Event Risk Management Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Event Risk Management - Assignment Example This is coordinated by the risk manager who controls the number of medical personnel to be present as well as the amount of equipments to be used. The equipments should be placed before the event begins. The personnel should also remain in place until the special event is over. There should be a communication plan to avoid conflict of interest in case of fire outbreak. According to Taylor (2002) the risk manager should plan for ambulances in case something happens. That is, the number of ambulances to be used as well as well as their passage to and fro the special event compound. People who reject medical attention should be documented to avoid legal issues later. There should also be a shelter to cater for the victims and medical personnel during rainy, sunny or extreme windy conditions. The medical official vehicles should also be secured to avoid cases of vandalism or theft. Fire incidences can quickly be controlled by the use of smoke alarms. Smoke alarms and sprinkler systems should be checked to reduce the spread of fire. Use of an evacuation plan is highly necessary especially for the old, disabled and children. The evacuation plan should be read and explained to the participants in advance. The evacuation plan should be pre tested and discussed by the various fire officials to prevent the actual fire incidence. The evacuees’ routes should be demarcated to necessitate ease during evacuation. Biochemical precautions should be taken care-of by consultations with the relevant experts. Biochemical hazards increase the intensity of the fire and it complicates the extinction of the fire (Taylor, 2002). The risk management team should ensure emergency power backups and phones are put in place to cater for emergences when need arises. Poison can be minimized by provision of hotline numbers for all poison control

Acknowledging Female Stereotypes in Much Ado About Nothing Essay Example for Free

