Sexual harassment opinions

Sexual harassment opinions Effects Sexual harassment often has adverse effects on the victims performance at work. Both the quantity and the quality of work may suffer, as well as the employees morale, attendance, and ability to work with others. Sexual harassment can cause employers losses in productivity and can lead to greater employee turnover and use of sick leave. The harassment can also harm the victims psychological and physical well-being. Sexual harassment can also have indirect effects ?p society. Many feminist scholars consider sexual harassment to be a form of oppression that men use to maintain male-dominated power structures. Women in fields of work that men have traditionally occupied-such as the military, law enforcement, and fire fighting-experience higher rates of sexual harassment. Some researchers assert that regardless of whether harassment is an intentional attempt to oppress girls and women, it contributes to lower achievement by women in society. Power differences between men and women, result from societys traditional sex-role stereotyping and is a major cause of sexual harassment. ? culture tending to place males into greater positions of power than females would expect to have women file a higher rate of sexual harassment complaints because they occupy positions of less authority. When unequal?al power relationships between the sexes are rooted in cultural experiences, work co?texts can provide a foundation legitimizing sexual harassment in the workplace. Cultural conditioning can create an environment conducive to sexually harassing behaviours. Expectations that women are passive and submissive and that men are aggressive and dominant create situations conducive to these behaviours. ? sexually harassing and hostile workplace can establish specific patterns of verbal and nonverbal communication creating unequal power relationships between men and women. PSYCHOLOGICAL OPINIONS ABOUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT CLAIMS While psychologists may offer an opinion regarding the connection between a traumatic event and emotional injury in an accident, that is less clear in sexual harassment. ?he emotional trauma experienced by the victim of sexual harassment is based ?p perceptions about the behaviour of others by the victim. Psychologists are not qualified to determine if sexual harassment took place, because that is a legal question, not a psychological one. However, psychologists can offer an opinion regarding whether a particular action by one individual can reasonably lead t? emotional distress in p another individual. Most of the time, psychologists are asked to evaluate victims of sexual harassment t? assess whether they are exhibiting any psychological distress, and whether that distress appears to be related to specific events ?p the part of another person. ?he court must then decide whether those actions were appropriate ?G legal. Some individuals misinterpret harmless, reasonable behaviour as malicious and specifically directed at themselves. Diagnostically this is called ideas of reference. ?his would suggest an individual with some type of psychological problem who overreacts t? reasonable behaviour because of their own perception of the world and the other person. ?his often occurs in individuals with personality disorders, paranoid disorders, ?G other psychological problems that might involve delusions ?G extreme exaggerations of negative events in their lives. ?therefore, psychological evaluations in sexual harassment cases also focus ?p the expectations of the victim, and whether the victim presents with psychological symptoms which result in exaggerated negative conclusions about others. For example, a persons boss is of a different sex than the person. The worker believes that the boss is sexist and discriminates against the workers sex. ?he worker requests to work on a specific project, but its not chosen. The worker assumes the choice was based on sexist behaviour, rather than merit ?G chance. ?he worker experiences a number of events like this over time, and feels harassed because of it, resulting in depression. Is this sexual harassment? ?he answer depends ?p many factors, such as alternative · reasons for not selecting the worker, whether the worker was selected positively ?p other occasions, whether other individuals had credentials which led to choosing them instead, and whether other individuals of the same sex as the worker experienced similar problems and perceptions. In addition to evaluating the presence ?G absence of psychological disorders, psychologists may also offer opinions regarding whether a persons expectations are reasonable, based on the circumstances. Many psychological problems result when we expect people to treat us in an unrealistically positive way. These cases are not clear cut, because they are not based solely ?p the identification of a psychological problem. Ultimately, the court will decide whether there is sufficient evidence to conclude that sexual harassment took place. Although sexual harassment is not specifically included in Title of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 in USA, it flows by regulation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from sex discrimination. It is defined as unwelcome sexual advances requests for sexual fa?ours and other ?verbal ?G physical/ conduct of a sexual/ nature, when linked to employment conditions, as part of a quid pro quo for employment decisions ?G when it creates an offensive, hostile work environment. Sexual harassment behaviours range from sexual innuendo, touching, and flirtatious remarks, to clear-cut sexual assault and rape. Often these are accompanied by retaliation against the victim for reporting