Friday, July 24, 2020

How to Write a KILLER LinkedIn Profile Raffle Drawing!

How to Write a KILLER LinkedIn Profile Raffle Drawing! How to Write a KILLER LinkedIn Profile Raffle Drawing! Did you know that last week (February 9-15, 2015) was International Random Acts of Kindness Week? Neither did I, until a woman named Ann Terry Gilman from Germany purchased my LinkedIn e-bookâ€"3 times! I wrote to Terry to find out whether she intended to purchase the book in triplicate, and she responded that no she did not, but would I please give away the two extra books to an organization in needâ€"in honor of RAK week! Terry took the message of RAK to heart and I am happy to announce that The Essay Expert will be holding a drawing on March 1 for an organization to receive a free lifetime subscription to the PDF version of How to Write a KILLER LinkedIn Profile. If you know a job club or an educational institution that would benefit from the information in the 11th edition of How to Write a KILLER LinkedIn Profile, please send the following information to Name of contact person Name of organization/institution Description of the mission of the organization/institution Email address the book (and lifetime updates!) will go to We will hold a drawing for 2 winners on March 1, 2015 and the winners will be announced through my e-list! Random Acts of Kindness Life Of course now that I know last week was RAK week, I’m thinking about whether I do enough RAKs in my life. Last week, one day I brought a smoothie to a friend who is a nurse and would miss dinner that day due to working long hours. I tried a new salmon recipe. I drove to Chicago to see people in my class person instead of attending, as I usually do, on the phone. I made 50 phone calls for people to assist on the Transform Training while the other people in my group were making 15-20 calls each. I brought my teddy bear to yoga class and talked to people I would not normally have talked to. I did all these things without knowing it was RAK week! Did you perform random acts of kindness last week too? Here are some ideas: Feel free to take these ideas and run with them on any day or week of the year! When recently have you put a smile on someone’s face or contributed to a good cause? Please share about it below! And if you know of an organization who would benefit from a lifetime subscription to How to Write a KILLER LinkedIn Profile, remember to send their name, organization name, organization mission, and e-mail address to!

Friday, May 22, 2020

The Logic of Collective Action by Mancur Olson

There are a lot of government policies, like airline bailouts, that from an economic perspective dont make any sense at all. Politicians have an incentive to keep the economy strong as incumbents are reelected at a much higher rate during booms than busts. So why do so many government policies make such little economic sense? The best answer to this question comes from a book that is almost 40 years old: The Logic of Collective Action by Mancur Olson explains why some groups are able to have a larger influence on government policy than others. In this brief outline, the results of The Logic of Collective Action are used to explain economic policy decisions. Any page references come from the 1971 edition. It has a very useful appendix not found in the 1965 edition. You would expect that if a group of people has a common interest that theyll naturally get together and fight for the common goal. Olson states, however, that this is generally not the case: But it is not in fact true that the idea that groups will act in their self-interest follows logically from the premise of rational and self-interested behavior. It does not follow, because all of the individuals in a group would gain if they achieved their group objective, that they would act to achieve that objective, even if they were all rational and self-interested. Indeed unless the number of individuals in a group is quite small, or unless there is coercion or some other special device to make individuals act in their common interest, rational, self-interested individuals will not act to achieve their common or group interests.(pg. 2) We can see why this is if we look at the classic example of perfect competition. Under perfect competition, there is a very large number of producers of an identical good. Since the goods are identical, all firms end up charging the same price, a price that leads to a zero economic profit. If the firms could collude and decide to cut their output and charge a price higher than the one that prevails under perfect competition all firms would make a profit. Although every firm in the industry would gain if they could make such an agreement, Olson explains why this does not happen: Since a uniform price must prevail in such a market, a firm cannot expect a higher price for itself unless all of the other firms in the industry have this higher price. But a firm in a competitive market also has an interest in selling as much as it can, until the cost of producing another unit exceeds the price of that unit. In this there is no common interest; each firms interest is directly opposed to that of every other firm, for the more the firms sell, the lower the price and income for any given firm. In short, while all firms have a common interest in a higher price, they have antagonistic interests where output is concerned.(pg. 9) The logical solution around this problem would be to lobby congress to put in place a price floor, stating that producers of this good cannot charge a price lower than some price X. Another way around the problem would be to have congress pass a law stating that there was a limit to how much each business could produce and that new businesses could not enter the market. Well see on the next page that The Logic of Collective Action explains why this will not work either. The Logic of Collective Action explains why if a group of firms cannot reach a collusive agreement in the marketplace, they will be unable to form a group and lobby the government for help: Consider a hypothetical, competitive industry, and suppose that most of the producers in that industry desire a tariff, a price-support program, or some other government intervention to increase the price for their product. To obtain any such assistance from the government, the producers in this industry will presumably have to organize a lobbying organization... The campaign will take the time of some of the producers in the industry, as well as their money. Just as it was not rational for a particular producer to restrict his output in order that there might be a higher price for the product of his industry, so it would not be rational for him to sacrifice his time and money to support a lobbying organization to obtain government assistance for the industry. In neither case would it be in the interest of the individual producer to assume any of the costs himself. [...] This would be true even if everyone in the industry were absolutely convinced that the proposed program was in their interest.(pg. 11) In both instances, groups will not be formed  because the groups cannot exclude people from benefiting if they do not join the cartel or lobbying organization. In a perfect competitive marketplace, the level of production of any one producer has a negligible impact of the market price of that good. A cartel will not be formed because every agent within the cartel has an incentive to drop out of the cartel and produce as much as she possibly can, as her production will not cause the price to drop at all. Similarly, each producer of the good has an incentive not to pay dues to the lobbying organization, as the loss of one dues paying member will not influence the success or failure of that organization. One extra member in a lobbying organization representing a very large group will not determine whether or not that group will get a piece of legislation enacted that will help the industry. Since the benefits of that legislation cannot be limited to those firms in the lobbying group, there is no reason for that firm to join. Olson indicates that this is the norm for very large groups: Migrant farm laborers are a significant group with urgent common interests, and they have no lobby to voice their needs. The white-collar workers are a large group with common interests, but they have no organization to care for their interests. The taxpayers are a vast group with an obvious common interest, but in an important sense they have yet to obtain representation. The consumers are at least as numerous as any other group in the society, but they have no organization to countervail the power of organized monopolistic producers. There are multitudes with an interest in peace, but they have no lobby to match those of the special interests that may on occasion have an interest in war. There are vast numbers who have a common interest in preventing inflation and depression, but they have no organization to express that interest. (pg. 165) In a smaller group, one person makes up a larger percentage of the resources of that group, so the addition or subtraction of a single member to that organization can determine the success of the group. There are also social pressures which work much better on the small than on the large. Olson gives two reasons why large groups are inherently unsuccessful in their attempts to organize: In general, social pressure and social incentives operate only in groups of smaller size, in the groups so small that the members can have face-to-face contact with one another. Though in an oligopolic industry with only a handful of firms there may be strong resentment against the chiseler who cuts prices to increase his own sales at the expense of the group, in a perfectly competitive industry there is usually no such resentment; indeed the man who succeeds in increasing his sales and output in a perfectly competitive industry is usually admired and set up as a good example by his competitors. There are perhaps two reasons for this difference in the attitudes of large and small groups. First, in the large, latent group, each member, by definition, is so small in relation to the total that his actions will not matter much one way or another; so it would seem pointless for one perfect competitor to snub or abuse another for a selfish, antigroup action, because the recalcitrants action would not be decisive in any event. Second, in any large group everyone cannot possibly know everyone else, and the group will ipso facto not be a friendship group; so a person will ordinarily not be affected socially if he fails to make sacrifices on behalf of his groups goals.(pg. 62) Because smaller groups can exert these social (as well as economic) pressures, they are much more able to get around this problem. This leads to the result that smaller groups (or what some would call Special Interest Groups) are able to have policies enacted that hurt the country as a whole. In the sharing of the costs of efforts to achieve a common goal in small groups, there is however a surprising tendency for the exploitation of the great by the small.(pg. 3). Now that we know that smaller groups will generally be more successful than large ones, we understand why the government enacts many of the policies it does. To illustrate how this works, well use a made-up example of such a policy. Its a very drastic over-simplification, but its not that far out. Suppose there are four major airlines in the United States, each of whom is near bankruptcy. The CEO of one of the airlines realizes that they can get out of bankruptcy by lobbying the government for support. He can convince the 3 other airlines to go along with the plan, as they realize that theyll be more successful if they band together and if one of the airlines does not participate a number of lobbying resources will be greatly diminished along with the credibility of their argument. The airlines pool their resources and hire a high-priced lobbying firm along with a handful of unprincipled economists. The airlines explain to the government that without a $400 million dollar package they will not be able to survive. If they do not survive, there will be terrible consequences for the economy, so its in the best interest of the government to give them the money. The congresswoman listening to the argument finds it compelling, but she also recognizes a self-serving argument when she hears one. So shed like to hear from groups opposing the move. However, its obvious that such a group will not form, for the following reason: The $400 million dollars represents around $1.50 for each person living in America. Now obviously many of those individuals do not pay taxes, so well assume that it represents $4 for each tax-paying American (this assumes everyone pays the same amount in taxes which again is an over-simplification). Its obvious to see that its not worth the time and effort for any American to educate themselves about the issue, solicit donations for their cause and lobby to congress if theyd only gain a few dollars. So other than a few academic economists and think tanks, nobody opposes the measure, and it is enacted by congress. By this, we see that a small group is inherently at an advantage against a larger group. Although in total the amount at stake is the same for each group, the individual members of the small group have much more at stake than the individual members of the large group, so they have an incentive to spend more time and energy trying to change government policy. If these transfers just caused one group to gain at the others expense, it wouldnt hurt the economy at all. It wouldnt be any different than someone just handing you $10; youve gained $10 and that person lost $10, and the economy as a whole has the same value it had before. However, it does cause a decline in the economy for two reasons: The cost of lobbying. Lobbying is inherently a non-productive activity for the economy. The resources spent on lobbying are resources that are not being spent on creating wealth, so the economy is poorer as a whole. The money spent on lobbying could have been spent buying a new 747, so the economy as a whole is one 747 poorer.The deadweight loss caused by taxation. In the article The Effect of Taxes on the Economy, its illustrated that higher taxes causes productivity to decline and the economy to be worse off. Here the government was taking $4 from each taxpayer, which is not a significant amount. However, the government enacts hundreds of these policies so in total the sum becomes quite significant. These handouts to small groups cause a decline in economic growth because they change the actions of taxpayers.

