Recent orders
Do Words Matter
Students Name
Instructor
Course
Submission date
Do Words Matter?
We use words every day, and this is true quite an obvious fact. We learned how to talk when we were kids, and as we grew, we developed the essential skill of communicating with our voices using words, and our vocabulary keeps increasing as we never stop learning. While we stumble across things that we certainly knew were bad and have consequences when done and certainly knew how the use of certain words affected us. Although whatever we say to others does not necessarily physically harm them, we cannot neglect that the words we use are sometimes terrible. And should not have been noted as per the context it was used as when they are used negatively, and they may convey discrimination.
The commercialization of taboo words does not make such words inherently okay to be used and cease being taboo. Terms such as the N-word used to refer to people of color, the B-word used on women may be used as a form of flattery as they are widely used across many forms of media does not prove that the use is unlimited and has no effect on society. The origin of such a word, such as the N-word, was a dark one, and using such a word in public spaces where everyone from all walks of life is present can be unaccommodating and cause feelings of discrimination. The N-word was used to subjugate the black man, and since it is now acceptable in the music made by the man, it does not cancel out the valid reason behind its existence. Racism does not just magically disappear because we claim it’s not there when it is there; it did not stop ailing us simply because we took our medicine. It grows and becomes hidden in plain sight (West). Flaherty cites that the N-word cannot be accepted in any given setting or context in an article. It was initially used to subjugate the put people of color under oppression.
Context is a huge factor in the use of the word. Words are used t strike certain aspects of the community, and the context in which they are used could harm the reputation of a given set of people. Words like the B-word, motherfucker, mama are often aimed at motherhood figures(Gross 6). The B-word is often used to refer to pretty women in some way as a means of flattery. But this is not the case; it is an insult to women and cannot be treated as a compliment. It devalues women and words such as motherfucker, which disrespects mothers who are our source of life. It cannot be taken as usual and should be as women are to be regarded as gracious members of the society who have some dignity.
The impact of cussing and the use of slurs on children. In an article Bergen, cites that “a child who wanders out into the world with a mouth like a sailor could cause harm to his reputation and that of his parents.” No research has uncovered where children learn how to cuss and use negative language. A parent’s primary responsibility is to keep track of their children’s language and warn them of the different contexts not to use them. According to research, pediatrics claim that when a child is exposed to profanity, it is dangerous and may numb the child’s usual way of responding to emotion (Bergen). According to the same research, the use of slurs has an even larger impact on children with less cognitive and social development (Bergen).
Taboo words could be used to vent out anger and reduce pain, but is it okay to be venting out anger and projecting our feelings on other people? As cited in new research, it is insufficient close to almost no evidence that demonstrates that a word in any way leads to harm (“The Science of Swearing”). The effect of venting out anger on other us is unknown to us. Cussing and slurs exposing our emotions is a non-violent display using malicious language that could instigate violence this affects all persons of all ages. When children bully one another in school and insult each other, it is not a healthy way of communication. Cuss words hurt people’s feelings, especially children who have not yet established a firm sense of self-awareness. In research, it is given that verbal abuse is known to be psychologically damaging ( Bergen). Think of it it is not okay to encourage the psychological damage of any individual, most especially children; it ruins their self-image and identity as you can never hide the meaning behind certain words.
Slurs and swear words kill any room for equality and inclusion of all. A study found that middle school students who were exposed to homophobic slurs were less connected to their school and showed signs of being depressed and anxious ( Bergen). The same study by Bergen revealed that when a particular group of students in a university started, they thought that less funding should go to HIV AIDS patients from groups at high risk. A certain percentage moved away from the ones they thought were homosexual. These slurs brought out a sense of division among the students, and the same happens every day.
