women should be allowed to enter any profession they wish
老师布置了一道论述题：womenshouldbeallowedtoenteranyprofessiontheywish应该怎么写呢？大家能帮帮我吗？谢谢大家了！！谢谢！我...
老师布置了一道论述题：women should be allowed to enter any profession they wish 应该怎么写呢？大家能帮帮我吗？谢谢大家了！！谢谢！
我要的是“应该”，而不是相反的意见阿
谢谢大家了 展开
我要的是“应该”，而不是相反的意见阿
谢谢大家了 展开
3个回答
展开全部
我的观点是不同意。文章如下。你可以节选一些。
Mothers Groups Abound
According to the network of mothers groups that formed over the past decade to represent them, the number of professional moms is skyrocketing. The membership of Illinois-based FEMALE—Formerly Employed Mothers at the Leading Edge—grew 54 percent in 1993 and 60 percent in 1992. The 6-year-old organization, which has 2,000 members and 102 chapters nationally, recently changed its name from Formerly Employed Mothers at Loose Ends. "The old name no longer fits the mind-set of our members or women in general," says Rush, who is FEMALE's national publicity director.
In the past 3 years, the 20-year-old mothers organization MOPS International, or the Mothers of Preschoolers, has nearly doubled in size, with 28,000 members nationwide. Both Mothers First, a Washington-area support group for full-time mothers, and Mothers at Home, a 10-year-old group that publishes a 15,000-circulation newsletter called Welcome Home, claim unprecedented growth in membership since 1990. "The phone's been ringing off the hook," says Beth Osborne, communications chairwoman of Mothers First.
Other groups abound, such as Home by Choice, Moms Club, the National Association of Mothers' Centers and the Lawyers at Home Forum. And in early 1994, another mothers-at-home group was launched: The National MothersCare Network, the first national federation of full-time moms groups, will act as a watchdog against what members feel are inaccurate and derogatory portrayals of stay-at-homers and will attempt to publicize their image of modern motherhood. "We're not wealthy women who like to sit in front of soap operas all day and eat bonbons," says Dixon, who is helping to launch the group. "Most of us have given up substantial incomes in order to take on long days at home—without lunch or coffee breaks—with our kids."
"There's definitely something new and subtle going on," says Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, vice president of the Institute for American Values, who specializes in family issues. "Confident women are now challenging some of the rigid tenets of what women should or shouldn't do with their work lives and family lives. I sense among younger women a much more critical attitude about all of the things that older feminists accepted as truth. There is a growing familism; we're beginning to rethink where our main values lie. And it's very recent—in the last two or three years."
Women Workers Decline
In 1991, for the first time this century, the percentage of women in the work force dropped, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. During the last half of 1990 and into the first quarter of 1991, 74 percent of women aged 20 to 44 participated in the labor force, down 0.5 percent from the year before. While women's work force participation jumped back in 1992, data show that the rate of increase in the 20 to 39 age group is slowing, according to bureau economist Howard Hayghe. "Mothers are finding alternative methods of employment that are allowing them to stay home more with their children," says Hayghe. "They're finding part-time work, home-based businesses and freelance work."
Many family researchers say the trend is much more pronounced than the bureau's data indicate, primarily because the agency counts individuals who work as little as one hour per week for profit or 15 hours or more without pay in a family business or on a farm. Mothers on extended maternity leave or those who baby-sit one night a week, do two hours of temp work, or tutor a friend's child for a nominal fee would all be considered part of the work force.
"One almost has to make a conscious effort to not be counted in order to escape inclusion in the BLS figures," says William Mattox, vice president for policy at the Family Research Council. "But if you look at recent polls, it becomes evident that at an attitudinal level, a change has definitely taken place."
A 1991 Washington Post poll found that 55 percent of Americans believed a child is likely to suffer if his mother works outside the home, up from 48 percent in 1989. A 1990 Gallup Poll for the Los Angeles Times showed that 73 percent of the public believed children fare best when they have a mother at home. And a 1990 Times-Mirror poll found that 73 percent of respondents believed too many children are being raised in day care, up from 68 percent in 1987.