it. It is estimated by some that up to 60% of victims ignore sexual harassment, believing that if they complain it will only cause more harm. In recent years, however, sexual harassment litigation has been increasing dramatically. In the past five or six years the EEOC reports that these complaints have almost tripled in number and by the year 2000 it is predicted that they will double again. What sexual harassment is and whether or not it occurred are legal and factual matters, but invariably psychological issues become embroiled in them and psychological opinions are frequently presented as part of the claim. These opinions are usually ones which either clarify the claim or define the damage. Psychological opinions which attempt to clarify the claim are the most controversial because they draw conclusions or make inferences about factual matters. Since many times it is only the word of the victim against the harasser, these opinions can tip the scales one way or another. Sometimes psychologists who give such opinions, and who may be acting in good faith, do not realize that they are entering a non-psychological area. This is in part because psychologists in a treatment relationship with a patient claiming sexual harassment need to validate the seriousness of the patients experience if they are to be helpful. But taking that clinical validation to a courtroom is another story. This is why treating psychologists are inherently biased if they are performing their clinical job well. This is also why independent experts, whose scope of inquiry is broader and who are not allied to the patient, may be in a more objective position to give opinions. Regardless of who is giving the opinion, mental health science has not reached the level of sophistication or accuracy to be able to determine whether an alleged sexual harassment incident actually occurred. No constellation of symptoms, mental status appearance, or psychological test results can do that. Even if suspect factors such a bizarre psychotic account, gross inconsistencies, obvious manipulation or marked personality predisposition are not present, psychologists dont really know who is Iying, who is fantasizing, and who is embellishing. However, opinions about a victims behaviour in the harassment situation may be appropriate, especially when a fact finder might not understand it otherwise. So, for example, explaining that victims often remain silent because of economic necessity, fear of retaliation, intimidation and powerlessness, or embarrassment may be helpful. But, care must be taken not to conclude that this victim who may have responded that way was, therefore, harassed; in addition, psychological opinions can help clarify typical response patterns that a victim of sexual harassment exhibits. Reactions such as guilt, self-blame, minimization and denial of harassment ?G even disconnecting onself emotionally from the uncomfortable events are not ?unusual .Without an understanding of those types of responses, a victim may be incriminated as inconsistent with having been harassed. Again, focusing on the general pattern of trauma response is not the same as concluding that harassment occurred. Psychological opinions in sexual harassment claims often ignore more complex organizational and workplace dynamics which form the background of many of these claims. Without input from people at the workplace and review of employment files, the account of the alleged victim stands in isolation from many potential contributing factors. It is not uncommon, for example, for personnel issues such as poor performance, reprimands and warnings, or fear of termination to present a crisis for which a sexual harassment claim serves as a convenient solution. Psychological evaluations which explore all aspects of the work environment, interpersonal relationships there, and work performance can provide a more balanced view of the relative seriousness of the known stressors, Another area for psychological opinions is identifying personality traits ?G personality disorders which may have created or contributed to the claim. First of all, not all sexual harassment is actionable. It must be severe or pervasive enough to create an objectively hostile or abusive work environment. Similarly, if the claimant is a not a reasonable woman of normal sensitivity, her claim may not prevail. ? number of personality disorders can play an important role in employment litigation and provide an alternative explanation of the claimants emotional distress. For e?ample, histrionic personality disorder, borderline personality disorder, anti-social personality disorder, narcissistic personality disorder, and paranoid personality disorder are just a few descriptions of people who have unusual sensitivity or are predisposed to maladaptive ways of dealing with others. If there is a clear history ?G pattern of such personality traits, then psychological opinions about them are imp ortant for a full understanding of events. Again, this does not mean that the psychological opinion can conclude that an event did not occur, in fact, individuals with some personality disorders may be vulnerable to victimization. Similarly, there may be a personality disorder that is present in the alleged harasser which can help explain a predatory pattern of conduct. A past history of sexual abuse can predispose a person to a variety of different reactions which may influence a later sexual harassment claim. Since the standard for Iiability in these claims is that of a reasonable woman who is not hypersensitive, the typical eggshell rule of common law does not apply expect as to damages. So, a person who has been previously abused may have developed fear, hyper vigilance, and an unusual sensitivity. In this context, even