A Study On The Khmer Rouge History Essay

A Study On The Khmer Rouge History Essay In Cambodia about 1.5 million people were killed in the mid 1970s. The Khmer Rouge were responsible for all the action that took place during that time. The Khmer Rouge believed in communism. They wanted everyone to be equal. The Khmer Rouge was led by Pol Pot and his brothers. The Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia from 1975 to 1979. According to the Wikipedia article 1/5 of the countrys total population (estimates range from 850,000 to 2.5 million) under its regime, through execution, torture, starvation and forced labor (Wikipedia Khmer Rouge[1]). Also According to the same article, The leaders were mostly from middle class families and had been educated at French universities (Wikipedia Khmer Rouge[2]). The Khmer Rouges idea of communism was bad for the country of Cambodia. The Khmer Rouge relocated people, put all of the people in Cambodia to work as farmers in labor camp and changed the lifestyle of the country. The Khmer Rouge made the people work hard labor, killed a lot of people, and they brainwashed the country telling by them that communism was good for them. The Khmer Rouge took over Cambodia in 1975 and put all the people to work in hard labor and changed the way of life. Pol Pot led the Khmer Rouge. When they took over Cambodia they closed down everything and relocated people. For example in the Khmer Rouge article the author writes, New people driving them in all directions from the capital and other cities. It forcibly settled townspeople among the rural base peopleand put them in agricultural labor camps without wages, right, or free time (Khmer Rouge[3]). This shows that the Cambodians did not have any rights when the Khmer Rouge was ruling. This is important because the Khmer Rouge wanted everyone to work on farms and enslaved the people. The Khmer Rouge let many Cambodians die from starvations and the Khmer Rouge executed people. For example, in the article Khmer Rouge, it says, by the early 1979 approximately 650,000 people, or one quarter of the new Khmer died from execution, starvation overwork, disease, and denial of medical care (Khmer Rouge[4]). This shows that the Khmer Rouge had a lot of power and they could do anything to the people. This is important because the Khmer Rouge didnt care about the people. The Khmer Rouge wanted everyone to be poor and have no society. According to the Wikipedia article, The Khmer Rouge attempted to turn Cambodia into a classless society by depopulating cities and forcing the urban population into agricultural communes. The entire population was forced to become farmers in labor camp (Wikipedia Khmer Rouge[5]). This shows that everyone had to work in the farms and everyone have the same job. This is important because the Khmer Rouge wanted to have a low class society and everyone has to be the same as one another. Having a classless society was important to Pol Pot. He did not want people to become rich. He feared that people with money would be able to gain power. So, Pol Pot decided to abolish the currency system, which made it impossible to become rich. Furthermore, he took the land away from the people and did not allow anyone to own land. The people of Cambodia had nothing. While the people had nothing, the Khmer Rouge had power and they had full control of the country. They could force people to do things and they could change the lifestyle of Cambodia. The Khmer Rouge killed a lot of people. The Khmer Rouge killed those who were not pure Cambodian. For example in the Khmer Rouge article it says they killed ethic Vietnamese, ethnic Chinese, ethic Thai, Cambodian christens, Muslims, and Buddhist monks (Wikipedia Khmer Rouge[6]). This shows that the Khmer Rouge didnt want to have a mixed race Cambodians. This is important because the Khmer Rouge wanted one race pure Cambodians. This was similar to Hitler when he killed all the Jews. Pol Pot and his followers executed and tortured anyone who was not pure Cambodians. He shot them in the head, he cut off their arms, he tore their eyeballs out, and beheaded many non pure Cambodians. He did this because he believed that they were not worthy to be human beings. He devalued them and treated them worse than animals. Pol Pot and his followers were filled with hate and anger. The Khmer Rouge also killed educated people. For example, in the Khmer Rouge article it says they killed professional and intellectual in practice this included almost everyone with an education (Wikipedia Khmer Rouge[7]). This shows that the Khmer Rouge didnt want educated people around. This is important because they might form a group and tell everyone that communism is bad then everyone going to be against it. Pol Pot and his followers didnt want the people of Cambodia to be educated. They were afraid that if the people were educated, they would be harder to control. They didnt want the people of Cambodia to resist what they were doing. The Khmer Rouge believed that the best way to control the people is by keeping them uneducated and ignorant and to use force with anyone that