Acknowledging Female Stereotypes in Much Ado About Nothing Essay Women in the Elizabethan age were extremely repressed and discriminated against. Most would not have gone to school or received any type of formal education. They were not allowed to vote, own property, or freely voice their opinions. They were seen as the property of a man, subject to his wants, needs, and not allowed to have their own; men held extremely stereotypical views of their female counterparts that helped them justify the way they treated them. Shakespeare exposes many of these injustices and biases in his stage plays, which are still commonly read and performed today. In Much Ado About Nothing, Claudio moves from seeing women (specifically Hero) as goddesses and wives to adulterers, and then back again to his original views. Claudio initially views Hero according to the established stereotypes, in Act 1, Scene 1 as property. When first speaking of Hero, he refers to her as the â€Å"daughter of Signor Leonato;† while this appears to be simply for identification purposes, he actually relinquishes the power of her name to her guardian (1. 1. 119). Instead of calling her by her given name, Hero, Claudio names her in relation to her more powerful male owner. He goes on to ask Benedick if she is a â€Å"modest young lady,† not wondering only if she is sweet, but if she is literally a virgin (1. 1. 121). A womans virginity was extremely valuable in Elizabethan England, and determined her worth as a potential wife. This outright inquiry into her purity foreshadows the later scandal surrounding it. Benedick asks Claudio if he would buy her, and Claudio responds with a seemingly noble hypothetical question: â€Å"Can the world buy such a jewel?† (1 1 134). While his question seems to imply that she is so valuable that the entire worlds money could not purchase her, it still perpetuates the stereotype that women are pieces of property, albeit very beautiful and expensive ones. Later in the same scene, Claudio demonstrates Elizabethan men’s views of women through Shakespeare’s thematic messages. He remarks that â€Å"in mine eye, [Hero] is the sweetest lady that ever I looked on† (1 1 139). This introduces a reoccurring theme of Much Ado About Nothing of seeing and perception. Here, and later on in the play, Claudio bases his opinions of Hero on her outward beauty and appearance of piety. In addition, the words â€Å"mine† and â€Å"I† stress the importance of Claudio himself, the important, powerful male in the situation. One notes Shakespeares wordplay in the pun implied when â€Å"eye† and â€Å"I† sound interchangeable when spoken aloud. Another theme surfaces in the use of the word â€Å"sworn† in line 144 of Act 1, Scene 1, whereby Claudio makes evident that his honor depends on peoples perception of him and, by proxy, his future wife, Hero. Also notable is the hope he expresses that Hero would â€Å"be [his] wife†, in that he uses language again pertaining to himself; where he could have wished that Hero would â€Å"marry him† or something similar, he instead wishes her to become his property. Claudio reveals that he has had an interest in Hero for a while before their present conversation about her. He admired her before he went away to war, but more pressing, important, masculine issues took his mind off her. This implies that matters of the heart were less valued by men than duty and honor, and that his current infatuation with Hero is sort of an afterthought, something to pursue as he is now bored. This distant, material admiration for Hero quickly turns to contempt when he thinks that Don Pedro has taken her for himself in Act 2, Scene 1. When Don John and Borachio tell him about his friends betrayal, Claudio seems to be angrier with Hero than with the man who stole his prospective bride. He claims â€Å"beauty is a witch, against whose charms faith meltheth into blood† (2 1 135-6). This demonstrates the stereotype that Elizabethan men held of women being easily turned to adulterers – it seems to be her evil beauty that lured Don Pedro into supposedly winning her over for his own. This is again an insult to Claudios pride; Don John and Borachio use forms of the word â€Å"swear† when recounting Don Pedros supposed conquest of Hero, calling to mind how Claudio swore to marry her in the first act. Claudio denounces Hero, and wishes Don Pedro â€Å"joy of her,† once again suggesting women to be objects of personal property, solely existing to fulfill the desires of man. When it is confirmed that Don Pedro was indeed just performing his friendly duties, Claudio instantly reverts to his view of Hero as a perfect, virginal, almost goddess-like potential wife. He says to Hero: â€Å"Lady, as you are mine, I am yours: I give away myself for you, and dote upon the exchange† (2 1 233-4). Claudio acknowledges that Hero is now his property, and as that is an accepted custom in Elizabethan England, it is therefore deemed heroic that he gives himself to her, as well. Using the word â€Å"exchange† suggests a formal transaction of property, which is what is really transpiring between Claudio and Leonato. Claudio expresses his anticipation for the wedding, as time moves slowly â€Å"till love have all his rites† (2 1 269-70); the two meanings of rites as the actual ceremony and rights as a husband provide insight into this. He feels a necessity for their union to be official, as legally marrying Hero will give him legal ownership of her, and her property. Though he claims to love her, his affection could ultimately be seen as a want of her dowry. Claudio shows his opinions of women in his comical description of Beatrice’s love for Benedick in Act 2, Scene 3. He describes her grief over her unrequited love in a ridiculous way, saying that she threw a savage fit. This implies Beatrice, and by extension all women, to be controlled and weakened by their emotions. Claudio says that Hero had told him that Beatrice would surely die if her situation with Benedick progresses in any direction, again poking fun at womens irrationality. He suggests she wear herself out by talking to someone about her love, as though she were a small child throwing a temper tantrum. Like most men of his time, Claudio appears to believe that womens perceived lack of control of their emotions made them less worthy of esteem. His view of women again turns cynical again when he receives news in Act 3, Scene 2 that leads him to believe that Hero has had an affair with another man. Don John uses the word â€Å"disloyal† to describe her actions, and Claudio repeats that word in outrage and confusion about this blow to his honor (3 2 76). Being â€Å"disloyal† seems worse than most other things, in that it has wounded Claudios pride and reputation. The prefix â€Å"dis† is extremely negative and poignant. He emphasizes that if he sees anything with his own eyes, he will believe these accusations. He describes the issue as â€Å"mischief strangely thwarting,† and extends that description to all women in general; here he shows that he has moved from seeing women as wives and goddesses to adulterers and shrews. At their wedding ceremony in Act 4, Scene 1, Claudio spitefully and ironically addresses Hero with all sorts of virginal, innocent, pure language like â€Å"maid† (4 1 19). He again describes her as property in calling her a â€Å"rich and precious gift,† yet this time it is with an air of contempt and scorn (4 1 23). Continuing the theme of perception and sight, he calls Hero â€Å"but the sign and semblance of her honor,† implying that she merely put on a facade of virginity and purity (4 1 28). He asks the attendees of the wedding and, by extension, the audience, to acknowledge that her innocence is merely a show. Claudio accuses her girlish blush to be truly that of guilt and shame. Where previously he has referred to Hero as a maid, here he calls her only â€Å"like† a maid; this literal comparison emphasizes his change of feeling toward her and her sex. He facetiously describes her as the goddess of chastity and the moon, Diana, and of an unopened flower bud virgin in appearance only. Then he compares her to Venus, goddess of sexuality, and even to mindless beasts that act only on impulse and instinct. In the line â€Å"Marry that Hero, Hero itself can blot out Heros virtue,† he proclaims that women are the source of their own downfall (4 1 75). Where her outward appearance was that of a virtuous young lady, her perceived actions lead Claudio to believe her to be a whore. Although one could argue that Claudios view of women was that of all Elizabethan men, including Shakespeare himself, the development of Benedicks opinions show that this is not true. He begins the play disliking the idea of marriage and especially marriage to Beatrice, yet, through the dramatic action, he learns to love and appreciate her for her previously detested intelligence and wit. Benedick learns to value women for the humans they are, and yet Claudio still sees them as property at the end of the play. This suggests that Shakespeare realizes that, although he can bring attention to the issue of gender equality in his works, he cannot expect the audience to fully accept his ideas. Claudio constantly moves between stereotypes in his views of women in this play: he alternatively sees Hero as wife, goddess, adulterer, and everything in between. Shakespeare’s specific word choice and themes revealed in Much Ado About Nothing provide insight into how women were actually thought of and treated in Elizabethan England, and how the author himself believed they should be. Today, the centuries-old fight for gender equality is far from over. But, like Shakespeare, we can hope that all women will eventually be respected as equals, like Beatrice. Works Cited McDonald, Russ. The Bedford Companion to Shakespeare. Boston: Bedford, 2010. Shakespeare, William. Much Ado about Nothing. Ed. Mary Berry and Michael Clamp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.

