Final Essay!!!

No Need For Monogamous, Heterosexual Relationships

            In a society that has an extremely high divorce rate, heterosexual, monogamous marriages are hard to come by. There are two factors that affect divorce. Both society and evolution are affecting the length, reasons, intensity, and cause of our relationships. If evolution plays such a large part can we change the outcome? We, as humans, can’t solely decide the fate of our own relationships and need to rely on evolution to point us in the right direction. Even evolutionary psychologists believe we can’t decide our fate.

            According to Wright, “Humans are designed to fall in love… they aren’t designed to stay there.” (Wright 280) However, this is not exactly true. Just look at people around you. Have you never seen that adorable older couple, still in love with each other? Sure they may argue, bicker, fight, and disagree but that doesn’t mean they don’t love each other anymore. Many couples are able to work through their disagreements. According to Wright, “The human mind was designed for the purpose of transmitting genes to the next generation; feelings of lust, no less that the sex organs, are here because they aided reproduction directly.” (Wright 280) The whole reason we feel lust is in order to reproduce. In evolutionary psychology, it doesn’t matter if you’re in a monogamous relationship, as long as you are spreading your genes (HelloLife).

            In America divorce rates are outrageous. Few couples get married and stay together their entire lives. Here are a few statistics and graphs to help spread light on this topic. In 2000 there were 58 million couples who were married, but divorced. People between 25 and 39 make up over sixty percent of all divorces. In 1998 the divorce rate to marriages was exactly 50% (see image 2) (Project America, Social Issues). The 1980’s had the highest divorce rates of any decade (see image 1) (Vanmann). Surprisingly, America is not the country with the highest divorce rates. America falls behind the Soviet Union in places such as Russia (see image 3). Lithuania, Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Poland are also very high on the list of divorce rates (Project America, International). This evidence supports evolutionary psychology in the fact that there is no need for monogamous, heterosexual relationships. Even with divorce rates being as high as they are, we are still an extremely overpopulated country.

Image 1:

   (Vannman) 

Image 2:

 (Project America, Social Issues)

Image 3:

 (Project America, International)

            When it comes to evolutionary psychology, there is no need for monogamous relationships. The whole point of being human and having sex organs is so that we can reproduce and make sure our species doesn’t go extinct (HelloLife). So in this sense, heterosexual, monogamous marriage doesn’t matter as long as you are having children. Today, we are a species who no longer depends on evolution to make sure we have children. Many couples are together long enough to have children and, in some cases, raise them. After children have left the “nest”, or are old enough to thrive on their own, many couples end up separating. They no longer have a need to be together, their job is finished. This isn’t always the case, but it is a very popular trend occurring within couples.  

            As the human species we no longer need to worry about spreading our genes. Now we are worried about finding our soul mates. In the sense of evolutionary psychology, no, we do not need monogamous, heterosexual relationships. We only need to find mates to reproduce with in order to make sure we spread our genes (HelloLife). In the sense of humans today, we don’t need monogamous relationships. Instead, we need to fulfill our wants and needs, whether it is through monogamous relationships or just quick courtships. We aren’t as worried about spreading genes but about making ourselves happy.

Works Cited

"International: Health Care: Marriage and Divorce Rate." Project America. Project America, 2008. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. <http://www.project.org/info.php?recordID=349>.

"Social Issues: Marriage and Divorce." Project America. Project America, 2008. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. <http://www.project.org/info.php?recordID=139>.

"The Male Biological Need for Sex Explore Your Health." HelloLife™ - Matching Your Commitment to a Healthy Lifestyle. 18 Jan. 2008. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. <http://www.hellolife.net/explore/shrinkage-dysfunction/the-male-biological-need-for-sex/>.

Vannman, Reeve. "Divoce Rates." Sociology 441: Stratification. University of Maryland, 8 Oct. 1999. Web. 28 Nov. 2010. <http://www.bsos.umd.edu/socy/vanneman/socy441/trends/divorce.html>.