In particular, women's attitudes toward their work and family have changed. In the past 3 years, Yankelovich Partners, a Connecticut consulting firm that studies societal changes and publishes an annual survey of working women, found striking changes in the attitudes of mothers toward their work. For 20 years, about 30 percent of women surveyed said they would quit their jobs to care for their children if they didn't need the money. In 1989, the number grew to 38 percent. By 1991, it had jumped to 56 percent.
The Failure of Feminism
"There has been a value shift lately," says Martha Bullen, coauthor of Staying Home: From Full-Time Professional to Full-Time Parent, which surveyed 600 stay-at-home mothers across the country. "In the eighties many women felt they ought to be out there competing with men and showing they could climb as high and fast as they could, perhaps to prove their feminist principles to themselves. But today, in the nineties, the emphasis is changing to the family. Women simply are no longer willing to sacrifice their roles as mothers to their careers."
But why now? As far back as 1981, feminist founding mother Betty Friedan said in The Second Stage that feminist theory must make room for the importance of families. And throughout the eighties, child care gurus from Dr. Benjamin Spock to T. Berry Brazelton have been warning about the ill effects of surrogate child care on children's psychological development.
Some attribute the new familism to the failure of feminist theory to adequately address the procreative side of women's lives. "Feminism has not accommodated the new thinking about family in its theory or rhetoric," says Arlene Rossen Cardozo, author of Sequencing: A New Solution for Women Who Want Marriage, Career, and Family, which advocates that women have a career and a family—just not at the same time. The term "sequencing" has now been adopted by theorists as a description for professional and other working women who take time off to raise children and then return to careers. "The feminist movement was never meant to embrace all women," says Cardozo. "Children were never factored into the original equation. Sure women can be like men if there aren't any children involved."
At its height in the seventies and early eighties, feminist careerism was based on three factors: changing society's attitudes about maternal care-giving; fathers sharing equally in child care responsibilities; and the availability of widespread, quality day care. None of these goals has been fulfilled.
According to national surveys, working women still bear the burden of child rearing and home maintenance. The amount of time fathers devote to primary child care has remained unchanged since 1965. In fact, a 1988 study by University of Virginia sociologists Steven Nock and Paul Kingston found that contrary to feminist hopes, fathers in one-income households spend more time with their children than do fathers in two-career homes. As a result, the eighties saw the rise of the so-called superwoman—the 10-hour-a-day working woman who would come home to a "second shift" involving child care, cooking and cleaning.
"We hear a lot of lip service to fathers' sharing equally in the tasks associated with parenting and house chores, and that's just not happening on a large scale," says Ellen Bravo, national executive director of 9to5 National Association of Working Women. "What society has really said to women is that having both a family and a job is something they're going to have to do alone. And that's a lot."
Many stay-at-home moms have decided to leave the work force after a series of child care difficulties ranging from undependable nannies to slipshod day care. In addition, the lack of flexible work arrangements such as job-sharing, flextime and tele-commuting jobs has left mothers without many options.
"At the moment, the progress of integrating family needs into the workplace is proceeding at a snail's pace," says Deborah Swiss, a consultant on work-family issues and coauthor of Women and the Work/Family Dilemma, which surveyed more than 900 female graduates of Harvard's law, business and medical schools. "That's why many women are leaving the workplace."
Swiss found that even among the nation's most elite professional women, there is frustration and confusion over how to bridge work and family. While 85 percent of the Harvard professionals said they believed reducing the hours of work would be detrimental to a woman's career, no less than 70 percent of them decreased their hours after their first child was born. A surprising 25 percent of MBA respondents left the workplace entirely. Swiss also found that the women who left the work force had made a more comfortable peace with their decision than had the part-timers.
Baby Busters
The coming of age of Generation X, successors to the baby boomers, has also contributed to the stay-at-home trend, according to William Dunn, author of The Baby Bust: A Generation Comes of Age. People in their 20s are the latchkey kids, children of divorce and children of full-time career mothers who yearn for the family lives they feel they missed. "They did not grow up in the Ozzie and Harriet family, and they're well aware of what they missed," says Dunn.