Words convey vices and either promote or discourage certain vices, which is inversely true when applied to taboo words and slurs. Swear words have a special place in language because once they are learned, their application is heavily dependant on context (“The Science of Swearing”). These contexts differ; they could be positive or negative. Swears can indeed be used in specific ways, such as conveying humor, but they could also threaten and pass as dangerous to some. In a threatening context, they could be incriminating depending on the severity of a case. How one is to receive a piece of information is highly subjective. One woman could perceive the “Bitch” as a compliment when one might view it as an insult or a threat. Using a word like that coupled with rude language could trigger defensive responses from people and land users of such language in colossal trouble as state laws oversee such cases. The directions provided on the use of language protect against discrimination and sexual harassment. Certain do convey signs of sexual harassment and intentions of discrimination. Words like the N-word on black people, the word bitch on women, and “retard” for people with learning disabilities. They negatively portray aspects of society and should be discouraged.
In conclusion, words matter, and context, gender, and culture should always be considered during communication. They cannot be ignored, and the use of words should not become subjective.
Works Cited
Bergen, Benjamin. “Go Ahead, Curse in Front of Your Kids.” Los Angeles Times, 20 Sept. 2016, www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-bergen-children-swearing-20160918-snap-story.html. Accessed 19 Nov. 2021.
Flaherty, Colleen. “The N-Word in the Classroom.” Inside Higher Ed, 12 Feb. 2018, www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/02/12/two-professors-different-campuses-used-n-word-last-week-one-was-suspended-and-one. Accessed 19 Nov. 2021.
“The Science of Swearing.” Association for Psychological Science – APS, 25 Apr. 2012, www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/the-science-of-swearing.*. Accessed 19 Nov. 2021.
West, Lindy. “A Complete Guide to ‘Hipster Racism.’” Jezebel, 19 June 2013, jezebel.com/a-complete-guide-to-hipster-racism-5905291. Accessed 19 Nov. 2021.
Gross, Beverly. “Bitch”,1994 Issue No.103. ProQuest. ProQuest.com https://montclair.instructure.com/courses/98564/files/5565174/download?verifier=BPZW2s1odu1TAo18KrqrY2TYD3vJo1OzhJjZIP8q. Accessed 19 Nov. 2021.
Do we fear the right things
Author
Tutor
Course
Date
Introduction
Fear has become a fundamental thing in the current American society. There are always fears about wars, terrorism, other people, as well as food-borne diseases among other things. There are varied opinions as to the basis of fear in the contemporary American society, with some insinuating that people’s fears are founded on the things that others have taught them to fear and not based on fact or critical thought.
In the article, “Do we fear the right things”, David G. Myers holds the opinion that people do not fear the right things. His main claim is that people fear what they have been sensationalized about and not what is likely. In essence, David argues that peoples’ fears are founded on the wrong things. He cautions that people should be careful as to the basis of their fears, and check their fears against facts. While, David’s claim falls under judgment or value claims since it involves attitudes, opinions, as well as a subjective evaluation of issues, he takes his time to present verifiable data.
As grounds for supporting his argument, David draws the example of the effect of 9/11 terrorism attack. After the attack, the number of people who signed up for flights reduced by about 20 percent. Instead, they chose to drive as much as they could and limit their flights to only the necessary. Ironically, more people die in road accidents than in the ill-fated flights. David draws from the report by the National Safety Council which insinuates that from the year 1995 to 2000, Americans were 37 times more likely to perish in car accidents than on commercial flights. Even in an imaginable instance where terrorists had taken down fifty planes each of which carried 60 passengers, Americans would still have been safer flying than driving in 2001. On the same note, David argues that people are less worried about food poisoning than terrorism, yet the former killed more people than the latter in 2001. In addition, most smokers are more worried about flying, which shortens an individual’s life by a single day, than their smoking habit, which reduces their lifespan by more than five years.
Any claim made must incorporate a warrant, which is essentially an inferential leap connecting the claim made and the grounds supporting it (David & Bart 2006). In this article, David Myers establishes a connection between his claim and the grounds that the claim is based on by drawing from psychological science. He explains that an individual’s intuition pertaining to risk is based on four influences. Psychological science explains that an individual is prepared by his ancestral history on what he or she should fear. Most of the emotions that human beings have today were tested during the Stone Age. In essence, yesterday’s risks prepare an individual to fear certain things even when those things have not been a danger to anyone in the contemporary times (David 2001). It is noteworthy that, an individual’s biological past predisposes him to fear something even when it does not pose any risk to him in the current times.
