Culture and the Turkish economy

Culture and the Turkish economy Introduction Peculiarities of running business and transnational communications are directly related to the culture of the country. Globalization of the economy has undoubtedly become a commonly accepted phenomenon. Even small and medium businesses, wanting or not, face problems of international business relationships: be it the purchase of equipment, materials or other trade and procurement activities, search for partners or investors, not to mention the direct competition with multinational companies in their own domestic market. Larger players of market, in connection with its inevitable saturation, are forced to think about entering the international arena. All these factors make the study of culture of business relationships and international communication increasingly relevant for managers. Awareness about the peculiarities of a particular culture, the ability to consider and use these peculiarities in practice help some companies quickly and at less cost to establish relations with partners, and others to deal more effectively with rivals. The knowledge of the features of international communication is also useful for managers working in foreign companies, since they help to better adapt to a foreign environment, understand the requirements of top-management, permissible frames of conduct and, accordingly, to move faster through the ranks. Major dimensions of culture in Turkey  and their influence on Turkish economy and business practices When building business relationships, finding partners for business, developing private business in the territory of another country, it is always necessary to take into account the totality of the rules of business etiquette and specificities of traditions of each cultural environment. Turkey has long been a secular state with European style of doing business, but it should be remembered that the influence of Islam, though not pronounced in recent times is reflected in some aspects of the Turkish business etiquette and bears a deep cultural meaning. Turkey combines European and Middle East traditions in the business culture, therefore common business etiquette here has some nuances which are useful to know for building successful and lasting business relationships. Lets consider these nuances. First, Turkey has a sufficiently well developed family-owned business with a clear hierarchy. Family traditions in Turkey are very important, both in life and in business (Burnaz, 2009). Second, different spheres of life in Turkey are influenced by religion. If the partners are religious people, one should keep in mind that Friday is a holy day for Muslims when they visit temple to pray, so no important business meetings and negotiations should be appointed on this day. Ramazan is a month-long sacred abstinence of all Muslims, during which one cannot eat, drink, smoke cigarettes from sunrise to sunset. This should be kept this in mind when planning a business lunch or dinner in a restaurant. During Ramazan it is better to appoint business meetings with Turkish Muslims after sunset, however, if it is possible to avoid them, it is better to postpone all negotiations until after Ramazan. Many Turkey residents leave on vacation in July or August, so the middle of summer is not the best time for negotiations and business meetings, while from October to May is the most active and fruitful period for Turkish business culture (Burnaz, 2009; OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey, 201 0). It should be remembered that as in any other country, courtesy and respect for etiquette in business in Turkey is especially important. Good personal relationships based on trust and mutual respect play a significant role in building business relationships with Turkish partners, therefore, before proceeding to business negotiations, it is necessary to show them openness and readiness for friendship and to emphasize the mutuality of benefits (Burnaz, 2009; Ararat, 2008, Gupta, 2009). Motivation in negotiating with the Turks should be clear and precise. It is very important in the process of business negotiations to clearly outline the advantages and profitability of a proposal for the Turkish side, although it is not the only thing a benefit may be expressed in for Turkish partners. Instead of profits it is recommended to focus often on such points of the transaction as increased authority and power. Respect, recognition and other intangible benefits may also have a positive impact on the outcome of business negotiations in Turkey (Gupta, 2009). Thus, understanding that Turkish culture is very different from European or American business culture is a big step in doing business in Turkey and with the Turks. It takes patience and time to learn all the ins and outs, but the Turks also show patience towards foreigners and willing to make allowances for any mistake or error in etiquette made by a foreigner. In general, Turkey is an attractive country to do business with the positive dynamics in the economy. Turkey managed to avoid large losses that might have occurred as a result of the global economic crisis of 2008-2009 (Turkey passes the crisis test, 2009). Having analyzed the economic development of Turkey for the period from 2002 to the present day, it can be argued that the state of the economy has become particularly favorable, due to the below factors (OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey, 2010; Turkey passes the crisis test, 2009; Turkey: Business environment at a glance, 2011; Aydin, 2006): The currency reform in Turkey, 2002; reforms in social security and health care; tax reform beneficial for entrepreneurs; TOKÄ ° Innovations (Housing Administration Projects) gave impetus to the development of national construction companies; State support for small and medium-sized enterprises, which constitute 97% of the Turkish economy; Increased economic growth in Turkey, which is largely due to the automobile industry, real estate and textile industry; Successful investments in tourism; Active development of the logistics sector in Europe; New international communications and new markets: the most promising emerging markets for Turkey are China, South Korea, India, BRIIC group, as well as markets of Pakistan and Bangladesh; Regional and social development: 40% of the EU budget is allocated to regional development and social infrastructure; Funding at the expense of TOBB (the Union of Chambers and Commodity Exchange of Turkey); Development of higher education: there are already 95 public and 45 private universities in Turkey. Apart from that, the Government of the Republic of Turkey considers foreign direct investment as the driving force of economic development and prosperity of the country. Turkey has one of the most liberal legal regimes for FDI among the member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Except for some sectors, businesses that are open to the private sector in Turkey are mostly open to foreign partners and investors (OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey, 2010). Nevertheless, all investors, regardless of nationality, face a number of specific obstacles characteristic of developing Eastern countries: excessive bureaucracy, slow acting justice system, high taxes, corporate governance weaknesses, sometimes unpredictability of the decisions taken at local government level, as well as frequent changes in legislation and regulatory framework (Gupta, 2009). However, foreign investment regulation, for the most part, is transparent. Turkey supports national regime, including the purchase of real estate by foreign capital companies registered in accordance with Turkish law, and in most sectors no investment audit is provided (only notification is required). The Turkish Government supports the principle of transparency with the associated nation as a precondition for the acquisition of real estate by foreigners, and imposes a limit of 2.5 hectare of property acquired by foreign individuals. Individuals cannot own more than 10% of the land in any of the areas of industrial development (Kalafatoglu, 2010; Keyman, 2005;). The maximum share of foreign equity participation is limited to 25% in broadcasting and 49% in aviation and maritime transport. Establishment of companies offering financial services including banking and insurance, as well as oil-related companies, requires special permission from the Government of Turkey for both domestic and foreign investors. In practice, regulators do not restrict foreign ownership in the financial sector: in 2005 and 2006 a series of acquisitions by foreign persons were approved, and several foreign financial companies has been operating in Turkey for a long time (Ulusoy, 2009). The privatization process in Turkey is currently going on. The Government of the Republic of Turkey privatizes the state economic enterprises through selling lots of securities, public offerings, or a combination of both. The total amount of transactions in the Turkish privatization program amounted to 8.1 billion dollars in 2006, 4.3 billion dollars in 2007, and 6.3 billion dollars in 2008. The state continues privatization process, despite the fact that the reduction of global financial flows, which began in 2008, may entail certain obstacles (Ulusoy, 2009; OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey, 2010). Bureaucratic delays used to be significant obstacles to both national and foreign companies. However, recent reforms have simplified the process of establishment of companies, reduced the requirements to obtain permits, set a single form of registration of companies and enabled individuals to register their businesses in the Union of Chambers and Commodities Exchange of Turkey. Cross-cultural analysis: business cultures of USA and Turkey Generally, two polar opposite styles of management are distinguished, and consequently, business relation cultures: American or Western and Oriental styles. They are fundamentally different in structure of collection and exchange of information, separation and