An Analysis of Emily Dickinsons Poem #315 :: Emily Dickinson Poem 315 Essays

An Analysis of Emily Dickinson's Poem #315 I believe that this poem can be interpreted in many different ways. Who is to say that there can only be one explanation or meaning to Dickinson's #315? Since being introduced to this poem, I have heard many different interpretations either from others in my group or from reading about it in web sites or books. In this close reading, I will concentrate on the very first word of this text: He. I will explain who I think this person is and how "He" is responsible for the actions in this poem. In my view, I think the one doing the action in this poem or, "He," is some form of deity. Whether it is God or just a god is beyond my comprehension. I think the only one who knows that answer is Emily Dickinson herself. At first thought, however, I envisioned a supreme Zeus-like god playing the song that is our lives like a musical instrument. We travel through life's trials and tribulations, provided by this being, and we ultimately die at the hand of him. The first line not only introduces this character but explains that his hands are guiding our souls. The mental image I received from the word "fumbles" (line 1) is a simple one. I thought of someone throwing bits of mozzarella cheese on top of a pizza getting ready to be cooked! This can be symbolic of our supreme being throwing at us the events of our lives as it fumbles through his hands with no concern or compassion as to where it falls. The next line verifies this image. "As Players at the Keys" (line 2) is symbolic of a pianist playing the song that is our life. However, the plural usage of "player" might suggest more than one god is in control of our existence. Like a song with its peaks and valleys (representing our life) the pianist's ("He," or, the gods) fingers strike at the "keys" with varying tempo's and force. This also ties in to lines three and four. "Before they drop the full music on - He stuns you by degrees-" At this point I feel Dickinson is trying to tell us that those who are in control of our soul are not in our favor.