In addition, people fear the things for which they do not have any control. This could be explained by the fact that, while downhill skiing poses a thousand times more risk to an individual’s health than the risk posed by food preservatives, most people have cannot touch preservatives but will gladly ski downhill. This is because they controls skiing but are not in full control of preservatives, and explains why people fear flying and not driving. In essence, people would never allow others to do to them what they gladly do to themselves (David 2001).
Moreover, David outlines the fact that people fear things that are immediate. This explains why teens are, more often than not, indifferent to the toxicity of smoking because they are more concerned about the present than their future. While the threat of a plane accident is concentrated on the moment of landing or takeoff, the dangers pertaining to driving are spread across numerous moments, each of which is minutely dangerous (David 2001).
Lastly, people are more adept at fearing things that are more readily available to their memories than those that are not. The 9/11 World Trade Center terrorist attacks produced gruesome images, which left indelible and available memories in the brains of many people. These memories are used as measuring rods with which people intuitively judge risks. When individuals have had numerous safe car trips, their anxieties pertaining to driving are extinguished. Vivid events cause individuals to overestimate odds, as well as have a distorted comprehension of the potential risks and their probable outcomes (David 2001). Individuals will remember the 266 passengers, who perished in the 9/11 flights, but not comprehend the numerous accident-free flights totaling 16 million accident-free landings and takeoffs in one stretch that took place in the 90s. In essence, individuals do not grasp possibilities but have their attention captured by dramatic outcomes. Since people fear the things that claim lives in an undramatic manner, they have misplaced priorities on where to channel resources to save most lives.
Conclusion
David Myers makes a claim that is essentially based on fact as well as personal opinion and attitude about fear. He makes a claim that the fears that people have are based on what they have been sensationalized about by the media, not what truly poses the highest risk to them. He makes the claim on the grounds that people fear flights more than driving yet, the later has claimed more lives than the former (David 2001). People tend to be more attentive to the drama that accompanies incidences and end up channeling resources to issues that are way too low on the ladder of priority. These grounds and warrants enable him to take a persuasive stand on his claim by expounding more on it (David & Bart 2006).
Exploitation of Migrant Farm Laborers
Exploitation of Migrant Farm Laborers
Author
Institutional Affiliation
Date
Exploitation of Migrant Farm Laborers
Technological advancements and newer farming methods in crop production have led to a rise in the quantity and quality of food produced and better agricultural practices. Crops such as soybeans and corn continue to rely heavily on newer machinery and newer production techniques (Sage, 2012). In countries such as the United States, the UK, and Canada, thousands of acres use machinery for planting, spraying, and harvesting, only employing a few people to man the machines and equipment like combines and tractors. However, some areas of agriculture still rely on manual labor, requiring that farms employ workers to help with all agricultural processes. The processing of meat and poultry, vegetables, and fruits relies primarily on human labor. In Canada, the agricultural sector relies significantly on migrant labor. A significant portion of the labor force is made up of migrant workers, a majority of whom are not documented (Landry et al., 2021). For this report, the term migrant worker will be used to mean any individual moving into the country for purposes of finding seasonal or temporary employment, with special interest in the agricultural sector in farm work. These migrant workers are accepted into various work programs as temporary helps with conditions that require them to remain employed to one employer per every season. As a result, they are exploited via poor pay, harsh work environment, dangerous conditions, and no benefits. In comparison to other types of farmworkers, migrant farm laborers, much like the slavery days, are made to work long hours with little to no pay depending on the conditions of where they are. Without a doubt, farmers who exploit migrant laborers should be ashamed of themselves, and should further face sanctions from the agricultural communities.