showed resistance. The Khmer Rouge also killed people who were against communism and the Khmer Rouge didnt want capitalism in Cambodia. Pol Pot did not want a free market in his country. They wanted agriculture and farming as a way to bring the country of Cambodia to prominence. He did not want Cambodia to have any western influence. Because the previous government had affiliations with France, anyone with ties to the previous government were killed. For example in the same article it says they killed anyone with connections to the former government or with foreign governments (Wikipedia Khmer Rouge[8]). This shows that the Khmer Rouge didnt want to have any connection with other government. This is important because the Khmer Rouge want to have control of the country. Therefore while Khmer Rouge was in power they killed all non-pure Cambodians, forced people into agriculture, killed people with an education, took away land and they didnt want anyone the have connection with the government. The Khmer Rouge believed in communism. According to the definition in Wikipedia, communism is a socioeconomic structure and political ideology that promotes the establishment of an egalitarian, classless, stateless society based on common ownership and control of the means of production and property in general (Wikipedia Communism[9]). This is important because the people of Cambodia believed that the Khmer Rouge would bring a classless society to the country. Furthermore, the people of Cambodia believed that every citizen in Cambodia would participate in the decisions making process in both political in economic spheres of life. However, the Khmer rouge had a different agenda. The Khmer Rouge was able to get the support of the Cambodian people based on the vision of a classless society that allows every Cambodian citizen to participate in the decisions making process both politically and economically. However, when the Khmer Rouge got into power, their actions were far from what the y promised for the people of Cambodia. They brainwashed the people and told them that communism is good for the country. Communism is people who want everyone in the country to be the same and equal. They want everyone to have the same job and same everything. The Khmer Rouge told the people everyone gets paid the same or they might not get paid at all, everyone have access to heath care, public assistance and everyone goes to the same school. The Khmer Rouge made it sound good for the people and the Cambodians thought they were going to have those things and all the benefit. But the Khmer Rouge didnt deliver the promise they made to the people. The Khmer Rouge separated families killed people, put them to work hard on the farms, and tortured people. Some people argued that it was beneficial to have the Khmer Rouge in control of the government and country of Cambodia. The Khmer Rouges leadership provided independence from France and loosened the control from other countries. The people of Cambodia believed that if they were independent from other countries they would have peace in their country and they will not have war. Furthermore, the supporters of the Khmer Rouge believe they could be a prosperous and financially independent country. Therefore, According to An Independent Cambodia article, They broke diplomatic and trade ties with virtually all countries and launched a program to achieve self sufficiency through rice production as the great kingdoms of Angkor had done(An independent Cambodia[10]). This is important because the Khmer Rouge wanted to bring independence and freedom to Cambodia. Therefore the Khmer Rouge wanted Cambodia to be independent from the other countries and they wanted the people of Cambodia to live fr ee healthy and prosperous lives. However, the Khmer Rouge brought pain and stress for the people of Cambodia. There were no benefits for having the Khmer Rouge in the country. They killed people, took away any rights, and they put the people to work as slaves. Although Cambodia had independence from other countries, the people of Cambodia continued to suffer. The people were forced to work on rice field up to 18 hours per day. The workers were rarely fed and were not paid any wages. Furthermore, many people were executed, tortured, and force to separate from love ones. The Khmer Rouge brought destruction, pain, and did not provide the freedom and prosperity it promised its citizens. The Khmer Rouges leadership and idea of Communism was bad for the country of Cambodia. It brought nothing but bad things to the country. The Khmer Rouge put people to work hard labor. Many people worked in the rice field. They worked like slaves and they didnt get paid. Furthermore, they didnt have any freedom; they did not have a choice. They were forced to work on rice fields against their will. If they didnt comply, they were executed, tortured, or beaten badly. The Khmer Rouge relocated people and separated families and forced them to work at different places. The Khmer Rouge killed a lot of people. The Khmer Rouge wanted all the Cambodian to be pure meaning that they didnt want to have mixed racist they only wanted everyone to be one race and they killed educated people. The Khmer Rouge brainwashed people saying that communism is good for the countries but that really didnt happen. Instead the Khmer Rouge put the Cambodians in labor camps and killing people. The Khmer Rouges rei gn in Cambodia was a horrific time period for many Cambodians. Wikipedia Khmer Rouge pg7 Wikipedia Khmer Rouge pg7 Khmer Rouge Khmer Rouge pg4 Wikipedia Khmer Rouge pg8 Wikipedia Khmer Rouge pg9 Wikipedia Khmer Rouge pg9 Wikipedia Khmer Rouge pg9 Wikipedia Communism pg1 An independent Cambodia pg4

