Principles of Physical Security Essay Example for Free

Principles of Physical Security Essay Physical security is the wide phenomena that are taken for the prevention or determent of attackers from a possible access of a resource, information that is stored within physical media and facilities. Physical security is viewed under three fundamental aspects. These are; †¢ Responding adequately to the measures of security that would repel or catch the possible attackers in the event of detection. †¢ Using gadgets and implements that are forthwith important in the control of secure atmosphere. This could include cameras, security lighting and use of alarms, patrols by security guards that provide easy noticing of attacks. †¢ Facilitation of obstacles that are aimed at frustrating any possible attackers and delaying the serious security cases. A proper set of security designs has the compliment of all these structures that work cohesively with one another. A good physical security design is a compliment of four important factors which are intrusion detection, electronic and mechanical access controls, environmental design and video monitoring. Physical security is based on various principles that are applied to solve various security concerns at varied depths. (Walter, 1997). These include; Building security:   Buildings are the source of residence for human beings. However, their structural planning and establishments is compromised by various security threat factors that make the life of those living in them unsafe. Building security therefore implies all the fundamental components of architectural and construction concerns that make buildings safe places for living and hostage. It is the compound of all structures that provide authenticity in the physical structures that provides the safest levels for the habitation. The guarantee for this security is well accorded during the designing phase of the building. The aspect of this security is inclusive of both the internal and the external environments that are occupied by the building. The physical structure of the building should be designed in the most appropriate manner that provides the highest levels of security measures for its inhabitants. It should include a coordinated design in the roofs, walls outlet such as doors, windows and locks (Donald, 1997) Ground security: This is the protective aspect that is attached to airports and its surrounding environment. It includes all aspects that are attached to the physical structure of an airport that makes it a safe place for the various activities that goes on within their contemporaries. It incorporates adequate placement of the structures such as runways, surveillance services, communication systems and all aspects that are endowed within the structures of an airport. Due to the delicacy of the airport operations, high importance should be attached in the highest levels of security for the activities and processes of the airport (Azari, 2003) Access control systems: These are systems of control that are applied in securing adequate security towards information and other facets of information systems. This is the provisions of providing the legitimate users with the principles with which they should apply in assessing stored data. Information is deemed as an essential aspect and a resource aspect within any organization. Access control systems should therefore address the fundamentals with which the information should be mined, shared and made into use. Improper and illegitimate use of data and information may lead to comparative disadvantages for the organization. Improper and inappropriate use of information is subject to huge loses to an organization through misuse of the data and information that leaves the organization at a competitive disadvantage when its information is used by its competitors to develop business strengths. Importantly, the aspects of corporate intelligence as well as industrial espionage are two important aspects that define the rationality for data security. The current business environment and the expanding technological advancement have seen this process fully acknowledged. Various tools have been used to safeguard the organization information and their respective systems. Substantially therefore, physical security on information and their systems remains implicit for the success of the organization (Harold, 2003) Perimeter security: This is the broad components of techniques and methods that are used in providing an outer bounder security of premises. This is essential in preventing possible access of unauthorized persons within the premises. These may keep off trespassers, thieves, unauthorized persons and others persons. It can be secured using physically constructed walls and fences. Perimeter security is made to advance the most optimal security prospects that would help to safeguard the internal structures that are endowed within premises. Perimeter security should be advanced therefore as protective measures that safeguard the internal prospects of the premises. Technological advances security: This is the security protection for innovations, technological advancements, designs and process improvements. This should be protected to avoid losses through comparative disadvantages occurring form business competitors. It includes intellectual property security that can be provided through trademarks. Innovations come as the process of advancement in specific lines of production and manufacturing or personal production of his/her intellectual work. Security on these productions providing the environment with which the producer or the copyright owners can be safeguarded form any possible activities of misuse of the product that may make the profit motive of the technology to be unmet. (Peter, 2000)

A Review On Nature Vs Nurture

A Review On Nature Vs Nurture For decades it has been debated that humans intelligence, behavior, and socioeconomic status are determined by the surrounding environment a human grows up in rather than the genealogical history they are born with. While humans may inherit physical traits from their biological parents, there is no reason genes should affect intelligence or behavior. It can be argued that human intelligence and behavior is passed down generations through genes, but there is evidence countering such theories. I firmly believe that humans come into this world as a blank slate and that behavior is formed as well as influenced by the surrounding environment in which they are raised. I will present both sides of this argument and provide both scientific and personal evidence. While both sides hold valid claims and possess good supporting evidence, the nurture simply more logical. This commonly known argument is known as the debate between nature and nurture. In this debate, nature argues that behavior and intelligence are affected genetically and that a person is able to maintain their minds ability solely through what they are born with. Those backing this belief in this case are known as nativists. Nativists in one way or another assume that human characteristics as a whole are a product of evolution. This debate only began over a century ago when Charles Darwin brought up this theory between the environmentalists and nativists. Darwins cousin, famous English scientist Francis Galton (1822 -1911), believed that intelligent families brought up intelligent children. Galton was the most famous explorer of human intelligence and made important contributions to criminology, physical anthropology, and meteorology. He made the most significant contributions to both psychology and genetics. Galton was convinced that intelligent humans came from families which possessed other intelligent family members. Professions of art, science, and politics often ran in those families that he observed. Galton theorized that people had the potential to produce a highly gifted race