Moreover, because they are entering the work force during a period of slow economic growth and job insecurity, these baby busters are less wedded to jobs and careers than were the baby boomers. "All this makes them more introspective, more independent and, in terms of the women, less inhibited about making the choice to drop out of the economy for several years to raise a family," says Dunn. In fact, a 1990 Time magazine poll on the twentysomething generation found that 63 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds hope to spend more time with their children than their parents spent with them.
"Thinking people are looking around at all of the problems children and youngsters are facing in American society and realizing that children aren't faring well in our country," says Brenda Hunter, a psychologist specializing in parent-infant attachment and the author of Home By Choice. "The fastest-growing segment of the criminal population consists of children. The SAT scores have dropped 80 points in the last 20 years and the suicide rate has tripled for 15- to 24-year-olds. People aren't stupid, they're concerned."
According to Hunter, research since 1980 on infants in day care shows that babies placed even in good-quality nonparental care for more than 20 hours a week are at risk for emotional and behavioral problems later in life. A Texas study of 236 third-graders who had spent more than 30 hours a week in day care during infancy found that the children were harder to discipline and had poorer work habits and peer relationships than did children who stayed at home. And Jay Belsky, a human development professor at Pennsylvania State University who once maintained that day care was harmless, now believes that early and extensive day care poses a serious risk to healthy psychological development.
Says Osborne of Mothers First, "A lot of people I know are seeing the problems that we're having in society and saying, 'Maybe parents being at home could have a beneficial impact.'"
Happy at Home
But above and beyond concerns that their children won't develop well psychologically, most mothers who choose to stay home say they do so primarily because they feel they would be missing their kids' wonder years if they worked. "I'm not home just because I think my children need me," says Julie Heflin, a Washington lawyer who is caring full-time for her two preschool sons. "I feel there's a big part of me that would miss out if I were at work, even if somebody could do exactly the same job with my kids as I could."
These women talk about personal fulfillment, contentment and quality time. They talk about meeting diverse women through mothers organizations and learning new skills. "My world has completely changed," says Dixon. "It's gone from a world where I was governed by external demands and ideas of success, identity and power to a very comfortable, happy, low-key rife where my world is governed by being a good parent to my kids and leading a balanced, interesting life.
"Our society has given us the message that a career is the road to happiness," she continues. "And I wasn't unhappy practicing law. But it didn't hold a candle to this. These three kids are five times more interesting than a legal problem or extra money in the bank. Everything's different than I thought."
Former professionals such as Dixon, as well as sociologists, are finding that the stigma associated with staying home—what they call the "I'm just a housewife" syndrome—seems to be fading. "There's no question," says Bullen, "that making this choice is easier today than it was five years ago."
Hunter agrees: "I don't think that women at home feel as downtrodden or as beaten down by cultural attitudes as they did in the last two decades. There's been a real shift away from feminist dogma toward individual preferences."
If the [recent] past is any indication, women in increasing numbers will leave the work force—temporarily—to devote themselves to their children. At least that's what the mothers groups would like. "Hopefully, the exodus will continue and we'll be large enough in number to one day be a force to be reckoned with," says Heflin, cochairwoman of the Washington-based Lawyers at Home Forum. "Right now people look at us cockeyed and say, 'You did what?' But I think it's going to be more common, and society will support it."
Mothers Groups Abound
According to the network of mothers groups that formed over the past decade to represent them, the number of professional moms is skyrocketing. The membership of Illinois-based FEMALE—Formerly Employed Mothers at the Leading Edge—grew 54 percent in 1993 and 60 percent in 1992. The 6-year-old organization, which has 2,000 members and 102 chapters nationally, recently changed its name from Formerly Employed Mothers at Loose Ends. "The old name no longer fits the mind-set of our members or women in general," says Rush, who is FEMALE's national publicity director.
In the past 3 years, the 20-year-old mothers organization MOPS International, or the Mothers of Preschoolers, has nearly doubled in size, with 28,000 members nationwide. Both Mothers First, a Washington-area support group for full-time mothers, and Mothers at Home, a 10-year-old group that publishes a 15,000-circulation newsletter called Welcome Home, claim unprecedented growth in membership since 1990. "The phone's been ringing off the hook," says Beth Osborne, communications chairwoman of Mothers First.
