Related Keywords

No Related Keywords

Register NowHow It Works Need Essay Need Essay
Feminist theory, it should be mentioned from the beginning of the paper, is not a unified theory. As women experience the social world differently according to class, age or "race", there exist different feminist standpoints within the feminist tradition "“ i.e. Marxist or Postmodernist feminists and this explains the need to talk of Feminisms "“ in plural. In general though, feminist theorists in order to explain the marginal position women's issues hold in the social sciences "“ and why they are merely "added on" in the academic discourse, focus their critique upon traditional scientific approaches existing in the social sciences, offering alternative theories of knowledge. In addition, they attack concepts that originate from the founding fathers of each discipline i.e. Durkheim in Sociology, and which still hold an exceptional position in the social sciences. For example, feminists believe that the concepts of scientific neutrality, or objectivity, or the belief that we can achieve "pure" knowledge of the social world, have all contributed to the androcentric status of the social sciences. In this essay we will attempt to define what is meant by "conventional epistemologies" focussing primarily upon Sociology, suggesting also that different feminist epistemologies offer different approaches regarding conventional epistemologies. Thus, it is going to be discussed why feminists view as problematic the "scientific" approach that permeates and influences traditional explanations of the social world. Moreover, we will attempt to explain how feminists, with the introduction of new ways of investigating society "“ that is, the introduction of new subject-areas in social research, the placing of the researcher along with the research in the centre of research analysis, or the emphasis of the importance of locating experience and emotions in the research, challenge conventional epistemologies. Finally, in the end we will suggest that feminist epistemologies strongly challenge not only the theoretical basis of conventional epistemologies, but its application to the methods of investigating the social world as well, offering feminist versions of traditional theories. Feminists criticised traditional social science, suggesting that it offers a distorted picture of social reality, as it predominantly focuses its attention upon men's experiences. But before taking this point further, it is pertinent to briefly explain what is meant by "epistemology". As L. Stanley and S. Wise suggest 1993, the question of epistemology is fundamental for feminism. They state that an "epistemology" is a framework or theory for specifying the constitution and generation of knowledge about the social world; that is it concerns how to understand the nature of reality: A given epistemological framework specifies not only what "knowledge" is and how to recognise it, but who are "knowers" and by what means someone becomes one, and also the means by which competing knowledge-claims are adjudicated and some rejected in favour of another/others. page 188. However, conventional epistemologies and for the purpose of this paper we will limit our discussion of conventional epistemologies referring to the positivist tradition, exclude in their discussion women. As S. Harding puts forward 1987, "epistemology" answers questions about who can be a "knower" and what tests beliefs must pass in order to be legitimated as knowledge. Yet, Traditional epistemologies systematically exclude the possibility that women could be "knowers" or agents of knowledge; they claim that the voice of science is a masculine one"¦ page 3. She goes on to suggest that traditional philosophy of science suggest that the origin of scientific problems or hypotheses is irrelevant to the "goodness" of the results of the research. However, feminist challenges reveal that the questions that are asked in social research, and most significantly those that are not asked, are at least as determinative of the adequacy of our total picture as are any answers we can discover: Defining what is in need of scientific explanation only from the perspective of bourgeois, white men's experiences leads to partial and ever perverse understandings of social life. page 7 Sociology's role in the exclusion and silencing of women from this discourse has also been the object of feminist criticism. D. Smith 1987 states Sociology has been based upon men's social universe. This renders problematic the attempt to think how women experience the world from their place, given the limited concepts and theoretical schemes available to employ. In addition, Smith repudiates the idea that Sociology can be a science challenging therefore directly positivist ideas concerning the status of this discipline within the social sciences. She argues that The Sociology I conceive is much more than ideology and at the same time much less than "science". The governing of our kind of society is done in concepts and symbols. The contribution of Sociology to this is that of working up the conceptual procedures, models and methods by which the immediate and concrete features of experience can be read into the conceptual mode in which the governing is done. page 87. Similarly, M. Millman and R. Kanter 1987 argue that Sociology focuses only on the formal, official action and actors. Thus, it explains the status quo and does not explore much needed social transformations; neither does it encourage a more just humane society. It is also relevant to mention here that the sociological subject in language has been male -"he" and that language which is used describes experiences purportedly universal, although they are exclusively male. Before turning our attention to the