Rural-Urban Linkages, Their Role in Sustainable Development

Although policy makers and the development community have widely used the phrase â€Å"rural development. The concept of rural development has changed significantly during the last 3 decades. Until the 1970s, rural development was synonymous with agricultural development and, hence, focused on increasing agricultural production. This focus seems to have been driven primarily by the interests of industrialization to extract surpluses from the agriculture sector to reinforce industrialization. With the focus on increasing agricultural production, the stated objective of most countries was to promote smallholder agriculture. Over time, this smallholder agriculture-centric concept of rural development underwent changes. By the early 1980s, according to Harris, the World Bank defined it as â€Å"†¦a strategy designed to improve the economic and social life of a specific group of people—the rural poor. Four major factors appear to have influenced the change: increased concerns about the persistent and deepening of rural poverty; changing views on the meaning of the concept of development itself; emergence of a more diversified rural economy in which rural non-farm enterprises play an increasingly important role; and increased recognition of the importance of reducing the non-income dimensions of poverty to achieve sustainable improvements in the socio economic well-being of the poor. The establishment of the Millennium Development Goals has significantly reinforce d the concerns about non income poverty. With the paradigm shifts in economic development from growth to broadly defined â€Å"development,† the concept of rural development has begun to be used in a broader sense. It is also more specific, as Harris noted â€Å"in the sense that it focuses (in its rhetoric and in principle) particularly on poverty and inequality. † In more recent years, increased concerns on the environmental aspects of economic growth have also influenced the changes. Today’s concept of rural development is fundamentally different from that used about 3 or 4 decades ago. The concept now encompasses â€Å"concerns that go well beyond improvements in growth, income, and output. The concerns include an assessment of changes in the quality of life, broadly defined to include improvement in health and nutrition, education, environmentally safe living conditions, and reduction in gender and income inequalities. â€Å"Today there seems to be a universal consensus that the ultimate objective of rural development is to improve the quality of life of rural people. As the concept of rural development changed so has the focus and approach to tackling and planning for rural development also change. Thus as already explained, today rural development is an integrated concept that that requires an integrated approach to development . thus the focus now is on sustainable development; hence an integrated sustainable rural development strategy is used to plan for rural development. However in order to successively design a strategy for integrated sustainable rural development, one must take into consideration rural-urban linkages because of the significant role it plays in sustainable rural development. Before proceeding with a discussion about the role that rural-urban linkages play in integrated rural sustainable development strategy, it may be necessary to define rural-urban linkages. In general, â€Å"rural-urban linkages† refers to the flow of (public and private) capital, people (migration, commuting) and goods and services (trade) between rural and urban areas. It is important to add to these three economic flows, the flow of ideas, innovation and information. These rural urban linkages could be expanded as; * The movement of people between rural and urban households many of which are of circular nature. These include temporary migration(as in seasonal moves ) and labour migration including weekly commuting; * The more permanent migration of people from rural to urban areas and vice versa. * The movement of people operating from a single rural urban household as in daily commuting or school trips, shopping and short term visits. * The movement of resources such as money and remittances, commodities and services. * There is also the more permanent type of linkages found mostly in infrastructure such as roads railway lines water and electricity telecommunication etc. Over the past few years, interest in the linkages between urban and rural areas has increased