Wright, Robert. "Our Cheating Hearts." Academic Communities/ Disciplinary Conventions. Ed. Bonnie Beedles and Michael Petracca. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2001. 278-291.

Final Project Peer Reviews - Hillary and Jacqueline

Jacqueline:

I’ve loved reading your blog. I feel that you have soo many strong entries that you can choose from, so I’ve picked three of my favorites to help you choose. The first one I really liked was “Brave New World”. I liked this blog a lot because it was different from your others. This one was full of research and was very strong, even though there wasn’t much voice. I think that for the final project this could be a great start and there is so much that you can elaborate on.

Another really strong blog you had was “Corporations and Creativity”. This was another entry that was well researched and I feel would be a great start to your final project. You could talk about how the music industry affects the economy and what the difference is between the music industries in the US and other countries. This would give you a lot of things to write about and your entry is already set up so that you can add these paragraphs in without changing your paper.

Lastly, I really liked your “Animal Anomalies” entry. I feel like your entry was full of so much information and that there was even more you could write about. This is one of those blogs that can be expanded so much more. I couldn’t stop reading this blog and it was one that really stuck with me the whole time I read the rest of your entries. I feel like this could become and extremely strong and well written paper if you decided to go this route. Good luck on your last paper!!! I hope choosing a topic isn’t too difficult for you.

Hillary:

I really enjoyed reading your blog. You are such a creative writer and I hope you do well on your final paper. I read all of your blogs and it was really hard to choose just a few favorites. My first favorite was your “German Influence” entry. This was a really well written and strong entry. Your transitions were great and I felt like you did so much research. I also think this entry, if you decide to use for your paper, would be pretty easy to expand on. There is a lot of information on German Immigration and the affect Germans had/have on the US. I really liked this entry.

My second favorite entry was “The Joys of a Consumer”. This was such a horrible story but it was so well written! I couldn’t stop laughing at the end. Your voice shone through the entire time and I loved the pictures. I really really liked this entry and it could be turned into a great paper. You could go into more detail about what happened at the ER. What you and your boyfriend are doing now, like if he broke up with you over the whole incident. Haha. I really liked this entry and it would be an awesome paper.

Lastly, I really liked your “Animal Homosexuality” entry. This entry was really strong and well written. I felt it was laid out nicely and it was an easy read. It was very informative and at the same time I feel that, if needed, you could expand on it. It was so hard choosing just three but I feel that any three of these entries could become a great paper. Good luck!!

Week 12 Blog Reviews

Rick:

In your “Which Is Better” blog, I really liked your introduction. It was strong and to the point. Immediately I knew where you stood on the topic and where your argument was going to go. I thought your transitions were smooth and this blog was really strong. It was a really well written entry.

In your “It’s Just Finance” blog I felt that your transitions could have been a little smoother. Your entry kind of jumped around from one topic to another but I liked how you really understood the reading and you were able to summarize the main points and explain it really well, but also with your own opinions thrown in there. I have really enjoyed reading your blog this semester!

Justin:

Your “443 freewrite” blog was really well written. Your transitions were very smooth and your opinion and voice jumped right out. I love that you throw in facts from the reading as well as your own opinions in a smooth manner. I feel like you could definitely elaborate more on this topic and even do your paper on it, if you wanted to.

Your “455 freewrite”, all I can say is wow! I don’t know what you are studying, but you know A LOT about finances it seems like. All the science and math behind it and everything. This was an awesome entry. I read the article but I felt like you covered soo much more than what was in the reading. Your transitions are very smooth (awesome!) and your opinions are still very strong. You have great writing and I’m glad I was able to read your blog.

Good luck on your papers!!!

Finances!

            Finance is the study of money and how it is invested, acquired, and saved. You would think that with money being around for as long as it has, that finance would be right there with it. Strangely, finance emerged around World War II, but its roots go back centuries. Back then bankers were “moneychangers” and they even had financers. So where did finance come from and why is it so popular today?