different feminist epistemologies mainly the "feminist empiricist" and the "feminist standpoint" we should explicate how feminists take concepts, as well as research practices dominant in conventional epistemology such as "empiricism" "objectivity" "positivism" and "scientific methodology", and deconstruct them in order to challenge the hegemony of such epistemologies. As far as 'objectivity' is concerned, positivist methodological approaches claim that 'objectivity' is an ideal that is attainable, as we can actually stand "outside" of our social world, and observe it without any preconceptions. As a result, the aim of the social scientist is to be detached from the research subject, excluding from the research analysis any discussion of "feelings" or "experiences". Stanley and Wise 1993 state that it is the inductivist research methodology which claims that pure, unbiased, objective knowledge can be produced from the scientific mind's experience of the world. Sydie also suggests that in traditional social science there exists a dichotomy in the sexes where 'objectivity' is given as a male attribute and 'subjectivity' therefore as a female one: The attributes of science are the attributes of males; the objectivity said to be characteristic of the production of scientific knowledge is specifically identified as a male way of relating to the world"¦women by contrast, are 'subjective'. Page 207. Sydie also discusses Weber and Durkheim ideas in relation to the issue of "objectivity" in the social sciences, as their ideas still hold an eminent position in modern social theory. Weber, she argues page 214 sustains that "objectivity" in the social sciences is secured by the fact that once the object of the sociological interest has been selected in terms of values, then values cease to enter into the causal explanations offered regarding the behaviour and events. If we turn to Durkheim now, we can see that he believed that it is possible for social facts to become visible to the sociologist, as they exist "independent of the individual forms" and can be "recognised by the power of external coercion it exercises over individuals Sydie, page 43. Thus, for Durkheim as Sydie argues the independence of social facts from particular individuals meant also that social facts had to be explained in terms of other social facts and therefore the "objectivity of the observation would be secured in the same manner as the natural sciences" page 43. However, according to many feminist theorists objectivity should not be the primary aim of a social investigation. Rather, researchers should take into consideration their age class and "race" and consider how these will effect the research process. In addition, it should be recognised that feminist researchers shape the results of their analyses no less than do those of sexist and androcentric researchers. The "objectivist" stance should be avoided as it attempts to make the researcher's cultural beliefs and practices invisible, while simultaneously skewering the research objects, beliefs and practices to the display board Harding, 1987:9. From the above discussion it is evident that feminist theories do not advocate the positivist methodology which exists in conventional theories of knowledge. However, we should be cautious here about how we use the term "positivist". And that because there are various schools of positivism i.e. the new realists, and also because the word "positive" can take different ontological, epistemological and practical forms Bryant, 1985. Johnson et al 1984 offer us a general definition of the term, stating that it refers to the extension of empiricist models of natural science, to the field of human action, by arguing for either a methodological or substantive unity of the two page 32. Its main methodological approaches of research are inductivism and deductivism. The former refers to the idea that knowledge "“ theory, can be produced by the researcher according to her experience of the world. By the latter term it is meant that theory pre-exists the actual research. Feminist thinkers have fiercely challenged those concepts found in traditional epistemologies, offering new approaches towards the research praxis. As it has already been mentioned, they place particular emphasis upon the location of the researcher in the research process. In addition, as we shall see, they introduce new subject areas for research, stressing the importance of conducting research on the subject of everyday life experiences. But let us see first how feminist theorists have rejected positivist attitudes. Stanley and Wise 1990 put forward that all knowledge is partial, results from the conditions of its production, is contextually located and originate from the minds and intellectual practices of theorists and researchers who give voice to it page 39. Therefore, this feminist standpoint dismisses claims of objective knowledge. Stanley and Wise 1993 also attack the method of ethnography in social research, claiming that it is an approach, which is positivist in nature: "Scientific detachment", "truth", "non-involvement" all exist as the aims of an ethnography. And despite all the controversies and debates about the place of "values" in ethnographic research, "scientific detachment", "truth" and "non-involvement""¦are still alive and well and frequently to be met. page 159 But what is the alternative approach of the feminist standpoint? First of all, as it has already been mentioned it is the location of women within research. And this is crucial to our understanding of women's place in the social world. Smith 1987, argues that in order to increase our understanding as women, we need a method from where women are, as subjects, located in the everyday world, not in imaginary spaces constituted by the objectified