considerably. This is clear, for instance, from the activities of the United Nations. The Habitat Agenda, adopted at the second United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) in Istanbul in 1996, states that â€Å"policies and programmes for the sustainable development of rural areas that integrate rural regions into the national economy require strong local and national institutions for the lanning and management of human settlements that place emphasis on rural-urban linkages and treat villages and cities as two ends of a human settlements continuum. † (UNCHS, 1997: 93-94). however, Studies of rural urban linkages indicate that the nature of the linkages differs from one place to another and differs for different sectors in the same place. It is equally necessary to identify successful practices that promote local rural and urban development and alleviate poverty, using rural-urban linkages, and to build the capacity of rural and urban local governments to review, adapt and replicate such practices. The growing understanding and the pool of good practices should form the basis for capacity building of local governments. Among the above linkages the ,focus would be on the point 1 and 4 that’s the migration and the economic exchange of goods and services and their implication on rural development . this is because they are among the important rural urban linkages necessary for integrated sustainable rural development. These would be dis cussed shortly. To begin with the economic exchange between urban and rural areas can be beneficial or detrimental to either or both areas . hus with economic links between rural and urban areas, the extent to which economic development in the one area benefits or obstructs economic development in the other area. For instance an exclusive focus on rural areas would result in an under-investment in urban areas and this would limit the growth of the urban sector and its ability to absorb the rural labour surplus. Likewise an exclusive focus on urban development would produce similar results, because it would accelerate rural-urban migration and reduce food production per capita (Richardson, 1987: 210). Reardon (n. d. : 8-9) distinguishes three stages in the development of rural non-farm sector and of rural-urban linkages: †¢ During the first stage, rural non-farm activity tends to have a production or expenditure linkage with agriculture while farming directly employs a large share of the rural population. Rural non-farm activity tends to centre on the countryside itself, with little dependence on rural-urban links. Rural non-farm activities are mainly home-based and small-scale production of goods, mainly sold locally. During the first stage, agriculture tends to depend on local supplies of farm inputs and services and on local processing and distribution of farm products, usually carried out by small to medium-scale firms. †¢ A greater mix of situations characterizes the second stage. The mix includes activities based on linkages with agriculture as well as on other, separate activities (e. g. tourism, mining and services), although the latter did grow out of a historical rural non-farm sector based on linkages with agriculture. The share of rural population dependent on farming is lower than during the first phase. Rural-urban links as the basis for rural non-farm employment have a greater weight than in first stage with nascent sub-contracting of rural companies by urban or foreign businesses and a rapid rise in the labour force commuting between the countryside and rural towns and intermediate cities. †¢ The third stage shows an intensification of the characteristics that differentiate the second stage from the first stage. There is a greater weight of urban-rural links manifested by the greater importance of more advanced forms of business linkages, such as subcontracting arrangements and labour commuting. A number of other tendencies also characterize this stage: the expansion of subcontracting beyond light durables to medium durables. The great heterogeneity of the non-farm sector in rural areas implies that there is little scope for general, broad, policy prescriptions. This observation may well provide an important lesson for our thinking about the process of policy formulation. A wide variety of interventions may be required to promote the non-farm sector, each tailored to specific local conditions. Decentralized decision-making may be necessary: mechanisms should be devised whereby local information flows upwards so that the localized bottlenecks are relieved and specific niches can be exploited (Lanjouw, 1999: 9). From the above it can be realised that, rural-urban linkages can play an important role in economic development and poverty alleviation in urban and rural areas. However,it is important to recognize that the nature of the rural-urban linkages differs from one place to another and from one function to another. As Douglas (1998) has pointed out, a particular urban centre may play a crucial economic role for the surrounding rural areas in one respect, while the rural area may completely