            The main scientific characteristics of finances came from the calculations of risk. Now it has become a science that demands different experiments and equations that account for objectives, accuracy, repeatability, and many other factors. Both then and now “versions” of finance derived from different equations stemming from many different men. One of the most popular models used in finance is called the Gordon model. This model helps to determine the value of stocks which, in this day, is extremely important, especially to big businesses. Another popular model is the capital asset pricing model which helps determine the returns on securities through time valve of money and any risks associated. Both of these models have helped to determine the price of stocks which is used by big businesses and stock brokers all over the nation (Peterson 447).

            Even though financing is centuries old, most of the calculating progress has been very recent. One man, Louis Bachelier, was the first to address the problem of assigning different prices to different options. Bachelier eventually developed a model that, even though was unrealistic, helped to develop another model that was more precise. This model was developed by Einstein and Norbert Wiener after refining the Bachelier model. The equation called Brownian motion was extremely important when it came to relation option pricing. The equation was very complicated but included volality, shift in price, shift in time, and the rise/fall of the price. Together three men helped develop the model which is now commonly used to help determine prices of stocks.

            Finance is a very difficult subject. It includes money, prices, fluctuations, chance, and many more unpredictable things. However many men have made a name for themselves by helping to come up with equations to determine ways to put a price on future objects. These men have changed the way many people see money and I think they have changed the way the stock business runs. These men have “carved a niche for themselves” when it comes to finances, and I’m sure many people thank them.

How Much is Too Much?

            What is libertarianism? According to David Boaz, "Libertarianism is the view that each person has the right to live his life in any way he chooses so long as he respects the equal rights of others" and that, "Libertarians defend each person's right to life, liberty, and property--rights that people have naturally, before governments are created.” (Boaz 1998) Libertarians make up about one-third of the political parties in the United States, and Arizona is one of the states that is Libertarian. People who believe in the Liberal view of politics and government believe that the government has no right intruding in their personal space and they try to do whatever they can to make sure their privacy is just that. Some Liberals believe that there shouldn’t be a ruling government and that they should be able to do as they please. Others believe that the government should control everything and without the government we wouldn’t have anything. I believe that I lie right in the middle of that spectrum. I believe that we need a government to help maintain rules and regulations, but I don’t think I need a government like in 1984 where they are watching every single thing I do.

            Sameer Parekh is one of those Liberals who isn’t very fond of the government. He helps to traffic cryptography into the United States and to different places all over the world. He believes that by using cryptography it will keep the government from prying into our privacy. Big businesses and banks use cryptography to keep con-men from hurting their business or stealing money. Sameer also believes that cryptography will be really useful to people who can’t afford to leave a paper trail behind, like those who want to cheat taxes. Money transfers will be untraceable, papers encrypted will be impossible to decode, money on the internet will be safe from the government, and people will be able to do what they want as long as what they are doing is encrypted (McHugh 436).  

            The only problem is, not only good people will get their hands on this cryptography. Sameer boasts that money transfers will be untraceable. What if a little girl is kidnapped and money is transferred to the kidnappers from the parents? With this cryptography, there would be no way police would be able to trace the kidnappers and they could get away with the money and the child. Terrorists would be able to use this new technology to plan new attacks and the government wouldn’t be able to pick up any red flags because they wouldn’t be able to decrypt the messages sent back and forth. Sure, this new technology can be used for privacy, but put into the wrong hands it can become very dangerous very quickly.

            I believe that we need to government to help keep and maintain laws. Sure nobody likes to pay taxes, but without those taxes many of the luxuries we have would be gone. Imagine a world without any sort of government. There would be no rules, no laws, and all chaos. Murderers would get off scot free, nobody would be working, theft would be an everyday thing for everybody. This is a not a world I want to live in. On the other hand, imagine a world where everything you do is monitored, videotaped, and you are being controlled by a high government. If you stole something the government would know right away. If you were planning on trying to overthrow them, they would be able to find out through your emails or phone calls. I don’t want to live in a world like this either. In order for our country to run smoothly we need a balance. We need a government who will enforce rules but not invade our privacy.