of men by judicious marriages during several consecutive generations (Neill, Nature vs Nurture in Intelligence). He called this eugenics. He also argued that intelligence was bred and not trained, siding with nature. Though arguably, Galton was raised through means of great wealth as his father Samuel Tertius Galton was a prominent banker. His family contained rich bankers and gunsmiths. There is no doubt that his family had easy access to high education. In his time, good education and the idea of attending a great college usually happened to wealthier folks. So it could instead be said that intelligent humans actually came from families who possessed great wealth and were actually able to afford a quality education. After World War I, several psychologists started to reconsider their nativist views and sought intelligence to be influenced through environment rather than through genealogical history. At the time African Americans were given IQ tests to compare with that of whites for a mass study. The end results showed that African Americans from Illinois scored higher on IQ tests than whites from nine other southern states. Through this analysis some scientists found it difficult to make peace with the basic idea that whites were intellectually superior to blacks. Evidence soon seemed to support a closer link between intelligence and social class, rather than race and intelligence. Following in the 1960s, the focus of an individual pertaining to hereditary studies began to shift towards social determinants. The idea started to move away from the nature and genetic outlet to the environmental and nurture end. In this case, nurture refers to the surrounding environment. Environment plays a huge factor as it may be the air we breathe, water we drink, food we eat, people we speak to, people we see, etc. Parents arent the only aspect of environment. There is also the surrounding culture. After this general idea began to be widespread, America reformed its public education and improved poor living conditions with welfare in order to better the environment. Talk of nature playing a role in contributing to any individual differences, especially intelligence, became minimalized through the present political stance. However, evidence of the differences in intelligence between racial and socioeconomic groups did not dissipate. In 1994, the Bell Curve controversy began. Richard J. Herrnsteins and Charles Murrays The Bell Curve swung the idea of nature back into the minds of the general public. This 800+ page book re-ignited the nature vs. nurture debate and generated massive controversy in sociology, education, psychology, and politics. It implied that an individuals intelligence, which was partially inherited from both biological parents, would determine that individuals socioeconomic background and future life experiences. So it claimed that your IQ could determine your job, annual income, education, criminality, relationships, and socioeconomic status. Now this is where the debate gets really heated. Readers from the left viewed the authors as racist scientists, un-American, and the book as a complete joke. Then you have the readers on the right seeing the authors at brave, powerful and respectable scholars. The nurture end of this debate claims that the behavioral differences and psychological characteristics that emerge from infancy to childhood are the simple result of learning. It leans towards the idea of how a human raised and nurtured affects solely the psychological aspect of childhood development. The only thing that biology here has to do with this is with the physical maturation of the human. Those with strong views on nurture in this debate are known as environmentalists. Environmentalists believe that the human mind at birth arrives into this world as a blank slate and that future actions along with personality and intelligence are gradually nurtured as a result from experience. Intelligence is very important to this debate. Nativists say that differences in intelligence are determined through means of certain smart genes that are being passed down generations -wealthy ones at that, if anything. Some environmentalists believe that differences in intellectual ability are a result of certain social inequalities relating in access to opportunities and material resources. For example, if a child is raised in a ghetto neighborhood, the likelihood that they will earn a good score on an IQ test is rather low because they were denied the exact same life chances that other more privileged members of society had. This is why the nature vs. nurture debate gets heated, and its understandable too, because what starts as an attempt to understand how the neighborhood that a child is raised in or the public school that they attend is able to determine the causes of behavioral differences can sometimes get into a politically motivated dispute about distributive power and justice in society. Thankfully I was raised in a nice neighborhood that consisted of friendly neighbors and calm locals. I had a good friend who lived two houses down and we would go to the same school together almost every day. His parents had college degrees and earned a good average living. I always thought he would turn out to be something big since he was very bright. Later I guess he moved in with his aunt in some other town because his mom and dad were fighting and arguing a lot. They ended up getting a divorce I figured, as the home he used to live in began to welcome moving trucks at the garage door. Last I saw him, we were both 12. The next time I saw him was when I turned 17 and it was on the local county news. He had assaulted a liquor store clerk and attempted to rob the place for a gang initiation. I wasnt so sure it was the same person because of the generic name until it was later confirmed through Facebook that evening. I looked through at his location, friends, and education and not surprisingly, he had moved to a very low income neighborhood that held a bad reputation that was located nearby downtown. So how could it have been that such an environmental shift affected his lifestyle s o drastically? He befriended gangsters and he lost interest at the public school that he attended nearby. When we were younger we went to the exact same school and lived in the exact same neighborhood. I surely did not turn out that way. I cant think of any one of my neighbors who had such a tragic change like that happen to them and affect them harshly. I always said that it was merely his environment. If parents talk, read, and listen to their kids, then they tend to do well academically and are very bright. If parents provide firm and flexible rules, then their children tend be to be well behaved. If parents treat their kids harshly then they tend to be anxious, aggressive and stressed out. A child can also acquire bad habits from their surrounding environment. Today in society, our environment isnt just about our families and friends. We have cellphones, television, music, and social networking which influence us in different ways. Todays youth is just a button away from sending a text message, searching the internet, or turning on the television. To conclude, the debate between nature and nurture consists of two ideas, both with much supportive evidence and criticism. The belief that nature is responsible for human intelligence, behavior and socioeconomic status is interesting, but does not convince me that those characteristics can be inherited. All I can see inherited are merely physical traits that appear through maturity. Nurture seems more plausible as it brings up the idea that a humans surrounding environment affects not only its intelligence and behavior, but its social life as well. This debate is still very current today as scientists battle over how much human intelligence and other behavior are determined by genes and how much by the environment.