a trivial innocuous remark may produce an excessive reaction. Also, people with previous sexual abuse are at times people to repetition compulsion which means they have a tendency to repeat past behaviour in spite of the suffering that may have been associated with it. In essence, they recreate the earlier sexual abuse by placing themselves in a position to be abused again. The relevance here is for the defence of welcome ness since the sexual conduct in a sexual harassment claim must be unwelcome and not solicited by the claiman t. Finally, individuals who experienced sexual abuse may be so damaged that they fabricate later incidents of abuse as a way of venting their anger. Because of previous experiences, their ability to describe abuse can be quite sophisticated and believable. Psychological opinions in all of these areas can be important sources of clarification about the possible circumstances of a claim. Psychological opinions which define the damage are seemingly more straightforward since they are based ?p diagnostic criteria. Unfortunately, this is more complicated since the criteria for many mental disorders are arbitrary and easily met by someone just distressed and pursuing litigation. Also, while a psychological opinion may purport to only address emotional harm, it invariably infers that the harm springs from a particular opinion which, in fact, occurred. Tile most striking example is the controversial diagnosis of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in which the trauma is built into the label. Although attempts have been made to identify specific and objective criteria for this condition, its rampant use in litigation attests to its subjectivity. Most individuals e?posed to a typical traumatic stressor do not develop PTSD, although following a rape the incidence can be high. Long-term lingering emotional symptoms in response to ordinary sexual harassment are unusual unless the nature of the harassment was particularly egregious and pervasive. Psychological opinions are routinely offered ?p emotional damages and the relative effects of alternative causes, the harm from litigation itself, and the secondary gain that comes from an expected financial award. !p traditional tort claims of negligence, the plaintiff must have suffered some harm. In sexual harassment claims, neither economic harm nor emotional harm is necessary. However the degree of damages awarded will undoubtedly be linked to psychological opinions which offer definition for the distress and the disorder suffered. Every individual has the right to work in an environment free from demeaning and humiliating sexual harassment. Laws that enforce that right are appropriate and help create parity for all workers. But the increase in sexual harassment claims also raises social questions. What behaviours are normal, should be acceptable, and will always be a part of mens and womens relationships? What harm comes to individuals ?G classes of individuals when a power gradient is established through sexua1 intimidation? How can the workplace be sensitized and educated about this without becoming cynical? How can a person communicate sensitivity without retribution? How can we accurately distinguish whether a sexual harassment claim is really based ?p the circumstances alleged ?G just a means of empowerment in a confliction and insecure work environment? Psychological opinions may help on some of these questions, but social opinion and public policy will be required for equitable solutions.

Rape Fantasies by Margaret Atwood :: Margaret Atwood Rape Fantasies Essays

Rape Fantasies by Margaret Atwood "Rape Fantasies" is written by Margaret Atwood in 1977. Basically this short story is about the narrator, named Estelle, recalling a conversation of several women during their lunch hour. It starts with one of Estelle's co-workers, asking the question 'How about it, girls, do you have rape fantasies?'(pg 72) The story goes on with each woman telling their supposed 'rape fantasy' to one another. As each is telling their fantasy, Estelle is doing her best to try to deflect the situation by making jokes about their fantasies. After all the women have told their fantasies, Estelle says, 'those aren't rape fantasies. I mean, you aren't getting raped, it's just some guy you haven't met formally who happens to be more attractive than Derek Cummins . . . and you have a good time. Rape is when they've got a knife or something and you don't want to.'(pg 74) Estelle then goes on to talk about her 'rape fantasies' from about to be raped by a short, ugly guy dieing from leukemia to squirting lem on juice in another attacker's eye.   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I believe that her use of characters in the story was good. This type of story telling would seem typical to me for girls in an office setting. I don?t think that they would really talk about the fantasy of being forcible raped by telling their sex with a stranger type story instead. I also think that the point of view is important. Estelle is retelling the story through her view to someone else. She is probly at a bar or something, telling her story to some random man she met. I believe that she is trying to control a possible bad situation, maybe avoiding a rape, because she says in the last page ?..how could a fellow do that to a person he?s just had a long conversation with, once you let them know you?re human, your have a life too, I don?t see how they could go ahead with it, rights??(pg 78)   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  I actually enjoyed this short story. I really like the way Margaret Atwood laces the humor into her stories, like making fun the blond receptionist and the other blond, and how they compete with one anther.