bypass that same urban centre and link directly to more distant urban centres and cities in other respects. It is, therefore, dangerous to generalize about the nature of rural-urban linkages and to base policy interventions on such generalizations. What is necessary is the recognition of (a) the existence a regional economy as a reality, rrespective of administrative boundaries, and (b) the need to develop knowledge about such regional (i. e. sub-national) economies (World Bank, 2000). The development of this knowledge should be demand-driven, as urban and rural local governments come to recognize their shared interests and constraints. The political impetus for this process of knowledge development may be t decentralization. In order to distribute economic and social opportunities equitably, the Government s hould strengthen grassroots economies that can provide sustainable incomes for the rural population. The Government should establish economic clusters that link rural and urban areas, and the cluster-based economic development should be consistent with the economic potentials, preferences and functions of each area. Another important rural urban linkage that has immense implication for today’s rural development is the rural urban migration. Thus the movement of people between rural and urban households . these include temporary migration and labour migration. Rural-urban migration reduces population pressure in the rural areas and, thereby, should improve economic conditions and reduce rural poverty. However, disparities between urban and rural areas in terms of income and employment and the availability of basic infrastructure and services persist. Urban areas offer more and better opportunities for socio-economic mobility of the poor and rural-urban migration, therefore, will continue. Labour migration could result in shortage of labour force for productivity in the rural areas which would intend result in low productivity and underdevelopment in the rural areas. Whereas the urban areas may not also be able to absorb the all the labour from the rural areas ,resulting in unemployment and increase in sanitation costs and government expenditure. it also increase population pressure in urban areas resulting in pressure on the few social amenities in urban centres. in this case, rural urban migration has more adverse effect on rural development. In addition to the above, Circular and temporary migration is already a common pattern in many countries, but working and housing conditions in the urban areas may not always be conducive to this form of migration. Housing is often an acute problem for temporary migrants who prefer to rent rather than to own housing, because they feel that their home is in the rural areas. Temporary migrants are sometimes not entitled to urban services and this makes their life in the urban areas more difficult than necessary. Local governments and private employers in the urban areas should accept temporary rural-urban migration as inevitable and perhaps even as desirable, and they may consider measures to facilitate such forms of rural-urban migration. For instance, Remittances are a crucial component of rural households’ incomes and a key element of the continued links between migrants and their home areas across all wealth groups. In northern Mali, migrants’ remittances have become probably the most important source of family cash, and are used for consumption and for the purchase of consumer goods such as radios and bicycles, but also for the purchase of agricultural inputs or for investment in livestock. In southeast Nigeria, it would be socially unacceptable for migrants not to send remittances and gifts: financial support to their parental households has greatly contributed to making young women’s migration socially acceptable. Most importantly, remittances and gifts ensure that migrants can maintain a foothold in the home area, and that they will be welcome upon their return. Gaile (1992: 134) argues that the problem is not urbanization as such, because the urban areas need to absorb the additional rural labour. The problem is that migrants have only a limited choice when migrating, because most local economic development occurs in one or a few large cities. He points out that the problem is really â€Å"under-urbanization†, i. e. the underdevelopment of the urban system. The major impediment to the working of the general market and the consequent development of a labour market is the undersupply of centres of sufficient minimal size to provide sites for market development. The above implies that in developing a strategy for sustainable rural development projects that encourages the bridging of gab between rural and urban areas should be considered. This would help reduce rural urban migration. Besides, major effort is required to ensure that the urban areas can absorb the growing urban population and that urbanization will not result in an urbanization of poverty. Small and medium-sized towns can play an important role in the urbanization process by absorbing rural-urban migrants. For instance Economic development in small