In the Canadian agricultural sector, about 20% of the jobs are filled by temporary migrant laborers (UFCW Canada and the Agriculture Workers Alliance (AWA), 2020). Despite holding a temporary position, migrant workers in Canada usually fill positions for extended periods and offer crucial support for the agricultural industry in Canada. According to UFCW & AWA (2020), the annual estimated number of migrant farm workers entering Canada from Central America, Mexico, and the Caribbean is currently at 60,000 “low-skilled” employees. The conditions in Canada have, for a long time, meant that there is no government supervision but rather a private management program within the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program (SAWP) and other similar initiatives. The migrant workers are usually desperate for employment, are undocumented, and have left families behind. The joblessness state in their individual nations is also a reason to why they accept the poor work conditions provided by farmers who attempt to undercut the system. Consequently, these workers are housed in substandard shelters, forced to work more hours without extra pay, are deprived of the minimum accepted pay per region, and do not even have personal breaks in between the work shifts (Caxaj, Cohen, Buffam, & Oudshoorn, 2020). Migrant workers will accept conditions and terms that the local workers will never agree to, and will then be exposed to unsafe working conditions such as exposure to dangerous chemicals, no training on how to handle equipment, lack health services, are excluded from the basic human rights laws including the Employment Standards Act and Health and Safety Legislation (Cohen & Hjalmarson, 2020). The migrant workers cannot join unions or participate in collective bargaining. In any case, they are fired or replaced en masse whenever there is an issue because of the availability of others like them ready to take on their places. Even with extensive years of operating in Canada, these workers continue to face the same issues that new workers are exposed to, including discrimination, poor pay, unsafe work environment, lack of training in handling equipment, and so on.
Canada, in one way or the other, has depended on migrant labor to build the agricultural sector (Sage, 2012). It has also done the same in other sector that support the economy. Migrant labor denotes the sector of labor held by migrant workers from various countries. The national railroad was built by Chinese migrant laborers and the fields of Western Canada were tamed by South Asian workers. As a result, Canada cannot dispense migrant workers in its domestic work, including agriculture. Despite this notable importance, the system used by farmers actively and consciously denies migrant workers the basic human rights that should not even be discussed by an ethics-driven industry. For their contribution, migrant workers barely make more than $8 an hour (Stasiulis, 2020), and do not have other benefits such as the Canada Pension Plan or the Employment Insurance benefits. The benefits are deducted from their pay despite having no entitlement to these services. The marginalized labor force of migrants should be the focus of ore studies in an attempt to understand why the system ignores these important aspect of the agricultural sector despite the meaningful contribution to the welfare of the Canadian industry.
Farmers in Canada have continued to take advantage of the weak rules in regards to the protection of migrant farmers from abuse and exploitation. For a majority of farmers, the migrant workers are required to stay silent and keep any problems they may have to themselves, or else are punished through wage reductions or firing and replacement. The fact that these migrant workers are foreigners makes it easier for local farmers to exploit them, and the government also does little to ensure that their basic human rights are guaranteed. At present, the government is a part of this problem due to its inaction and a conspicuous lack of direction on how farmers are required to treat migrant laborers. Although Perry (2012) points to the multiple pressures on the Canadian agricultural sector leading to the restructuring of the value chain, Walia (2010) refutes any claims that excuse farmers that exploit migrant laborers due to the interplay of various factors. As the Canadian agricultural sector moves more towards demanding sustainable practices, the issues relating to climate change, organic farming, and other issues continue to push farmers to cut costs at every possible point of production (Sage, 2012). Consequently, it is understandable when farmers opt to recruit migrant laborers in an effort to profit from their vulnerability. Even with this conditions pushing farmers towards cost-reduction strategies, it still does not justify the decision to exploit migrant workers on the basis of their vulnerability and for their desperation to secure any form of employment available to make a living for their families. It is as much an unethical issue as other forms of unacceptable practices, especially because of how it takes away the dignity of these migrant laborers due to the poor working conditions, poor pay, and a non-existent basic human rights provision.
