that the population size of the village had grown from the original lottery. This made the use of the wood chips unpractical.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Other changes took place, it would seem, just to make the lottery go faster. ?there had been a recital of some sort, performed by the official of the lottery, a perfunctory, tuneless chant that had been rattled off duly each year; some people believed that he was supposed to walk among the people, but years and years ago this part of the ritual had been allowed to lapse. There had been, also, a ritual salute, which the official of the lottery had had to use addressing each person who came up to draw from the box, but this also had changed with time, un... ...Christ making it the most honored and important holiday in the Christian religion. But it does have its traditions that are a far cry from the original intent. It should come as no surprise to find that the Easter Bunny was not present and distributing multi-colored hard-boiled eggs to the twelve apostles two-thousand years ago.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Most holidays and celebrations in American culture have beginnings based on religious tradition, those same traditions are often forgotten or replaced by ones that have no relevance to the original intent. The erosion of tradition in ?The Lottery? mirrors that of our own society in the fact that customs change to suit society. The younger generations in ?The Lottery? took pleasure in the act of stoning someone to death. It no longer mattered that there had been a good reason for if, if indeed there had been a good reason. In our society, Christmas and Easter are used by big business to sell products and greeting cards. Tradition is only preserved if it benefits those who practice it. Works Cited: Jackson, Shirley. "The Lottery." Bridges: Literature Across Cultures. Gilbert H. Muller, John A. Williams. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1994. p 849-854.

Food Production

This essay will explain about farming today, and how it affects our environment, also ways in which we can help to protect our environment, our health and animal welfare. Farming is the production of food and other materials by raising plants and animals. Many people buy their food in supermarkets close to their homes, but the food is imported from many different countries, and many products are farmed in a number of different ways. The way food is farmed affects the environment. It also affects people's health and the treatment of animals. Some farming methods are more harmful than others. Over 11,000 years ago, people got all their food by gathering wild plants, hunting and also from fishing. They travelled around constantly in search for food. But then people learned how to grow plants from seeds. They learned how to raise animals, and then began to settle in one place. Now they could wait for their plants and crops to grow, and begin to harvest them when they were ripe. Then about 250 years ago farmers in much wealthier countries started using machines. Machinery did most of the work for people, so people could make food for many more people and sell it to their community. Scientists then developed chemicals to produce more food, and developed new plants and different breeds of animals. Many more farmers now use more chemicals such as fertilisers, pesticides and herbicides to grow more crops. Fertilisers make the soil more fertile. Pesticides kill insects that harm crops and herbicides kill weeds among the crops. Today in wealthy countries such as Britain and the USA people live in cities rely on fewer farmers in the countryside to grow their food. But many people are worried about how their food is produced, chemicals are sprayed onto the crops and they can stay on the food. They can also run into rivers and the water underground. New kinds of plants and new breads of animals may upset the natural environment. Valuable soil is also being lost or damaged. There is a lot of reduction in land and one of the causes for this is farming Farming methods, including overgrazing, incorrect farming methods and the overstocking of land, remove essential nutrients from the soil. This results in the denudation of the land. As no vegetation is available to retain the soil, it is washed away. Soil erosion further lessens the amount of land available for natural plants and animals. As the number of people grows daily, more food is needed and more land is being utilised for farming, decreasing the amount of land used by animals and plants, especially in the case of rainforests in tropical countries. As the rainforest are destroyed to make way for more farming land. Nature, insect and vegetation. In other countries hedge rows and trees are lost also killing that which resides there. Modern farming results include: 1) The hybridisation of plant species 2) improvements from animal breeding 3) the use of fertilisers and insecticides There are two types of insecticide found: 1) Organic: from plants and animals, e.g. manure and compost 2) inorganic: from non-living materials, e.g. rocks, minerals (these can disrupt ecosystems) When inorganic fertilisers are dissolved in rainwater, they run off into water sources. This is called Eutrophication. Eutrophication is the over growth of algae in water ecosystems where nutrients are usually limiting. Many fresh water systems are ‘oligotrophic', meaning that the growth of primary producers (algae) is limited not by dissolved gas or light, but by nutrients such as nitrates and minerals. The organisms in these environments have evolved to be