towns can have a positive impact on the economy of the surrounding rural areas, if the increase in purchasing power results in the purchase of agricultural and non-agricultural products from the surrounding rural areas. This will obviously depend on the types of products produced, their quality and cost and their competitiveness compared to products from other parts of the country (and elsewhere). The development of the local urban economy may also lead to a reduction in rural-urban migration to the larger urban centres and the city and redirect migration flows to smaller urban centres. This in the long run led to sustainable development in both the rural and urban areas. Conclusion and Recommendations From the above discusions, it can be observe that there is growing interdependence of urban and rural areas that reduces the significance of the rural-urban distinction. The flow of people, capital, goods, services and ideas between urban and rural areas, made possible by improvements and cost reductions in communication and transport, is reinforcing the existing rural-urban linkages and more than ever conditions and developments in the urban areas have an impact on the rural areas and vice versa. Rural residents adopt urban lifestyles and occupations; small settlements require urban infrastructure and services; residents of rural areas commute between rural and urban areas; industries move to rural areas; urban waste pollutes natural resources in the rural areas; and agriculture in urban areas is becoming important for both economic and environmental reasons. It is, therefore, an anachronism that governments still design policies and programmes that are focused either on urban or on rural areas, but rarely on both. Rural and urban communities need to have an interest in each other’s conditions, and policy-makers need to consider these when formulating policies and programmes for sustainable rural development. Coordination of decision-making and cooperation between authorities of urban areas and their surrounding rural areas are critical to ensure that the development of urban areas and rural areas support each other. However, the continuing integration of rural and urban areas requires more than simply coordination and cooperation, it requires planning that incorporates rural and urban development. Such regional planning should not be an urban-centred exercise as it often has been in the past. Rural and urban areas need each other and each can benefit when the other’s needs are met. Backward linkages and forward linkages between agricultural production and industry and services can foster positive rural-urban interactions and a virtuous circle of development. However, policies that encourage such mutually reinforcing linkages need to overcome the traditional separation between rural and urban planners. They also need to avoid generalizations and be grounded in the specifics of the regional context (Tacoli, 1998: 13).

Compare & Contrast Russian Serfdom Essay

In the dark ages of 1450 to 1750, a devastating time period, Russian slavery & Caribbean slavery became popular. Although Russian serfdom & Caribbean slavery are similar in regard to how they were punished, the laborious work, & the little rights they received. They’re different in regard to their location, ways in which they’re owned & their payment for work. To start, the three similarities between Russian serfdom & Caribbean slavery are: the ways the slaves were punished, the laborious work, & the little rights they received. Both Russian slaves & Caribbean slaves were punished the same way, corporal punishment. Slaves in both regions were whipped & beaten. Rougher means of punishment was also implemented, such as starvation, sexual abuse, & hanging. Slaves would face this punishment when acting out, such as trying to flee, or back talking the master or landowner. Sometimes, the slave was punished for small things such as: not eating or answering questions fast enough. The laborious work was similar as well, both types of slaves worked long hours in fields or in factories. Typically 18 hours of work or from sun rise to sun set. Both Caribbean slaves & Russian slaves were free farmers. They planted, grew, & harvested all different things, typically cotton & sugar. These slaves had little to no rights. As mentioned above, they were constantly beaten, not respected, & had no freedom whatsoever. They often went days at a time not eating then had to work hard in the fields, but when they’d try to take a break, they would be whipped. Three differences between Russian serfdom & Caribbean slavery are: their location, ways in which they were owned, & their payment for work. Russian slaves hailed from Europe, particularly Russia while Caribbean slaves hailed from islands between the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean, particularly the Bahamas, Puerto Rico, & Cuba. While both produced similar products, they were in totally different regions of the world. They ways in which Russian & Caribbean slaves were different in the sense that Russian slavery was like Russian serfdom. Russian serfdom