Female Circumcision Reader Response

Conn 1 Jennifer Conn Professor Michael Hickman GWRTC 103 –Sect. 61 15 April 2013 Reader Response #3 Though Meyerhardt states that the opening account on female circumcision seemed â€Å"Amusing†, I personally found it far more disturbing. I was very shocked and disgusted while reading this piece, as I am sure my classmates were as well. The â€Å"small opening left for urination and menstruation . . . held open by a single piece of straw which is left there during the healing process† (1) forced me to feel that is an unbelievably unnatural, dehumanizing practice. I was extremely curious about what cultural beliefs supported this practice.When coming to the supposed health reasons and seeing how flawed and inaccurate they all were, I was unable to keep an open mind or continue trying to understand this practice. The idea of â€Å"looking at each other’s genitals to see who had the smallest opening† (2) struck me in a large way. This procedure that is done for society, for a future husband, and for acceptance, seems to take away from the woman. It is as if her body does not truly belong to her. I thought it was interesting and important for the author to include the effect of cultural relativism on the reader.I know that my lack of experience and understanding of the topic, as well as the way of life influences my opinion towards the procedure. Throughout the piece, I was unable change my perception of female circumcision as horrid. Though she seemed to go back and forth in the second half of the essay, the author seemed to have bias as well. I could see the vague connection to culture dominating a woman’s view and treatment of her body. In this way, the procedure seems similar to eating disorders in America. In fact, eating disorders come across as far more deadly.However, I feel that the connection was weak and overdramatized especially when the author stated, â€Å"in America, being fat and ugly, for some, is a fate w orse than death†(3). If this was true, and our culture was as consistent with our beliefs, then we would not have obesity rates as high as they are today. The statement that plastic surgery in America by trained professionals causes â€Å"as much pain† as â€Å"midwives [using] whatever is lying around: a razor, a knife, a broken bottle† (3) is absurd. Safe, comfortable, controlled cosmetic surgery is not widespread, made by someone’s own will, and often looked down upon.The fact that eating disorders are not accepted in our society destroys this analogy to female circumcision. Another poor analogy attempted by Meyerhardt can be found in the beginning of the piece. The author connects children no longer making funny faces due to slight unjustified fear to the cutting off of female genitalia. Though the â€Å"thought of looking odd and malformed scared us enough to stop† in both circumstances, the examples are extremely different. Funny faces are not natural, and little is required to stop making them. Possessing female genitalia is natural however, and the removal of it is dangerous.This analogy downplays the extremity of female circumcision, and does not work. This piece was interesting, and informative on a topic I had known nothing about. For many reasons, it was my impulse to reject the idea of female circumcision and find it horrifying. There seemed to be no truly justified reasoning for why it is still happening, aside from traditional. Though the author attempted to describe opposing views, I found them very weak and confusing. I was unable to connect this procedure with concepts in American life, or accept the vague, unrealistic, positive ending that the author provided.

Humanities Study Guide

Study guide Ch 16 Enlightenment Enlightenment 1700-1789- intellectual and cultural movement. Rococo- pastile, light and everyday scene of wealthy atistocles, and sexual or exrotic. Neoclasicism- Deism- worship a supreme being a god who created the universe and set the laws of nature in motion but who never again interfered in natural or human affairs. Pietism- Philosophes- leaders of enlightenment. Encyclopedie- First great awakening- Phillip Spener- Jonathan Edwards- Mozart- Departure from Cythera- 1717 oil on canvasOath of the Horatii- 1785 Ch17 Revolutions Capitalism/laissez-faire- rule by the people and government keeps out of economy. romanticism- sublime- Industrial revolution- switch to mass production. american revolution- seeking independence from great britian and taxation without repreatation. french revolution- enligtment > freedom and equality for all. declaration of independence-1776 war aganist great britian. Estates-general- adam smith- national constituent assembly- louis XVI- king of france and reign of terror aximilien robespierre- reign of terror- declaration of the rights of man and citizen- goethe-1749-1832 the sorrows of young werther 1774 death of marat-1793 the third of may-1808, 1814-1815 the raft of the medusa-1818 oil on canvas ch 18 triumph of the bourgeoisie Liberalism- democracy and individual liberity. Nationalism- pride in one's nation. Equality and brotherhood real politik- realistic/praticial governing style ; strong armies 1850-1871. socialism-destruction of class system, proletariat. Evangelicalism-protestant and methodists ranscendentalism- thoreau walden 1859 and rom movement in U. S. Realism- concead in real life, everyday problems. slave narrative-1845 life of fredick douglas and 1850 narrative of sojourner truth. pope pius 9-1848 syllabus of errors and doctrine of papal infallibility. karl marx ; friedrich engels- communist manifesto 1848. charles darwin- origings of species 1859. charlotte bronte- jane eyre 1847 emily bronte- wuthering heights 1847 leo tolstoy- sojourner truth- the slave ship- 1840 J. M. W. Turner