segregation of duties, degree of standardization, coordination and subordination. The American system is characterized by management based on science, individualism and personal responsibility, a clear division of labor, specialization, planning based on the analysis of large amounts of quantitative information. Oriental management system is based on collective responsibility, rotation system, long-term career planning, equation of employees to the company and its customs (Burnaz, 2009; Gupta, 2009). At the same time, in line with the Western style, there has recently distinguished a pan-European, also partly inherent to Turkey as an EU member, with a simultaneous focus on economic and social indicators, such as a guaranteed opportunity for staff development, involvement of employees in decision-making process, the emphasis on favorable climate in the company (Burnaz, 2009; Gupta, 2009). However, despite the tendency to unify business methods and communication standards, we believe that the explicit differences in business culture will remain in the future. Despite the huge variety of business cultures, there are methods to predict certain aspects of behavior of representative of a certain culture. Ones of the most applicable methods are the classification of countries according to G. Hofstedes four variative characteristics reflecting basic differences of cultural values, and contextual ranking of cultures, proposed by E. Hall (Cateora, 2000). According to these theories, the USA is a notable example of a country with a high index of individualism (IDV=91), when a separate individual poorly integrates itself into the group, and strong individualistic mentality is observed with a focus on the importance of personal life and initiative. The Turkish society is rather a society where the mentality of community relations dominates, so it is based on morality, sense of duty, predominance of the interests of the collective over the individual ones, and loyalty (IDV=37) (Table 1). Another important cultural dimension is the parameter of power (hierarchical) distance. Power distance index measures the tolerance of the society towards social inequality, i.e., unequal distribution of power between superior and subordinate members of the social system. The degree of distancing shows the relation of employees to the power of managers. Turkey has a culture with a high index of power distance (PDI=66), and power in Turkey may even be inherited. Here there is a significant difference between the members of the society who are at different social levels and difference in the privileges, which are perceived by the members of the society for granted. In countries with a low power distance index, like USA (PDI=40), the reverse pattern is observed (Table 1). The next quality largely determined by culture is the control of the level of uncertainty, which shows the extent to which members of a cultural community are programmed to freedom of action in unstructured non-standard situations. In this aspect, the USA and Turkey also hold totally different positions. As a country with high uncertainty avoidance index, Turkey (UAI=85) is less resistant to stress, more concerned with security issues and following the rules, which leads to poor perception of change and slow adaptation to new ideas. USA is characterized by culture with low UAI (UAI=46) associated with greater mobility, willingness to take risks, innovation, tendency to rely on knowledge, rather than absolute knowledge (Table 1). Moreover, the USA is rather a country described by Hofstede as the country with masculinity behavior (MAS=62), i.e. dominance, encouragement to competition, high demands, desire for career achievements and entrepreneurship, greed and passion for capital accumulation, lack of caring about others. In contrast, though attached now to the European community, Turkey still belongs to femininity pattern (MAS=45) and the prevailing values are humility and altruism, gender equality, emphasis on serving people, mutual aid (Table 1). Table 1. Indexing USA and Turkey depending on cultural values by Hofstede. Country IDV Ranking by IDV* PDI Ranking by PDI UAI Ranking by UAI MAS Ranking by MAS USA 91 1 40 38 46 43 62 15 Turkey 37 28 66 18/19 85 16/17 45 32/33 * Classification among 53 countries of the world, by 2000. (Cateora, 2000) In addition to the parameters identified by Hofstede, the predominant and characteristic of the culture type of communication is of great importance in the typology of business cultures. On this parameter, all nations can be ranked by the degree of cultural contextuality. Recent studies have revealed a high correlation between high/low-contextuality and the Hofstedes indices of individualism/collectivism, and hierarchical level of distancing (Cateora, 2000). Thus, low-context American culture shares relatively low hierarchical differences and high level of individualism. On the contrary, high-context Muslim culture is typically characterized by a significant difference between the hierarchical levels and low levels of individualism. Therefore, the majority of modern managers, employees of international companies, are more effective in countries with the low-context language, since they are relying on the reports, contracts and other acts documented in writing. But even in low-context cultures, communication is largely dependent on cultural differences (Cateora, 2000; Gupta, 2009). High-context cultures require a considerable period of time before starting the business part of the relationship, because future partners must get to know each other for joint business. For example, if one cannot find time and desire to drink coffee and talk about abstract topics, one cannot advance to the business part of the conversation (Cateora, 2000; Gupta, 2009). Another indicator is the source of power and level of authority, which is a direct consequence of the level of the hierarchical distance, as it combines the effect of the power structure in business with the status and position of manager in the community, depending on the size of the company, publicity, type of property, and cultural values. In Turkey, the decisions are mainly made exclusively by the head of the company, who prefers to deal only with senior executives of other companies. Business here is not between companies or divisions, but between individuals. The latter also means that in case of leadership changes from one side or another, the achieved agreements may lose their power, if trust relationships arent re-established between new top executives of companies. Besides, the decentralized system, common for the U.S., enables managers at various levels to make decisions relevant to their functions, which is not common for Turkey (Ararat, 2008; Gupta, 2009). Thus, the obvious conclusion is that it is necessary for the authoritarian cultures as well as companies with a decentralized power structure to correctly determine the decision-makers, while working with companies in which decisions are taken by consensus, it is important to convince each member of the committee or group. Peculiarities of conducting business in Turkey Business in Turkey is quite difficult to arrange. But the results of registration of the business in Turkey and certain investments can be easily recouped. Peculiarities of doing business in Turkey determine such things as sale and purchase, opening bank accounts, tax system, offshore, ready business, small business and profitability of big business. In general, 2011 will be very important for Turkey. In June, the general election will be held. The current government has been successful in many areas of the economy; although some serious problems still remain. Therefore, opposition political parties should form new political-economic strategies with respect to the above areas. Turkey has to achieve significant economic growth, reduce unemployment, ensure social justice, and resolve tax issues. If it is done succeeds, it will be able to join the BRIIC (Kalafatoglu, 2010; OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey, 2010). The Government of Turkey since 2001 has been implementing a comprehensive program designed to accelerate all the procedures related to investments and attract more direct foreign capital into the country. The national body, the Coordinating Council for the Improvement of the Investment Environment (YOIKK) provides methodological support in this issue. In addition, in 2004 the Investment Advisory Council for Turkey (IAC) was established, whose recommendations serve as a guide for YOIKK, and activities undertaken within the Councils recommendations are published in annual reports of the Treasury of Turkey on the activities of IAC (Keyman, 2005). The government continues to implement legislative reforms, some of which are aimed at attracting foreign investment to Turkey. The draft of National Legislative Network, a project of automation and integration completed the process of developing the technical infrastructure in 2008, designed to accelerate the execution of business cases by facilitating the transfer of documents and transcripts of court proceedings and give the opportunity to file an application online. In addition, the government simplified the access of foreign investors to justice, including legal advice and Alternative Dispute Resolution, supported by the U.S., EU and World Bank (Turkey: Business environment at a glance, 2011; Kalafatoglu, 2010). Turkey made the tax system more convenient for investors as well. In 2006 the basic rate of income tax was reduced from 30 to 20%. The government also cancelled the income tax for foreign investors who own bonds, notes and shares, preserving it for bank deposits and repurchase transactions. In 2007 tax administration established a division designed to manage taxes collection from large corporations (Keyman, 2005). However, the Government of Turkey has not yet managed to implement further tax reforms, including reducing the tax on wages, which is one of the highest among OECD members. The Turkish Government also increased the VAT on leasing