Other groups abound, such as Home by Choice, Moms Club, the National Association of Mothers' Centers and the Lawyers at Home Forum. And in early 1994, another mothers-at-home group was launched: The National MothersCare Network, the first national federation of full-time moms groups, will act as a watchdog against what members feel are inaccurate and derogatory portrayals of stay-at-homers and will attempt to publicize their image of modern motherhood. "We're not wealthy women who like to sit in front of soap operas all day and eat bonbons," says Dixon, who is helping to launch the group. "Most of us have given up substantial incomes in order to take on long days at home—without lunch or coffee breaks—with our kids."
"There's definitely something new and subtle going on," says Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, vice president of the Institute for American Values, who specializes in family issues. "Confident women are now challenging some of the rigid tenets of what women should or shouldn't do with their work lives and family lives. I sense among younger women a much more critical attitude about all of the things that older feminists accepted as truth. There is a growing familism; we're beginning to rethink where our main values lie. And it's very recent—in the last two or three years."
Women Workers Decline
In 1991, for the first time this century, the percentage of women in the work force dropped, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. During the last half of 1990 and into the first quarter of 1991, 74 percent of women aged 20 to 44 participated in the labor force, down 0.5 percent from the year before. While women's work force participation jumped back in 1992, data show that the rate of increase in the 20 to 39 age group is slowing, according to bureau economist Howard Hayghe. "Mothers are finding alternative methods of employment that are allowing them to stay home more with their children," says Hayghe. "They're finding part-time work, home-based businesses and freelance work."
Many family researchers say the trend is much more pronounced than the bureau's data indicate, primarily because the agency counts individuals who work as little as one hour per week for profit or 15 hours or more without pay in a family business or on a farm. Mothers on extended maternity leave or those who baby-sit one night a week, do two hours of temp work, or tutor a friend's child for a nominal fee would all be considered part of the work force.
"One almost has to make a conscious effort to not be counted in order to escape inclusion in the BLS figures," says William Mattox, vice president for policy at the Family Research Council. "But if you look at recent polls, it becomes evident that at an attitudinal level, a change has definitely taken place."
A 1991 Washington Post poll found that 55 percent of Americans believed a child is likely to suffer if his mother works outside the home, up from 48 percent in 1989. A 1990 Gallup Poll for the Los Angeles Times showed that 73 percent of the public believed children fare best when they have a mother at home. And a 1990 Times-Mirror poll found that 73 percent of respondents believed too many children are being raised in day care, up from 68 percent in 1987.
In particular, women's attitudes toward their work and family have changed. In the past 3 years, Yankelovich Partners, a Connecticut consulting firm that studies societal changes and publishes an annual survey of working women, found striking changes in the attitudes of mothers toward their work. For 20 years, about 30 percent of women surveyed said they would quit their jobs to care for their children if they didn't need the money. In 1989, the number grew to 38 percent. By 1991, it had jumped to 56 percent.
The Failure of Feminism
"There has been a value shift lately," says Martha Bullen, coauthor of Staying Home: From Full-Time Professional to Full-Time Parent, which surveyed 600 stay-at-home mothers across the country. "In the eighties many women felt they ought to be out there competing with men and showing they could climb as high and fast as they could, perhaps to prove their feminist principles to themselves. But today, in the nineties, the emphasis is changing to the family. Women simply are no longer willing to sacrifice their roles as mothers to their careers."
But why now? As far back as 1981, feminist founding mother Betty Friedan said in The Second Stage that feminist theory must make room for the importance of families. And throughout the eighties, child care gurus from Dr. Benjamin Spock to T. Berry Brazelton have been warning about the ill effects of surrogate child care on children's psychological development.
Some attribute the new familism to the failure of feminist theory to adequately address the procreative side of women's lives. "Feminism has not accommodated the new thinking about family in its theory or rhetoric," says Arlene Rossen Cardozo, author of Sequencing: A New Solution for Women Who Want Marriage, Career, and Family, which advocates that women have a career and a family—just not at the same time. The term "sequencing" has now been adopted by theorists as a description for professional and other working women who take time off to raise children and then return to careers. "The feminist movement was never meant to embrace all women," says Cardozo. "Children were never factored into the original equation. Sure women can be like men if there aren't any children involved."