Farmers are aware of the non-existent laws protecting migrant labors in the agricultural sector. Their exploitative strategies are not in any means illegal because there are no laws that demand safety, protection, or provision of basic human rights for such marginalized groups. The law excludes labor and workplace rights of migrant workers making them more vulnerable compared to the general Canadian workforce in the same sector (Weiler, 2018). The conditions are fueled by the fact that the SAWP program requires that migrant workers only work for the specific employer who took them. In this closed work system, the employee’s options are closed and lacks flexibility in decision making. Gabriel and Macdonald (2018) hold that the employer holds a lot of power compared to the employee, yet the agricultural sector would lose a lot in revenue and resources if these workers decided not to work in the present conditions. The response of the federal government in 2019 to introduce an open work permit for vulnerable laborers under the SAWP program is not enough to address the issue of exploitation. According to Perry (2018), the program is temporary and does not address the long-term demands and needs of migrant workers relating to fair labor and protection against various forms of exploitation. Despite the early failure of such programs and responses from the Canadian government, such initiatives will gradually lead to the meaningful reform of the sector, bringing in necessary reforms and much-needed changes.
From the discussion above, shaming farmers using exploitative labor is not enough to address the problem facing migrant workers. It is recommended that the SAWP program be revised to accommodate a voice from such temporary workforce due to their tremendous contribution to the growth of the Canadian agricultural sector and the economy. Federal reforms must look at how representation in a union or any other collective bargaining options can be availed to such workers. A significant portion of the vulnerability of these workers comes from the fact that they lack a collective voice to make changes in the industry. Additionally, the SAWP program should be revised to eliminate the closed approach that requires a workers to only work for only one employer. Ending employer-specific permits and replacing them with an open and more flexible system or even an occupation specific permit would enable better work conditions due to the availability of options for the worker. While it may seem unfair to the farmers, it is also important that the federal government introduces irreducible minimums as a part of the requirements for operations, requiring farmers to provide basic human rights conditions including acceptable pay, better living conditions, training when using equipment, health and safety standards, and any other basic rights of an employee. Even with these provisions, ethical practices must be a core part of every sector, especially in the agricultural sector where historical injustices embedded in slavery and other practices are likely to recur if farmers are allowed to continue exploiting laborers.
References
Caxaj, C. S., Cohen, A., Buffam, B., & Oudshoorn, A. (2020). Borders and boundaries in the
lives of migrant agricultural workers. Witness: The Canadian Journal of Critical Nursing Discourse,, 2(2), 92.
Cohen, A., & Hjalmarson, E. (2020). Quiet struggles: Migrant farmworkers, informal labor, and
everyday resistance in Canada. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 61(2-3), 141-158.
Gabriel, C., & Macdonald, L. (2018). After the International Organization for Migration:
Recruitment of Guatemalan temporary agricultural workers to Canada. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 44(10), 1706-1724.
Landry, V., Semsar-Kazerooni, K., Tjong, J., Alj, A., Darnley, A., Lipp, R., & Guberman, G. I.
(2021). The systemized exploitation of temporary migrant agricultural workers in Canada: Exacerbation of health vulnerabilities during the COVID-19 pandemic and recommendations for the future. Journal of Migration and Health, 3, 100035.
Perry, J. A. (2012). Barely legal: racism and migrant farm labour in the context of Canadian
multiculturalism. Citizenship Studies, 16(2), 189-201.
Perry, J. A. (2018). Living at work and intra-worker sociality among migrant farm workers in
Canada. Journal of International Migration and Integration, 19(4), 1021-1036.
Sage, C. (2012). Environment and food. Routledge.
Stasiulis, D. (2020). Elimi (Nation): Canada’s “Post-Settler” Embrace of Disposable Migrant
Labour. Studies in Social Justice, 2020(14), 22-54.
UFCW Canada and the Agriculture Workers Alliance (AWA). (2020). The Status of Migrant
Farm Workers In Canada, 2020 Special Report: Marking three decades of advocacy on behalf of Canada’s most exploited workforce. UFCW Canada. https://ml.globenewswire.com/Resource/Download/709696c3-7d67-4d2d-bf71-e600701a2c8cWalia, H. (2010). Transient servitude: Migrant labour in Canada and the apartheid of
citizenship. Race & Class, 52(1), 71-84.
Weiler, A. M. (2018). A food policy for Canada, but not just for Canadians: Reaping justice for
migrant farm workers. Canadian Food Studies/La Revue canadienne des études sur l’alimentation, 5(3), 279-284.