Common Spelling and Grammar Errors Should You Use Its or Its

Common Spelling and Grammar Errors Should You Use Its or Its According to the readers of my blog, the distinction between it’s (with an apostrophe) and its (without an apostrophe) is the top pet peeve and common error out in the writing world. This article attempts to explain the distinction between the two words and when to use its or its. It’s is a contraction. Most of us have heard of and are familiar with contractions. Here’s how they work: If you want to say â€Å"here is† and be less formal about it, squash the words together and substitute an apostrophe for the last vowel (i) to create heres.   If you want to say â€Å"do not† less formally, squash the words together and substitute an apostrophe for the last vowel (o) to create dont. This process of contraction is how we get many words such as: can’t; doesn’t; aren’t; there’s; and (drumroll please)†¦ it’s! How simple is that? If you want your word to mean â€Å"it is† or â€Å"it has† then just make a contraction: it’s. Examples: It is time for bed. = It’s time for bed. It is a girl! = It’s a girl! It has been raining for days. = It’s been raining for days. These examples seem simple enough. I think where people get flummoxed is when they want a word meaning â€Å"belonging to ‘it.’† â€Å"Its† is possessive. Why is this one confusing? When something belongs to Harry we add an apostrophe after Harry and say it’s Harrys. When something belongs to the barber we add an apostrophe and say it’s the barbers. However, when it comes to saying something belongs to it, the apostrophic form goes out the window, i.e. we do NOT use an apostrophe. Something belonging to it is its. Why is there no apostrophe in its? Note there are other times we do not use an apostrophe to show possession. When something belongs to her we say it’s hers. When something belongs to him we say it’s his; when something belongs to us we say it’s ours and when something belongs to them we say it’s theirs. There are many irregular constructions here. Yet somehow most people don’t make mistakes when it comes to these other possessive forms. It’s its that continues to baffle us. You might notice something in common about all the examples where apostrophes are not used to show possession: they are all a part of speech we refer to as a pronoun. Pronouns are our shortcuts so that we do not have to keep referring to people and things by their name or other descriptor. They are a referential shortcut. They replace, or substitute for, nouns. I will write more about pronouns in a future article where I will talk about the use of â€Å"I and â€Å"me.† For now you can look at  the University of Ottawa’s Writing Center grammar page under What Is a Pronoun?, for more information. Some examples of pronouns are he, she, they, you, her, him, us, our, their and its. Here’s your rule to remember: When forming a possessive PRONOUN, do NOT use an apostrophe. Since â€Å"it† is a pronoun, we do NOT put an apostrophe after it to make it possessive. Just as you would not write â€Å"her’s† or â€Å"our’s,† do not write â€Å"it’s† when you are intending to show possession. Another trick is to remember the phrase Its raining apostrophes! This sentence means It is raining apostrophes, so you can remember that when you mean it is, you should use its, with an apostrophe. It’s my fervent hope this article has cleared up some common misperceptions and that its contents will be distributed widely by its readers! If you or someone you know needs writing or editing assistance, contact The Essay Expert. We can help clear up any apostrophe problems youre having.

In the Shadow of Man essays

In the Shadow of Man essays In this paper I am going to discuss how anthropology is a science. I am also going to explain how Jane Goodall is a scientist with her works with chimpanzees, and how that is known as primatology. I will also look at the order primates in correspondence with Jane Goodalls book on primates, specifically the chimpanzee. Anthropology is a science; it has four aspects in which you can study. Anthropology takes a look at humankind and with its subdiciplines you can break down individual societies into four parts. Physical anthropology, archaeology, linguistic anthropology, and cultural anthropology; allows you to break down specific things in a culture, past, present, and to make predictions about thing in the future. Empirical data is also important because the objects that they study are what make anthropology a science. Anthropology is a social science similar to sociology, psychology, and economics. What they learn and observe is taken from research. For example an archaeologist will search through ancient empirical data and observe what they find, to evaluate and note how one thing relates to another. Anthropology being a science uses the scientific method to evaluate data that they have found or have observed, where in science a hypothesis is created and then somehow a theory is made. In taking a theory it sometimes can be wrong and afterwards will be changed to fit the new standard, which is an ongoing process. This could be known as the scientific process. In the book, In the Shadow of Man, Jane Goodall, specifically deals with primatology. Primatology is the study of primates. She studies, observes, and finally is accepted by the chimpanzees at the Gombe Stream, therefore, becomes a primatologist. In doing this she describes how she took notes and recorded her findings and observations throughout her day. Then she tells us how, during endless nights, she would retype her findings to be clearer. She describes these ...