Weiye Loh's Library tagged → View Popular, Search in Google
what Benedict Anderson describes, that ”the Bangkok bourgeoisie isn’t far from that of Manila, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore and Jakarta: timid, selfish, uncultured, consumerist, and without any decent vision of the future of the country”, is a fairly accurate picture, particularly with regards to the upper middle classes in Singapore.
By distinguishing between acts of random violence and acts of violence against women, the sponsors of the Violence Against Women Act believe that they are showing sensitivity to feminist concerns. In fact, they may be doing social harm by accepting a divisive, gender-specific approach to a problem that is not caused by gender bias, misogyny, or "patriarchy"-an approach that can obscure real and urgent problems such as lesbian battering or male-on-male sexual violence
-
"There was some pressure-at least I felt pressure-to have rape be as prevalent as possible . . .. I'm a pretty strong feminist, but one of the things I was fighting was that the really avid feminists were trying to get me to say that things were worse than they really are"
-
One obvious reason for this inequity is that feminist advocates come largely from the middle class and so exert great pressure to protect their own. To render their claims plausible, they dramatize themselves as victims-survivors or "potential survivors." Another device is to expand the definition of rape...
- 1 more annotation(s)...
-
By design, the university wants to be an enclosed institution, so you’re very strongly required to live on campus, which means that you’re not living in the city. You don’t have a landlord or neighbors or those kinds of things. You’re pretty much required to sign up for the meal plan, which means you don’t interact with people in restaurants or grocery stores or any of that kind of stuff. The drinking age is twenty-one, and it’s strictly enforced in the city but mostly unenforced on campus, which means if you want to drink or go to a party, you can only do that on campus, but if you want to go see a band at a club, you can’t do that.
-
the end result is that it makes the university into an ivory tower—I mean, incredibly so. It would be one thing if you were out in the woods—but this is Boston. In four years of living in that city I pretty much didn’t come to know anybody who wasn’t affiliated with Harvard. And I’m someone who’s interested in cities, and who’s interested in meeting different kinds of people. The university is a completely isolated environment, and the fact that you’re inside a city somehow makes that more insidious and terrible.
- 4 more annotation(s)...
In his opening remarks, Janadas Devan (right), the new Director of IPS, pointed out an intriguing overlap between the results map of the 2011 general election and that of the early 1960s. The areas where opposition parties did relatively well this year were the areas that supported the People’s Action Party (PAP) fifty years ago, whereas those areas where the PAP did well in 2011, were areas that had supported the Barisan Sosialis.
How to explain this?
He postulated that this pattern might be due to the fact that the districts that supported the PAP in the 1960s were the built-up areas while those that tended to support the Barisan were rural. Today, the former are areas with private housing, whereas the once-rural areas are mostly filled with public housing.
What this then suggests is that class distinctions are important in understanding political views.
-
Notable jumps can be seen in four issues. Cost of living and job situation scored strikingly higher in 2011, indicating increased economic stress. These, together with jumps in issues in party manifestoes and upgrading, indicate greater political consciousness and perhaps more attention to the consequences of one’s vote choice.
-
It should be borne mind that there are significant contextual differences between 2011 and 2006. This year, nearly all constituencies were contested and 89 percent of registered voters actually voted. In 2006, there were more walkovers and a good part of both the electorate and respondents to the 2006 survey didn’t actually have to vote.
- 6 more annotation(s)...
Most of us think of peasants of being illiterate, over-worked and incapable of managing themselves. Evidence has shown this to be a biased misconception. This article is written to show that today’s modern people are not that different from peasants from medieval period
-
Feudalism was a system whereby the King gave his lands to his vassals in return for military service, labour and products, like wheat, in the form of taxation. The vassals granted some of the same lands to the serfs to live and work on them, in return for services and products. In addition, the vassals were expected to support the serfs by charity during times of difficulties, such as famine.
-
Within the peasantry, there were also sub-classes to differentiate their social status. They were freemen villeins, bordars and slaves. Freemen were rent-paying tenants of their landlords and owed little or no feudal burden to the latter. Villeins, bordars and slaves collectively formed the serfs.
Serfs were bound to their land, under serfdom. Even as they owned the lands, serfs were barred from selling their lands, neither could they abandoned their lands without their lord’s permission. However, they were free to accumulate wealth and personal properties. Serfs could also raise anything on their lands and sell the surplus to the market, though they had to pay their taxes in wheat.
- 10 more annotation(s)...
TEST PREP FOR KINDERGARTEN: KIDS AND CLASS PRIVILEGE
-
a New York Times article covered the stiff competition for entrance to public and private kindergartens in Manhattan for especially smart kids. Whereas at one time teachers recommended students to these programs, today entrance to both public and private schools for gifted children is dependent entirely on test scores.
-
It’s unfair that entrance into kindergarten level programs is being gamed by people with resources, disadvantaging the most disadvantaged kids from the get go. I think it’s egregious. Many people will agree that this isn’t fair.
- 2 more annotation(s)...
-
The question often asked of couples cooing on Mumbai's streets: don't you have a house and privacy? And the truth is that often they don't. They don't because there are parental restrictions. They don't because their houses are too small and occupied by too many.
-
When public displays of affection are sought to be pushed indoors, it is the morality of the middle classes that is being enforced, the morality that demands a two-bedroom-hall-kitchen flats and closed doors.
- 10 more annotation(s)...
-
Location is certainly significant-55 per cent of women fantasise about sex in their own bedrooms, but only 14 per cent each think about doing so on a beach, under a waterfall and 8 per cent on a rooftop. Among men, 67 per cent fantasise about sex in their own bedrooms as against, 6, 9 and 20 per cent respectively under a waterfall, on a beach and on a rooftop.
-
Clearly, private spaces are much more conducive to fantasies than public spaces-or is it that we dare not think or speak of public spaces? Are we afraid of being labelled that most overused of words: "obscene"?
- 2 more annotation(s)...
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Top Contributors
Groups interested in Class
Diigo is about better ways to research, share and collaborate on information. Learn more »
Join Diigo