optimally suited to these conditions, and everything works fairly well. But when someone builds something next to a lake (e.g. golf course), and the fertilizer being used on the grass runs off into the lake, the algae grows too fast for the rest of the ecosystem to keep up, and overgrows the lake, killing everything in it. That's one example, there are many other the solutions generally involve not washing lots of nutrients into lakes and streams (or the ocean, which, although generally full of nutrients, can also be locally overwhelmed with runoff, especially in coral reef environments). Farmers use pesticides and insecticides to kill organisms that damage their crops. The following methods are used: 1) Chemical: a poison is introduced, e.g. herbicides and DDT 2) biological: a natural predator is introduced, e.g. snakes to kill rats 3) mechanical: people and machines are used, e.g. rat traps Side effects of these methods can include: 1) The death of animals that are not pests 2) DDT entering and moving up the food chain DDT is an effective but dangerous pesticide. Below is a diagram to show how DDT is moved up the food chain. Farming produces much pollution, mainly water pollution through chemicals, and air pollution through machinery used in the farming process, the consequences of fumes being given off lead to, the green house effect which leads to global warming. Detrimental effects on human health and vegetation. This also causes acid rain. Water pollution was mentioned earlier. And how the chemicals being used travel through the lakes and rivers. This disrupts our ecosystems. So now you basically know what effects food production has on our environment, so how can we prevent this from happening? Well for a start we could all begin to eat more organic foods. Organic agriculture bars the use of synthetic pesticides and artificial fertilizers, and instead relies on ecological interactions to raise yields, reduce pests and build soil fertility. Diverse planting patterns, frequent rotations and attraction of beneficial insects, for instance, would all be organic means of pest control. Organic meat and dairy farming is the raising of animals without hormones, antibiotics or other artificial chemicals; it also includes using organic feed and allowing animals sufficient range of movement and sunlight. Genetic engineering of plants and animals is not considered organic. Organic farming is definitely a way forward. Lets hope in the future more people see it this way.

Conflict in Organizations, Good or Bad Essay

Organizational conflict is a state of discord caused by an actual or perceived opposition of needs, values and interests between people working together. Conflict takes many forms in organizations. There is the inevitable clash between formal authority and power and those individuals and groups affected. There are disputes over how revenues should be divided, how the work should be done and how long and hard people should work (team and relationship conflict). There are jurisdictional disagreements among individuals, executives, managers, teams, departments, and between unions and management. There are subtler forms of conflict involving rivalries, jealousies, personality clashes, role definitions, and struggles for power and favor. There is also conflict within individuals — between competing needs and demands — to which individuals respond in different ways. A process that begins when an individual or group perceives differences and opposition between itself and another individual or group about interest and resources, beliefs, values or practices that matter to them. It occurs or arises due to difference in expectation and knowledge, poor communication, fear, attachment, incompatible values, harassments, stress, scarce resources, past trauma, misunderstandings and perceived oppression. It also arises usually during mergers and acquisitions, union negotiations, performance appraisals, interpersonal issues, changing job functions, downsizing and reorganizations. Conflict has negative effects on organizations such as, increase in turnovers, absenteeism, health issues, wasted resources, increase in production cost and decrease in job satisfaction and performance. Its positive effects include, increases effort of workers, diagnostic information, creativity, learning of new skills and forming of deep bonds. Conflicts can be handled through in tegrating, forcing, competition, sharing, smoothing, avoiding and compromising. There are two ways of looking at organizational conflict; the functional and dysfunctional. Each of these ways is linked to a different set of assumptions about the purpose and function of organizations. Conflict that occurs in organizations need not be destructive, provided the energy associated with conflict is harnessed and directed towards problem-solving and organizational improvement. However, managing conflict effectively requires that all parties understand the nature of conflict in the workplace. The dysfunctional view (bad) of organizational conflict is imbedded in the notion that organizations are created to achieve goals by creating structures that perfectly define job responsibilities, authorities, and other job functions. Here, each worker knows where he or she fits, knows what he or she must do and knows how to relate to others in the organization. This traditional view of organizations values orderliness, stability and the repression of any conflict that occurs. To the â€Å"traditional† organizational thinker conflict implies that the organization is not designed or structured correctly or adequately. Common remedies would