transactions from 1 to 18% in 2007. Special consumption tax on alcoholic beverages in 2008 reached 275.6% with the minimum requirements for special tax based on market prices of products (Ulusoy, 2008). Turkish laws affecting the investment climate continues to develop. It guarantees freedom of transfer of profits, fees and royalties and repatriation of capital. This guarantee is reflected in the bilateral investment treaties between Turkey and the United States in 1986, and in some similar agreements, which regulate the unlimited and proper handling of all funds related to investment in a freely convertible currency in the self-regulating market (Treaties and Agreements, Turkey-United States, 1986). Turkey is a member of the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). Turkey also ratified the Convention Establishing the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) in 1987. Turkish law provides the confirmation of international arbitration execution of investment disputes between foreign investors and the state. Turkeys is also a member of the WTO Agreement on Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMS) (Keyman, 2005; Ulusoy, 2008). Turkey investment stimuli system was significantly improved in 2006 to support manufacturing industry, energy sector, and export. General regime of investment incentives suggests tax benefits and, in some cases, the possibility of lending. Turkish Treasury also regulates some issues regarding interest rates on investment loans for small and medium enterprises, RD projects, environmental protection, as well as projects in 50 provinces, where the annual income per capita is below 1500 U.S. dollars. For such provinces, the law provides income tax incentives, social insurance benefits, free land and reduced electricity cost up to 20-50% (Ulusoy, 2009; OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey, 2010). In RD sphere, Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) and Technology Development Foundation of Turkey (TTGV) deal with reimbursements for RD and capital borrowing. Projects that get such benefits include development concepts, technology research, technical feasibility evaluation, concept-to-design laboratory researches, samples study, test products production, experimental facilities construction, product testing, patent research and design problems solutions. In addition to these incentives, the Government of Turkey provides support for technological development zones, which involves the creation of infrastructure and production facilities, exemption from taxes, VAT, income taxes and revenues, and from customs duties for special IT-sector. Moreover, export stimulating program is focused on RD, market research, and participation in international exhibitions and fairs. In Turkey, no technical requirements for the beginning, implementation and expansion of investment projects are provided. There are also no restrictions to the acquisition by investors of goods from national sources and exporting specific percentage of products. Investors access to foreign currency does not affect exports. There are also no restrictions for domestic companies to own shares of foreign investors for the fact that the proportion of foreign shares will be gradually reduced or investor will transfer its technology on certain terms. There are also no conditions established by the state in terms of the permission to invest, including the location in specialized geographic areas, specific percentage of national resources for the production of goods and services, national shares packages, import substitution, export requirements, employment of the population the investor technically located in, technology transfer and financing from national sources (Ulusoy, 2008; Ulusoy, 200 9; OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey, 2010). The Government of the Republic of Turkey does not force investors to disclose proprietary information or any other kind of information different from the publicly available one during the process of obtaining permission from the supervisory authority. Companies with foreign capital are to send a report on their activities, submitted to the General Assembly of shareholders, the auditors report, and balance sheet in the Foreign Investment Department of the Treasury annually in May. Except for issues relating to openness to foreign investment and transparency of the system of regulation, Turkey provides all the rights, benefits, deductions and privileges available to national capital and companies, as well as foreign capital and companies on the basis of most favored nation regime (for selected countries). For example, American and other foreign firms can participate in publicly funded programs and programs of subsidizing research and development on the basis of national treatment. The Government of the Republic of Turkey has adopted policies and laws that, for the most part, should promote free competition and transparency in business. However, foreign companies in some sectors complain that the regulations are not transparent and understandable from time to time. One should keep in mind that Turkey is an observer, but not a member of World Trade Organisations Commission on Government Procurement. However, Turkey is an actively developing country, which tries to keep pace on all the contemporary European and American innovations. One of the most perspective areas in Turkey is internet and mobile commerce. For instance, recent researches show that mobile marketing has acquired great popularity with the development of technology SMS since 2000 in Europe and different parts of Asia. Over the past few years SMS-messages have become a major advertising channel in Turkey, and many experts even tend to view Turkey as an innovator in mobile marketing (Demirbag, 2008). The vivid example of this success is the experience of the Turkish branch of Pepsi, which in the last 3 years has been one of the most active players using mobile marketing tools. To date, according to the data of Pepsi Turkey, the level of participation in promotional campaigns conducted by the department is the highest in the category. The company uses mobile technologies, because it considers them more effective than TV tool to provide an opportunity for interactive communication with Turkish consumers. One of the campaigns introduced by Pepsi offered consumers wallpapers and ringtones, including the famous song Da Da Da. Over the course of a promotional campaign, users downloaded more than 200,000 ringtones (Tsalikis, 2009). Turkish companies (like Finansbank, BP, FritoLay) proved that simplicity and possibility of immediate gratification are of great importance for the Turkish consumer, and the mobile channel can provide this effect (Demirbag, 2008). In general, the trust of Turkish consumers continues to rise since February 2010, reaching 85.8. This is the highest level over the past 14 months (OECD Economic Surveys: Turkey, 2010). According to the report published by the Institute of Statistics of Turkey in 2010 jointly with the Central Bank of Turkey, the index of consumer confidence amounting to 85.8 points is the highest mark since February of 2009 when it amounted to 87.60% (Tsalikis, 2009). The index started to rise since November 2009, after reaching a record low value of 78.38 points. If the index exceeds 100, it means that consumers are optimistic, and if it equals to 100, it means that consumers are neither optimistic, nor pessimistic, but if the index is below 100, it indicates pessimistic consumers (Aydin, 2006). The report determines the growth of the index of consumer confidence through the increase of the purchasing power of consumers in the current and future period, the general state of the economy and employme nt opportunities in the coming quarter. Conclusion The research has shown that Turkey is characterized by the specific business culture, experiencing the influence of European Union, USA, and its Asian partners. Belonging rather to eastern patterns of business culture, Turkey differs much form the United States in the major cultural indicators, such as indices of power distance, individualism, uncertainty avoidance, and type of business behavior (masculinity vs. femininity). However, in recent years, Turkey demonstrates high indicators of economy growth, openness to reforms, laws adjustments and democratic investment policy, which makes Turkey a favorable business partner. In addition, Turkish policy and legislation on labor, health and safety do not impede investment, although legal restrictions on firing workers may create obstacles to labor-intensive activities in the formal economy. The specific tax policy sometimes hinders investment decisions, e.g. high taxation of beverages, similar to Coca-Cola, hinders investment in the sector. However, serious tax incentives for free trade zones provide incentives to invest in these zones. Similarly, incentives for investment in certain low-income provinces are designed to increase investments in these areas. Nowadays, international credit rating agencies insist that the investment level of the Turkish economy is still not high, but markets do not express much concern. Credit default swaps insuring Turkish securities against default for 5 years, are estimated at 1.84%. And while the Eurozone is struggling with budget deficits, Turkey states huge budget surplus due to the growth of tax revenues. Turkey is considered to be a country of investment grade in the market of credit default swaps after its dollar-denominated bonds started to exceed the bonds of developing countries in Europe largely due to accelerated economic growth. According to preliminary estimates of the Government, the economy of Turkey grew in first quarter by 12%, which allowed the Prime Minister of Turkey to claim that Turkeys credit rating wont be reduced in the coming 6-10 months. Generally, the country retains the trend towards improvement of economic performance, development and innovation, which opens new perspectives for foreign investment, collaboration and partnership.