Thrust Vectoring :: War Technology Technological Essays

Thrust Vectoring Imagine two US Air Force Jets with controls not responding, they are heading right for each other, the pilots don’t have enough time to eject, there’s a mid-air explosion, and the needless death of American servicemen. About one fifth of peacetime fighter losses during the past few years were due to loss of control. Now imagine that the US has been developing the technology to prevent this for the last decade, but due to budget problems this technology was never installed on our fighters. I’m talking about a Thrust Vectoring. This engineering term describes the use of an engines nozzle to direct the force coming from a jet engine in different directions other then straight out the back. Besides tragic, needless deaths, this technology has a military significance for front line fighter jets. With the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Americans have seen the devastating power of our Air Force on Countries without a serious Air Defense network, like Is rael or Great Britain. These are countries with not just a Surface to Air Missile (SAM) threat, but an Air Force that can rival ours in its current state. Thrust Vectoring is the technology that will make our fighter jets true rulers of the air, not just on bombing runs, but air-to-air combat, better know as â€Å"Dog Fighting†. Thrust Vectoring was first used in a trivial form on Nazi Germany’s V-2 rockets. These rockets were devastating to the Allies in WWII with their accuracy due to graphite control vanes that helped the guidance of the missile. Modern rockets, both SAMs and Air-to-Air missiles have been using thrust vectoring to increase their agility in flight, and hence make them more lethal. During the Cold War German military planers recognized the shear numbers of Soviet fighters, and believing that any war would include intense Dog Fighting, began to look for ways to even the odds. Wolfgang Herbst with the Messerschmitt-Boelkow-Blohm, now Deutsche Aerospace, Company led a team in Post-Stall engineering. Post-Stall describes a flight condition in which normal flight controls, like flaps, are no longer sufficient to maintain the flight ability of the aircraft. His team investigated new flight laws to describe the movement of an aircraft in Post-Stall flying conditions.

Free Hamlet Essays: Hamlet, Fortinbras and Leartes :: GCSE Coursework Shakespeare Hamlet

Hamlet, Fortinbras and Leartes Hamlet, Fortinbras and Leartes are all very different people with different lives, but as these men interact in the play we learn that there are many circumstances surrounding them that mysteriously connect them. All three of these characters had some reason to avenge some circumstance in their life, but they all had a very different way of conquering the object of their hatred. Fortinbras Fortinbras had levied an army to attack and conquer Denmark. Though son of the late King of Norway, the crown of Norway had gone to his uncle, just as the crown of Denmark had gone to Hamlet's uncle. This shows that in the world of the play it was not unusual for brothers to late kings to be elected to the throne over the pretensions of their younger nephews. But Fortinbras was not prepared to accept his constitutional dispossession so easily. If he had been deprived of the throne of his father, he would try to conquer a kingdom of his own in which, as he later tells Horatio, he has "some rights of memory." Fortinbras is not willing to put an end to his military adventures. Desiring to win honor through the sword, he cares not that the prize of his glory is worthless or that he will sacrifice thousands of lives and much wealth for this hollow victory. Like Hamlet, Sr., Fortinbras is an empire builder who desires only to fight for glory and so, in an ironic way, he is fitted by character to inherit the kingdom of Hamlet, Sr. Leartes Laertes is a young man whose good instincts have been somewhat obscured by the concern with superficial appearances which he has imbibed from his father, Polonius. Like his father, Laertes apparently preaches a morality he does not practice and fully believes in a double standard of behavior for the sexes. But if his father allows him these liberties, it is that he may better approximate the manner of a so - called gentleman. More concerned with the outward signs of gentility than with any inner refinement of spirit, Laertes has well observed his father's advice to be concerned with appearances since "the apparel oft proclaims the man." As unconcerned for the order of society as he is for his own salvation, he would rather "dare damnation" than leave his father's honor and his own besmirched. Though the sight of his sister's madness brings him to a moment of true grief, he is still primarily enraged by his father's "obscure funeral - / No trophy, sword, nor hatchment o'er his bones, / No noble rite nor formal ostentation.