be to further elaborate job descriptions, authorities and responsibilities, increase the use of central power (discipline), separate conflicting members, etc. This view of organizations and conflict causes problems. Unfortunately, most managers consciously or unconsciously, value some of the characteristics of this â€Å"orderly† environment. Problems arise when it is not realized that this way of looking at organizational conflict only fits organizations that work in routine ways, where innovation and change are virtually eliminated. Virtually all government organizations work within a very disorderly context — one characterized by constant change and a need for constant adaptation. Trying to â€Å"structure away† conflict and disagreement in a dynamic environment requires tremendous amounts of energy, and will also suppress any positive outcomes that may come from disagreement, such as improved decision-making and innovation. When a bad conflict worsens it becomes an ugly conflict. Ugly conflicts occurs where the manager (and perhaps employees) attempt to eliminate or suppress conflict in situations where it is impossible to do so. Ugly conflicts in organizations occur when: conflicts run for years, people have given up on resolving and addressing conflict problems, there is a good deal of private â€Å"bitching† and complaining but little attempt to fix the problem and when staff show little interest in working to achieve common goals, but spend more time and energy on protecting themselves Under these circumstances there is a tendency to look to the manager or formal leader as being responsible for the mess. In fact, that is how most employees w ould look at the situation. It is true that managers and supervisors play critical roles in determining how conflict is handled in the organization, but it is also true that the avoidance of these ugly conflicts must be a shared responsibility. Management and employees must work together in a cooperative way to reduce them, and increase the likelihood that conflict can be channeled into an effective force for change. The functional (good) view of organizational conflict sees conflict as a productive force, one that can stimulate members of the organization to increase their knowledge and skills, and their contribution to organizational innovation and productivity. Unlike the position mentioned above, this more modern approach considers that the keys to organization success lie not in structure, clarity and orderliness, but in creativity, responsiveness and adaptability. The successful organization, then, needs conflict so that diverging views can be put on the table, and new ways of doing things can be created. The functional view of conflict also suggests that conflict provides people with feedback about how things are going. Even â€Å"personality conflicts† carry information to the manager about what is not working in an organization, affording the opportunity to improve. Personal conflict Personal conflict refers to an individual’s inner workings and personality problems. Conflict sometimes has a destructive effect on the individuals and groups involved. At other times, however, conflict can increase the capacity of those affected to help deal with problems, and therefore it can be used as a motivating force toward innovation and change. Conflict is encountered in two general forms. Many difficulties in this area are beyond the scope of management and more in the province of a professional counselor, but there are some aspects of personal conflict that managers should understand and some they can possibly help remedy. Social conflict include interpersonal, intragroup, and intergroup differences Role Conflict Another facet of personal conflict has to do with the multiple roles people play in organizations. Each member of the organization belongs to a role set, which is an association of individuals who share interdependent tasks and thus perform formally defined roles, which are further influenced both by the expectations of others in the role set and by one’s own personality and expectations. For example, in an organization, employees are expected to learn from the instructor by listening to him, following his directions, undertaking assigned tasks, and maintaining appropriate standards of conduct. The manager is expected to provide the employee with high-quality working materials and resources, give advice and direction, conduct evaluation tests and work appraisals, provide a conducive working environment, and set a good example. The system of roles to which an individual belongs extends outside the organization as well, and influences his functioning within it. As an example, a man’s roles as husband, father, son, and church member are all intertwined with each other and with his set of organizational roles. As a consequence, there exist opportunities for role conflict as the various roles interact with one another. Other types of role conflict occur when an individual receives inconsistent demands from another person; for example, he is asked’ to serve on several time-consuming committees at the same time that he is urged to get out more production for his work unit. Another kind of role strain takes place when the individual finds that he is expected to meet the opposing demands of two or more separate members of the organization. Such a case would be that of a worker who finds himself pressured by his boss to improve the quality of his work while his work group wants more production in order to receive a higher bonus share. Conflict within groups Conflicts between people in work groups, committees, task