Las 432 †Genetically Modified Foods Essay

It has been determined that GMO’s are made up of plants, animals, viruses and bacteria that are created in laboratories. Scientist started experimenting with GMO’s in the early 1950’s with investigation of plants DNA. In the 1970’s scientist developed the first genetically engineered organism. By the early 1990’s biotechnology had expanded on production of GM foods to the public, but this brought fourth concerns. There are also those who believe that the laws and regulations that are attributed to genetically modified foods have been influenced through both the media and political aspects. These influences have brought about worries to GM food consumers and they started comparing the similarities and differences in organic foods and GM foods. Consumers want to know what GM food products they have consumed and will be aware of any affects that may be acquired with consumption. Not only are there consumer challenges that must be faced with these technological experimentations, but also the impacts that may be developed environmentally or effects that may incur with nature and wildlife. Some societies are worried about how the rich will prosper and the poorer countries will suffer and possibly go hungry. Some religions and groups protest eating genes and do not want to consume such un-natural foods and other concerns still the unknown effects on human allergies and transfer of antibiotic resistance to intestine bacterial flora or pathogenic bacteria in our bodies. Genetically Modified Organisms in Food Thesis: Consumers today have a right to know if genetically modified foods are harmful to our health, the environment and our economy. In order to be able to answer these questions more research needs to be done. Summary Controversy around genetically modified foods is becoming big news and sorting through volumes of information can be intimidating. The public is asking a lot of questions about GM foods and they are also raising concerns about the effects these foods may have on their health or the environment. There are different advantages and disadvantages of GM foods, although to what extent they can help or harm humans and the environment is a debatable aspect of this technology. The time has come to look at the decisions that we make about genetic engineering in food crops and if it will have permanent consequences on our food production capacity. Are genetically modified foods putting us at a crossroads in terms of the agricultural legacy that we will leave behind for our children and grandchildren? Modern technology has given us the ability to go beyond selective breeding. Organisms can now be modified by moving genes from one species to another and by introducing synthetic genetic material into their genomes. Humans no longer simply select from variations present in the population: they create new variations! Some find our new power exciting. They dream of crops with greater resistance to disease and insect pests, pigs with healthy fats, and a level of agricultural production sufficient to feed everyone on the planet. Others fear that we have crossed an important boundary and are now tinkering with living systems that we understand incompletely. They question our ability to predict the consequences of our actions and are afraid that we may disrupt the delicate natural order. GMO Technology I. What Are GMOs? GMOs (genetically modified organisms) are plants, animals, viruses and bacteria that are created in the laboratory. Their DNA (genes) has been modified through the use of gene splicing techniques in a desire to create â€Å"new† organisms. The technology involves removing the DNA of one species and inserting it into another species, resulting in new and different varieties of plant, animal, viral and bacterial genes which don’t naturally occur in nature or by hybridizing (Smith, 2012, para. 7). Other names for the technology are â€Å"modern technology or gene technology,† genetic engineering or recombinant DNA technology, and biotechnology (World Health Organization (WHO), 2012, para. 2). GMOs are used to create genetically modified plants which in turn are used to create genetically modified crops for human consumption and as animal feed. Developers believe that producers and consumers would be interested in these foods due to their â€Å"built-in† advantages of lower prices, high nutritional value and hardiness. The desire is to achieve crops that are resistant to spoilage, drought, insects and herbicides. At the outset genetically modified (GM) seed manufacturers envisioned their product being used by producers, thus they focused on innovations those farmers, and more generally the food industry, would accept and appreciate (WHO, 2012, para. 3). WHO states that (2012), the initial objective for developing plants based on GM organisms was to improve crop protection. The GM crops currently on the market are mainly aimed at an increased level of crop protection through the introduction of resistance against plant diseases caused by insects or viruses or through increased tolerance towards herbicides† (para. 4). Commodity crops were the First Generation GM crops and included soybean, maize/corn, cotton, canola and sugar beets (Schonwald, 2012, p. 26). GM soybeans and canola have permeated the market and can be found in most processed foods, e.g. , spaghetti, candy Schonwald, 2012, p. 25). There was expectation that with the success of first generation crops, biotech specialty crops (produce) would follow, focusing more on consumer tastes. According to Kent Bradford, director of University of California (UC) at Davis’s Seed Biotechnology Center (2012), â€Å"these crops hadn’t been commercialized since 1998† (Schonwald, 2012, p. 26). The author wondered why, and so enlisted the assistance of Kent Bradford for answers on â€Å"what was going on with bioengineered specialty crops† (Schonwald, 2012, p. 26). Bradford and a collaborator, Jamie Miller, found that research on specialty crops was underway and had never ceased. The research involved input traits that are important to agriculture such as â€Å"disease resistance,† â€Å"insect resistance,† â€Å"adaptability to certain environments† and output traits that â€Å"improve taste and texture and could lead to changes in the dining experience of the future† (Schonwald, 2012, p. 26). Schonwald says Bradford contends that (2012), â€Å"There was research on 46 different species with more than 300 traits being tested† (p. 26. ). So things were going on at the research level, but the results were not moving forward. Bradford found this was due to regulatory controls. Because of the lack of consumer confidence in transgenic breeding the regulatory process for genetically modified foods was much different than for non-GMO foods. In contrast, foods using classic breeding processes were considered safe for consumption. But GMO foods were â€Å"guilty until proven innocent† (Schonwald, 2012, p. 26). Schonwald reports that (2012), â€Å"A genetically engineered crop must pass review by the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Environmental Protection Agency, and the Food and Drug Administration before it is commercialized. The cost could range from $50,000 to tens of millions of dollars to win regulatory approval. For every â€Å"transgenic event,† the genetic engineer must show exactly what genes went into the plant and how they function, and then prove how the plant makeup has been altered. That research is costly. So is plant storage. Once a transgenic creation is spawned at the Plant Transformational Facility, it is whisked to the UC Davis Controlled Environment Facility, where it will stay in a tightly secured warehouse. Or it will be airmailed to some other place, where it will live out its life in another intensely biosecure environment. The process is costly and time-consuming, which partly explains why biotech crop development is largely in the hands of the agribusiness giants – the Monsanto’s, Syngenta’s, and Bayer Crop Sciences of the world—who have the resources to undertake the process. With such high approval costs, big companies have favored commodity crops with market potential for hundreds of millions of dollars to sales, not tens of millions† ( p. 26) According to Bradford, non-governmental organizations – Greenpeace and the Union of Concerned Scientists – were responsible for the stringent governmental handling of the biotech specialty crops. The $20 million organic foods industry labored to stop the proliferation of GMO foods. They did so by launching a campaign against GMOs, inundating the USDA with thousands of letters (â€Å"275,026 to be exact†) expressing anti-GMO sentiments. This led to the non-inclusion of GMO foods under the USDA’s standards of organic produce (Schonwald, 2012, p. 27). U. S. Leads in Biotech AgricultureMore than 170 million acres of biotech crops are under cultivation in the United States, more than twice Brazil’s acreage, which ranks second. Experts credit faster technological advances, more lenient regulations and expanding economic benefits for the U. S. lead. Biotech acreage by Country, 2011| Country| Acres (in millions)| Biotech crops| United States| 170. 5| Corn, soybean, cotton, canola, sugar beet, alfalfa, papaya, squash| Brazil| 74. 9| Soybean, corn, cotton| Argentina| 58. 6| Soybean, corn, cotton| India| 26. 2| Cotton| Canada| 25. 7| Canola, corn, soybean, sugar beet| China| 9. 6| Cotton, papaya, poplar, tomato, sweet pepper| Paraguay| 6. 9| Soybean| Pakistan| 6. 4| Cotton| South America| 5. 7| Soybean, corn, cotton| Uruguay| 3. 