Metallic Hydrogen :: essays research papers fc

Hydrogen: the most abundant element in the universe. Normally it has been considered to remain a non-metal at any range of temperatures and pressures. That is, until now. Recently this year, hydrogen was changed into a metallic substance, which could conduct electricity. An experiment conducted by William J. Nellis et al. at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory accomplished this feat. Hydrogen was converted from a non-metallic liquid, into a liquid metal. The likelihood that the most abundant element in the universe could be converted into metallic form at sufficient pressures was first theorized in 19351, but tangible evidence has eluded scientists in the intervening decades. "Metallization of hydrogen has been the elusive Holy Grail in high-pressure physics for many years," said Bill Nellis, one of three Livermore researchers involved in the project. "This is a significant contribution to condensed matter physics because a pressure and temperature that actually produce metallization have finally been discovered."2 Livermore researchers Sam Weir, Art Mitchell, and Bill Nellis used a two-stage gas gun at Livermore to create enormous shock pressure on a target containing liquid hydrogen cooled to 200 K (- 4200 F). Sam Weir, Arthur Mitchell (a Lab associate), and Bill Nellis published the results of their experiments in the March 11 issue of Physical Review Letters under the title "Metallization of Fluid Molecular Hydrogen at 140 GPa (1.4 Mbar)." When asked about the significance of the work, Nellis had this to say: "Hydrogen makes up 90 percent of the universe. Jupiter is 90 percent hydrogen and contains most of the mass in our planetary system. Hydrogen is very important to a lot of work done at the Lab. Hydrogen in the form of deuterium and tritium isotopes is the fuel in laser-fusion targets and how it behaves at high temperatures and pressures is very important to Nova and the National Ignition Facility."3 By measuring the electrical conductivity, they found that metallization occurs at pressure equivalent to 1.4 million times Earth's atmospheric pressure, nine times the initial density of hydrogen, and at a temperature of 30000 K (50000 F). Because of the high temperature, the hydrogen was a liquid. The intense pressure lasted less than a microsecond. Optical evidence of a new phase of hydrogen has been previously reported using an experimental approach that involves crushing microscopic-sized samples of crystalline hydrogen between diamond anvils.4 However, metallic character has not been established. Metallic character is most directly established by electrical conductivity measurements which are not yet possible in diamond anvil cells at these pressures. The Livermore team's results were surprising because of their methods, the form of hydrogen used and the pressure needed to achieve the result (which was much lower than previously believed). Virtually all predictions surrounding metallic hydrogen have been made for solid hydrogen at

Animal testing Essay

Animal testing is used for many products worldwide. Also animal testing is used for a wide range of things, such as items in houses and medicines. Many places test on animals, such as private facilities, universities, and government laboratories. A big debate in today’s society is whether or not scientist should use animals for testing. Most of the animals die during or after the testing. Typing animal testing on images on the Internet it is most likely that gruesome images of rabbits, mice, cats, and dogs being used as test subjects will appear. Some people believe that animal testing has improved the world and continues to do so. They look, at the good side of what animal testing has done for humans. People want to make sure that the product that they are using is safe and won’t affect them in a negative way. Most people believe that it is okay as long as the animal is put to sleep while being tested on and if the animals feel no pain then it doesn’t matter tha t they are being tested on. Most people think that since most people eat animals; why not use them for testing, which can help humans. But other people think that there are better ways to conduct these experiments. These people can’t stand the fact that millions of animals die because of testing. Haugen, David Animal Experimentation A lot of animal testing is used for cosmetics. Items such as mascara and shaving cream are common cosmetics. The most used animals for animal testing are rabbits, guinea pigs, and mice or rats. It is important for some people to know that their cosmetics were not used to harm animals. However, other people say that they would rather have their products tested by animals because they would rather be safe and to make sure that they wont be affected by the product in a negative way. Another main reason for animal testing is for medical research. Medical research has helped technology. Scientist, want to make sure that they are testing with the most current technology and at this moment its animals. The study of animals helps scientist understand better. Ways that Animal testing has helped medial research is that it has helped find a cure for breast cancer, leukemia, lung cancer, and many others. Now days it seems not ethical for humans to be tested on, but in the past people in mental hospitals or prisons have been used as â€Å"guinea pigs†. In the past this behavior was acceptable. Humans that are tested subjects these days are able to speak up for themselves where animals are not capable of that. Most people that agree with animal testing have never been forced to do something that they didn’t have a say about and didn’t have rights. Darwin has showed that we share a common lineage with other animals, and a subsequent genetic research has shown the closeness of evolutionary links. This means that we are very similar to animal. Boines, The use of curari in a repository medium in the management of acute poliomyelitis. Most of the animals that are from the streets or animal shelters that are being used as test subjects. Scientists believe that if the animal is going to no use, then it should be used for testing. Some laboratories hire people to drive around to find animals on the street. Most people don’t believe that this is right because that animal could be someone’s lost loving pet. In the past there have been cases of animals being stolen for testing and even trades happening for testing. Jmett, The student roos Animal testing has decreased. The main cause of it decreasing is that people have become more aware of it and what the side effects are to animals. Also a lot of people spend most of their time protesting against it and making other people aware of it. The push of stopping animal testing has affected businesses. For example cosmetic, companies have lost customers because the customers that believe that animal testing isn’t ethical don’t want to buy their pro ducts from a business that test on animals. This has pushed many large cosmetic companies