Causes And Effects On High Divorce Rates Essay Sample For College

Since the past, people have gotten married and lived together. Some married couples are unable to maintain their relationship as a couple; therefore, they choose to get a divorce. Furthermore, half of American marriages now end in divorce. There are three main causes to this increase in divorces: the changes in women’s roles, stress in modern living, and lack of communication. The first significant cause in the rise in the divorce rate is that women have changed roles throughout the years. In the past, the husband usually worked and made the money to support his family, and the wife stayed home and did the entire house work.

Therefore, the wife had no money and had to depend on her husband’s money. Because of this, divorcing then was difficult for a woman to separate from her husband. However, this situation is changed nowadays. The equality between men and women in roles are pretty much equal now. Women now work outside the home to make money, while men share the household work. It is clear that women are now independent, because they can earn money for themselves and support living costs. As a result of this independence, women now have no problem with separating from their husbands. Another cause for the rise in divorce rates is stress in modern living.

Many people have considerable pressures to earn money. Some people study in universities for a better chance to find a good job or opportunity to earn money. If a person gets laid off from their job, then stress starts to occur and this can lead to arguments with a married couple. When a married couple argues too much, they will often want to get divorced. Therefore, stress in modern living may lead to the increasing divorce rate. The final cause of the high divorce rate is lack of communication. Because some people work so much, married couples often find no time to communicate with each other.

This can cause lack of interest in each other, and problems not being discussed. If there is no communication in a marriage, the couple starts to feel like they do not know each other anymore. All these communication problems can lead to a couple wanting to get divorced, increasing the divorce rate. Although these three causes of the high divorce rate are expressed, there are also two effects of this divorce rate: negative effects and positive effects. First off, the effects of recent enlargement in divorce rates are negative effects. Most married couples often have children.

Divorces affect children in a negative way. Children living in single parent families are more probable to get pregnant as teenagers, drop out of high school, do drugs, and have emotional problems. Some children may leave a home when their parents are getting divorced, and consequently, they become homeless children. These are some negative effects on the high divorce rates. Secondly, some effects of the high divorce rate are positive effects. Some people who divorce from their partners, want to have a better quality of life, if they are unhappy with their spouses.

When people get divorced, they can learn from the mistakes that occurred in that marriage; such as trust and commitment. One can also learn what is really important to make a marriage work. Not only do they have more free time to do many things, but they also free from their spouses’ complaining. Divorce also gets rid of arguments that can lead to physical or mental abuse. These are some of the positive effects on the high divorce rate. At the moment, divorce has become the substantial problem because of the changes in women’s roles, the stress in modern living, and lack of communication between husband and wife.

Nevertheless, there are also two different effects that have the affected the high divorce rate, which are positive effects and negative effects. Some couples, with no children, divorce by each other’s consent; therefore, divorce should be a good solution for couples to deal with problems. On the other hand, some couples having children should think carefully before ending their marriage. Although people tend to think carefully before they get married, the divorce rate is still high.

James Paul Gee’s Introduction To Literacy, Discourse, And Linguistics Short Summary

James Paul Gee’s introduction to Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics and his article, What is Literacy?, examine literacy studies using psychological and sociological perspectives. According to Gee, literacy encompasses social practices, emphasizing that it involves not only how one expresses something but also who they are and what they do when expressing it. At the beginning of the text, Gee defines Discourse as a combination of various actions such as speaking, writing, acting, existing, valuing, and more. He regards Discourse as a social construction that bears similarities to Culture.

To become proficient in a Discourse, one must undergo an extensive process of enculturation or apprenticeship, which entails emphasizing social practices and engaging with individuals who have already achieved mastery in that Discourse. The initial Discourse we acquire, often centered around the household and our relatives, is referred to as our Primary Discourse. According to Gee, the Primary Discourse is “obtained through participation in a particular group or community.” It serves as a groundwork and differs from one individual to another.

Secondary Discourses are acquired through social institutions such as school, church, and work. There are two categories of Secondary Discourses: Dominant Discourses enable individuals to gain social benefits and increase their status, while Non-Dominant Discourses do not provide these opportunities but still allow individuals to establish connections within a particular social group. According to Gee, Literacy is defined as the proficiency in a specific Secondary Discourse.

Gee argues for the concept of Liberation through Literacy in his article. He questions the significance of superficial aspects of language that contribute nothing to meaning. Gee emphasizes the need for classrooms to function as active apprenticeships to achieve fluency. Once individuals attain full fluency and become truly literate, they can free themselves by engaging in discussions, comparisons, and inquiries about various Discourses instead of blindly adhering to specific Secondary Discourses. However, I find Gee’s perspective somewhat conservative as he regards Primary Discourses as restrictive.

I frequently find my Primary Discourse to be incredibly liberating; however, the article argues that this is impossible. Additionally, the author’s perception of Dominant and Non-Dominant Discourses troubles me because it implies that Non-Dominant Discourses do not carry any status. It appears that within a specific network, solidarity could potentially generate some form of outcome, even if it does not elevate one’s status. The author asserts early in the text that Discourse is not fixed. Could there be a chance for a Non-Dominant Discourse to transition into a Dominant Discourse?