forms of sociological knowledge. Similarly, for Millman and Kanter 1987 there is the need for research in "local" settings, which are largely populated by women in their daily rounds of life and which have received no serious sociological attention. Thus, for them the importance of ordinary aspects of our social life becomes more prominent in a feminist perspective, as "women have traditionally been chained to an existence of cleaning up and caring for others" page 33. Another way of challenging conventional methodologies in social research is to encompass "emotions" and "experience" in the research analysis. And that because the employment of emotions in the social investigation challenges dominant notions of the inferior status of emotions as a reliable source of data. Thus, the use of emotion in research does not somewhat fit with the conventional image of the detached, objective social researcher. Stanley and Wise 1993 state that their own feminist epistemology does include emotionality. They view emotionality as the product of a culture and therefore open to "rational" analysis as much as any other culturally inscribed behavioural forms. Moreover, they argue that emotions are vital to systematic knowledge of the social world and that "any epistemology which fails to recognise this is deeply flawed" page 193. As mentioned before, feminist criticism is not unified and consists of different epistemologies "“ some more marginal than others i.e. black feminist or lesbian epistemologies. One thing that has in common though, is the belief that social sciences should have a new purpose. That is, to use women and their experiences as new empirical and theoretical resources. If we are to look at feminist empiricist, we can see that this epistemology advocates a stricter adherence to the existing methodological norms of the scientific inquiry, in order to eliminate sexist and androcentric biases. What is responsible therefore for biases in social research according to this standpoint, is the misuse of existing research methods Harding, 1987. Also, what we can deduce is that feminist empiricists do not see anything fundamentally wrong with dominant, conventional methodologies in social science. It is merely the case of conducting the research better. The "feminist standpoint" position on the other hand, claim that their research findings offer a more complete and less distorted picture of social life. And this because knowledge is supposed to be based on experience and feminist standpoint theorists argue that their experience is more complete because it originates from the struggles against their male oppressors Harding, 1987. Yet, Stanley and Wise 1990 are against both these feminist epistemologies, as "they still accept the existence of a "true reality" and the methods of science as a means to establish it" page 42. Considering now another feminist epistemology "“ the lesbian one we can see how diverge feminist epistemologies are. The starting point of this epistemology is that "women" is a social category defined in terms of economic, physical or other dependency on men Stanley and Wise, 1990. As a result, they view women as a politically and socially constructed class. It is evident therefore how this epistemology challenges conventional theorising on women, in the social sciences. What is ambiguous about feminist epistemologies is whether they wish not only to challenge conventional ones but also lose their marginal status and substitute conventional epistemologies with feminist ones as well. For some feminists feminist theories of knowledge are best kept in the margins in order to avoid temptations of assimilation Stanley and Wise, 1990. Thus, according to Miles quoted in Sydie feminism is not simply about substituting a female understanding for the current male viewpoint. In addition, feminism is the viewpoint of outsiders to power, who have therefore a more accurate view of reality because they have no stake in mystifying that reality page 214. On the other hand, it can be argued that feminism is primarily a political movement for the emancipation of women, and as such, the predominance of its theory in the social sciences could ameliorate women's position in society mainly through social research. Smith quoted in Sydie is in fact in favour of creating a Sociology for women, instead of women. This will result in initiating a discourse among women that "transcends the traditional academic and knowledge boundaries" page 216. As a result, what has been argued in this paper is that there exists a twofold challenge of traditional epistemologies of the social sciences. That is, feminists challenge dominant ideologies located in the social world i.e. sexism as well as dominant methods of investigating it. Finally, despite the tensions within feminist epistemology feminism has managed to expose what dominant models of viewing and researching the world have overlooked.
1 User(s) Rated!
Words: 2602 Views: 842 Comments: 0
Feminist theory, it should be mentioned from the beginning of the paper, is not a unified theory. As women experience the social world differently according to class, age or "race", there exist different feminist standpoints within the feminist tradition – i.e. Marxist or Postmodernist feminists and this explains the need to talk of Feminisms – in plural. In general though, feminist theorists in order to explain the marginal position women's issues hold in the social sciences – and why they are merely "added on" in the academic discourse, focus their critique upon traditional scientific approaches existing in the social sciences,...
of creating a Sociology for women, instead of women. This will result in initiating a discourse among women that "transcends the traditional academic and knowledge boundaries" page 216.