to quit animal testing, but some of them don’t tell the complete truth. People have found that companies that say they are â€Å"animal testing free† usually have other companies test their products on animals for them. They can get away with having the other company willing to test for them because the companies that sell â€Å"animal tested free† products can get away with double or tripling the actual value because they know that customers want to see the words of animal tested free and then the company will share the profit with the other company that tested the products on the animals for them. n.p, A Critical Evaluation of Animal Research People read articles and the description of how they actually test the animal and it shocks them and they think that animal testing should be banned forever, but most of these people also don’t realize that animal testing has helped us with our medical research. Most people that have been sick or are close to someone that is seriously ill and animal testing is one of their only hopes for getting better; then they all of a sudden are all for animal testing. A big question is, ‘is animal testing worth it†? Some people say no because more than half of the animals end up dying after testing. And the testing is usually for the humans and their bodies can react different than the animals, so most people believe that testing isn’t even worth it. The other side of the people believes that testing is worth it because even though animals die there is still progress in today’s medical research. The more that animals get tested on the more we come closer to a better society. They believe that scientists need to start with something and that something is testing on animals. Botting, The history of thalidomide. Drug News & Perspectives, Evaluation of the potential effects of ingredients added to cigarettes. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 40 There have been multiple cases where animal testing has affected animals differently than it affected the humans. When cigarettes first came out, they tested them by animals to see if they were safe. If they went by just what animal testing showed about cigarettes, it would be wrong. For animals to inhale cigarette smoke is okay and it won’t harm them, where it would harm humans. Cigarettes also didn’t cause cancer in animals, which they actually do in humans. This shows that cancer is different for animals and humans. Another example is the drug Thalidomide, which was to help prevent nausea and morning sickness for pregnant mothers. Thalidomide was tested on many animals and all of the animals showed the drug as being safe and okay. The drug ended up being unsafe, which caused babies to be born with deformities. The main deformity from this drug caused â€Å"flipper limbs†. This was when the legs and arms were really short and were joined at the hip and shoulder joints. The reason that all of the animals showed this drug to be safe was because the drug was not correctly tested. To be correctly tested they would have had to test the drug on pregnant animals to show accurate results, which shows another way that animal testing isn’t always effective and doesn’t always show the most accurate results. This is just two out of countless documents where animal testing failed to work. All the products were initially tested on animals and were thought to be safe for humans, but when given to humans, major consequences took place leading to deaths and deformities. Animal testing was disproven to be accurate in these tests. This leads people to believe that animal testing is not safe and that people shouldn’t always trust that animal testing would be accurate. Allanou, Public availability of data on EU high production volume chemicals. Some people believe that animal testing has slowed the process of medicine. They believe this because they think that scientists waste time by testing on the animals. They could waste time because some animals react diffe rent then humans and most animals end up dying. Others believe that it is worth the time and that great things can come out of animal testing, which is very true. Humans should be very thankful for what scientist have accomplished. Because of animal testing, scientists have been able to create medicines, vaccines, and insulin that can cure humans. Animal testing has also helped physicians. Animal testing has helped them by making it more accurate for them to perform surgeries, such as heart and lung surgeries. Testing has allowed doctors and scientists save many lives. â€Å"Animal research has played a vital rise in virtually every major medical advance of the last century – for both human and veterinary health. From antibiotics to blood transfusions, from dialysis to organ transplantation, from vaccinations to chemotherapy, bypass surgery and join replacement, practically every present day protocol for the prevention, treatment, cure and control of disease, pain and suffer ing is based on knowledge attained through research with lab animals.† The Foundation for Biomedical Research. This makes people believe that if animal testing were to slow down then advancements in modern medicine would significantly slow down. There are about 450 ways to replace animal testing. For some reason many people believe that animal testing is the only option, but that its wrong. The reason we haven’t completely stopped testing on animals is because it would cost a lot of money to replace it, but in the long run it would probably save us money. Also, animals are easier to obtain in labs because scientist are so used to working with them. It’s easy to keep their day-to-day habits instead of changing their whole research and starting over. Also people see that animals die everyday from being tested and they couldn’t imagine seeing humans die occasionally from being experimented with. The rate that society is going, animal testing will always happen, but as time goes by it will be improved and become more humane. Some people believe that animals do not feel pain. Scientists assume though that they do feel pain. An animal has a vertebra back bone just like humans, which leads scientist to believe that they have the same nerves as us. This means that the animals might feel the same or similar to what we feel. Some scientists do believe that if the animal is in intense shock from the testing it won’t feel any pain. This information makes people aware of the effects of animal testing. Some people argue and say that instead of testing on animals test on humans because animals have no say in what happens to them as where humans have a voice and can speak up for themselves. The other side of the argument is that a human’s life is more valuable than an animal’s. Humans are more advanced than an animal, which leads people to feel more compassionate about the human.Crawford The schizophrenic career of a â€Å"monster drug† Some people view animals as equals to humans. The common thing that most people think is that humans are on a higher level than animals because humans have