Thursday, May 7, 2020

Power and Discourse Analysis Essay - 1811 Words

Power use is around us whether noticed or not. Power in Discourse Analysis is a medium to achieve an end. The end is for stronger of the two sides of the discourse. Power in discourse analysis is the use of language in a discourse allowing the person who acquires knowledge and high status in the discourse takes control of the discourse thus having the higher power. In the following paragraphs, I will discuss nature of power argued in Discourse Analysis, attempts made to define ‘power’ in social research and discuss the different types of power. First, nature of power argued in Discourse Analysis is related to the nature of language. Using language in life is accompanied by using its power. Different conditions vary the power and the†¦show more content†¦Pragmatics is strictly focused on language as a use of language according to a certain strategy planed by language speaker or writer. Cognitive psychology and Artificial Intelligence analysis on language study is too narrowed. It has no ideological and social implications shaped by human being. How does a computer machine know emotions intended in single word? It can’t. Within discourse analysis, comes a more practical and useful approach which is Conversation analysis. But it is also narrowed. It shows the study of every person in a conversation and each time every person speaks or writes. The moment that a person stops to speak or write again is very important. What he meant before might change at every time he stops. Second, there are many attempts to define ‘power’ in social research. â€Å"The description of discourse analysis (henceforth DA) can be viewed as a challenging enterprise, given the variety of approaches that this field encompasses† (Zanà ³n 1-2) so there are more than one definition for discourse analysis. Saussure’s understanding of language is like an abstract before the use of language and the use of it is what he calls â€Å"parole†. The variation of language is matters of individual choice but Sociolinguistics argue that the term discourse is socially identified and its variation is socially constructed. Basically as there is power manipulation and domination in society thus discourseShow MoreRelatedCritical Discourse Analysis1510 Words   |  7 PagesCritical Discourse Analysis Social communication is increasingly becoming a subject of scientists’ discussions from different disciplines, as well as ordinary language users.  In contemporary social sciences, especially in linguistics, we see a clear shift to discourse.  Discourse allows us to talk about use of the language, as well as the language as a socio-cultural activity.  In this sense, discourse, on one hand, reflects the social reality, on the other hand, it shapes it, therefore participateRead MoreCritical Discourse Analysis1347 Words   |  6 Pages2.1. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA): 2.1.1. What is CDA? Critical, discourse and analysis Before beginning to address what CDA is, it is important to be clear about what is meant by the concepts of critical, discourse, and analysis: The notion of ‘critical’ is primarily associated with the critical theory of the Frankfurt School where social theory should be oriented towards critiquing and changing society. In CDA, the concept of ‘critical’ is appliedRead MoreCritical Discourse Analysis ( Cda )1507 Words   |  7 PagesCritical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is an interdisciplinary approach, which has been further developed on the basis of Discourse Analysis (DA) since 1970s. The insights have been expanded into a broader range of social, cultural, psychological and political practices. It is regarded as the textual study aiming to elucidate the abuses of power residing in the texts by analyzing linguistic/semiotic remarks in accordance with the existing (social, political, cultural, etc.) contexts in which those textsRead MoreBlack Masculinity Through The Media923 Words   |  4 Pagesbe derived from the data (Creswell, Creswell, 2007) CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS OVERVIEW The primary method of this research is Critical discourse analysis or CDA. Critical discourse analysis is a theoretical and methodological approach to an empirical study of the relationship between discourse, social development and cultural development in the different social domains (Jorgensen Phillips. 2002). Critical Discourse Analysis is one of the main components of Phenomenology. Phenomenology â€Å"isRead MoreLiterature On Teacher Student Power Relations783 Words   |  4 Pagesliterature on teacher-student power relations, is that the matter of power shall be addressed carefully either from teacher or student’s side since it can directly affect the relationship formation and learning process. For instances, teachers are advised and guided with several specific bases and effective of power, or students are subtly apply resistance strategies to the teachers. Secondly, it is acknowledged that there is a gap in the literature of teacher-student power relations in terms of neglectingRead MoreThe Concept Of Abductive Methodology786 Words   |  4 Pagesconflict theory, it will also suggest possible hypothesis while analyzing the data available. Discourse analysis is a framework used to analyze written, vocal, or sign language. (Yatsko V.A, Integrational discourse analysis conception). Discourse analysis does not presuppose a bias towards the study of either spoken or written language (Stef Slembrouck as cited in Whittaker, O’Donnell, Hidalgo). Discourse is the conventional idea that writing and language is planned according to different patternsRead MoreAnalysis Of Foucault And Queer Theory 1211 Words   |  5 PagesIn Foucault and Queer Theory Spargo defines queer theory as a nebulous group of cultural criticism and analysis of social power structures relating to sexuality . It is these power structures and aspects of culture that are responsible for the discourse that creates and informs ones understanding of gender, race, and sexuality. However these aspects of identity do not exist separately from one another, but are constructed in tandem throughout history. These layers of identity inform each otherRead M oreA Critical Discourse Analysis ( Cda ) And Argumentation Theory860 Words   |  4 Pagesempirical study constitutes a critical discourse analysis of part of the discourse that surrounds the New Caledonian independence issue. It aims to explore audience response to political speeches, to investigate how politicians attempt to persuade people to follow a particular course of action, to link the notions of discourse and action to the cognitive dimensions of ideology and presuppositions, to further clarify various contextual factors, such as power configurations, to describe possible semanticRead MoreNew Caoleia Case Study997 Words   |  4 Pagestools such as Systemic Functional Grammar and Pragma-Dialectics, as well as insights from postcolonialism and poststructuralism to explore the impact of power and ideology on language use and social or political practice in the New Caledonian decolonisation process. Not only was linguistic evidence adduced to show how the French dominant po wers employ a common destiny rhetoric to manipulate the other groups into accepting that New Caledonia needs to remain closely associated with France, motivatedRead MoreHistorical Analysis, Discourse, And Frame Analysis835 Words   |  4 Pagesstatistical analysis, historical analysis, discourse analysis, and frame analysis techniques, Beckett is able to paint a broad picture of her argument. Her use of polls and surveys demonstrates that the traditional link between public opinion and the tough on crime policies that led to mass incarceration is problematic. Her historical analysis traces the historical development of these policies highlighting the various players and actors operating and struggling for power. Finally, her discourse and frame