forces, and other organizational forms of face-to-face groups are inevitable. As we have mentioned, these conflicts may be destructive as well as constructive. Conflict arises in groups because of the scarcity of freedom, position, and resources. People who value independence tend to resist the need for interdependence and, to some extent, conformity within a group. People who seek power therefore struggle with others for position or status within the group. Rewards and recognition are often perceived as insufficient and improperly distributed, and members are inclined to compete with each other for these prizes. In western culture, winning is more acceptable than losing, and competition is more prevalent than cooperation, all of which tends to intensify intragroup conflict. Group meetings are often conducted in a win-lose climate — that is, individual or subgroup interaction is conducted for the purpose of determining a winner and a loser rather than for achieving mutual problem solving. The win-lose conflict in groups may have negative effects such as: divert time and energy from the main issues, delay decisions, create deadlocks, drive unaggressive committee members to the sidelines, interfere with listening, obstruct exploration of more alternatives, decrease or destroy sensitivity, cause defensiveness, members to drop out or resign from committees, arouse anger that disrupts a meeting, interfere with empathy, leave losers resentful, incline underdogs to sabotage, provoke personal abuse. Conflict in the group need not lead to negative results, however, the presence of a dissenting member or subgroup often results in more penetration of the group’s problem as well as more creative solutions. This is because disagreement forces the members to think harder in an attempt to cope with what may be valid objections to general group opinion. But the group must know how to deal with differences that may arise. True interdependence among members leads automatically to conflict resolution in the group. Interdependence recognizes that differences will exist and that they can be helpful. Hence, members learn to accept ideas from dissenters (which does not imply agreeing with them), they learn to listen and to value openness, and they learn to share a mutual problem-solving attitude to ensure the exploration of all facets of a problem facing the group. Intergroup conflict between groups is a sometimes destructive, sometimes necessary, since event occurs at all levels and across all functions in organizations. Intergroup conflict may help generate creative tensions leading to more effective contributions to the organization’s goals, such as competition between sales districts for the highest sales. Intergroup conflict is destructive when it alienates groups that should be working together, when it results in win-lose competition, and when it leads to compromises that represent less-than-o ptimum outcomes. Intergroup conflict occurs in two general forms- Horizontal and Vertical strain. Horizontal strain involves competition between functions: for example, sales versus production, research and development versus engineering, purchasing versus legal, line versus staff, and so on. A clash between a sales department and production over inventory policy would be an example of horizontal strain. Vertical strain involves competition between hierarchical levels: for example, union versus management, foremen versus middle management, shop workers versus foremen. A struggle between a group of employees and management is an example of vertical strain or conflict. Certain activities and attitudes are typical in groups involved in a win-lose conflict. Each side closes ranks and prepares itself for battle. Members show increased loyalty and support for their own groups. Minor differences between group members tend to be smoothed over, and deviants are dealt with harshly. The level of morale in the groups increases and infuses everyone with competitive spirit. The power structure becomes better defined, as the â€Å"real† leaders come to the surface and members rally around the â€Å"best† thinkers and talkers. On the other hand, each group tends to distort both its own views and those of the competing group. What is perceived as â€Å"good† in one’s own position is emphasized, what is â€Å"bad† is ignored; the position of the other group is assessed as uniformly â€Å"bad,† with little â€Å"good† to be acknowledged or accepted. Thus, the judgment and objectivity of both groups are impaired. When such groups meet to â€Å"discuss† their differences, constructive, rational behavior is severely inhibited. Each side phrases its questions and answers in a way that strengthens its own position and disparages the other’s. Hostility between the two groups increases; mutual understandings are buried in negative stereotypes. It is easy to see that under the conditions described above, mutual solutions to problems cannot be achieved. As a result, the side having the greater power wins; the other side loses. Or the conflict may go unresolved, and undesirable conditions or circumstances continue. Or the conflict may be settled by a higher authority. None of these outcomes is a happy one. Disputes settled on the basis of power, such as through a strike or a lockout in a labor-management dispute, are often deeply resented by the loser. Such settlements may be resisted and the winner defeated in underground ways that are difficult to detect and to counter. When this happens, neither side wins; both are losers. If the conflict is left unresolved (it becomes an ugly conflict), as when both sides withdraw from