When dealing with issues that pertain to people’s beliefs and faith, one has to tread with caution. Although there is religious liberty, one has to be careful about religious issues when it comes to public places. For one, I believe that religion is a personal thing and restrain should be put on it when we come to a place where other people that are not of the same religious belief are. Not that we are not at liberty to display our faith but the truth is that as we have right so do other people have rights too and our own faith should not overshadow theirs. However, there are some instances where we might be in a dilemma of what to do.
The case provided is a good example of this scenario. Without recourse to emotions or sentiments, I think the board made a right decision which has been long overdue. However, as expected, some people will rebuff this decision because of some rather emotional or sentimental reasons. Their argument will be will not be objective but their rebuttal of the board’s decision will be patterned after the following argument. The position of the parents who rebuffed the decision of the board will be grounded on the fact that the late principal deserves some respect because he has toiled in that school.
These parents will consider the action made by the board as disrespectful to the late principal and thus will call for the reversal. Apart from this, they might argue that the portrait has been an integral part of the school tradition and that they consider the idea of just waking up one day and deciding to remove what has been a part of the school life and tradition rather absurd. “What do you want the poor boy that painted the portrait to feel? Imagine the number of hours the poor boy spent in painting that portrait. ”
Furthermore, these parents may argue that since no one is complaining about the portrait, the portrait is not affecting the board. “Is it disturbing you or is it hindering the discharge of your duties? ” Question 2: A. Linda Mealey argued in her paper titled “Bulking up: the roles of sex and sexual orientation on attempts to manipulate physical attractiveness” that “Socialization processes can either reduce or enhance biological differences between individuals or groups” Sex role socialization and sexual orientation has led to stereotypes.
The more people are aware of their sexual orientation, the more they come to be identified with the general preconceived ideas about the sex. For example, if a lady believes in a stereotype about women generally, she comes to see herself from the point of view of this stereotype and this will make her naturally identify with people that fall under the same sexual orientation. Although, stereotypes might sometimes lead to discrimination of a sex, the truth is that it allows people that fall under the same sex to identify with each others as it serves as a unifying platform.
B. There are some school roles that reinforce sex role stereotypes for girls. An example of this is the fact that the position of cheerleaders in the school football teams. This reinforces sex role stereotypes for the girls because they are made to feel that they can not meet up with the challenges that men do. Another example is that in some schools, the positions of vice-presidents of organizations are reserved for ladies.
This also reinforces sex role stereotypes that men are leaders and women should support them in whatever they do. Although these school roles might not be directly intended to reinforce sex role stereotypes, the truth is that they do. Reference: Mealey, L. “Bulking up: the roles of sex and sexual orientation on attempts to manipulate physical attractiveness” (1997) Retrieved on April 28, 2008 from http://findarticles. com/p/articles/mi_m2372/is_n2_v34/ai_19551975
Courtney from Study Moose
Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one? Check it out https://goo.gl/3TYhaX