As a result, what has been argued in this paper is that there exists a twofold challenge of traditional epistemologies of the social sciences. That is, feminists challenge dominant ideologies located in the social world i.e. sexism as well as dominant methods of investigating it. Finally, despite the tensions within feminist epistemology

feminism has managed to expose what dominant models of viewing and researching the world have overlooked.

Become A Member Become a member to continue reading this essay orLoginLogin
View Comments Add Comment

In the world of media today,...In the world of media today, an ethics code is one of the most important things to follow. Unfortunately, Mike Barnicle and Patricia Smith did not feel the same way. Mike Barnicle and Patricia Smith, both former workers for The Boston Globe, plagiarized and falsified information in order to bring forth newsworthy stories. Throughout this paper I will discuss the unethical acts of both Barnicle and Smith, the problems they caused for themselves, and the problems they caused for The Boston Globe. "The following is what happens when a company lacks consistent response to, and enforcement of, its core values and standards"Hoffman 1. The summer of 1998 became one of the worst summers The Boston Globe has ever seen. For thirty years The Boston Globe had built itself a great reputation and had won twelve Pulitzer prizes. "The Globe even outshone its cross-town rival, the Boston Herald" Hoffman 1. In 1973 the Globe hired a writer by the name of Mike Barnicle. Mike wrote about the Boston's working class. Including cops, single mothers, gas station owners, elderly immigrants and young veterans. Problems with Barnicle started to surface early in his Boston Globe career. The Globe settled two lawsuits stating that Barnicle plagiarized quotes of famous people. Also, a man by the name of Mike Royoko complained that Barnicle was copying his work. Many workers at the Globe then came to resent him and complained that he was arrogant. Just when it seemed that Mike Barnicle's problems were beginning to subside, on August 1, 1998, Barnicle wrote a column titled, "I was just thinking"¦..". A reader called the Globe and alerted the Boston Herald that many of the excerpts in Barnicles column actually came from George Carlins book, Brain Droppings. The column Barnicle had written was not his own work.. This was the worst case scenario for the Boston Globe because their competitor released the story first and at the same time revealing the earlier problems the Globe had had with Mike Barnicle. "The thirty eight, one-liners in the column included eight items similar to George Carlin's book, without citing Carlin as the source"Jurkowitz 1. Here is an excerpt from the actual article that Barnicle wrote compared to the writings of George Carlin. The book: "If cockpit voice recorders are so indestructible, why don't they just build an airplane that's just one big cockpit voice recorder?"Carlin;Jurkowitz 3. The column: "How come planes aren't made with the same indestructible material used to assemble those black boxes that always survive crashes?"Barnicle;Jurkowitz 3. The book: "People who should be phased out: Guys who wear suits all day and think an earring makes them cool all night."Carlin;Jurkowitz 3. The column: "I don't get it when guys over forty think they're cool because they wear an earring."Barnicle;Jurkowitz 3. As you can see through this small excerpt, Mike Barnicle obviously took his column from George Carlin's book, even though Barnicle claims to have never read Carlin's book. This wasn't the end to Barnicle's unethical ways. In1995 Barnicle wrote a piece about two families with a child at Children's Hospital. The story had been told to Barnicle, but was never meant for news and the story was embellished and flawed in the retelling. Barnicle wrote that one family lost a child and the other family generously gave them a personal gift of ten thousand dollars, when in actuality a gift of five thousand dollars was given and it was given to go toward a scholarship, not a personal gift. Also the race of the child was not accurate. When The Boston Globe became aware of what Barnicle was doing they were outraged. The Globe immediately asked for Barnicle's resignation accusing him of plagarism and falsification. Barnicle states, "Plagiarism is not the word to use here. Laziness or stupidity might be."Jurkowitz 2. Barnicle asked the Globe to run a final column so that he could argue his case. Barnicle's request was denied, but he was allowed to write a column announcing his resignation. So at the age of fifty-four in August of 1998, Barnicle resigned. In his resignation column he states, "My employment ended in forced resignation and personal disbelief this August when I could not immediately provide sources for a 1995 column that included the reconstruction of dialogue I had not actually heard directly."Barnicle 5. Barnicle had worked at the Globe for twenty-five years and said that they were wonderful, but now it was time for him to do something different. Unfortunately the problems at the Globe did not stop with Mike Barnicle. Patricia Smith was also working at the Globe. Patricia was a fairly new employee, but she was well renowned. She had been a finalist for a Pulitzer Prize. During her work at the Globe, indications that she was making up material had surfaced, but the paper decided not to confront her about the issue. Readers