the scene, intergroup cooperation and effectiveness may be seriously impaired to the detriment of the en tire organization. Disputes that are settled by higher authority also may cause resentment and what is called â€Å"lose-lose† consequences. Such settlements are invariably made on the basis of incomplete information —without data that the conflict itself obscures — and therefore are poor substitutes for mutually reasoned solutions. Strategies for Managing Group Conflicts include: Avoidance – a management strategy which includes non-attention or creating a total separation of the combatants or a partial separation that allows limited interactions. Smoothing – technique which stresses the achievement of harmony between disputants. Dominance or Power Intervention – the imposition of a solution by higher management, other than the level at which the conflict exists. Compromise – strategy that seeks a resolution which satisfies at least part of the each party’s position. Confrontation – strategy featuring a thorough and frank discussion of the sources and types of conflict and achieving a resolution that is in the best interest of the group, but that may be at the expense of one or all of the conflicting parties. Trained conflict resolver can begin with an economical intervention, such as getting group members to clarify and reaffirm shared goals. If necessary, he or she moves through a systematic series of interventions, such as testing the members’ ability and willingness to compromise; resorting to confrontation, enforced counseling, and/or termination as last resorts To conclude, the notion that conflict should be avoided is one of the major contributors to the growth of destructive conflict in the workplace. The â€Å"bad† view of conflict is associated with a vision of organizational effectiveness that is no longer valid (and perhaps never was). Conflict can be directed and managed so that it causes both people and organiza tions to grow, innovate and improve. However, this requires that conflict not be repressed, since attempts to repress are more likely to generate very ugly situations. Common repression strategies to be avoided are: nonaction, administrative orbiting, secrecy and law and order. Thus, conflict affecting organizations can occur in individuals, between individuals, and between groups. Also, conflicts within and between work groups in organizations are often caused by struggles over control, status, and scarce resources. The constructive resolution of such conflicts can most often be achieved through a rational process of problem solving, coupled with a willingness to explore issues and alternatives and to listen to each other. Conflict is not always destructive, it may be a motivator. When it is destructive, however, managers need to understand and do something about it. A rational process for dealing with the conflict should be programmed. Such a process should include a planned action response on the part of the manager or the organization, rather than relying on a simple reaction or a change that occurs without specific action by management. If managers should subscribe to the flexible vision of effective organizations, and at each conflict situation provide opportunity to improve, they can have the chance to harness the energy of conflict, directing it to be productive. Rather than trying to eliminate conflict, or suppress its symptoms, their task becomes managing conflict so that it enhances people and organizations, rather than destroying people and organizations. So, the task is to manage conflict, and avoid what we call â€Å"the ugly†Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.where conflict is allowed to eat away at team cohesiveness and productivity.

Ethical Economics essays

Ethical Economics essays The term ethical and economics should never be put into the same sentance. They are almost oxymoronic in the sense that in order for one to succeed on an economic level, ethics are usually never involved. America as we have come to know it is a world full of mice and snakes. The mice are those in society who voluntarily choose to live off of the prosperous, as the snakes go out and get their prey. The capitalistic society we live in known as America is truly what we make of it. The standards and principles of America's capitalism are truly ethical and fair. One is reminded of the Darwinian theory of evolution that only the strong survive. Those who do not provide for themselves will be left to "die" in American society. The American economic society that we have come to know and love is truly fair and equal on all levels. Since the end of Feudalism, America has lived up to it's reputation as a Capitalistic society. The True Market System kick-started the freedom of possibilities of capitalism. The right to private property, choice, voluntary exchange, comptetition, and economic incentives are what we thrive towards every day. With the incorporation of voluntary exchange and competition, American's were forced to go out into the world and produce in order to survive and make a profit, much different than traditional economics when a child would inherit his father's work. Economic Incentives, better known as profit, lead to a broader array of choices that we are able to make as free-minded Americans. The comparison between Socialist and Free Market economies show us how truly eithical and fair America's economic system truly is. Resources in a Socialistic Economic system are government owned and regulated, which in turn, the government determines what and how much of "what" will be produced. Th e capital from the gove ...

