Domestic Violence/Journal Essay Examples

- Prostitutes/Exotic Dancers: initially I was conflicted on these professions because an exotic dancer is a typically accepted form of job for a woman in our culture while prostitution is looked down on. However, in both jobs the woman is using her body and sexuality in order to gain a profit. The only difference (sometimes) is that one involves sexual activity whereas the other does not. This is a fine line between the jobs and yet society somehow thinks it is okay to harass prostitutes while exotic dancers are normally protected by bouncers and security guards. I do not think this is right. Each job is, in its own right, a form of sex working. Neither person should be subject to harassment. They have chosen to use their body for financial gain. I am, however, of the mind that these jobs should not necessarily be treated like other jobs. I do not think prostitutes and exotic dancers should receive a 401k or health insurance. These benefits are typically reserved for members of society who hold jobs that legitimately help people. It is arguable that these individuals help people, but not in any way that they could not help themselves through manual stimulation, legitimate companionship, or the internet.
- When it comes to professional athletes, and especially when it comes to the referees of professional sports games, I do not understand violence or harassment. They are simply playing a game, or instigating the rules of the game. There have been bad calls during every sport, but this is no reason to show violent outbursts toward players or referees. They are just doing their jobs. What fans should more likely be upset about is that the other team plays better than their favorable team. Again, I do not think that professional athletes should receive the same benefits as typical jobs. To begin with, they make enough money to invest or hire somebody to invest for them in order to be set for retirement. They also make enough to purchase health insurance privately. It is wonderful to be physically talented and play professional sports but I do not believe it merits a paycheck surpassing more important professions such as teaching, or science.
- Unless somebody has done a poor job of hiring a doorman or bouncer at a nightclub, I cannot imagine why anybody would be violent against one or harass one. In the event that they did they could probably take care of themselves. Bouncers do more of a service than some might expect by keeping peace and allowing law enforcement to attend to other more serious matters. While I do not think they should receive a retirement fund or a company car, they could be paid better.
- Soldiers and police officers should know how to handle violence or harassment when it comes at them, though they should not have to deal with it. They probably see enough stress during work hours or deployment without also being subjected to it while off the clock. I do believe these should be treated like other jobs. Soldiers and police officers should receive benefits, hazard pay, and a retirement fund. The government fund should ensure that their families are taken care of if anything should happen to them.
- Nurses and doctors in a mental institution might be just as inclined to be violent toward their patient as the reverse. This is a very stressful work environment where professional individuals need to keep their calm. I do not think this job should be treated as other jobs; I believe these individuals should be forced to take sabbaticals of no less than one or two months after every year of work in order to recharge.
I believe that in the beginning sports are more violent than they are as time progresses. MMA, for example, was much bloodier and more violent when it was first conceived. Many do not consider it a real sport but there are hundreds of gyms offering the chance to train. There are also many teams offering the chance to fight. Since its conception, however, many rules have been put in place that make what was once a street fight in a ring now looks like to men bear-hugging in the ground for 3-5 rounds. Football evolved much in the same way, with many rules passed to prevent holding of the facemask, and unnecessary roughness.
Because of this, no I do not believe children are learning too much violence from sports or that sports are the sole cause of children thinking violence is acceptable. Many areas of society contain violence. Children’s cartoon, children’s movies, video games, commercials, comic books, and computer games all depict graphic and violent scenes. Children see violence wherever they look. Sometimes it is subtle, as it is in Looney Tunes, and sometimes it is overt, as it is in sports, but the violence in sports is not the only reason children think violence is acceptable. Most importantly, children think violence is acceptable because they see the stimulus and parents do not bother explaining it or putting it into context. No adults pull the child aside to explain that one man is tackling another because they are professional football players, and then people blame the child when he tackles his friend. With this in mind, the law should not be involved when it comes to violence in sports, the law should be involved in the homes of children with parents who do not bother explaining anything to them.
I think I did okay on me anger management assessment. I was happy to see that I do not partake in explosive anger. It sounded dangerous and like something that would push others away. I do not want to be filled with rage like that. I was also happy to see that I do not use anger as an instrument. Using anger, or any emotion, to get what I want sounds very childish and immature. I do not feel outrage over a disagreement involving my beliefs either. I am firm in what I believe; others may have their opinion, the differences do not concern me. I do not get angry when people insult me either. I am secure in myself. If they insult me I know it is a problem with them, not me. I also am happy to report that I do not get angry when others are more successful than I am. I am either happy for them or indifferent to it if I do not know them. I also do not feel strong feelings of anger within me. I am not angry all of the time and I do not possess road rage.
However, I also do not want to be meek and passive-aggressive, as the test also suggests that I am. I do try never to get angry; I do not think it is a productive emotion. This was labeled as anger avoidance, which is exactly what I do. I avoid the anger until I feel like it is gone. My parents expressed to me when I was young that anger would only hurt the feelings of others, and so I tried to follow their example. I feel bad for getting angry at others, but because anger cannot always be avoided, sometimes it does happen. This apparently makes me passive-aggressive. I am not the type to stab anybody in the back but I have been known to be sarcastic or make snide comments to others. I do not like this about myself. I do have a hard time letting go of anger, perhaps because I attempt to internalize it so desperately so nobody knows I am mad. Because I am not expressing it properly it festers. When I am unable to internalize it and others see it, I am filled with shame and feel guilty, which also makes it hard to forgive myself. I do not believe, as the description says, that I would lose any psychological battles.
With that being said, the types of anger I am apparently most likely to express are anger avoidance and passive aggression. It appears that I need to work on being comfortable expressing my anger so I can let it out constructively and not internalize it.
I do believe, wholeheartedly, that society tolerates too much violence. There are numerous studies, found from reputable scholarly journals that state for a fact that violent television encourages teenagers to act more violently. The same resources will explain that sexual activity on television will encourage teenagers to start experimenting sexually much earlier than they would have otherwise. This can lead to STDs and unplanned pregnancies. Seeing violence all the time desensitizes teens to it. If it is not explained in the proper context, they may begin to believe that those actions are acceptable or, even worse, not a big deal.
Though too much violence is bad I do not think we should apt for zero tolerance. One extreme does not solve another extreme. I do think we, as a society, should tone down the sex and violence to a reasonable amount. As of now, nearly everything teens and children see needs to be explained to them. If most of what they saw could be understood in and out of context without an uncomfortable discussion with their parents, we will have found the right level to operate on. Certain outrageous scenes might be okay, if the show or movie absolutely calls for it. I do not want to stand in the way of cinema. If this is how it well be though, ratings must become as strict as they once were. An “R” rating really must mean for children 18 and older while PG-13 must mean only children 13 or older can receive parental guidance while watching that particular show or film.