said that her words sang to them, they were heartfelt and they were proud to read her columns. O'Brien 1. In 1998 The Boston Globe for the second time fell apart. Patricia Smith was found out. Walter Robinson, then the Globe's assistant manager, then editor for the local news was told that someone on the copy desk had raised questions about the level of truth in Smith's work.O'Brien 3. During this same time period Walter received a phone call from a reader who had doubt about the existence of a character in a recent column. The column in question was about a man named Ernie Keane from Somerville, Massachusetts who supposedly phoned Smith in the newsroom to talk about President Clinton's upcoming visit to Boston. Keane allegedly wanted Smith to relay a message to the President which read like this in her column: "I ain't real smart and I don't have no fancy words to make folks sit up and take notice. I'm just ordinary, but there are a lot of ordinary folks here getting sick of screaming and no one hearing. Our country's supposed to take care of us when we get old, that's our reward for working all these years and living here in this so-called democratic place. Just tell him that."O'Brien 3. After reading this article the Globe decided to conduct an investigation themselves. They attempted to contact the people that Smith had used in her articles, but to no avail. The Globe then found out that in 1986, while Smith was working for The Chicago Sun-Times, she covered an Elton John concert. She wrote negatively about the concert saying that he wore something that he had not and played songs he had not played. She also said that the audience wasn't pleased although the promoters said that he was well received. The concert representatives also said that Smith never even picked up her tickets. Smith denied this allegation. After finding this out and revealing other stories the Globe was once again in a tight spot. They set up a meeting with Smith letting her know that they were going to try to contact all of the people she had written about in her stories. Smith was "shaken"Storin;O'brien 5 by the meeting, and from then on the quality of her work went down. The Globe conducted their investigation and was able to confirm fifty-two suspicious columns since 1995. After viewing the evidence the Globe decided to give her a second chance. In turn she had to bring in names and phone numbers so the characters in her stories could be contacted. From the beginning this didn't work. On May 11th they came across another suspicious story. This story focused on a cancer patient named Claire who was excited about what may be a cure. She discussed new treatments that had been tested on mice and worked. This time the Globe was able to prove that her story was bogus. Smith cited people with occupations that required licensing and therefore they should have been able to be tracked down. "When they couldn't be located, the game was over."O'Brien 7. The Globe asked Smith to verify the existence of six of the characters, and it was then that she admitted that they were fictitious. Smith was then forced to resign. Before she left she wrote an apology to the people who read her columns. It read like this: "It's not to late to apologize to you. From time to time in my Metro column, to create the desired impact or to slam home a salient point, I attributed quotes to people who didn't exist. I could give then names, I could give them occupations, but I couldn't give then what they needed most"”a heartbeat. Anyone knows that this is one of the cardinal sins of journalism. Yet there are always excuses. It didn't happen often, but It did happen and that was one time to many."O'Brien 11. That may have been the end of it all for Patricia and Mike, but it surely wasn't the end for The Boston Globe. When this ethical scandal erupted it threatened the integrity and core of the Globe. Many people felt that it was the Globe's fault, not Mike and Patricas. Alan Dershowitz, one of the papers critics stated "It's time to focus on Globe higher-ups. They really are to blame."Kalb 1. Many of the workers at the Globe were angry because the Globe did not make their decision fast enough. In turn it caused tension in the workplace. On the other side many felt that it was the fault of Patricia and Mike because they violated readers trust and the trust the newspaper had in them; and that the paper handled the crisis well. In conclusion, having consistent ethical standards and enforcing those standards is the key to running an ethical business. Having no clear standards is what causes an ethical crisis such as the one at the Globe. The biggest problem with plagiarism is that the readers begin to doubt the truth of anything that they read in the Globe. Maybe Mike Barnicle and Patricia Smith either forgot the rules, if they were ever explained, or convinced themselves that what they were writing was acceptable. "It is up to management to remind employees of the rules and the values for which the company stands."Hoffman 5. By failing to state or enforce clear standards, The Globe's management failed Barnicle, Smith, its readers and itself.   

In the world of media today, an ethics code is one of the most important things to follow. Unfortunately, Mike Barnicle and Patricia Smith did not feel the same way. Mike Barnicle and Patricia Smith, both former workers for The Boston Globe, plagiarized and falsified information in order to bring...