           

Works Cited

Boaz, David (1998). Libertarianism - A Primer. Free Press. p. 2. ISBN 0-684-84768-X.             http://www.libertarianism.org/ex-1.html. Retrieved 26 Sep 2010.

Week 11 Blog Reviews

Rick:

Your “Are They Good or Bad For Us” blog was great. I liked that it was full of research and a lot of details. You really showed me about the history Germans have on the US. I wanted to know why you picked Germans; if it is because you are German or just because you wanted too. I also think this blog was just a little short. You didn’t really have an intro, body and conclusion. The whole thing just ran together as one paragraph.

On the other hand, your “Cost of Materialism” blog was really really good. I liked that you included a lot of voice and opinion, as well as a lot of quotes and material from the book to help back up and support your argument. This was a really well written blog and your intro was really strong.

Justin:

I liked that in your 418 freewrite, you stated your opinion right away. Your were very adamant and you didn’t just say “Twitchell is wrong”. You went on to describe why you don’t agree with him and what you do agree with. This blog was very well written and nicely laid out. I really like that your blogs are full of voice and opinions.

I also really liked your 426 Freewrite. You obviously did a lot of research and it shows throughout the entire blog. I think that you could do your next paper on this topic because I can see a lot of places where you are able to expand and go more in depth. Not only does your research shine through your blog but your voice and opinion does as well. I love your style of writing and can’t wait to read more.

Irish and Proud of It

             My great-great-grandparents emigrated from Ireland in the late 19^th century. My grandparents told me they immigrated due to the fact that their religious beliefs were being prejudiced and the war overpopulated much of Ireland. They wanted to come to America to have freedom to follow their religious views, and they thought there would be more job opportunities.  Apparently, my great-great-grandparents weren’t the only people with this mindset. Between 1820 and 1860, Irish made up more than one-third of the immigrants and by the 1950’s Irish people were one-fifth of all foreign born population. Most Irish immigrants helped build canals and railroads and, because of these developments, American cities began to expand (Handlin). Not only did the Irish help expand American cities, they also helped bring religion with them.

            When Irish immigrants began to settle down they formed tight-knit communities. Many Irish immigrants were Catholics, so when the immigrated to America they brought along their Catholic views. Many of the earliest Catholic churches were built by and run by Irish immigrants. St. Patrick’s Day was also brought around when Irish immigrated to America. Many American’s viewed this day as a separation of Irish and American’s, but this day actually helped to bond Irish immigrants from all over America (Hirschmann). Unfortunately, not all American’s saw the immigrants as “worthy” people, and they weren’t afraid to express their opinions.

            Immigration has caused a lot of fights, arguments, and protests. After the Irish started immigrating to the United States, many Americans rebelled. The most popular form of rebellion was the burning of Irish-Catholic churches. American’s thought this was the one thing the Irish cared about most, it was one of their main reasons for immigration. Priests were also attacked and convents were destroyed. Also, with the great influx of immigrants, many believed that the immigrants caused the depression. Over 3.5 million immigrants immigrated in the 1800’s to the United States. This amount of people overwhelmed the United States and definitely could have threw them into a depression. But Irish weren’t the only immigrants in that time period, so the blame cannot be completely put on them.

            I am very proud to be Irish. My relatives may have helped to expand cities and bring water to different parts of the country. They may have also played a part in building Catholic churches, and maybe even part of some of the first St. Patrick’s Day celebrations. I feel like my ancestors for Ireland played an extravangant role in helping to build the United States.

Works Cited:

            Handlin, Oscar. A Pictorial History of Immigration. New York: Crown Publishers, 1972

            Hirschmann, Charles. "The Impact of Immigration on American Society: Looking Backward to the Future." Border Battles. 28 July 2006. Web. 28 Oct. 2010.       <http://borderbattles.ssrc.org/Hirschman/>.