GROUP 3 beauty discrimination / prejudice

PRO(discrimination / prejudice because of beauty is okay…)• when you earn your money with your appearance (model)• when you have to represent your company• if you are ugly AND disgusting AND unkempt (run like stink)• if you are beautiful, you are able to show it• more advantages for men

CON(discrimination / prejudice because of beauty is NOT okay…)• when you’re ugly, but the beautiful, stupid one gets the job, even when you’re better• when your appearance is not related to the job• it’s not your fault when you are ugly, so it is not okay if you get hassled• pretty women get often discriminated because of jealousy• beautiful ones are more arrogant than ugly ones (most time)

ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS• skills should be more important than beauty• you should be dressed suitable• you shouldn’t have an untidy-looking• beautiful persons are more self-confident

Letter to BBC - women advertisement

Jana Blabla
Straßenweg 6
A-4890 Feldkirch

December 2nd, 2008

BBC Office
Street 78
5647 London


Ref: Complaint letter to BBC about women in advertisement


Dear BBC,

I want to complain about how women were treated in advertisement.
It’s good that nowadays women have got the chance to do jobs in public not as years ago. They used to stay at home and do the housework. But in my opinion women get short changed.
People take women for every kind of advertisement because of their pros of their feminity, so women and men got advertent. They have to present household goods and a lot of beautiful women present make-up. So everyone things: “Oh, at least I look like them!”
If a man sees a woman with few clothes they rather buy the things they promote for.
I think this is really sexism. Our society should care for the welfare of women. Because otherwise women who don't really have a lot of money will take off their clothes only to make money.
And as we can see that in a lot of advertisement are women who are semi-nude.
In the end I want to say that the behaviour of women should be changed and that every sex will be well treated. So our society would be much better when there wouldn’t be any sexism.

Yours sincerely,
Jana Blabla

ESSAY city life--> country life

City life or country life. These two types are totally different and everyone has several views. In my essay about this topic I want to list some pro and con arguments about each life. Which one is better?

First of all I want to list the pro and con arguments about city life. In a city it’s good that you have a lot of public transports. So you can go everywhere at every time. If you want to go shopping, it’s no problem in a city, because in each city are a lot of shops, where you can get everything you need. You can also meet a lot of people from everywhere. Maybe people from other countries come to your city to go shopping, make holidays, etc. So it’s very easy to make new contacts.
One con argument is definitely that in a city is a lot of pollution and you can’t really do something against it. That could be very dangerous especially for children. For children it’s also bad that they can’t really go outside and play on the streets like in a country. In a city are too much cars which can hurt them.

Next to a life in a country. The good thing is that you are near the beautiful nature and the air is surely clean. It is calm and there aren’t as much cars on the streets as in the city. Children can play outside the house on playgrounds and in open country sides. Everyone knows everyone in a country, because there aren’t a lot of habitants.
The bad thing in a country is that there aren’t really a lot of spare time activities. So a life there could be very boring especially for teenagers who want to go out, make party or to go shopping.

In my opinion city life is better because in a city you have a lot of options. If you want to go swimming, shopping, go out, go in a museum or restaurant, you can do all this stuff and more in a city. I would get bored in a country. So I want to live in a city the next few years, maybe I will move to a country when I am a little bit older and if I will have a family. Because if you have a family country life is definitely better. You don’t have to be scared that something could happen to your children.

So my conclusion, never mind where you live, you have to be happy.
In any place are good things and bad things. Everyone should live in a place where they are native to.

My attitude

I want to tell you something about my attitude in life, so about my clothes & style, my music, my outlook in life and what things does influence me.
First of all I have to say that I don't belong to any youth group, because I hate all this stereotyped thinking of people. That's why I don't really have a constant style and I always wear what I like to wear in a moment, for example jeans with a T-shirt or a pullover and sneakers. Everything I wear is relative comfortable and simple. Actually I don't have any favourite colour in clothes, so I like clothes which are black, blue, purple and so on. For all practical purpose it's very good because then I have clothes of each colour at home and so I always find something that is a good fit.
Next to my taste of music. I hear a lot of music every day and without music I woult be lost.
For me it's hard to say what kind of music I listen to because I like music from every category and almost every country. For example I like Electronica, Hip-Hop/Rap which incluedes german, french, english and swiss, and a lot of more. When I go out it's important for me that there is good music at this place with that you can make party and have fun.
So I get influenced by people who I care for like friends and by artists I like and their music. But I defently don't want to be exaclty like them because I want to be something different from the others. I also get influenced by the fashion but fashion always changes very quick and actually I don't really have enough money to have always the latest fashion fad. In general friends influence me in different things like outgoing, music, style. I think it's very important to have friends who are almost like yourself but also friends who are completely different. You can learn from everyone new things.
At last my outlook in life. I'm looking forward to the graduation and I hope I will find a good job where I earn enough money to keep me alive on my own. Another important point is that I want to be healthy even my family and friends. I know that life involves a lot of surprises and low points, but I'm never allowed to capitulate and never stop to think about the good moments in life.

Perks of being a Wallflower - Review

The novel „The Perks of being a Wallflower“ by Stephen Chbosky is about the 15 year-old Charlie, who describes in a series of letters to an unknown person his problems of being a teenager. He deals with the topics friendship, growing up, love, drugs, the role of an outsider, sexuality and a lot of more. Big roles in his life are his friends, he would do anything for them and everyone can lean on him. But in the end of the book his foretime prevails over him. He was abused by his favourite aunt and that’s the reason why he’s so emotional, shy and secretive.