Words: 1751 View(s): 313 Comment(s): 0
According to Donald F. Roberts et...According to Donald F. Roberts et al, 2003, At the simplest, most global level, people of all ages listen to music because it provides pleasure; for adolescence this pleasure can be powerful and tends to be associated with the most intense experiences of life. I chose this subject because it was one which I could relate to and provide a more in-depth personal input on. Music, in my opinion, plays a role in every decision a person makes, and every goal a person has; a person's life can unfold according to what kind of music they listen to. In this essay I will talk about the positive effects of music, the negative effects of music, and the personal effect music has had on me. Bruce Springsteen said "Music"¦. Is there, to provide you with Something to face the world with." Music can have a very positive effect on the 15 year old that is searching for an identity amongst a group of peers. Music listened to is linked directly to how well an adolescent does in school and in education as a whole. Music can enhances performance on abstract/spatial reasoning tests Rauscher, Shaw, & Ky, 1.993. A study showed that classical music against loud, rock music produced better results on the same test taken by teens that were in the same grade point average. On a personal note, I have found this to be true. Lately, for my psychology tests I started listening to different symphonies in my room as I studied and found it helpful and more relaxing than my former style of studying which was to blast my favorite rapper on my stereo. Music also contributes the well-being of an adolescent. On the ride to school either in a car or a bus, the type of music listened to, can reflect the kind of day it is going to be. Music reduces stress Stratton, 1992 and anxiety levels Mornhinweg, 1992. The challenging life of a teen with education and extracurricular activities, music can be used as a form of stress relief and help calm a tedious schedule. Throughout high school we had the different social and peer groups that were always together. The music they listened to was correlated with how they dressed and acted; the "Goths" listened to heavy metal and punk and dressed in black, while the football team was more of a hip-hop culture, both listening and dressing. I myself was very open with all music and never classified myself as one group and insulted another. Music can help a teenager socialize with a group he/she feels more comfortable with and not isolate him/herself. On the other hand, all of these aspects of a teenager's life can be influenced negatively if proper supervision and care isn't taken. Larson R, Kubey 1983 Research done before the introduction of music videos demonstrated that although both television and music captured adolescents" attention, it was music that powerfully engaged their emotions. The withdrawal personality music can cause on a fragile mind like a teens is devastating. A friend that I went to middle school with was a very outgoing and thoughtful, came back after our summer vacation in 8th grade, very quiet and secluded; He would also have his cd player everywhere he went. After confronting him about his difference in personality, I found out that he had lost a parent and found music as his only safe haven. From then on we grew more and more apart. A negative psychological effect of music can be one if an adolescent listens to music with suicidal lyrics, or encouragement of violent behavior, he/she can turn right around and act out what was said in the music with the knowledge that "it's ok" without thinking of some ramifications. With regard to school, heavy metal fans report more conflict with teachers and other school authorities and perform less well academically than those whose tastes run more to the mainstream Christenson & van Nouhuys, 1995; Hakanen & Wells, 1993. Personally, I was never a person of one music selection. Growing up I had listen to different pop groups and even country. My perception toward music was widely varied, if the song captures my attention, then it is worth listening to regardless of the genre. As of today I find music to be a mood setter and also a mood changer. Throughout high school, I was the chess team that went to the national 3 out of 4 years, played basketball and volleyball. These busy and time consuming activities would leave me stressed and strained; I would use music in any sort of free time to help me relax and re-establish my mood and homeostasis. On an educational note, recently I have applied piano music into and during my study time and found that it helps calm the situation and the anxiety of a big test. Does this mean that all music involved with loud, obnoxious people yelling into the microphone are going to cause all children to become less than those children who listen to music which is friendlier to the eardrum? Of course not. Music is listened to because they take pleasure in doing so. Music even loud ones is a source of entertainment which if a teen has control over, it won't affect him/her negatively. For most teenagers music helps them concentrate, allows more creative thinking and even correlates itself with the good/bad mood it places them in. Although some music isn't directly beneficial, it also isn't harmful either.   

According to Donald F. Roberts et al, 2003, At the simplest, most global level, people of all ages listen to music because it provides pleasure; for adolescence this pleasure can be powerful and tends to be associated with the most intense experiences of life. I chose this subject because it...

Words: 932 View(s): 86 Comment(s): 0