Oedipal Complex Essay

The essential component to any tragedy, Greek or Shakespearean, is a protagonist with a fatal flaw. In Greek tragedy this is called hamartia. This Latin term translates directly into the word â€Å"flaw† but is usually used to describe an excess of a personality trait – virtue or vice (Cave 68). The protagonist’s fatal flaw pushes the the plot and action of the tragedy forward. It is this tragic flaw, which leads to the eventual downfall of the character, his circumstances, and the denouement of the drama. In examining the bulk of the literature’s protagonists, no other character embodies the essential role of the flawed protagonist like Hamlet. Without the flaw there would be no drama, and no irony and â€Å"would have ended dismally with a sense of utter frustration and inadequacy† (Wilson 236). Many critics believe that Hamlet’s fatal flaw is his Oedipal Complex. Sigmund Freud and The Oedipal Complex The Oedipal Complex was first developed by Sigmund Freud. The theory revolves around the concept that individuals have a hidden desire for sexual interaction with a parent of the opposite sex. At the same time the child feels a rivalry with the parent of the same sex. It may be that Freud named the oedipal complex after the infamous king of Thebes not because Oedipus’s childhood experience mirrored the developmental phase he described but simply because Oedipus was readily recognizable as a man who killed his father and had sex with his mother. (Sugiyama 121). Freud intensely studied Hamlet, and wanted to be known as the man who diagnosed Hamlet’s mental disorder. He writes, in The Interpretation of Dreams, the play is seems to be about Hamlet seeking revenge for his father’s murder, but Shakespeare, within the text of the play, does not show a reason for why Hamlet waits so long to kill Claudius. Freud states â€Å"According to the view which was originated by Goethe and is still the prevailing one today, Hamlet represents the type of man whose power of direct action is paralyzed by and excessive development of his intellect. † (98). Ernest Jones Interpretation of Hamlet Dr. Ernest Jones offered one of the first indepth presentations of the theory that Hamlet suffered from the Oedipal Complex. He asserted, in Hamlet and Oedipus, â€Å"The story thus interpreted would run somewhat as follows: As a child Hamlet had experienced the warmest affection for his mother, and this, as is always the case, had contained elements of a more or less dimly defined erotic quality† (98). There are two qualities which the Queen has which supports this reasoning. Shakespeare clearly shows her sensual nature. He also explains that she has a great deal of intense love for her son. Jones believes â€Å"The former is indicated in too many places in the play to need specific reference, and is generally recognised† (98). Hamlet is a study of â€Å"the powerful influence of infantile sexuality on the patterns of unconscious thinking in the lives of adults. † (MacCary 114). Hamlet’s fatal flaw is his Oedipal complex which leads to indecision. The rising action, falling action, and resolution, in Hamlet, can be attributed to the theme of indecision. Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark, is a bright young man with many talents. He is an academic, a witty orator, and a flawless actor. Certainly, he has the potential to do anything he wants which may have included, in the future, being the King of Denmark. His aptitude for all things calls into question why there is a great delay between Hamlet’s decision to avenge his father’s murder and the actual revenge. Hamlet laments over his indecision: O that this too too solid flesh would melt, Thaw, and resolve itself into a dew! Or that the Everlasting had not fixed His canon ‘gainst self-slaughter! O God! O God! How weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable Seem to me all the uses of this world! (Act I, sc ii) He continues, condemning his mother for leaving his father and more importantly choosing Claudius over him: Within a month, Ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tears Had left the flushing in her galled eyes, She married. O, most wicked speed, to post With such dexterity to incestuous sheets! It is not, nor it cannot come to good. But break my heart, for I must hold my tongue! (Act I, sc ii) Knowles, in his article â€Å"Hamlet and Counter-Humanism,† states â€Å"Hamlet’s father’s death, his mother’s concupiscence and hasty marriage to her husband’s murderer, produce a grief and loathing of such a profound degree that a sense of being created by emotion estranges him from the previous identity of a princely role† (1046). This grief is compounded