Introduction To Stoichiometry

Introduction To Stoichiometry One of the most important parts of chemistry is stoichiometry. Stoichiometry is the study of the quantities of reactants and products in a chemical reaction. The word comes from the Greek  words:  stoicheion  (element) and  metron  (measure). Sometimes youll see stoichiometry covered by another name: mass relations. Its a more easily pronounced way of saying the same thing. Stoichiometry Basics Mass relations are based on three important laws. If you keep these laws in mind, youll be able to make valid predictions and calculations for a chemical reaction. Law of Conservation of Mass - mass of the products equals the mass of the reactantsLaw of Multiple Proportions - the mass of one element combines with a fixed mass of another element in a ratio of whole numbersLaw of Constant Composition - all samples of a given chemical compound have the same elemental composition Common Stoichiometry Concepts and Problems The quantities in stoichiometry problems  are expressed in atoms, grams, moles, and units of volume, which means you need to be comfortable with unit conversions and basic math. To work mass-mass relations, you need to know how to write and balance chemical equations.  Youll need a calculator and a periodic table. Heres information you need to understand before you start work with stoichiometry: How the Periodic Table WorksWhat a Mole IsUnit Conversions (Worked Examples)Convert Grams To Moles (Step By Step Instructions) A typical problem gives you an equation, asks you to balance it, and to determine the amount of reactant or product under certain conditions. For example, you may be given the following chemical equation: 2 A 2 B → 3 C and asked, if you have 15 grams of A, how much C can you expect from the reaction if it goes to completion? This would a be a mass-mass question. Other typical problem types are molar ratios, limiting reactant, and theoretical yield calculations. Why Stoichiometry Is Important You cant understand chemistry without grasping the basics of stoichiometry because it helps you predict how much of a reactant participates in a chemical reaction, how much product youll get, and how much reactant might be left over. Tutorials and Worked Example Problems From here, you can explore specific stoichiometry topics: How To Balance EquationsExample of Balancing an EquationUnderstanding Molar RatiosHow To Find the Limiting ReactantHow To Calculate Theoretical Yield Quiz Yourself Do you think you understand stoichiometry? Test yourself with this quick quiz.

Anger ( Psychology Assignment) Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Anger ( Psychology ) - Assignment Example In these regards, the article begins with situating anger within the Freudian context. It argues that Freud believed anger represented a defense mechanism to protect a fragile ego that was under siege from an outside attack. The article argues that while Feud’s contention has some bearing to reality, that to comprehend the true nature of anger one must go beyond these articulations. This is a notable point in that it indicates that Freud’s early articulations of anger as rooted in ego defense is too simplistic a means of understanding that human condition, and that rather than speaking of it in terms of ego, one must embrace a more complex articulation of personality. In these regards, the article argues that one must understand the expansive nature of personality construction and realize that anger oftentimes masks emotions an individual is feeling elsewhere in their life. Anger is then understood as a sort reactive, secondary emotion in these regards. For instance, on e can consider the nature of anger in the contextual situation of driving and getting cut-off in traffic. Within this context the initial emotion experienced by the individual was that of fear and the secondary reactive emotion was anger. In these regards, the predominant understanding of anger is the type of emotion that is reactive rather than an initial and instinctual emotion. One of the critical issues in examining anger in these regards is developing a workable definition of what constitutes anger. In these regards, the article advances a notion of anger as a protective emotion. The article’s contention is that when individuals experience anger it is out of a sort of survival instinct that is triggered by external circumstances. These circumstances then function by sending signals to the heart and internal organs and senses such that they alert the individual to the potential threats in the environment. While there are a great variety of things that can cause anger to o ccur, the two most overarching concepts in these regards is the current vulnerability as well as the extent of the individual’s perception of this vulnerability. It’s argued that the core assumptions of the nature of anger are such that they necessitate varying types of definitions. One such of these is problem anger, which indicates that the individual acts out of vulnerability to such an extent that it hinders their long term goals or interests. The article indicates that this is generally a temporary and short-lived occurrence that is brought on by a sudden shift in core value. This then result in the individual lashing out in angry ways towards those or the incident that caused their malaise. The article also addresses means of overcoming these sorts of problem anger situations by indicating that the individual should refrain from immediate action and enter a contemplative state of affairs. A more insightful insight in such a context is that when an individual find s themselves in such a state must act in accordance not with their feelings of anger, but with their long term goals. While the article makes interesting insights into the nature of human anger or consciousness, in large part one questions the overriding validity of the claim. For instance, the argument that there is an element of angry that is known as problem anger is seems more likely suited