2| Soybean, corn|. Source: Clive James, â€Å"Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2011,† International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, 2011, p. 2, www. isaaa. org/purchasepublications/itemdescription. asp? ItemType=BRIEFS&Control=IB043-2011| (McClure, 2012, p. 724) Below is a list of tips on how to say no to GMOs: Tip #1: Buy Organic Certified organic products cannot intentionally include any GMO ingredients. Buy products labeled â€Å"100% organic† â€Å"organic,† or â€Å"made with organic ingredients. † You can be doubly sure if the product also has a Non-GMO Project Verified Seal (see next tip). Tip #2: Look for Non-GMO Project Seals Products that carry the Non-GMO Project seal are independently verified to be in compliance with North America’s only third party standard for GMO avoidance, including testing of at-risk ingredients. Tip #3: Avoid At-Risk Ingredients Even if it’s not labeled organic or verified non-GMO, you can still avoid products made with ingredients that are likely derived from GMOs. The eight most common GM food crops are: *Corn (as in corn oil, cornmeal, cornstarch, and other corn-based ingredients) *Soybeans (as in soybean oil, soy protein, soy lecithin, soy milk, tofu, and other soy-based ingredients). *Canola (as in canola oil) *Sugar beets (the â€Å"sugar† listed on food labels is almost always derived from sugar cane and GM sugar beets) *Most Hawaiian papaya *A small amount of zucchini and yellow squash *Also, beware of dairy products, which may come from cows injected with GM bovine growth hormone, and meats from animals (including farmed fish) that have been fed GM foods. [Instead] look for dairy products labeled No rBGH or rBST, artificial hormone-free, or organic; wild-caught fish; and meat labeled organic or 100% grass-fed. Tip #4: Use Non-GMO Shopping Guides. Download either the new Non-GMO Shopping Tips brochure or Non-GMO Shopping Guide at www. nongmoshoppingguide. com; in order to help identify, avoid GM foods and find hidden GM ingredients on food labels. If you have an iPhone, download the ShopNoGMO guide for free from the iTunes store. Copyright of Better Nutrition is the property of Active Interest Media, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use (Smith, 2012, p. 14). II. Scientific Techniques and Experiments Various techniques are used to transfer DNA genes into the host cell. Researchers have been perfecting these techniques over the past 40 years. In one technique, target cells are bombarded with heavy metals coated with the gene transferred have been bombarded. Yet another technique transfers genes by using a naturally occurring bacterium along with a pulse of electricity to introduce genes into the targeted cell (McClure, 2012, p. 720). According to McClure (2012), Opponents of GM foods argue that the public should be informed of the techniques used in gene-transferring (p.720). At the Plant Transformation Facility at the UC, Davis more than 15,000 transgenic events have occurred. Transgenic event is the molecular biologists way of describing the blasting of DNA from one life form into another. This building, a short distance from the student union, houses thousands of Petri dishes of microscopic plantlets bathing in pink and fluorescent blue lights. Here biologists use a gas-pump-like tool called the Helium Particle Delivery system to mix sexually incompatible species together. They use gold bullets (literally) to fire genes from one species into another in a bombardment chamber. As a result the â€Å"Davis lab has birthed grapes spiked with jellyfish, tomatoes spiked with carp, transgenic squash, transgenic carrots, and transgenic tomatoes† (Schonwald, 2012, p. 25). In Changing Genes to Feed the World, David Pimentel takes a look at one molecular biologist’s account of plant breeding and the field of genetic engineering of crops. In her book, Mendel in the Kitchen, author Nina Fedoroff compares the contributions of genetically engineered plants with that of early plant breeding research, e. g. , development of hybrid corn, achieved through the transfer of genes within the confines of crop species. This method contributed greatly to the growth of crop yields during the Green Revolution. Specifically, according to Fedoroff (2004), traditional methods of cross breeding were responsible for, â€Å"40 percent of the increase in yields. The remaining 60 percent was due to greater inputs in fossil-fuels energy, fertilizers and pesticides† (Pimentel, 2004, paras. 1-2). Crop yields increased greatly during the years 1950-1983. Globally, 80 percent of the calories consumed by humans came from grains, making the Green Revolution an important feeding mechanism for billions of people around the world (Pimentel, 2004, para. 2). Though the use of traditional breeding methods greatly increased the yield and quality of crops, these methods were quite slow, in comparison to the advances being made in the field of molecular biology and genetic engineering. Before, breeders were required to manually manipulate genetic material within a specific crop to increase yields. Now, through genetic engineering, genes can quickly be transferred from one plant species to another and brought into crops (Pimentel, 2004, para. 3). As more and more genetically modified foods are being integrated into our food systems, there is a need to be able to detect their presence in food products in order to determine if food manufacturers are in â€Å"compliance with labeling requirements† (Yi, Yien-Chian, Foo-Peng Lee, and Nam-Trung, 2009, para. 1). There is a method that allows for the rapid detection of the presence of GMOs in foods and it is called ferrofluid-driven PCR microchip. â€Å"The microchip was fabricated in polymethyl methacrylate by CO? laser ablation and was integrated with three temperature zones. PCR solution was contained in a circular closed micro channel and was driven by magnetic force generated by an external magnet through a small oil-based ferrofluid plug. Successful amplification of genetically modified soya and maize were achieved in less than 13 minutes. This PCR microchip combines advantages of cycling flexibility and quick temperature transitions associated with two existing microchip PCR techniques, and it provides a cost saving and less time-consuming way to conduct preliminary screening of GMOs† (Yi, Yien-Chian, Foo-Peng Lee, & Nam-Trung, 2009, para. 1). History of GMO’s I. Biotechnology Chronology â€Å"1950s – 1960s: Scientists identify genes and begin investigating the role of DNA in plant development. 1953-American biochemist James Watson and British biophysicist Francis Crick describe the structure of DNA, setting the stage for mapping the genetic code. 1967-Lenape potato, a new variety bred for making potato chips is withdrawn from experimental production after high levels of toxin are found. 1970s – 1980s: Scientists begin experimenting with genetic transformation of plants and animals. 1973-Scientists create first genetically engineer organism. 1983-Researchers transfer new DNA into plants, leading to the creation of genetically modified crops. 1989-Calene Inc. receives U. S. patent for gene sequence in GM Flavr Savr tomato. 1990s: Biotech foods are marketed to the public despite environmental and health concerns. 1992-FDA decides not to require labeling of most GM foods, sparking mistrust of the technology. 1993-FDA allows cows to be injected with bovine growth hormone (rBGH) made from genetically modified bacteria, setting off consumer protests. 1994-FDA approves Flavr Savr tomato, first GM food approved for sale to consumers. 1996-Monsanto introduces Roundup Ready soybeans, first of several popular herbicide-tolerant or insecticide-producing crops. 1998- European Union (EU) halts approvals of new GM crops in what is termed an â€Å"unofficial moratorium. † 2000s: Genetically engineered foods face continued criticism despite growing scientific consensus that they do not pose greater safety risks than conventional crops. 2000-Bowing to international demands, U.S. officials agree to label GM commodities for export†¦. Weeds resistant to Roundup discovered in Delaware†¦. Friends of the Earth, a major environmental group, reports that genes from StarLink corn, a GM crop approved only for animal consumption, have been discovered in taco shells. The discovery prompts recalls of corn products and lawsuits, but researchers are unable to document any human health effects†¦. Centers for disease Control study concludes StarLink did not cause allergic reactions claimed by 28 people. 2002-National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy finds that GM crops in the United States produced four billion pounds of additional foods and fiber on the same acreage, improved farm income by $1. 5 billion and reduced pesticide use by 46 million pounds†¦. Monsanto announces it will delay introduction of GM wheat amid concerns from farmers that it will harm exports. 2003-Bollworms resistant to the Bt toxin, an insecticide produced by GM cotton, discovered in the South. 2004-Under U. S. pressure, EU drops de facto ban on GM crops but institutes mandatory labeling; many European stores won’t stock GM foods because of consumer fears. 2008-Monsanto sells unit that produces rBGH, as major grocers including Wal-Mart, Publix and Kroger decline to sell milk from cows treated with the product. 2010-After approving the sale of GM eggplant, India’s environment minister declares a moratorium on the product because of public outcry. 2011-GM crops are grown on 395 million acres of farmland globally, though more than 90 percent is in just three crops: soybeans, corn and cotton. 