by Hamlet’s repressed romantic love for his mother. The Problem Revealed : Hamlet Identifies with Claudius It is Hamlet’s Oedipal Complex which leads to indecision and the reevaluation of his choice to kill Claudius. Claudius was able to kill Hamlet’s father and sleep with Hamlet’s mother. He was able to do what Hamlet could not. Hamlet is living out his Oedipal fantasies through Claudius (Joseph 26). Killing him would end Hamlet’s fantasies. Hamlet is disgusted by his mother marrying his uncle. In Conscience of a King, Bertram Joseph (28) believes that Hamlet â€Å"showed all the signs of a noble and well-balanced sanguine temperament. † Joseph assumes that Hamlet is not experiencing insanity and he is in perfect mental health – the embodiment of everything a good Elizabethan should be. Incest was not acceptable in Elizabethan times. When reflecting on the thought of his father and mother sleeping together, Hamlet states† Must I remember? Why, she would hang on him, as if increase of appetite had grown. † He wishes he does not remember how his mother hung onto his father. His uncle and mother married at a â€Å"most wicked speed† and now sleep in â€Å"incestuous sheets†. The literal interpretation may be that his belief system is causing his anger. However, Hamlet goes on to say â€Å"It is not nor it cannot come to good; But break, my hear, for I must hold my tongue. † Hamlet is not upset over his father’s death but is jealous because his mother choose Claudius (her brother in law) instead of Hamlet (her son) to marry. Hamlet’s Idealism Defined Hamlet actions should not attributed to mental illness but a repressed desire for his mother. Thomas MacCary asserts, in Hamlet: A Guide to the Play, â€Å"Shakespeare’s Hamlet, has its roots in the same soil as Oedipus Rex†¦. the secular advance of repression in the emotional life of mankind† (104). He continues thats â€Å"In Hamlet it remains repressed; and — just as in the case of a neurosis — we only learn of its existence from its inhibiting consequences. . . . Hamlet is able to do anything — except take vengeance on the man who did away with his father and took his father’s place with his mother, the man who shows him the repressed wishes of his own childhood realized (MacCary 105). Hamlet believes fully that men were born good and were meant to do good things. His strong belief system contrasts strikingly with the reality and corruption of the world when he returns home and his own fantasies. He comments on the state of Denmark and more specifically his father’s house, â€Å"‘Tis an unweeded garden that grows to seed; Things rank and gross in nature possess it merely† (Act I, sc ii). He is disgusted not just by his home community but the evil which existed in his family. Upon the realization that the world was cruel, and that he will never actually be with his mother, he describes life as a â€Å"prison† (Act II sc ii). He finds it difficult to resolve his illusions of what he feels and what he should feel. It is his Oedipal Complex and the living out of his fantasies through Claudius which allows him to conceal his bitterness while his internal moral will pressures him to avenge his father’s death. Hamlet attempts to use logic, a typical idealist characteristic, to determine what course of action he must take (Gresset and Samway 7). Shakespeare uses Hamlet to â€Å"provide new and revealing insights into the evolving Renaissance codes of honor, for Shakespeare creates characters in Hamlet that represent various stages in the evolution of a changing honor system. (Terry 1070). Hamlet struggles with idea that he may be a coward for his inaction and a sinner for his cardinal thoughts. Despite his nightly supernatural chat with the ghost of his murdered father, he is still unsure if justice should be done by his own hand. Fendt comments, in Is Hamlet a Religious Drama? An Essay on a Question in Kierkegaard, that â€Å"The plot shows Hamlet to be a first class detective — he uncovers a criminal who has committed a perfect crime, and only in his more scholarly moments of soliloquy has he time to consider despising himself† (60). Fendt makes a good point in that Hamlet has to figure out for his own peace of mind what truly happened to his father. He understands that if Claudius did kill his father he must kill Claudius. He understands that in a world of lies it was hard to tell truth from fiction, and a sinner from a saint. Hamlet states, â€Å"the native hue of resolution is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought†(Act III sc i), and concludes that the death of Claudius must be based on justice not emotional revenge. Therefore, Hamlet must have independent proof that his