I really liked the novel because Charlie is always completely honest, sometimes on a naive way, with everything he writes, for example when he explains how to masturbate or when he saw a girl being raped by a popular football player. The fact that “The Perks of being a Wallflower” contains all the problems a normal teenager has, makes this book so interesting. Everyone knows the feeling of frustrations, mourning, first experiences, happiness,… but nevertheless this novel really touches your heart and you know that you’re not the only one with such problems.
I can only advise everyone to read this novel who likes books where someone notices every one in his environment and then writes it down. Even though the end is a little bit too exaggerated when we find out that he was abused by his aunt.

Perks of being a Wallflower - CHARLIE

At the beginning of the novel „The Perks of being a Wallflower“ the shy main character Charlie is 15 years-old and a freshman at an American High School.
He always stays at home to read books twice, which gives him his teacher Bill. Charlie doesn’t have any friends first, because his best friend Michael committed suicide a year before High School starts.
He’s no geek at school although he’s not popular. A lot of people look at him strange, because he’s very emotional, so he cries a lot, which doesn’t change during the book. He gets straight A’s, which is the wish of his parents. They don’t have a lot of money, so maybe he would get a scholarship.
So he’s not really interested in going out and he’s also scared to do something forbidden.
During the book, when he gets to know Sam and Patrick, who is gay. It’s the turning point for his character. For the first time he feels how good it is to have such friends. He falls in love with Sam, which he never did before with any girl, not even with his first girlfriend Mary Elisabeth. He starts to going out, drinking, even taking drugs, lying to his parents and such stuff. Until the end of the novel he can’t say what he thinks and also can’t say no, which changes in the end of the book. It comes out that he was abused by his favourite aunt Helen, who died in an accident, and that’s the reason for his mentally disorder. So he comes into therapy like he was when he was a little kid.

Sa Verbesserung

Nowadays there are a lot of different opinions whether people are influenced by violence and vioelnt media. In this essay I want to show you some points from each side (advocate and the opposite side).
The first paragraph is about the 4 big lies of Hollywood. Medved claims that the violence in the movies is only harmless entertainment. That's definitive false, because, for example, children can't know what's harmless and what's critical. So the next lie is that violence doesn't influence children. But everybody know in the time of uncensored media there is a lot of more crime in our world. He also says that the violence in the media reflects our worlds and most violent filmds are too exaggerated. But a lot of people take such films serious. Such people become copycat.
I personally believe there are various seasons for the violence in this world. To stare with, there are 3 seasons that are frequentli mentioned, namely we leran it, we are born with it and we turn violent because of frustration. I think it's self-evident there's a grain of truth in each theory. In addition I thinkg it's the result of being stupidity. Violence is frequentli cause by negative emotions like hatred.
Next I want to find proposals to reduce the violence among children. First of all the parents should do more for their family life. Children wouldn't be as violent if their family life were okay. A critical point for violence is a lot of heroes of the children aren't good role models at all. Sport stars, movie stars, should be a good role model for the children, because a lot of children emulate their heroes. Pete Doherty takes drugs in public, Paris Hilton drinks and drives. What should the children learn from them? The whole society should set an example. Then there would be defentive less violence.
To sum up, as I've treid to show in my essay there are various factors that contribute to the violence in the world. It's a result of learning and frustration, but of course it's also innate. Therefore, we can diminish it by helping people to act out their aggressions without any danger to the public, by teaching people to communicate and by reducing the violence children are exposed to.

ESSAY

These days violence is a big problem in our society. In the newspaper, tv, radio, etc.
always tell us about acts of violence. The question is, should there be a ban on violence in movies?

There are 3 reasons for such a ban. First, in a lot of movies are so much violence and so much blood, for example in Quentin Terentino's "Kill Bill", which cannot be realistic anyway.
A lot of scences in horrormovies are to exaggerated, so a lot of people will have nightmares.
Second, non-violent films are successful, too. Probably because there are so much horrormovies on the market with no background. These films are only brutal and after watching a few of these films, nothing can shock people anymore. So people prefer films with a good story and not films where people will be killed one by one.
Third, a lot of people imitate the murderers in movies, that's a violence theory. For example in "Nightmare on Elmstreet" Freddy Krueger kills a lot of children. In fact US-teenagers like such powerful characters and this has the result that everyone of them loves Freddy Krueger and maybe they will imitate him because of this cause.

In contrast, there are also 3 reasons against a ban on violence in movies.
First, most horrormovies are so unrealistiv that a normal person doesn't copy it. The people know that this is only a movie and they will not run out of the street to kill some people just like in the film before. Second, the majority of people doesn't get violence because of a film. Maybe a violent person watchs horrormovies, but then they were violent before. We should think about what went wrong in the live of a copycat, a character in a brutal movie will only be the catalyst.
Third, we don't turn into a non-violent society just because we don't show violence. Violence is a real part of our live and we shouldn't euphemise it. Violence exists everywhere anyway. No matter if people watch violent films or not.

There shouldn't be a ban on violent film from my point of view, because violence is a part of the human being whether violent movies were showed or not. But it's absolut necessarily to have age restrictions. No child should see to much violence in movies, they could be influenced and parents should project their children from this.