Wednesday, May 6, 2020

Wage Gap Between Genders Free Essays

Earnings often signify how in dividends are valued socially and economically, therefore earning ratios between men and omen have been essential for social movements. The remaining is often wage discriminate ion since it is the difference in earnings between identical males and females. Women with equal 1 credentials should be paid equal as men Pay Equity Discrimination Women should be paid equally as men because gender makes no difference I n what a person can do on the job. We will write a custom essay sample on Wage Gap Between Genders or any similar topic only for you Order Now The resulting â€Å"urban legends† of gender difference can affect men and women at work and at home, as parents and as partners. When it co mess to personal relationships, bestselling books and popular magazines often claim t at women and men don’t get along because they communicate too differently. A lot of people believe that just being female they can not do the same as males. The fact that people belie eve females to be physically and mentally shows discrimination in genders. Women are been g put down because of their gender but can be physically and mentally better than men. As stated in Human Psychology 101 most discrimination is due to past prejudice. Whooped and ‘Pay Equity Discrimination Institute for women’s policy 201 1. 9 DCE. 20 14 http://www. iwpr. org/initiatives/payequityanddiscrimination others were regarded as women’s most significant professions. Since e early times women have been uniquely viewed as a creative source of human life. Women should be paid equally as men because historically the inequality has proven to be pure discrimination. Discrimination between genders is deeply rooted in our modern society. The gender pay gap affects all Women, but for Women Of cool r the wage gap is worse. Asian American women’s salaries show the smallest gender pay gap, at 90 percent of white men’s earnings. Hispanic women’s salaries show the largest gap, at 5 4 percent of white men’s earnings. White men are used as a benchmark because they make e up the largest demographic group in the labor force. Let is unlawful to harass a person because of that person’s sex. Harassment can include â€Å"sexual harassment† or unwelcome sex al advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical harassment of a sex al nature. Harassment does not have to be of a sexual nature, however, and can include offensive remarks about a person’s goalmouths the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing g, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal I when it is so request or severe that It creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision.. Most discrimination is caused due to either peer pressure to curry favor with their friends around them, or because they have a total lack k of selectors and selfsame, and they can’t feel good about who they are unless they are p outing down someone else, or making another person feel badly. In the past most believed that the male gender was the superior gender and put women down to keep it that way. W omen were first thought to only be made to carry children and do household chores. Before it as prohibited for women to have professions except for teaching and writing. Some feared t hat the female gender would take over. It is unlawful to harass a person because of that person’s sex. Discrimination between genders is nothing new; it all goes back to before cool nail times. In the 1 9th century the medical profession was an example of a change d attitude. Beginning in the 19th century education was required but, women were bare d from attending colleges for any profession other than teaching. This usually proven Ted women that married and bore child’s at young ages to begin any professional career they c SSE. Around this time discrimination rose. For example in 1846 the American Medical Sass conation barred women from being members. It wasn’t until 1915 that the American Medical a association began to allow female admittance-Since the signing Of the equal pay act Of 19 63, it is now illegal to pay men and women substantially different wages for equal work (N WAC, 2013). Pay difference between men and women remains a hot topic that keeps resume facing over the years and reasons behind the gap are highly debated. Gendered violence (GOB) is violence that is directed against a person on t he basis of gender. It constitutes a breach of the fundamental right to life, liberty, security, dignity, equality between women and men, nondiscrimination and physical an d mental integrity. Gendered violence and violence against women are often used indistinguishable as most gendered violence is inflicted by men on women and girls. Gendered violence includes: domestic violence, sexual harassment, rape, sexual violence during conflict an d harmful customary or traditional practices such as female genital mutilation, f arced marriages and honor crimes trafficking in women, forced prostitution and violations of human rights in AR De conflict (in particular murder, systematic rape, sexual slavery and forced pregnancy) ; forced sterilization, forced abortion, coercive use of contraceptives, female infanticide and prenatal sex selection. Domestic violence remains one of the most widespread forms of genders violence. Battering, often referred to as domestic violence happens to women of every age, race, class, and nationality. Battering takes many forms and includes a RA Eng of threatening and harmful behavior. It may take the form of verbal and emotion anal abuse, with the direct or implied threat of violence. Gender equality is a human right. Gender Equality is not only a fundamental human right, but a necessary foundation for the creation of sustainable and p useful societies. Women are entitled to live with dignity and with freedom from want and from fear. Women are treated in many other aspects Of life as equals so why not be paid equally also. Gender equality is at the very heart of human rights and United Nations values. A fundamental principle of the United Nations Charter adopted by woo RL leaders in 1945 is â€Å"equal rights for men and women†, and protecting and promoting woo men’s human rights is the responsibility of all States. Empowered women contribute o the health and productivity of whole families and communities, and they improve pros sects for the next generation. All women and girls have equal access to quality education, employment, housing, and health, irrespective of race, class, income, immigrant Zion Status or involvement with the criminal justice system. For more than 30 years, LINEN A has advocated for women and girls, promoting legal and policy reforms and gene resistive data collection, and supporting initiatives that improve women’s health and e expand their choices in life. Protecting and promoting her reproductive rights is essential t ensuring her freedom to participate more fully and equally in society. The UCLA has alls o been working to secure gender rights and ensure all women’s are able to lead lives of dignity free from violence and discrimination. They have been making sure that educe action privileges are equal between genders. They keep all job opportunities the as me. All opportunities are being kept equal yet women still haven’t been given an ex. al and fair amount of pay. Women have been in the workforce for generations. They strives to be equal to men and gain the same rights as them. How to cite Wage Gap Between Genders, Papers