control over their lives and more characteristics, such as humans are more intelligent, creative, aware, technologically advanced, able to understand and speak an language, and able to make moral choices. These rights are what lead people to believe that humans are higher than animals, but the other side of the argument can prove this wrong in their own way. The other side of the argument says that since animals can feel pain they are the same equally as humans. People don’t think that humans and animals should be separated into different groups because they both suffer and can both die. People also point out that not all humans are capable of having all the characteristics that a normal human would have, such as infants or handicapped humans. These people that have less characteristics sometimes might even have less than an animal so an animal would be higher on power. Also since infants don’t have high levels of characteristics many Americans believe that they should be given equal power, which is the same power as a grown adult. They think this is right because their parents value them. But then that doesn’t work for pets if a human values them. This is very inconsistent it shows that life isn’t fair at times. But to be fair everything that is valued by an adult should have rights not just one half. One of the biggest issues that people use to defend animal testing is that the animals are going to die eventually anyway. They say that in nature animals would end up killing each other or dying of natural causes. This is very true, but the other side can argue and say that the way the animals are getting tested on is not â€Å"natural†. The animals end up dying, but a painful death that wasn’t planned to happen. Some humans torture other humans without their consent; such as rape and that it is looked down upon and is not acceptable in our society. Also people for animal testing say humans hunt the animals and kill them to eat, which is true. The other side states that it’s not the same because hunting is for a benefit to survive. They understand that animal testing could be for our benefit for example it can be good for medical research. Even though it can be beneficial, it still is different than hunting because animal testing can be a painful process for the animal and not every company uses it for benefits. LyonTobacco smoke and involuntary smoking, monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. International Agency for Research on Cancer Most people are unaware that animal testing is actually beneficial to animals themselves. Animals need to have the best nutrient and if anyone has an animal as a pet more than likely the animal isn’t going to go out and hunt for its food in the wild, which would make sure it got all of its necessary nutrition. So to make sure the pet has the best nutrition it has to get all of it in its dog food that people buy at the store for them. To make sure all of the right nutrients is in the dog food and won’t harm the animal scientists have to test the product on animals to get the best result. Scientists have also used animals for testing on worms, which is a medical problem for animals and have come up with a result that helps pet’s lives. Most people agree that this is right because it is actually benefiting the animals and their lives weren’t just a waste. I believe that animal testing isn’t ethical. I am an animal lover, but it’s not just that. I disagree in what takes place in the labs. I believe that humans and animals are equally on the same level. So when you see an animal cramped up in a tight, small cage think to yourself what if they were one of your friends or a family member? These animals never get affection so I imagine what life would be like growing up as a child with no one there to support me or lead the way for me. Animal testing has been around for years and people are just now realizing that it is harmful. I also don’t believe that animal testing is accurate. Rabbit’s eyes are different than ours. Rabbits feel more pain in their eyes than humans and the pain effects them longer and it takes a long time for the substance that we put in their eyes to go away. A rabbit’s eye is ten times more reactant to hydraulic solution than our eyes. After the rabbits are tested on scientists wait 14 days until they clean the solution out of their eyes. Whenever I’m in the shower and I get shampoo in my eyes I make sure that I clean them out right away, which is normal they shouldn’t have to have solution sitting in their eyes for two weeks when us humans cant even stand it for a minute. The rabbits are extremely affected by this test. The chemical causes swollen eyes, irritated and cloudy eyes, and inflamed skin around the eyes. Also they might endure ulcers, bleeding, or blindness. Once the test are finished the rabbits die. I believe most cosmetic companies are frauds. They say they are doing animal testing to make sure that the products are safe and that they care about their customers. In reality they just perform the animal testing so any customers don’t sue them. Many cosmetic companies say that the law requires them to perform test on animals to make sure their products are safe, but the companies don’t make that a law. So millions of animals suffer and die for selfish companies not wanting to get sued by their customers. I also believe that in the past when new products were first coming out it was okay because we didn’t even know how these products would affect anything. In general I think every cosmetic companies knows what’s right and wrong for their customers. Works Cited Hansen, Allanou R. Public availibility of data on EU high productions volume chemicals. N.p.: Jont Research center, 1009. Print. American Practice. Boines, 3 May 2010. Web. 12 Oct. 2012. James, Botting J. The History of thalomide. N.p.: Food and Chemical Toxicoigy, 1991. Print. Lane, Crawford C. The schizophrenic carrer of a â€Å"monster drug.† N.p.: Pediatrics, 1993. Print.

Constructing Feminine Form for Masculine Sake Essay