Symbolism In A Novel Lord Of The Flies Literary Analysis

Symbolism is a critical factor in numerous books, such as The Lord of the Flies by William Golding. The novel heavily relies on symbolism to progress the story. Although they may appear insignificant at first, upon closer analysis, these symbols are crucial in depicting the microcosm of the island. One example is the conch shell, which initially serves as a symbol and retains its importance until the end. Ralph and Piggy stumble upon the conch and use it to assemble the boys after their plane crash. “We can utilize this to summon others,” they proclaim.

According to Golding (16), the sound of the conch served as a call for a meeting, with the expectation that others would gather to listen. Throughout the story, the conch symbolizes civilization and order on the island. At the beginning, it is entrusted to a boy who has the power to speak for the group: “I’ll give the conch to the next person to speak. He can hold it when he’s speaking” (Golding 33). As both a symbol and a tangible representation of political legitimacy and democratic power, the conch gradually loses its authority and control as the boys descend into savagery. Consequently, their once orderly lives quickly deteriorate into chaos.

The conch’s power reaches its climax when Roger destroys it by pushing a boulder down castle rock, which collides into Piggy while he is holding the conch. Piggy is killed while the conch is shattered into fragments. This gruesome incident represents the end of the civilized instincts in almost all of the boys on the island. Among the boys, Piggy is the most intelligent and rational individual, and his glasses symbolize the power of science and intellectual pursuits in society. The glasses are used to start a signal fire on top of the mountain using the sun’s rays. Jack suddenly points and suggests, “His Specs—use them as burning glasses!” (Golding 40). Jack utilizes Piggy’s glasses to ignite the fire, demonstrating his intelligence and mastery of scientific principles to produce fire. Without the glasses, there would be no signal fire to light. Along with the glasses, the signal fire itself is also a symbol. The fire serves as an indicator of the boys’ connection to civilization. When the fire is maintained, it shows that the boys desire to be rescued. However, when the fire burns low or goes out, it symbolizes how the boys have lost their longing for salvation and have embraced savagery in their lives.

The signal fire serves as a symbol of the remaining hope and civilized instinct on the island. The protagonist emphasizes the need for smoke in order to be rescued. However, there is silence and hesitation among the group. Piggy kindly reminds them that smoke is necessary for rescue. Ralph angrily responds, claiming he knew it all along but momentarily forgot. He tries to distance himself from Piggy’s reminder, refusing to admit his mistake. This passage illustrates the loss of hope and diminishing civilized instinct in Ralph’s character.

The primal instinct of savagery that exists within all human beings is represented by the beast that frightens the boys. The boy’s behavior in the novel is what brings the beast into existence. “‘We’ve got to have rules and obey them. After all, we’re not savages. We’re English, and the English are best at everything’” (Golding 42). Initially, they do not believe in the beast and try to maintain civilized behavior. However, as they engage in more destructive actions, their inherent savagery surfaces and the belief in the beast intensifies. [The hunters’ thoughts were] crowded with memories… of the knowledge… that they had outwitted a living thing, imposed their will upon it, taken away its life like a long satisfying drink” (Golding 70). At the beginning of the novel, they are well-behaved and civilized boys, but as the story progresses, except for a few exceptions, they become ruthless and bloodthirsty. Their transformation into savagery occurs because the beast resides within them; it is not an actual physical creature. “Maybe there is a beast…. maybe it’s only in us” (Golding 89).

Fear in the boys brings out their savagery on the island, with no fear there would be no savagery. The lord of the flies symbolizes evil residing in every human heart. When Simon confronts the sow head, it reveals that evil will torment him and foreshadows his death. The lord of the flies represents both the physical beast and the power of evil. It is also a Satan-like figure that awakens the inner beast within each person.

Lord of the flies represents the devil, whereas Simon represents Jesus Christ. Golding suggests that evil will consistently prevail over good, as indicated by the lord of the flies foretelling Simon’s demise. The biblical name Beelzebub is equivalent to the lord of the flies, which denotes a formidable demon in hell, occasionally believed to be the Devil. The Devil is universally recognized as the embodiment of evil, therefore in the book, the lord of the flies symbolizes the power of evil. The various protagonists in the novel symbolize distinct aspects of society.

Ralph signifies organization, guidance, and civilization; Piggy signifies the scientific and intellectual components of civilization. Simon embodies innate goodness within society, while Jack embodies savagery and the craving for power within society. Roger represents extreme brutality and bloodlust. The island serves as a representation of a political state. The littluns embody the common people, whereas the older boys symbolize the ruling class and political leaders. Simon, Ralph, and Piggy, the older boys who have embraced civilization, utilize their authority to safeguard the littluns and fulfill their necessities.

Instead of prioritizing the older boys’ interests, they prioritize the welfare of the entire group. In contrast, Roger and Jack, the older savage boys, exploit their power to manipulate the littluns for their own selfish desires, neglecting the well-being of the group. The Lord of the Flies employs various symbols that play a crucial role in advancing the narrative. Without these symbols, the gradual shift from morality to chaos would not be effectively depicted. Golding skillfully utilizes symbolism throughout the book to illustrate the transformation of society into an unethical microcosm.

error: Content is protected !!