Monday, April 27, 2020

Mills Utilitarianism Essays - Ethics, Philosophy, Utilitarianism

Mill's Utilitarianism When faced with a moral dilemma, utilitarianism identifies the appropriate considerations, but offers no realistic way to gather the necessary information to make the required calculations. This lack of information is a problem both in evaluating the welfare issues and in evaluating the consequentialist issues which utilitarianism requires be weighed when making moral decisions. Utilitarianism attempts to solve both of these difficulties by appealing to experience; however, no method of reconciling an individual decision with the rules of experience is suggested, and no relative weights are assigned to the various considerations. In deciding whether or not to torture a terrorist who has planted a bomb in New York City, a utilitarian must evaluate both the overall welfare of the people involved or effected by the action taken, and the consequences of the action taken. To calculate the welfare of the people involved in or effected by an action, utilitarianism requires that all individuals be considered equally. Quantitative utilitarians would weigh the pleasure and pain which would be caused by the bomb exploding against the pleasure and pain that would be caused by torturing the terrorist. Then, the amounts would be summed and compared. The problem with this method is that it is impossible to know beforehand how much pain would be caused by the bomb exploding or how much pain would be caused by the torture. Utilitarianism offers no practical way to make the interpersonal comparison of utility necessary to compare the pains. In the case of the bomb exploding, it at least seems highly probable that a greater amount of pain would be caused, at least in the present, by the bomb exploding. This probability suffices for a quantitative utilitarian, but it does not account for the consequences, which create an entirely different problem, which will be discussed below. The probability also does not hold for Mill's utilitarianism. Mill's Utilitarianism insists on qualitative utilitarianism, which requires that one consider not only the amount of pain or pleasure, but also the quality of such pain and pleasure. Mill suggests that to distinguish between different pains and pleasures we should ask people who have experienced both types which is more pleasurable or more painful. This solution does not work for the question of torture compared to death in an explosion. There is no one who has experienced both, therefore, there is no one who can be consulted. Even if we agree that the pain caused by the number of deaths in the explosion is greater than the pain of the terrorist being tortured, this assessment only accounts for the welfare half of the utilitarian's considerations. Furthermore, one has no way to measure how much more pain is caused by allowing the bomb to explode than by torturing the terrorist. After settling the issues surrounding the welfare, a utilitarian must also consider the consequences of an action. In weighing the consequences, there are two important considerations. The first, which is especially important to objectivist Utilitarianism, is which people will be killed. The second is the precedent which will be set by the action. Unfortunately for the decision maker, the information necessary to make either of these calculations is unavailable. There is no way to determine which people will be killed and weigh whether their deaths would be good for society. Utilitarianism requires that one compare the good that the people would do for society with the harm they would do society if they were not killed. For example, if a young Adolf Hitler were in the building, it might do more good for society to allow the building to explode. Unfortunately for an individual attempting to use utilitarianism to make for decisions, there is no way to know beforehand what a person will do. Furthermore, without even knowing which building the bomb is in, there is no way to predict which people will surely be in the building. A subjectivist utilitarian would dismiss this consideration and would examine only what a rational person would consider to be the consequence; however, even the subjectivist utilitarian must face the question of precedent setting. Utilitarianism considers justice and humane treatment to be good for society as a whole and therefore instrumentally good as a means