2012-Anti-GMO groups file petitions containing more than 1 million signatures demanding that the FDA require GM foods to be labeled†¦. Californian vote scheduled for Nov. 6 on ballot initiative requiring labeling for GM foods† (McClure, 2012, p. 727). II. Advantages and Disadvantages The people of the United States (U. S. ) have been unknowingly consuming GMO foods since the 1990s. The Food and Drug Administration scientists warned that these new foods had the capability to produce new allergens and toxins and advised that more thorough testing was needed. But the U. S. government’s position was that GM foods were equivalent to non-GMO foods and failed to require labeling and testing (Smith, 2012, para, 9). According to the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM), eating GMO foods contributes to a number of health risks (Smith, 2012),â€Å"including infertility, immune system issues, accelerated aging, disruption of insulin and cholesterol regulation, gastrointestinal issues, and changes in organs† (para. 9). AAEM reported that doctors most likely are seeing negative health effects in their patients and may not realize that GMO foods are the culprit. Doctors are urged to prescribe non-GMO diets for all of their patients (Smith, 2012, para. 9). The environment is not exempt from the risks of GMO foods. There is the threat of GMO seeds contaminating nearby fields of organic and non-GMO crops. Pesticide usage has dramatically increased over the first thirteen years since the GM crops were introduced. Further, high amounts of herbicide usage on GM herbicide –resistant crops have caused the development of â€Å"superweeds† that adapt to and withstand your typical herbicides (Smith, 2012, para. 10). On the positive side, genetic engineering offers a wonderful solution to farmers, especially those in developing countries, and that is the opportunity for developing perennial grains. As most grains are annual crops, tilling and replanting of the soil is required every single year. This involves an enormous amount of energy each year, including fossil and human energy and strength. Annual tillage also results in soil erosion. Planting perennial grains would mean that farmers would only need to till and replant every five or six years. This would be a major benefit for farmers in developing countries, as tilling for them involves 400 hours per hectare, hand-tilling their fields prior to planting their crops. As such, according to the author, â€Å"plant breeding and genetic engineering will continue to make a tremendous contribution to our food supply† (Smith, 2012, para. ). Other advantages of GM foods include disease resistance, cold tolerance, drought resistance, nutrition, pharmaceuticals, and phytoremediation (Whitman, 2012, pp. 2-4). Legal and Political Issues I. Regulations and Laws There have been an abundant number of studies done in the past on American health and safety standards that have demonstrated the inconsistencies of risk assessment. Some standards are rather strict and offer few or no benefits in savings lives, preventing diseases or injuries; while other standards have been negligent and have placed a considerable amount of lives at risk or harm. It is essentially due to the passage of these standards for which the American regulatory policy making has been implanted. In the past, both Congress and the political appointees who head regulatory agencies have been very susceptible to public opinion and public pressures. As a result, the more the American public is prone to worry about a particular risk, the more meticulous American policy-makers are likely to regulate it. â€Å"Therefore, many of the American regulatory policies, especially those between the mid 1960s through the mid 1980s, were characterized by the triumph of â€Å"passion† over â€Å"sound science. † (Vogel, 2001). In 1984, the Federal Government established a formal policy that is referred to as â€Å"The Coordinated Framework for Regulation of Biotechnology†. This policy describes the Federal system for evaluating products that have been developed using modern biotechnology. â€Å"The Coordinated Framework is based upon health and safety laws developed to address specific product classes and involves the cooperation of three federal regulatory agencies; the EPA, the USDA, and the FDA. The U. S. Government has written new regulations, policies and guidance to implement these laws for biotechnology as products have developed† (United States Regulatory Agencies Unitied Biotechnology Website, 2012). EPA Regulation â€Å"Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the EPA regulates the use of intergeneric microorganisms in commerce or commercial research. The EPA considers intergeneric microorganisms to be those formed from organisms in different genera (genera is the plural of genus, which is a level in a taxonomic classification system based on the relatedness of organisms) or those microorganisms formed with synthetic DNA not from the same genus† (Biotechnology Program under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 2012). â€Å"The EPA believes that inter generic micro organisms have a sufficiently high likelihood of expressing new traits or new combinations of traits to be termed â€Å"new† and warrant EPA review. The Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT), Biotechnology Program conducts a screening program for new microorganisms under section 5 of TSCA. In 1997, the EPA published regulations that fully implement its pre-manufacture program for microorganisms under TSCA section 5. Prior to 1997; the EPA operated its biotechnology program in accordance with the 1986 Policy Statement† (Biotechnology Program under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 2012) USDA Regulation. | â€Å"USDA supports the safe and appropriate use of science and technology, including biotechnology, to help meet agricultural challenges and consumer needs of the 21st century. USDA plays a key role in assuring that products produced using biotechnology are safe to be grown and used in the United States. Once these products enter commerce, USDA supports bringing these and other products to the worldwide marketplace† (Bitechnology, 2012). | â€Å"The Advisory Committee on Biotechnology and 21st Century Agriculture (AC21) was originally established in February, 2003 and first met in June, 2003. Under its Charter, the committee is charged with examining the long-term impacts of biotechnology on the U. S. food and agriculture system and USDA, and providing guidance to USDA on pressing individual issues, identified by the Office of the Secretary, related to the application of biotechnology in agriculture. The AC21 is a broad-based committee representing a wide range of interests and agricultural expertise† (USDA Advisory Committee on Biotechnology & 21st Century Agriculture (AC21), 2012). FDA Regulation â€Å"In the Federal Register of May 29, 1992 (57 FR 22984), FDA published its â€Å"Statement of Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties†. The 1992 policy clarified the agency’s interpretation of the application of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to human foods and animal feeds derived from new plant varieties and provided guidance to industry on scientific and regulatory issues related to these foods (Genetically Engineereed Plants for Food and Feed, 2012). The 1992 policy applied to all foods derived from all new plant varieties, including varieties that are developed using recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (rDNA) technology. This site refers to foods derived from plant varieties that are developed using rDNA technology as â€Å"bioengineered foods†Ã¢â‚¬  (Genetically Engineereed Plants for Food and Feed, 2012). â€Å"In the Federal Register of January 18, 2001 (the premarket notification proposal; 66 FR 4706), FDA issued a proposed rule that would require that developers submit a scientific and regulatory assessment of the bioengineered food 120 days before the bioengineered food is marketed. In the premarket notification proposal, FDA recommends that developers continue the practice of consulting with the agency before submitting the required premarket notice† (Genetically Engineereed Plants for Food and Feed, 2012) The chief statutes under which the above agencies have been given regulatory or Review authority comes from the following Act’s: * The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) (EPA); * The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) (EPA); * The Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act (FFDCA) (FDA and EPA); * The Plant Protection Act (PPA) (USDA); * The Virus Serum Toxin Act (VSTA) (USDA); * The Public Health Service Act (PHSA)(FDA); * The Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) (FDA) * The Meat Inspection Act (MIA)(USDA); * The Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) (USDA); * The Egg Products Inspection Act (EPIA) (USDA); and * The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA)(Guide to U. S. Regulations of Genetically Modified Foods and Argricultural Biotechnology Products, 2001) II. Current Political Issues Genetically modified foods have been a concern for many people around the world. In the past Europeans have been the most vocal in their resistance to GM foods and crops, to the point that they have implemented strict labeling requirements for any genetically modified foods sold. In the absence of stronger health and safety data, many national governments across the world have taken steps to lessen the existence of GE food within their borders. â€Å"In Europe, six nations (Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, and Luxembourg) have enacted bans on the cultivation and import of GE products, and nearly 50 nations worldwide require that all GE foods be labeled as such† (Dahl, 2012). To date in the United State there have been no mandatory labeling requirements for genetically modified foods. However this may soon change, Americans are now starting to ask questions about what they are eating and suspicions about the health and environmental effects of biotechnology is now behind the demand that foods from genetically modified crops be labeled. The most recent labeling effort that has come to the fore front is the California ballot initiative Proposition 37 called â€Å"The Right to Know†. What is Proposition 37? The California â€Å"Right to Know† Genetically Engineered Food Act is easy: The initiative would basically require food that is sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it is produced through genetic engineering, and would not allow these products to be labeled as â€Å"natural. † Prop 37 allows companies 18 months to change their product labels, and allows for the GMO disclosure to appear wherever they choose on the packaging (Facts Yes on Prop 37, 2012). If this initiative passes, California will be the first state to require all foods that have genetically modified crops in them to be labeled. However, there is an opposing side to this Proposition. Those that are against Proposition 37 feel that by having to label all foods with genetically engineered crops would mean higher food prices due to the cost of re-package existing foods, recordkeeping, or companies being forced to switch to higher priced non-GM foods. The opposing side also states that it would add more government bureaucracy and taxpayers cost, and create frivolous lawsuits (Stop the Deceptive Food Labeling Scheme, 2012). This is one political debate that will have everyone on the edge of their chairs. III. What are the Possible Health Effects of GM Foods? With so many of our foods today now coming from GM crops, questions are now being asked if there is a health risk from GM foods. The problem is that unlike the safety evaluations that are required for the approval of a new drug, the safety evaluations of genetically engineered foods for human consumption has not been as strict. So what is known about possible health issues from the consumption of GM foods? Scientists from around the world have been complaining that a majority of the research that is being done about the possible side effects of GM foods for human consumption is being conducted by scientists that are associated with the biotechnology companies; the same companies that are selling the crops seeds. That and the fact that these studies are being done by the biotechnology companies tend to show that there are no health problems associated with eating GM foods. The problem is this is a one sided research study. One of the biggest problems that independent researchers are facing is that it is extremely hard to get GM seeds in order to conduct any type of research. These seeds can only be purchased through a licensed seed dealer and a technology licensing agreement must be signed stating that no research will be done on the seed; this includes any research attributed to health and environment. Scientists who have managed to do research on the health impacts of the GM seeds are often harassed, intimidated, and defamed by those with a strong interest in the GM technology. Even with these challenges researcher have managed to conduct medical research on the health effects of GM seeds; of these tests the most obvious concern has been the risk of allergic reactions.

Male Perspective of Love in Literature Essay

Compare and contrast the ways writers use form, structure and language to portray the male perspective of love in Shakespeare’s ‘Othello’, Fitzgerald’s ‘The Great Gatsby’ and the Poetry of Robert Browning. The male perspective of love is interesting to look at when looking at different texts in comparison. Although they have been written in different literary movements male characters portray very similar attitudes and reflect the same aspects towards love and relationships. This essay concerns the male perspective of love, however it is important to analyse the factors that cause these interpretations of love that the writers have created for the male characters. For example a reoccurring perspective is the need for dominance over their significant other for example in Shakespeare’s Othello, Othello establishes his dominance over Desdemona by murdering her, similarly in the poetry of Robert Browning his poems ‘My Last Duchess’ and ‘Porphyria’s Lover’ where they also kill their lovers in order to reinforce their male dominance over their partner. In The Great Gatsby Daisy’s partner Tom displays his dominance over Daisy when he abuses her by punching her in the face. The male perspective of love is understood when looking at the theories of causation. As stated one of the most prominent male perspective of love conveys the need and desire to be dominant over their partner. In the Shakespearian play ‘Othello’ set in 16th century Venice looks at the idea of unconditional love despite the fact that Othello and his love Desdemona are from two completely different worlds. Othello is a Moore which refers to the Islamic – Arabic inhabitants of North Africa, whereas Desdemona is a Venetian. Contextually their love for one another would be seen as highly controversial and taboo, however despite Desdemona insists that she marries Othello. ‘To you, preferring you before her father, so much I challenge that I may profess due to the Moor my lord. ’ Here Desdemona recognises that her duty is divided, however her honesty with her father shows how willingly loyal she is. A literary interpretation of Othello’s character would suggest that Othello feels the need to dominate over Desdemona due to his much insecurity as a character, directly associated with the idea that he is not of the Venetian culture. Leavis views that Othello is a ‘weak and stupid character’ that doesn’t understand himself or Desdemona, Othello is an outsider to the Venetian community where as Cassio isn’t, hence his insecurities structure between Cassio and Desdemona when Iago suggests that they are having an affair together. As a result Othello may realise that to maintain his prestige and respect as a soldier he must justify what has been done on him by killing Desdemona. To some extent I do agree more with the analysis that Leavis’ creates as looking within the context of the time although Othello and his achievements have been celebrated he evidently is a cultural and racial outsider. In addition to insecurities that Othello it is also a possibility that Othello is threatened by Desdemona’s sexual nature, as a character she is very flirtatious and friendly with most of Othello’s comrades including his lieutenant Cassio, whom has suspicion of sleeping with his wife. Desdemona’s supposed infidelity and unfaithfulness to her husband has caused her death. In the patriarchal Venetian society, women were told to remain submissive and meek at all times. However, in ‘Othello’, the women express independence, though in private, and Emilia, Desdemona’s maid, presents us with feminist opinions when she warns that â€Å"the ills we do, their ills instruct us so†. Feminist readings of ‘Othello’ suggest that even though women are shown to be submissive, possessions and are even called ‘whores’, when they do express their feelings and disobey their husband, as is the case with Emilia when she tells Othello of the handkerchief and Iago, she is killed. This, similar to what happened to the Duchess and Desdemona, shows that any sign of independence from their husband is unwelcome and they are quickly eliminated. This demonstrates my argument that destruction is caused by the male need to control the womenThis could be seen as a threat to Othello as not only is he a cultural outsider; his wife could be potentially having an affair with another man who is of the culture. Additionally Desdemona is of a higher class status than Othello, which also contribute to his insecurities this links with the novel ‘The Great Gatsby’ by Fitzgerald this text also portrays various conflict issues with class, for example when Daisy proclaims that she would rather be with her unfaithful husband rather than Gatsby. There are some very strong comparisons between Othello and some other texts also for example the poem Porphyria’s Lover and My Last Duchess by Robert Browning presents similar male perspectives of love. Porphyria’s Lover, the Duke and Othello all feel that they are losing control of their significant other and the power in the relationship. Feminist interpretations would suggest that that these characters are somehow threatened by the sexual nature of their partner, they feel that they should be the dominant in the relationship therefore to maintain that level of power they need so they kill their lovers, it would also indicate that the male characters of these texts are highly insecure. For example Desdemona’s sexual identity is a threat to Othello’s status, if he kills Desdemona however he can still maintain his prestige without fear of embarrassment [PEE]. This is also similar to the poem My Last Duchess the duke was also threatened by the sexual nature of his wife [PEE]. There are also some comparisons between Othello and the Great Gatsby; they both have similar conflicting issues with class and status. For instance Desdemona is of higher status than Othello, this also adds to Othello’s