uncle murdered his father. â€Å"Other Shakespearean plays exploit the device of the play-within-a-play as a form of recognition ‘token’,† (234) comments Cave in Recognitions: A Study in Poetics. Cave is correct, play with in plays is a common tool used by Shakespeare. It is also the only way Hamlet, besides direct conformation, is going to be able to tell if Claudius is guilty. In addition Hamlet is able to prolong his Oedipal fantasies. It is for this reason that Hamlet invites players in to perform a â€Å"murderous† play to ferret out the truth from his mother and new father. Symptoms of Oedipal Complex within Hamlet Shakespeare slowly reveals Hamlet’s complex through a series of subtle yet functional hints. Claudius comments on the relationship between Hamlet and Gertrude â€Å"The queen his mother lives almost by his looks† (Act IV, sc vii). implying an unnaturally close interaction between the two of them. This shows that Hamlet must have a place within his mother’s life. His deep desire for his mother attributes to his inability to love Ophelia. Hamlet is drawn to Ophelia because she, in some ways, resembles his mother. It is for this same reasons that Hamlet takes out anger for his mother on Ophelia. This accounts for Hamlet’s mistreatment of Ophelia throughout the play. Polonius believes that Hamlet’s is love sick over Ophelia and that is why he is going mad. Alexander Welsh, in Hamlet in His Modern Guises, believes that Polonuis â€Å"diagnosis of Hamlet’s madness as being due to unrequited love for Ophelia was not so far from the mark, and he certainly recognized that his distressful condition was of sexual origin. Thus Polonius had the right idea though the wrong woman† (Welsh 138). Even the ghost urges Hamlet to â€Å"Let thy soul contrive against they mother† (Act I, sc v) and give up his desires for her, so that Hamlet can avenge his father’s murder. In it within Act III, that Hamlet’s Oedipal complex is directly seen. John Mills, in Hamlet on Stage: The Great Tradition, states â€Å"†He was openly abusive to Ophelia and Gertrude in the play scene, delivering the sexual innuendos loudly enough for the whole court to hear†(Mills 236). In this scene Hamlet is hiding in her closet, watching her carefully. He confronts his mouhter about the murder of his father and speaks explicitly about her sexuality. He screams: This was your husband. Look you now, what follows: Here is your husband; like a mildew’d ear, Blasting his wholesome brother. Have you eyes? And batten on this moor? Ha! have you eyes? You cannot call it love; for at your age The hey-day in the blood is tame, it’s humble, (Act III, sc iv) He explains that she could not love Claudius and that his father would not approve of her choice. He continues on, with the play’s most explosive dialog: Nay, but to live In the rank sweat of an enseamed bed, Stew’d in corruption, honeying and making love Over the nasty sty,– (Act III, sc iv) It is important to note that this scene takes place in the Queen’s bedroom. The conversation symbolized Hamlet and Gertrude essentially â€Å"in bed† together and hints to a sexual relationship. Hamlet confronts his mother with his sword drawn which Freud considered a phallic symbol (Maccary 114). The conversation between Hamlet and Gertrude, is not a son talking to his mother. Hamlet speaks like a jealous lover chastising his girlfriend for sleeping with a different man and making their bed â€Å"enseamed†. The Queen is extremely upset and actually asks Hamlet to help her figure out what to do. At this point when Hamlet should have told her to confess, he urges her to stop her relationship with Claudius, â€Å"Not this, by no means, that I bid you do: Let the bloat king tempt you again to bed† (Act III, sc iv). Hamlet’s jealous orders restrictive his mother from being sexual with his â€Å"father,† making all Queen’s attention to be given to Hamlet. Fantasy Becomes Reality Hamlet’s inability to understand the motives of evil in actions and thought can also be attributed to his sole idealistic viewpoint. He does not understand why anyone would commit murder and therefore he is uncertain that he had ability to violently kill a man. Murderous revenge represents everything that Hamlet is not. Hamlet’s rational intellect allowed him the clarity of mind to understand both the good and bad in the act of the revenge and perhaps what his true motives for waiting are. The mental degradation of Hamlet, is believed to be insanity by the other characters but it was clear to the audience that he is merely coming to terms with what he believes to be right. Hamlet is a religious man and murder was a sin. Hamlet is a man of classical philosophy and revenge is not