Thursday, March 19, 2020

Free Essays on One Hell Of A Night

One Hell of a Night I have never felt the action of my heart falling into my stomach, until the night of June 3, 2001. It was around three o'clock in the morning and I was waiting up for my girlfriend, Tracy, to get off of work. She was a bartender at a night club in Philadelphia, called Maui and she would always call me as she was leaving. She needed someone to talk to her on the ride home, since it was almost 50 minutes long. Tonight was like any other night, she called and we talked about how her night went, how much money she made, gossip at work, etc. Like any other night, her night was horrible. The people who frequently went there were rude and didn't tip well. After dealing with uneducated jerks, the ride home talking to me was a blessing. She would finally be able to relax after serving people drinks for over six hours straight. About ten minutes after we got on the phone, I heard a quick intake of breath, a loud boom, a brief period of silence, and then my girlfriend screaming. It was the worst scream I have ever heard in my entire life, a scream of pain, a scream of complete human pain. And it was coming from the love of my life, the woman I wanted to spend the rest of my life with. That is the moment when I felt my heart fall into the depths of my stomach. After a few minutes she stopped screaming and I had no idea what had happened. Frantically I repeated her name over and over, until finally I heard her reply. As she sobbed into the phone, she told me that she had gotten into a car accident and the driver who hit her had taken off. The driver blew a red light and hit her on the drivers’ side door, totaling her car. Luckily the airbags were deployed and she was wearing her seatbelt. She kept repeating how much her arm hurt, and how she couldn't move it. Since no one was around, I told her to call 911, and to call me back right away. I hung up the phone with her and began my quest for a ride. ... Free Essays on One Hell Of A Night Free Essays on One Hell Of A Night One Hell of a Night I have never felt the action of my heart falling into my stomach, until the night of June 3, 2001. It was around three o'clock in the morning and I was waiting up for my girlfriend, Tracy, to get off of work. She was a bartender at a night club in Philadelphia, called Maui and she would always call me as she was leaving. She needed someone to talk to her on the ride home, since it was almost 50 minutes long. Tonight was like any other night, she called and we talked about how her night went, how much money she made, gossip at work, etc. Like any other night, her night was horrible. The people who frequently went there were rude and didn't tip well. After dealing with uneducated jerks, the ride home talking to me was a blessing. She would finally be able to relax after serving people drinks for over six hours straight. About ten minutes after we got on the phone, I heard a quick intake of breath, a loud boom, a brief period of silence, and then my girlfriend screaming. It was the worst scream I have ever heard in my entire life, a scream of pain, a scream of complete human pain. And it was coming from the love of my life, the woman I wanted to spend the rest of my life with. That is the moment when I felt my heart fall into the depths of my stomach. After a few minutes she stopped screaming and I had no idea what had happened. Frantically I repeated her name over and over, until finally I heard her reply. As she sobbed into the phone, she told me that she had gotten into a car accident and the driver who hit her had taken off. The driver blew a red light and hit her on the drivers’ side door, totaling her car. Luckily the airbags were deployed and she was wearing her seatbelt. She kept repeating how much her arm hurt, and how she couldn't move it. Since no one was around, I told her to call 911, and to call me back right away. I hung up the phone with her and began my quest for a ride. ...