At its height in the seventies and early eighties, feminist careerism was based on three factors: changing society's attitudes about maternal care-giving; fathers sharing equally in child care responsibilities; and the availability of widespread, quality day care. None of these goals has been fulfilled.
According to national surveys, working women still bear the burden of child rearing and home maintenance. The amount of time fathers devote to primary child care has remained unchanged since 1965. In fact, a 1988 study by University of Virginia sociologists Steven Nock and Paul Kingston found that contrary to feminist hopes, fathers in one-income households spend more time with their children than do fathers in two-career homes. As a result, the eighties saw the rise of the so-called superwoman—the 10-hour-a-day working woman who would come home to a "second shift" involving child care, cooking and cleaning.
"We hear a lot of lip service to fathers' sharing equally in the tasks associated with parenting and house chores, and that's just not happening on a large scale," says Ellen Bravo, national executive director of 9to5 National Association of Working Women. "What society has really said to women is that having both a family and a job is something they're going to have to do alone. And that's a lot."
Many stay-at-home moms have decided to leave the work force after a series of child care difficulties ranging from undependable nannies to slipshod day care. In addition, the lack of flexible work arrangements such as job-sharing, flextime and tele-commuting jobs has left mothers without many options.
"At the moment, the progress of integrating family needs into the workplace is proceeding at a snail's pace," says Deborah Swiss, a consultant on work-family issues and coauthor of Women and the Work/Family Dilemma, which surveyed more than 900 female graduates of Harvard's law, business and medical schools. "That's why many women are leaving the workplace."
Swiss found that even among the nation's most elite professional women, there is frustration and confusion over how to bridge work and family. While 85 percent of the Harvard professionals said they believed reducing the hours of work would be detrimental to a woman's career, no less than 70 percent of them decreased their hours after their first child was born. A surprising 25 percent of MBA respondents left the workplace entirely. Swiss also found that the women who left the work force had made a more comfortable peace with their decision than had the part-timers.
Baby Busters
The coming of age of Generation X, successors to the baby boomers, has also contributed to the stay-at-home trend, according to William Dunn, author of The Baby Bust: A Generation Comes of Age. People in their 20s are the latchkey kids, children of divorce and children of full-time career mothers who yearn for the family lives they feel they missed. "They did not grow up in the Ozzie and Harriet family, and they're well aware of what they missed," says Dunn.
Moreover, because they are entering the work force during a period of slow economic growth and job insecurity, these baby busters are less wedded to jobs and careers than were the baby boomers. "All this makes them more introspective, more independent and, in terms of the women, less inhibited about making the choice to drop out of the economy for several years to raise a family," says Dunn. In fact, a 1990 Time magazine poll on the twentysomething generation found that 63 percent of 18- to 29-year-olds hope to spend more time with their children than their parents spent with them.
"Thinking people are looking around at all of the problems children and youngsters are facing in American society and realizing that children aren't faring well in our country," says Brenda Hunter, a psychologist specializing in parent-infant attachment and the author of Home By Choice. "The fastest-growing segment of the criminal population consists of children. The SAT scores have dropped 80 points in the last 20 years and the suicide rate has tripled for 15- to 24-year-olds. People aren't stupid, they're concerned."
According to Hunter, research since 1980 on infants in day care shows that babies placed even in good-quality nonparental care for more than 20 hours a week are at risk for emotional and behavioral problems later in life. A Texas study of 236 third-graders who had spent more than 30 hours a week in day care during infancy found that the children were harder to discipline and had poorer work habits and peer relationships than did children who stayed at home. And Jay Belsky, a human development professor at Pennsylvania State University who once maintained that day care was harmless, now believes that early and extensive day care poses a serious risk to healthy psychological development.
Says Osborne of Mothers First, "A lot of people I know are seeing the problems that we're having in society and saying, 'Maybe parents being at home could have a beneficial impact.'"