rational. In â€Å"The Mind of Man in Hamlet†, Levy writes â€Å"In Hamlet, man is still the rational animal, but a revolution in understanding the operation of thought occurs†. Hamlet is a man of classical philosophy and revenge is not rational (Levy). Choosing to appear mentally impair is good strategy because if the characters believe he is unwell, he will not be able to figure out the true. Hamlet’s true character remains unblemished. Hamlet is a man who believes in chivalry, and slaughter is not gentle. Hamlet is trying â€Å"to be worthy of the times in which he lives is not so far in essence from the protagonists of Greek drama. His fear of the risk of damnation is not something that can be called a moral flaw ; yet it acts like one, paralysing his will, making him behave like a coward† (Joseph 129). It is those idealistic qualities which causes the postponement of Claudius’ death. It is in the moment that Hamlet allows his emotion to dominate over his intellect that Claudius was killed. He is consumed by the thoughts of his father’s demise and is haunted by the knowledge that his father’s soul will not be able to rest until his death is avenged. Hamlet willfully concludes, â€Å"My thoughts be bloody or be nothing worth† (Act IV sc iv). It is then that Hamlet finally had the ability to suppress his idealistic nature, and do what is right. The murder is not a well planned scheme and occurs in the heat of the moment. Hamlet, after the murder of Claudius never once wavers in his decision. He has done what is right and believes that â€Å"There is a special providence in the fall of a sparrow† (Act V sc ii). Oddly enough fatalism is part of idealistic theory and therefore Hamlet always remains true to himself and his idealism. This also further supports that the Oedipal Complex can be applied to Hamlet, because he succeeds in killing â€Å"his father† (Claudius). Jones comments â€Å"And we have assumed as well that the final murder of Claudius also represents, in its actual psychological significance, the murder of the mother’s husband, made possible by the theme of vengeance for the father. This is the basis of the drama† (124). The act of killing his mother, even directly, could symbolize the act sex. Therefore, Hamlet has finally succeeding in attaining his subconscious need to have a sexual relationship with his mother. Conclusion Hamlet’s indecision caused his desire for his mother makes him the perfect tragic protagonist and leads to theme of indecision. Reta Terry, in her journal article â€Å"Vows to the Blackest Devil†: Hamlet and the Evolving Code of Honor in Early Modern Englandâ€Å", believes â€Å"Hamlet’s tragedy is, in part, that he is forced to attempt to balance these â€Å"rival ethical legacies† as he struggles to remain honorable† (Terry 1). Without his intense regard for the ideals of truth, justice, goodness and beauty being in conflict with his most basic physical desires there would be no play. His fatal flaw of indecision and his desire to sleep with his mother create a moral dilemma which the characters, and plot revolves. Even Hamlet, the academic, comments on the presence of hamartia in human nature. He states: oft it chances in particular men That for some vicious mole of nature in them, As in their birth, wherein they are not guilty, By the o’ergrowth of some complexion, Oft breaking down the pales and forts of reason, Their virtues else, be they as pure as grace, Shall in the general censure take corruption (Act 1, sc 4). Hamlet continues late in the resolution of the play, â€Å"though I am not spleenative and rash Yet have I in me something dangerous† (Act V. sc i.) Critics believe while Hamlet is â€Å"Normally not rash at all, he is capable of extreme rashness when provoked extremely. The â€Å"something dangerous† is the proud impatience that there is in his otherwise noble sense of public mission. â€Å"(Elliott 25). Freud states â€Å"Hamlet is able to do anything but take vengeance upon the man who did away with his father and has taken his father’s place with his mother – the man who showed him in realization the repressed desires of his own childhood† (101). The pain which should have caused him to take immediate revenge was replaced by pity for himself. Freud continues â€Å"by conscientious scruples, which tell him that he himself is no better than the murderer whom he is required to punish† (102). It is Hamlet’s idealistic nature mismatched with his pragmatic circumstances of his Oedipal Complex, that creates the ultimate theme and driving force behind all the rising action, falling action, and resolution of this tragedy. Works Cited Cave, Terence. Recognitions: A Study in Poetics. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1988. Croxford, Leslie. â€Å"The Uses of Interpretation in Hamlet. † Alif: Journal of Comparative Poetics (2004): 93+. Elliott, G. R. Scourge and Minister: A Study of Hamlet: A Tragedy of Revengefulness and Justice. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 1951. Fendt, Gene. Is Hamlet a Religious Drama? An Essay on a Question in Kierkegaard. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press, 1998. Gresset, Michel, and Patrick S. J. Samway, eds. Faulkner and Idealism: Perspectives from Paris. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi, 1983. Jones, Ernest. Hamlet and Oedipus . New York: Norton, 1949. Joseph, Bertram. Conscience and the King: A Study of Hamlet. London: Chatto and Windus, 1953. Knowles, Ronald. â€Å"Hamlet and Counter-Humanism. † Renaissance Quarterly 52. 4 (1999): 1046. Levy, Eric P. â€Å"The Mind of Man in Hamlet. † Renascence: Essays on Values in Literature 54. 4 (2002): 219+. MacCary, W. Thomas. Hamlet A Guide to the Play. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1998. Mills, John A. Hamlet on Stage: The Great Tradition. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1985. Shakespeare, William. â€Å"The Tragedy Hamlet. † THE NORTON INTRODUCTION TO LITERATURE. Ed. Alison Booth, J. Paul Hunter, Kelly J. Mays, and . New York: Norton, 2000. Sugiyama, Michelle Scalise. â€Å"New Science, Old Myth: An Evolutionary Critique of the Oedipal Paradigm. † Mosaic (Winnipeg) 34. 1 (2001): 121 Sigmund Freud, The Interpretation of Dreams, tr. James Strachey, Avon, N. Y. 1965. Terry, Reta A. â€Å"†Vows to the Blackest Devil†: Hamlet and the Evolving Code of Honor in Early Modern England. † Renaissance Quarterly 52. 4 (1999): 1070. Walker, Roy. The Time Is out of Joint: A Study of Hamlet. London: Andrew Dakers, 1948. Welsh, Alexander. Hamlet in His Modern Guises. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001. Wilson, J. Dover. What Happens in Hamlet. New York: Macmillan, 1935.

Rules Of The American Collegiate Committee - 872 Words

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND RESOLUTION†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦...†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦..1 1. PUBLIC ENHANCEMENT†¦..†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦..1 1.1 Subsection: Students Defined†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦...1 1.2 Subsection: Consequences†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.2 2. ESTABLISHING THE AMERICAN COLLEGIATE COMMITTEE†¦..2 2.1 Subsection: ACC Function†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.3 2.2 Subsection: Committee Employees†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦..8 3. REGULATED INCOME PROCEDURES†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦..8 3.1 Subsection: Separate Frozen Account†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦...†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦8 3.2 Subsection: Money within the Cap†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦9 3.3 Subsection: Federal Loans†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦9 4. TARGETED INSTITUTIONS†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦..†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦10 4.1 Subsection: Definitions†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦.†¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦Ã¢â‚¬ ¦10 5. ON-SITE REGULATORY†¦show more content†¦This house believes that comprehensive regulations should be imposed on post- secondary institutions to lessen the burden of what is considered high, debt-incurring tuition for each post-secondary student. This house will create a committee that will watch over all public colleges’ expenses known as the American Collegiate Committee (ACC) that this bill will later address in greater detail. This house believes that each individual student should receive their own customized tuition price based on their financial need, which will be established through a questionnaire that will be filled out during the process of applying to the institutions that this bill will impact. Section 1: Public Enhancement This bill has come about to help certain individuals receive an affordable post-secondary education, which has become a burden due to the high demands resulting from post- secondary institution tuitions. We want to aid the very people to be affected by this bill. Sub Section 1: Once the bill is established, any person legally residing within the United States, including the fifty states and the District of Columbia as an American citizen, an American resident, and those with an Education Visa, will be affected. According