Tuesday, March 3, 2020

Best Character Analysis Daisy Buchanan - The Great Gatsby

Best Character Analysis Daisy Buchanan - The Great Gatsby SAT / ACT Prep Online Guides and Tips In The Great Gatsby, Daisy Fay Buchanan is the object of Jay Gatsby’s singular obsession, which means in many ways she is the center of the novel. But despite this, there is quite a bit we don’t know about Daisy Buchanan as a character – her inner thoughts, her desires, and even her motivations can be hard to read. So what do we know about Daisy, and what would a typical analysis of her look like? Learn all about Daisy, The Great Gatsby’s most alluring, controversial character, through her description, actions, famous quotes, and a detailed character analysis. Article Roadmap Daisy as a Character Physical description Daisy's background Actions in the novel Character Analysis Quotes about and by Daisy Common discussion topics FAQ about Daisy's motivations and actions Quick Note on Our Citations Our citation format in this guide is (chapter.paragraph). We're using this system since there are many editions of the novel, so using page numbers would only work for students with our copy of the book. To find a quotation we cite via chapter and paragraph in your book, you can either eyeball it (Paragraph 1-50: beginning of chapter; 50-100: middle of chapter; 100-on: end of chapter), or use the search function if you're using an online or eReader version of the text. Daisy Buchanan's Physical Description First up: what does Daisy look like? â€Å"I looked back at my cousin who began to ask me questions in her low, thrilling voice. It was the kind of voice that the ear follows up and down as if each speech is an arrangement of notes that will never be played again. Her face was sad and lovely with bright things in it, bright eyes and a bright passionate mouth- but there was an excitement in her voice that men who had cared for her found difficult to forget: a singing compulsion, a whispered "Listen," a promise that she had done gay, exciting things just a while since and that there were gay, exciting things hovering in the next hour.† (1.33) Now and then she moved and he changed his arm a little and once he kissed her dark shining hair. (8.16) Note that Daisy’s magnetic voice is a central part of her description – Nick describes her voice before her physical appearance, and doesn’t even include key details like her hair color until much later on in the book. We’ll discuss Daisy’s voice in depth later in this post. Also, note that Daisy is modeled after dark-haired beauty Ginevra King. King married another man despite Fitzgerald’s love for her (sound familiar?). Oddly, despite this biographical fact – and the clear description of Daisy's â€Å"dark shining hair† – all of the films show Daisy as blonde. Daisy Buchanan's Background Daisy Buchanan, born Daisy Fay, is from a wealthy family in Louisville, Kentucky. Popular and beautiful, she was courted by several officers during World War I. She met and fell in love with Jay Gatsby, an officer at the time, and promised to wait for him to return from the war. However, she succumbed to pressure from her family and married Tom Buchanan instead. The next year, they had a baby girl together, Pammy. Although Daisy is happy immediately after she and Tom are married, he begins having affairs almost immediately after their honeymoon to the South Seas. By the time Pammy is born, Daisy has become rather pessimistic, saying that the best thing in the world a girl can be is â€Å"a beautiful little fool† (1.8). The couple move around to anywhere where â€Å"people played polo and were rich together† – specifically, they live in both Chicago and France before moving to Long Island (1.17). Despite associating with a partying crowd in Chicago, Daisy’s reputation comes out unscathed: â€Å"They moved with a fast crowd, all of them young and rich and wild, but she came out with an absolutely perfect reputation. Perhaps because she doesn't drink. It's a great advantage not to drink among hard-drinking people† (4.144). By the beginning of the novel, Daisy and Tom hope to stay in New York permanently, but Nick is skeptical about this: â€Å"This was a permanent move, said Daisy over the telephone, but I didn't believe it† (1.17). Daisy frequently hosts her friend Jordan Baker, and seems desperate for something - or someone - to distract her from her restlessness and increasing pessimism. To see how Daisy's background ties her in to the biographies of the other characters, check out our novel timeline. Daisy's Actions in the Book We first meet Daisy in Chapter 1. She invites Nick Carraway over to her home for dinner, where he is first introduced to Jordan Baker. Tom takes a call from his mistress Myrtle during the evening, creating some tension. Daisy later confesses dramatically to Nick about her marital troubles, but undercuts that confession with "an absolute smirk" (1.120). When Nick leaves he has already predicted Daisy won’t leave Tom: â€Å"It seemed to me that the thing for Daisy to do was to rush out of the house, child in arms- but apparently there were no such intentions in her head† (1.150). In Chapter 5, Nick invites Daisy to tea over at his house. This is actually just an excuse for Jay Gatsby to come over and reunite with her after five years apart. After a tearful reunion, she tours Gatsby’s lavish mansion. Later, Nick leaves them alone and they begin an affair. Daisy attends one of Gatsby’s riotous parties in Chapter 6 and hates it. This causes Gatsby to stop throwing his parties entirely. He also fires his old staff and brings a new staff sent by Meyer Wolfshiem to his house – in part because of his business but also to help keep his affair with Daisy secret. In Chapter 7, Gatsby pushes Daisy to confront Tom, say she never loved him, and leave him. They originally plan to do this in Daisy and Tom’s house, but end up driving to Manhattan instead since everyone is so agitated. The confrontation ends up occurring in a room in the Plaza Hotel, and Daisy finds she can’t completely disavow Tom. This crushes Gatsby, and Tom, certain of his victory, tells Daisy she can drive home with Gatsby – he does this as a show of power; he’s confident that at this point Daisy will never leave him, even if she's left alone with Gatsby. During that drive back to East Egg, Myrtle Wilson runs out in the road (she has confused Gatsby’s yellow car with Tom’s) and Daisy runs her over and continues without stopping. Myrtle is killed on impact. The next day, she and Tom leave New York to avoid the fall out from the accident. She avoids contact from both Nick and Gatsby, such that we never see her response to Gatsby’s death or even her own response to killing Myrtle. This means our last glimpse of Daisy in the novel is at the end of Chapter 7, sitting across from Tom: â€Å"Daisy and Tom were sitting opposite each other at the kitchen table with a plate of cold fried chicken between them and two bottles of ale. He was talking intently across the table at her and in his earnestness his hand had fallen upon and covered her own. Once in a while she looked up at him and nodded in agreement" (7.409). So Nick leaves Daisy in Chapter 7 just as he did in Chapter 1 – alone with Tom, not happy, but not unhappy either. His prediction has turned out to be accurate: Daisy is too comfortable and secure in her marriage with Tom to seriously consider leaving it. We'll dig into more reasons why Daisy doesn't divorce Tom below. In fairness, fried chicken makes just about any situation better. Daisy Buchanan Quotes (Lines By and About Daisy) She told me it was a girl, and so I turned my head away and wept. 'All right,' I said, 'I'm glad it's a girl. And I hope she'll be a fool- that's the best thing a girl can be in this world, a beautiful little fool." (1.8) This deeply pessimistic comment is from the first time we meet Daisy in Chapter 1. She has just finished telling Nick about how when she gave birth to her daughter, she woke up alone – Tom was â€Å"god knows where.† She asks for the baby’s sex and cries when she hears it’s a girl. So beneath her charming surface we can see Daisy is somewhat despondent about her role in the world and unhappily married to Tom. That said, right after this comment Nick describes her "smirking," which suggests that despite her pessimism, she doesn't seem eager to change her current state of affairs. "Here, dearis." She groped around in a waste-basket she had with her on the bed and pulled out the string of pearls. "Take 'em downstairs and give 'em back to whoever they belong to. Tell 'em all Daisy's change' her mine. Say 'Daisy's change' her mine!'