insecurities as not only is Desdemona very flirtatious, she is also very wealthy. PEE] Othello is also warned from the beginning of the play by Brabantio, Desdemona’s father to be cautious of her [PEE] Another interpretation made by Bradley who rejects this view and presents an overwhelming positive analysis of Othello whom he sees as relatively blameless for his actions. On the other hand Bradley suggests that it is indeed the manipulative language used by Iago that had caused Othello to develop these insecurities that ultimately lead to his downfall. This theory seems evident in Act 3, Scene 3 also known as ‘the corruption scene’. This is the scene where the initial manipulation begins, Iago begins to manipulate Othello firstly by making that he is someone trustworthy and reliable therefore he forms a friendship with Othello. Iago had been turned down from the role as Othello’s lieutenant which has explained why he may have some resentment towards Othello; however despite this there is no clear indication to why Iago manipulates Othello in such a way. Some people have interpreted this as a homosexual affection that Iago shows for Othello in which he is jealous of the love Desdemona and Othello have for each other, therefore he convinces Othello to ultimately kill her in attempt for a chance with Othello. One such interpretation is that Iago is motivated by jealousy of Othello’s love for Desdemona, and is maddened by a repressed homosexual desire. There is a hint of this in Act 3, Scene 3, as Iago, pledging his loyalty to his general, tells Othello, â€Å"I am your own forever†. Iago’s chosen word’s perhaps express more than soldierly devotion, and possess a distinctly romantic tone not too dissimilar to the language of a marriage vow However in some aspects it would seem clear that Othello has already chosen to kill Desdemona almost out of his own will, nothing that anyone says will make a difference at all. ‘Yet she must die, else she’ll betray more men’. The dialog is full of legalistic language as if Othello has tried her and is now sentencing her. The novel The Great Gatsby is set during the American Jazz Age of the early 1920’s, this was a time jazz music became increasingly popular and played a significant part in wider cultural changes during this period. This was also a time where the American Dream also played an important part in people’s lives; people would immigrate to America in order to achieve this ‘American Dream’. The idea of unrequited love is a prominent theme. Narrated by Nick Carraway the story tells of Jay Gatsby’s quest for Daisy Buchanan, Nick writes from Gatsby’s point of view as he is writing the novel two years after the story actually happens, so much Gatsby’s point of view is the point of view from Nick, although a trustworthy third party he can sometimes also be unreliable. Nick is determined to make himself seem trustworthy, claiming to be â€Å"one of the few honest people that [he has] ever known†. He also claims not to be judgemental, yet he tells Gatsby that â€Å"They’re a rotten crowd†¦. You’re worth the whole damn bunch put together†. This line shows Nick’s judgemental side, proving him to be an untrustworthy narrator. Gatsby’s perspective of love is that in order for him and Daisy to unite he must change, therefore he gained the wealth and prestige in order to win her heart, however Daisy is now married with Tom Buchanan an upper class socialite and had married daisy even though she had promised herself to Gatsby, despite that Tom is unfaithful to her. Like Othello and the protagonists of ‘My Last Duchess’ and ‘Porphyria’s Lover’ Tom Buchanan is also the self-proclaimed ‘alpha-male’ and feels like he too needs to establish his authority over his love interests for example when he strikes Myrtle in the mouth for speaking ill of his and Daisy’s relationship. The Great Gatsby also shows a portrayal of love and money Gatsby gained his wealth illegally by selling alcohol in an era when alcohol was prohibited. Dishonesty becomes his nature, displayed when he tells Nick that he is â€Å"the son of some wealthy people in the Midwest† and lies about being â€Å"brought up in America, but, educated in Oxford†. Daisy’s immorality is also evident when she allows Gatsby to take the blame for her crime, an act that ultimately results in his death. Unlike Othello and the Browning poetry which was written in a much different era to Gatsby, the novel portrays contrasting perspectives of love. Such as going after your lover, and changing yourself rather than trying to change your partner. The Browning poetry was also written in a similar era to Othello, and therefore the correlation between love and dominance are a reoccurring aspect. For example in the poem ‘My Last Duchess’ the poem is one huge monologue to the audience about a Duke talking to a painter about his last Duchess like Othello the female protagonist is portrayed someone of a sexual and flirtatious nature. Ingersoll describes the character of the Duke as a dominating character with strong will and purpose but as a narcissist who has an insecure need to construct a self-important image of himself which could be seen as a similar interpretation to Leavis’ analysis of Othello. The Duke is also portrayed by browning as someone who has complete desire to gain over control over every aspect in his life for example all that remains of the duchess is a painting concealed under a pull curtain, ultimately the duke decided who sees her and who doesn’t, or if she is even showed at all. The duke shows satisfaction in this by almost boasting about how he was able to control this young girl. Tucker argues that not only does the power give him pleasure, but by reducing the Duchess to a painting, he reduces her to something he can understand and in turn, control. The male need to control women by reducing them to ‘art’ is also visible in ‘Othello’ when he asks, â€Å"Was this fair paper, this most goodly book,/ Made to write â€Å"whore† upon? †, referring to Desdemona and her suspected infidelity. The poem ‘Porphyria’s Lover’ also portrays a similar message; this is also a monologue that is violent and abrupt: a working man, the lover of a middle class girl, murders her when she comes to his cottage, strangling her with her hair. At the end of the poem he sits, apparently calmly, with her corpse in some kind of pseudo embrace. Like Gatsby and Othello the protagonist is again threatened by the idea of their significant other having some sort of control over them. Ingersoll believes that â€Å"In his own mad fashion, the Lover has read that text in order to escape being positioned as ‘feminine’ i. e. A loved object to be abandoned again as she may have many times before. He reaffirms her ‘feminine’ position as one too weak to break those ‘vainer ties’ to a world in which he can have no presence. Torn between moments of passionate possession of her and inevitable abandonment or ‘loss’, he has murdered her n order to turn her into a fetishistic object which can never leave†. This also links with Gatsby as they both deal with conflict issues regarding class, however Daisy would never have a relationship with someone that is of a lower class than her, however the female protagonist against all odds rejects this sociological concept and has relations with a man of lower status regardless, however like Othello this causes the male protagonists to become insecure and weak in their relationship, therefore to restore that order they get rid of their loved ones completely. Stuck on conclusion.

Regulating Energy Drink Sales Why The Sale Of Energy...

Regulate Energy Drink Sales Why the Sale of Energy Drinks should be regulated Energy drinks, canned beverages that combine caffeine with sugar and other mood-affecting ingredients, are becoming more and more popular. At almost any convenience store one can find a rack of energy drinks, and it is not uncommon to see young people drinking them around campus or in the city. Unlike coffee or tea, which have naturally occurring caffeine, energy drinks have chemically produced caffeine and other chemicals in varying amounts and combinations. Energy drinks also do not require the same labeling as other foods, so people might not know what they’re consuming, or how much they’re consuming. The increasing prevalence of energy drinks, along with†¦show more content†¦Now, it is also important to establish what is meant by the thesis, the sale of energy drinks should be regulated. Specifically, one must consider what is regulation over the â€Å"sale of† energy drinks. It is the position of thi s paper that the â€Å"sale of drinks† includes the obvious over the counter exchange of canned drink for currency, but that the sale of energy drinks is also larger. Is it not true that one’s purchasing decisions are motivated not only by in-the-moment desires, but also by more subtle factors such as subconscious biases and the presence or absence of certain pertinent pieces of information? The sale of an energy drink is part of an ecosystem of factors, some of which far precede the actual moment of purchase and some of which might alter the purchase decision if they had been present. For instance, frequent television marketing will have an undeniable affect on the subconscious to the point that one’s decision, while it may seem autonomous, is informed by the death-defying stunts or claims of near-invincibility one sees in many energy drink advertisements. And what’s more, the purchase decision is affected by store display—as in the actual shelvin g and also the cans that the drinks are sold in. Might one’s decision to buy an energy