Happy at Home
But above and beyond concerns that their children won't develop well psychologically, most mothers who choose to stay home say they do so primarily because they feel they would be missing their kids' wonder years if they worked. "I'm not home just because I think my children need me," says Julie Heflin, a Washington lawyer who is caring full-time for her two preschool sons. "I feel there's a big part of me that would miss out if I were at work, even if somebody could do exactly the same job with my kids as I could."
These women talk about personal fulfillment, contentment and quality time. They talk about meeting diverse women through mothers organizations and learning new skills. "My world has completely changed," says Dixon. "It's gone from a world where I was governed by external demands and ideas of success, identity and power to a very comfortable, happy, low-key rife where my world is governed by being a good parent to my kids and leading a balanced, interesting life.
"Our society has given us the message that a career is the road to happiness," she continues. "And I wasn't unhappy practicing law. But it didn't hold a candle to this. These three kids are five times more interesting than a legal problem or extra money in the bank. Everything's different than I thought."
Former professionals such as Dixon, as well as sociologists, are finding that the stigma associated with staying home—what they call the "I'm just a housewife" syndrome—seems to be fading. "There's no question," says Bullen, "that making this choice is easier today than it was five years ago."
Hunter agrees: "I don't think that women at home feel as downtrodden or as beaten down by cultural attitudes as they did in the last two decades. There's been a real shift away from feminist dogma toward individual preferences."
If the [recent] past is any indication, women in increasing numbers will leave the work force—temporarily—to devote themselves to their children. At least that's what the mothers groups would like. "Hopefully, the exodus will continue and we'll be large enough in number to one day be a force to be reckoned with," says Heflin, cochairwoman of the Washington-based Lawyers at Home Forum. "Right now people look at us cockeyed and say, 'You did what?' But I think it's going to be more common, and society will support it."
本回答由提问者推荐
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
北京金瑞博
2024-08-15 广告
欧洲QP（Qualified Person）声明是欧盟及PIC/S成员国在医药产品临床阶段的一种正式GMP（良好生产规范）符合性声明，具有法律认可的效力。该声明证明了企业在药品生产各环节，包括原料、生产、质量控制、仓储及物流等方面均符合欧盟...
点击进入详情页
本回答由北京金瑞博提供
展开全部
题目的意思是:妇女应该被允许做她们想做的职业
就现在的形势来说妇女当然是应该平等,做她们想做的任何职业.就像以前的国家领导人都是男的,现在只要女的有这个能力,当然也可以领导国家繁荣富强.以前的企业家大多数都是女的,现在很多女强人做的比男的还好.像今年的胡润百富榜第一名就是女性,这就证明了,性别并不是能力的差异所在.现在的妇女已经开始从家庭主妇的角色走了出来,走向社会,独自撑起半边天,因此,我们应该允许她们做她们想做的职业,if they can!
从这个立意来说具有时代性也更具有说服力.
至于想从一些偏的角度来说明妇女不应该拥有这种权利,如果你们老师是女的,她一定会有所不满,尽管你说的有点道理.但是,很抱歉,不够充分,像这类的辩题结论是很明显的.
就现在的形势来说妇女当然是应该平等,做她们想做的任何职业.就像以前的国家领导人都是男的,现在只要女的有这个能力,当然也可以领导国家繁荣富强.以前的企业家大多数都是女的,现在很多女强人做的比男的还好.像今年的胡润百富榜第一名就是女性,这就证明了,性别并不是能力的差异所在.现在的妇女已经开始从家庭主妇的角色走了出来,走向社会,独自撑起半边天,因此,我们应该允许她们做她们想做的职业,if they can!
从这个立意来说具有时代性也更具有说服力.
至于想从一些偏的角度来说明妇女不应该拥有这种权利,如果你们老师是女的,她一定会有所不满,尽管你说的有点道理.但是,很抱歉,不够充分,像这类的辩题结论是很明显的.
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
展开全部
楼上是自己写的么。。。。
已赞过
已踩过<
评论
收起
你对这个回答的评价是？
推荐律师服务：
若未解决您的问题，请您详细描述您的问题，通过百度律临进行免费专业咨询