." She began to cry- she cried and cried. I rushed out and found her mother's maid and we locked the door and got her into a cold bath. She wouldn't let go of the letter. She took it into the tub with her and squeezed it up into a wet ball, and only let me leave it in the soap dish when she saw that it was coming to pieces like snow. But she didn't say another word. We gave her spirits of ammonia and put ice on her forehead and hooked her back into her dress and half an hour later when we walked out of the room the pearls were around her neck and the incident was over. Next day at five o'clock she married Tom Buchanan without so much as a shiver and started off on a three months' trip to the South Seas. (4.140-2) In this flashback, narrated by Jordan, we learn all about Daisy’s past and how she came to marry Tom, despite still being in love with Jay Gatsby. In fact, she seems to care about him enough that after receiving a letter from him, she threatens to call off her marriage to Tom. However, despite this brief rebellion, she is quickly put back together by Jordan and her maid – the dress and the pearls represent Daisy fitting back into her prescribed social role. And indeed, the next day she marries Tom â€Å"without so much as a shiver,† showing her reluctance to question the place in society dictated by her family and social status. "They're such beautiful shirts," she sobbed, her voice muffled in the thick folds. "It makes me sad because I've never seen such- such beautiful shirts before." (5.8) During Daisy and Gatsby’s reunion, she is delighted by Gatsby’s mansion but falls to pieces after Gatsby giddily shows off his collection of shirts. This scene is often confusing to students. Why does Daisy start crying at this particular display? The scene could speak to Daisy’s materialism: that she only emotionally breaks down at this conspicuous proof of Gatsby’s newfound wealth. But it also speaks to her strong feelings for Gatsby, and how touched she is at the lengths he went to to win her back. â€Å"What’ll we do with ourselves this afternoon,† cried Daisy, â€Å"and the day after that, and the next thirty years?† (7.74) In Chapter 7, as Daisy tries to work up the courage to tell Tom she wants to leave him, we get another instance of her struggling to find meaning and purpose in her life. Beneath Daisy’s cheerful exterior, there is a deep sadness, even nihilism, in her outlook (compare this to Jordan’s more optimistic response that life renews itself in autumn). â€Å"Her voice is full of money,† he said suddenly. That was it. I’d never understood before. It was full of money- that was the inexhaustible charm that rose and fell in it, the jingle of it, the cymbals’ song of it. . . . High in a white palace the king’s daughter, the golden girl. . . . (7.105-6) Gatsby explicitly ties Daisy and her magnetic voice to wealth. This particular line is really crucial, since it ties Gatsby’s love for Daisy to his pursuit of wealth and status. It also allows Daisy herself to become a stand-in for the idea of the American Dream. We'll discuss even more about the implications of Daisy's voice below. "Oh, you want too much!" she cried to Gatsby. "I love you now- isn't that enough? I can't help what's past." She began to sob helplessly. "I did love him once- but I loved you too." (7.264) During the climactic confrontation in New York City, Daisy can’t bring herself to admit she only loved Gatsby, because she did also love Tom at the beginning of their marriage. This moment is crushing for Gatsby, and some people who read the novel and end up disliking Daisy point to this moent as proof. Why couldn’t she get up the courage to just leave that awful Tom? they ask. However, I would argue that Daisy’s problem isn’t that she loves too little, but that she loves too much. She fell in love with Gatsby and was heartbroken when he went to war, and again when he reached out to her right before she was set to marry Tom. And then she fell deeply in love with Tom in the early days of their marriage, only to discover his cheating ways and become incredibly despondent (see her earlier comment about women being â€Å"beautiful little fools†). So by now she’s been hurt by falling in love, twice, and is wary of risking another heartbreak. Furthermore, we do see again her reluctance to part with her place in society. Being with Gatsby would mean giving up her status as old-money royalty and instead being the wife of a gangster. That’s a huge jump for someone like Daisy, who was essentially raised to stay within her class, to make. So it's hard to blame her for not giving up her entire life (not to mention her daughter!) to be with Jay. Daisy Buchanan Character Analysis To understand Daisy’s role in the story and to analyze her actions, understanding the context of the 1920s – especially the role of women – is key. First of all, even though women’s rights were expanding during th 1920s (spurred by the adoption of the 19th Amendment in 1919), the prevailing expectation was still that women, especially wealthy women, would get married and have children and that was all. Divorce was also still uncommon and controversial. Pictured: the biggest moment Daisy Buchanan could ever aspire to. So Daisy, as a wife and mother who is reluctant to leave an unhappy marriage, can be seen as a product of her time, while other female characters like Jordan and Myrtle are pushing their boundaries a bit more. You can explore these issues in essays that ask you to compare Daisy and Myrtle or Daisy in Jordan – check out how in our article on comparing and contrasting Great Gatsby characters. Also, make sure you understand the idea of the American Dream and Daisy as a stand-in for it. You might be asked to connect Daisy to money, wealth, or the American Dream based on that crucial comment about her voice being made of money. Finally, be sure to read chapters 1, 4, 5, 6, and 7 carefully for any Daisy analysis! (She doesn’t appear in Chapters 2, 3, 8, or 9.) What does Daisy represent? Wealth, unrequited love, the American dream, or something else entirely? Daisy definitely represents the old money class, from her expensive but relatively conservative clothing (like the white dress she is introduced in), to her â€Å"fashionable, glittering white mansion† (1.15) in East Egg, to her background, that â€Å"beautiful white girlhood† (1.140) spent in Louisville. You can also argue that she represents money itself more broadly, thanks to Gatsby’s observation that â€Å"her voice is full of money† (7.105). She also is the object that Gatsby pursues, the person who has come to stand in for all of his hopes, dreams, and ambition: â€Å"He knew that when he kissed this girl, and forever wed his unutterable visions to her perishable breath, his mind would never romp again like the mind of God. So he waited, listening for a moment longer to the tuning fork that had been struck upon a star. Then he kissed her. At his lips' touch she blossomed for him like a flower and the incarnation was complete† (6.134). Because of this connection, some people tie Daisy herself to the American Dream – she is as alluring and ultimately as fickle and illusive as the promises of a better life. Some people also say Daisy stands for the relatively unchanged position of many women in the 1920s – despite the new rights granted by the 19th amendment, many women were still trapped in unhappy marriages, and constrained by very strict gender roles. For an essay about what Daisy represents, you can argue for any of these points of view – old money, money itself, the American Dream, status of women, or something else – but make sure to use quotes from the book to back up your argument! Why is Daisy’s voice so important? First, we should note the obvious connection to sirens in The Odyssey – the beautiful creatures who lure men in with their voices. The suggestion is that Daisy’s beautiful voice makes her both irresistible and dangerous, especially to men. By making her voice her most alluring feature, rather than her looks or her movement, Fitzgerald makes that crucial allusion clear. He also makes it easier to connect Daisy to less-tangible qualities like money and the American Dream, since it’s her voice – something that is ephemeral and fleeting – that makes her so incredibly alluring. If Daisy were just an especially beautiful woman or physically alluring like Myrtle, she wouldn’t have that symbolic power. Daisy’s beautiful voice is also interesting because this is a very chatty novel – there is a lot of dialogue! But Daisy is the only character whose voice is continually described as alluring. (There are a few brief descriptions of Jordan’s voice as pleasant but it can also come across as â€Å"harsh and dry† according to Nick (8.49).) This creates the impression that it doesn’t really matter what she’s saying, but rather her physicality and what she represents to Gatsby is more important. That in turn could even be interpreted as misogynistic on Fitzgerald’s part, since the focus is not on what Daisy says, but how she says it. Discuss Daisy, Jordan, and the role of women in the 1920s. Are they flappers? Who's more independent? This question might seem quite simple at first: Daisy is sticking to her prescribed societal role by marrying and having a child, while Jordan plays golf, â€Å"runs around town† and doesn’t seem to be in a hurry to marry. Daisy is conservative while Jordan is an independent woman – or as independent as a woman could be during the 1920s. Case closed, right? Not quite! This could definitely be the impression you get at the beginning of the novel, but things change during the story. Daisy does seem to contemplate divorce, while Jordan ends up engaged (or so she claims). And even if Jordan is not currently engaged, the fact she brings up engagement to Nick strongly hints that she sees that as her end goal in life, and that her current golf career is just a diversion. Furthermore, both Daisy and Jordan are also at the mercy of their families: Daisy derives all of her wealth and power from Tom, while Jordan is beholden to an old wealthy aunt who controls her money. They don’t actually have control over their own money, and therefore their choices. So while Jordan and Daisy both typify a very showy lifestyle that looks liberated – being â€Å"flappers,† having sex, drinking alcohol (which before the 1920s was seen as a highly indecent thing for a woman to do in public), and playing golf in Jordan’s case – they in fact are still thoroughly constrained by the limited options women had in the 1920s in terms of making their own lives. Do we really know Daisy as a character? Does anyone really know her? One argument Daisy supporters (people who argue she’s misunderstood and unfairly vilified by certain reads of the novel) make often is that we don’t really know Daisy that well by the end of the novel. Nick himself admits in Chapter 1 that he has â€Å"no sight into Daisy’s heart† (1.17). And readers aren’t the only people who think this. Fitzgerald himself lamented after the novel failed to sell well that its lack of success was due to the lack of major, well-developed female characters. In a letter to his editor, Fitzgerald wrote: â€Å"the book contained no important woman character, and women control the fiction market at present.