is based on land, & whoever bought the plot was the slave’s master while Caribbean slavery was being owned by a master, who chooses & buys the  slave. Another difference in Russian slavery & Caribbean slavery is the payment the slaves were awarded with for their work. Russian slaves were granted the protection from invaders, due to the master owning the land. Typically masters were either rich, royal or both, granting them the ability to have people guard their land. While Caribbean slaves were rewarded pretty much nothing other than being able to have one third of whatever crop they grew & harvested. They were not paid nor granted protection. Based on analysis, Russian & Caribbean slavery are similar & different due to what needed to be produced. Their differences are due to the way they were owned & amount of protection. Caribbean slaves produced sugar as did Russian slaves, but Caribbean sugar seemed to be more popular & was often exported because of the region of the Caribbean. Rich fertile soil & good growing conditions needed to have workers that were chosen for the hard work, while Russian slaves producing a little bit of everything needed versatile workers that could do a little bit of everything. This leads to protection, everyone in the Caribbean was trying to produce sugar, and the masters didn’t feel the need to have protection of the slaves, because all of the other slaves owned by other masters were busy doing the same thing. Meanwhile in Russia, the master of the land felt the need to protect their versatile workers & their crops. The reason for the similarity in the products they produce was oddly region. The fact that both Russia & the Caribbean slaves were able to produce the same products was due to the fact that both regions had very fertile soil, & good weather conditions during certain times of the year.

Fairytales The Way Of The Society And Mainstream Pop...

For almost two centuries, fairytales have been a huge part of society and mainstream pop culture. Fairytales are ways creators explain the world to children. Fairytales give a platform to teach young children moral lessons and give them ideas on how to apply them to everyday situations in kid-friendly language. Even though fairytales are make believe stories, often the portrayal of males and females in them are not accurate. Women are often seen as damsels-in-distress who wait for a brave knight in shining armor to come rescue them and live happily ever after. Men are often described as handsome heroes ready to save the day. How is this proper representation on what women and men roles are? In the majority of fairytales the way gender roles are displayed it fosters up an image that women are inferior to men. Traditional gender role stereotypes in fairytales negatively impact young children. Stereotypes are a widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing. Some widely known stereotypes about gender are women are compassionate, cook and clean, and dependent. Men are strong, they are not emotional, and are in charge. The list goes on and on. While on the hand there are traditional gender roles. Traditional gender roles are the public image of being a particular gender that a person presents to others. Typical traditional gender roles are men are the breadwinners while women stay at home to take care of the family, men are toughShow MoreRelatedCultural Analysis Of Disney Films Frozen And Cinderella 2402 Words   |  10 Pagesthe â€Å"net worth and market capitalization of Disney Company has been estimated as $103.96 billion in 2013† (Walt Disney Company Net Worth - Celebrity Net Worth,†). From the premiere of the Steamboat Willie cartoons in 1928 Disney has transformed pop culture as we know it today. This paper is designed to look into four major issues gender identity, gender roles, ethnicity, social class throughout Disney’s Cinderella (1950) and Frozen (2013). I aim to show that in these films can be found a subtle manualRead MoreThe Bachelor And The Construction And Destruction Of The Fantasy Romance3051 Words   |  13 PagesThe Bachelor and the Construction and Destruction of the Fantasy Romance Reality TV shows, especially dating programs, has become a popular culture phenomenon status globally in the past few decades. The media have taken advantage of this trend to incorporate them into their mainstream programming in order to maximize profits from the intense followership it attracts among various audiences. This popularity has also captured the interest of many scholars and researchers who seek to identify why suchRead MoreSwot Analysis25582 Words   |  103 Pagesshaver—Shavemaster—was introduced to the market. Despite heavy international competition, Shavemaster became a market leader shortly after its launch. The appliance revolution continued to penetrate the Australian market. Consumers were introduced to the pop-up toaster, the electric frypan, and the dry iron. Over the years, models were replaced and the Toastermatic was introduced in 1960. In 1972 Sunbeam sold more than 1 million products. By 1973, Sunbeam had sold 3.5 million frypans, one for eve ry three