Fashion provides one of the most ready means through which individuals can make expressive visual statements about their identities. (Bennett, 2005) Constructing Feminine Form for Masculine Sake. Does it make sense to say that sex is at the heart of identity today? The answer is surely yes, and more so than ever before. (Gauntlett, 2008). Introduction. Consider the cover of the December 2011 edition of FHM (Fig. 1). It portrays a constructed ideal of female attractiveness. Aimed at the male market it conveys the attributes of female form deemed attractive to men. Has this identity been constructed by women or imposed upon by men? Butler (1999) suggests ‘the female body is marked within masculinist discourse’ , and women have not had the freedom to create their own identity, ‘women with the ostensibly sexualized features of their bodies and, hence, a refusal to grant freedom and autonomy to women as it is purportedly enjoyed by men’ (Butler, 1999). Macdonald (1995) notes that this enforced construction is neither a new concept nor just present in magazines aimed at a male audience: The body has historically been much more integral to the formation of identity for women than for men. If women had defined for themselves the ideals of their bodily shape or decoration, this would not be problematic. It is the denial of this right in the western cultural representation, in medical practice and in the multi-billion dollar pornography, fashion and cosmetic industries, that has granted women only squatter’s rights to their own bodies. However for the purpose of this essay we will concentrate on the feminine identity constructed in men’s lifestyle magazines and identify from where this was created. Why we enjoy beauty. ‘It is suggested that what makes one thing beautiful and another less so is our psychological attraction, probably unconscious, to some quality in the former that is absent from the latter, combined of course with equally-implicit cultural biases.’ (Lakoff and Scherr, 1984) Considering this, it is hard to determine how a particular portrayal of the female form is universally attractive. However studying the following passage from Sigmund Freud’s study Civilization and its Discontents we can note the possibility that the images constructed of women in men’s magazines are not to portray beauty, but to invoke sexual feeling through lack of clothing and provocative poses: Psychoanalysis, unfortunately, has scarcely anything to say about beauty either. All that seems certain is its derivation from the field of sexual feeling. The love of beauty seems a perfect example of an impulse inhibited in its aim. ‘Beauty’ and ‘attraction’ are originally attributes of the sexual object. (Lakoff and Scherr, 1984) Another psychotherapist Lacan puts forward the idea ‘women are objects for men: men are objects for women: men are objects for men, and women are objects for women. Each of us can only ever be objects for another subject, however much we try. (Hill, 1997) With this in mind it can be said that all identity is constructed to receive the admiration of others, regardless of gender. (Gauntlett, 2008) states ‘sex as being at the core of identity’ further suggesting that male identity is constructed with the same intentions the female. Although ‘it has been women in particular who have been defined primarily in terms of their physical appearance’ (Negrin, 2008). The emergence of new men’s lifestyle magazines. It is interesting to note that men’s lifestyle magazines are not a new concept, neither has their content changed over time. The earliest attempt to launch a men’s lifestyle magazine in the UK was in 1935, it consisted of ‘heroic masculinity with style features and pictures of female nudes’. (Gill, 2007). The 1950’s saw the launch of Playboy, a lifestyle magazine aimed at an emerging class of men who enjoyed consumption as much as their female counterparts. The magazine ‘became the ‘bible’ for the men who dominated this class fraction; its individualistic, hedonistic, consumption-orientated ethic of personal gratification represented a rebellion against the ‘old’ figure of male as breadwinner and family provider and opened up a space of libidinous fun and lascivious consumption, albeit premised on troublingly sexualized and objectified representations of women. (Gill, 2007). The content of such magazines was not necessarily in place to objectify women but to protect the ‘new man’s’ masculinity. ‘Consumption for men was promoted in an atmosphere not threatened by suspicions of homosexuality’ (Gill, 2007) and said of Playboy ‘the breasts and bottoms were necessary not just to sell the magazine, but also to protect it’ (Ehrenreich, 1983.). If we look forward to the 80’s and 90’s we see a new generation of men’s magazines emerging, ‘constructed around an assumed white, working class aesthetic and sensibility, centred on football, (beer) drinking, and heterosexual sex. (Gill, 2007) In circulation terms, figures from 2006 show that over 370,000 copies of FHM are sold per month and almost 300,000 copies of Nuts per week. (Gauntlett, 2008). From this we can see the popularity of such publications and the importance of the portrayal of a new type of masculinity. Considering the content of these magazines; ‘numerous photo-shoots of semi-clothed and topless women appear in the UK magazines’ (Gauntlett, 2008), and speaking of the launch of Loaded ‘the sexual politics of the magazine were in place from the first issue, which featured photographs of Liz Hurley, a homage to hotel sex, porn channels etc., a ‘travel feature’ recounting cheap cocaine and cheap women, and the Miss Guyama bikini contest. (Gill, 2007). The magazines depict the rise of a new type of masculinity or the ‘new lad’, the figure of which ‘became embedded in advertising and popular culture- his multiple articulations in different spaces generating a sense of his solidity and ‘realness’, making him instantly recognizable as an embodiment of a type of masculinity’ (Gill, 2007). This new generation of ‘Lads Mags’ has often been attributed to two factors; firstly the ‘feminine backlash’ occurring in the 80’s. These new publications ‘constructed around knowingly misogynist and predatory attitudes to women, represents a refusal to acknowledge the changes in gender relations produced by feminism, and an attack on it. (Gill, 2007) served to reaffirm male dominance in the gender war and a refusal to change. They are considered by Whelehan ‘a direct challenge to feminism’s call for social transformation, by reaffirming – albeit ironically – the unchanging nature of gender relations and sexual roles.’ (Gill, 2007) Studying the content of these magazines in more depth there is an underlying theme where ‘’feminist’ becomes a pejorative word to label, dismiss and silence any woman who object to the lad mags’ ideology’ (Gill, 2007). Two examples of such; ‘an article concerned with the question of ‘how to get your girlfriend to come in your face’ (FHM, April 2000) any possible feedback is forestalled with the comment ‘now before I get any angry letters from feminists†¦..I have asked women and they agree it can be an incredibly rewarding experience’. (Gill, 2007) and ‘a letter to FHM from a woman called Barbara who wished to object to the magazines portrayal of women as ‘weak, fr ail, obedient, submissive and sexually available’ is dismissed as a ‘blundering rant’ from ‘Butch Babs’ (FHM, May 2000)’ (Gill, 2007.) Two prime examples of where the subject of feminism is dismissed before it has even been raised, suggesting the magazines know their content is anti-feminist, but either dispel the argument before it is raised or ridicule and patronise anybody that dares challenge their viewpoint. The second factor is again a backlash, this time on a type of masculinity, himself more aligned with the ideals of feminism, referred to as ‘The New Man’. (Gill, 2007). Trying to dispense with this, the ‘masculinity they constructed was regarded as true to men’s real selves, in contrast to the contrived image of the new man.’ (Gill, 2007.) As with the issue of feminism this form of masculinity was ridiculed and dismissed, leading the way for ‘laddish’ behaviour to be accepted. ‘New man was derided for his ‘miserable liberal guilt’ about sexual affairs and presented as insipid and unappealing. By contrast, new lad was presented as refreshingly uncomplicated in his unreserved appreciation of women’s bodies and heterosexual sex.’ (Gill, 2007) Are these the views of the average man? So we can deduce how these magazines and images within them came to be but where does this leave the average male? Are these depictions of woman the ‘ideal’ for men? ‘By men’s own admission, the playboy ideology has created conflicts both in men’s view of themselves and in their attitude towards women.’ (Lakoff and Scherr, 1984) Many men insist they do not subscribe to this scantily clad, temptress type identity as being their ideal. (Lakoff and Scherr, 1984) suggest what most men fantasize about is a woman they can connect with and that personality is more important than looks; ‘Many men spoke of movement, gracefulness, a direct look in the eyes, an aura of mystery, attributes which cannot quite be captured by a camera, as what they felt constituted female beauty.’ Their ‘observations seem to contradict what the media not only tell us men want but also what they propose women should look like.’ This seeming indifference to contrived images of female form could be the over production and readily available means to consume them. ‘we are so bombarded with visual images that men are taking refuge and looking for the real thing’ (Lakoff and Scherr, 1984) Also another factor is that as we are increasingly aware of artifice in the production of images it can cause the consumer to be disillusioned with them; ‘And its disappointing to find that the women, when interviewed, don’t sound that interesting really. And it’s disappointing because you see these gorgeous women who wouldn’t look twice at you, but then you remember that they probably look like people you know, really, and it’s the careful styling and makeup and photography that makes them so irresistible’ (Gauntlett, 2008) Where do women fit in? What we have to remember is there always a willing subject to construct identity upon. In this case, a women to present as the ideal to men. Whilst feminists may view the women featured in the magazines as ‘submissive, obedient and sexually available’, do the subjects themselves feel this is the case? Pre-feminist women were programmed to be as attractive as possible to their male counterparts. Anne Fogarty an extremely successful American fashion designer highlights the importance of dressing for men ‘when your husband’s eyes light up as he comes in at night, you’re in sad shape if its only because he smells dinner cooking’ (Fogarty, 1959). It is possible that even now women are still programmed by society to want to appear as attractive as possible to men. With the post-feminist shift in gender relations it is argued that women are now objectifying men in the same way that they have traditionally been; ‘looking at scantily-clad women was clearly quite wrong for a right-thinking man, but have started to change their views as time has moved on and gender relations have changed again (including the development of the new language in popular culture where women can treat men as disposable eye-candy too).’ (Gauntlett, 2008). This seems to have caused a sense of double standards when talking of the objectification of women; â€Å"I used to agree, and I mean I really did agree, with women who said that naked women in magazines was a bad thing. But now-a-days I can hardly remember what the argument was. Women can look at handsome men in films and magazines, and men can look at attractive women†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦it seems fair.† (Gaunlett, 2008) Another reason argued why women cultivate this identity is it can provide means to increase their economic and social standing; ‘denied access to power and status by legitimate means, they had to resort to using their looks as a means of furthering their aims.’ (Negrin, 2008). This was very true of the playboy era where working class women did not have the same opportunities for advancement as their male counterparts. Conclusion. So who is determining this supposed ideal of the female form? Psychoanalysis tells us we all respond to natural sexual urges and have the need to objectify other beings. Yet today’s men’s magazines were not primarily constructed to satisfy their sexual urges. The content was also put into place long ago, not to objectify women, but to protect masculinity from any suggestion of homosexuality. What better way to diminish these threats than by filling the pages with naked women? The tone of the ‘new generation’ of men’s magazines was constructed around a backlash to feminist principles and the emergence of the ‘sensitive, understanding man’. Again what better way to protect these new threats by objectifying women and distancing themselves to ‘new man’s’ ideals? As gender roles have shifted and the issue of equality is facing us, men do not feel that looking at women is a guilty pleasure, as women do it themselves towards men and are compensated for it by the advancement of their social and economic standing. It can be said that this construction of female identity truly is for masculine’s sake, not necessarily for their consumption and enjoyment, but to protect and cultivate the meaning and existence of masculinity, reminiscing of a time where men were secure in their place in society. Fig. 1. Bibliography. Halberstam, J. (1998) Female masculinity. Durham, N.C. ; London : Duke University Press, 1998.:. Bennett, A. (2005) Culture and everyday life. London: Sage, p.95 – 116. Berger, J. (1972) Ways of seeing : based on the BBC television series with John Berger / a book made by John Berger †¦ [et al.].. London: Penguin. Butler, J. (1999) Gender Trouble; Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London: Routledge. Forgarty, A. (2011) The Art of being a Well Dressed Wife. 2nd ed. London: V&A Publishing. Gauntlett, D. (2008) Media, Gender and Identity: An Introduction.. 2nd ed. Oxon: Routledge. Gill, R. (2007) Gender and The Media. Cambridge: Polity Press. Happysocks.com (2011) Happy Socks / FHM UK  « Happy Socks in the Press. [online] Available at: http://www.happysocks.com/press/?p=2851 [Accessed: 2nd June 2012]. Hill, P. (1997) Lacan for beginners. London : Writers and Readers:. Lakoff, R. and Scherr, . (1984) Face value : the politics of beauty . Boston ; London : Routledge & Kegan Paul:. Macdonald, M. (1995) Representing Women:Myths of Femininity in the popular media. London: Edward Arnold, p.192 – 221. Meyers, D. (2002) Gender in the Mirror. New York: Oxford University Press, Inc.. Negrin, L. (2008) Appearance and identity: Fashioning the body in Postmodernity. Cowden: Palgarve Macmillan, p.33 – 52. Sturken, M. and Cartwright, L. (2001) Practices of looking: An Introduction to Visual Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press., p.72 – 108.