† In any case, I think our best glimpse at Daisy comes through the portion narrated by Jordan – we see her intensely emotional response to hearing from Gatsby again, and for once get a sense of how trapped she feels by the expectations set by her family and society. The fact that Nick turns the narrative over to Jordan there suggests that he doesn’t feel comfortable sharing these intimate details about Daisy and/or he doesn’t really value Daisy’s story or point of view. So, unfortunately, we just don’t see much of Daisy’s inner self or motivations during the novel. Probably the character who knows her best is Jordan, and perhaps if Gatsby were from Jordan’s point of view, and not Nick’s, we would know much more about Daisy, for better or worse. How would the novel be different if Daisy and Gatsby got together at the end? The Great Gatsby would probably much less memorable with a happy ending, first of all! Sad endings tend to stick in your mind more stubbornly than happy ones. Furthermore, the novel would lose its power as a somber reflection on the American Dream. After all, if Gatsby â€Å"got the girl,† then he would have achieved everything he set out to get – money, status, and his dream girl. The novel would be a fulfillment of the American Dream, not a critique. The novel would also lose its power as an indictment of class in the US, since if Daisy and Gatsby ended up together it would suggest walls coming down between old and new money, something that never happens in the book. That ending would also seem to reward both Gatsby’s bad behavior (the bootlegging, gambling) as well as Daisy’s (the affair, and even Myrtle’s death), which likely would have made it less likely Gatsby would have caught on as an American classic during the ultra-conservative 1950s. Instead, the novel’s tragic end feels somewhat appropriate given everyone's lack of morality. In short, although on your first read of the novel, you more than likely are hoping for Gatsby to succeed in winning over Daisy, you have to realize the novel would be much less powerful with a stereotypically happy ending. Ending with Daisy and Tom as a couple might feel frustrating, but it forces the reader to confront the inescapable inequality of the novel’s society. FAQ Let's address some common questions about Daisy and her motivations, since she can be challenging to understand or sympathize with. Does anyone else hate Daisy? At the end of their first read of The Great Gatsby, many students don’t like Daisy much. After all, she turned Gatsby down, killed Myrtle, and then skipped town, even refusing to go to Gatsby’s funeral! Perhaps that’s why, on the internet and even in student essays, Daisy often bears the brunt of readers’ criticism - many forums and polls and blogs ask the same question over and over: â€Å"does anyone else hate Daisy?† But you have to remember that the story is told from Nick’s point of view, and he comes to revere Gatsby. And since Daisy turns Gatsby down, it’s unlikely Nick would be sympathetic toward her. Furthermore, we don’t know very much about Daisy or her internal life – aside from Chapter 1, Nick doesn’t have any revealing conversations with her and we know little about how her motivations or emotions change over the novel. There are also hints that she is emotionally unstable – see her interactions with Gatsby, Jordan, and Nick in Chapter 7: As [Tom] left the room again she got up and went over to Gatsby and pulled his face down kissing him on the mouth. "You know I love you," she murmured. "You forget there's a lady present," said Jordan. Daisy looked around doubtfully. "You kiss Nick too." "What a low, vulgar girl!" "I don't care!" cried Daisy and began to clog on the brick fireplace (7.42-8). With her husband in the next room, Daisy kisses Gatsby, encourages Jordan to kiss Nick, and then starts dancing gleefully on the fireplace, only to calm down and begin crooning exaggeratedly as her daughter is brought into the room. These aren’t exactly the actions of a calm, cool, collected individual. They suggest immaturity at best, but at worst, emotional or even psychological instability. How can Daisy stand up to the weight of Gatsby's dreams and expectations if she's barely keeping it together herself? Basically, be careful about jumping to conclusions about Daisy. It’s understandable – you could argue even it is Fitzgerald’s intention – that the reader doesn’t like Daisy. But you shouldn’t judge her more harshly than other characters in the book. For more on Daisy's unpopularity among Gatsby fans, check out these recent defenses of her. Does Daisy really love Gatsby? Does Gatsby really love Daisy? Daisy openly admits to loving both Tom and Gatsby, and the flashback scene suggests she really did love Gatsby before she married Tom. As we discussed above, it’s possible she doesn’t leave Tom partially because she’s wary of another heartbreak, along with her reluctance to give up her place in society. Gatsby is in love with Daisy, but he loves her more for her status and what she represents to him (old money, wealth, the American Dream). In fact, Gatsby is willfully ignorant of Daisy’s emotions later in the novel: he lurks outside the Buchanans’ house at the end of Chapter 7, convinced that Daisy still intends to run away with him, while Nick observes that Daisy and Tom are closely bonded. Instead of loving Daisy as a person and seeking to understand her, he becomes carried away with his image of her and clings to it – a choice that leads to his downfall. Why doesn’t Daisy just divorce Tom? Divorce was still rate and controversial in the 1920s, so it wasn’t an option for many women, Daisy included. Plus, as we’ve discussed above, part of Daisy still loves Tom, and they do have a child together, which would make it even harder to divorce. Finally, and most crucially, Daisy is very at home in her social world (as seen by how uncomfortable she is at Gatsby’s party), and also values her reputation, keeping it spotless in Chicago despite moving with a fast crowd. Would Daisy really be willing to risk her reputation and give up her social standing, even if it meant being free from Tom and his affairs? Is Daisy the most destructive character in the book? You could argue that since Daisy was the one who killed Myrtle, which led to the deaths of George and Gatsby, that Daisy is the most destructive character. That said, Gatsby’s obsession with her is what places her in the hotel that fateful night and sparks the whole tragedy. Nick, for his part, faults both Daisy and Tom, as rich people who smash things up and leave the mess for others to clean up (9.146). However, Nick comes to admire and revere Gatsby after his death and doesn’t dwell on Gatsby’s role in Myrtle’s death. As a reader, you can consider the events of the novel, the limitations of Nick’s narration, and your interpretation of the characters to decide who you think is the most destructive or dangerous. You can also decide if it's worth deciding which character is the most destructive - after all, this is a novel full of immoral behavior and crime. What’s Next? Love Daisy's style? Check out our list of fun Gatsby-themed decor and apparel. Want to read even more in-depth about Daisy’s marriage to Tom and her affair with Gatsby? Learn all about love, desire, and relationships in Gatsby to find out how her relationships stack up to everyone else’s! If you’re writing a compare and contrast essay featuring Daisy, make sure to read about the other character featured as well – here are our pages for Jordan and Myrtle. Confused about the events of Chapter 7? Don’t be ashamed. It’s a monster chapter – more than double the length of the other chapters in the book! It also contains several intricate conversations and events that can be a bit hard to follow. Check out our summary of Chapter 7 for a clear breakdown and analysis. Want to improve your SAT score by 160 points or your ACT score by 4 points?We've written a guide for each test about the top 5 strategies you must be using to have a shot at improving your score. Download it for free now: