Category: Perspective

‘Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world’ (Nelson Mandela, 1997). Education can certainly determine the quality and power it can hold within an individual’s life. Education improves the knowledge, skills, and attitude which can automatically affect the chances of employment. However, on the other hand, some unfortunate children suffer from major crises of poverty. Poverty originates into two forms: Absolute and Relative. The government publishes a ‘household below average income’ (HBAI), which shows many statistics on individuals who live in low-income households. This survey is able to set the poverty line which measures a low income of at least 60% below the annual median income which can also be known as relative poverty. Absolute poverty is a condition where a certain household is under the standard amount to uphold shelter or clothing. This essay argues how schools should be responsible for issues of poverty and expands on to what extent and the limitations the schools should go through to help maintain a child’s well-being, but they need to consider the different types of barriers they could face.

Schools can be responsible for adapting new rules and relegations on addressing the issues of poverty. Children who suffer from poverty experience trauma which can affect their educational achievement and physical development. According to the National Education Union, Child Poverty – the Facts 2021, they received reports from different schools that demonstrated how children in poverty expose moments of tiredness or exhaustion which can lead to a lack of concentration and focus on their lessons. This displays how poverty can have a huge impact on a child’s learning as they would constantly be stressed over their everyday recourses such as free school meals, shelter, or clothing. They would find it difficult to live up to the expectations set by the teachers and would often exclude themselves from the class and pupils. Schools are able to help overcome this by allowing the children to have access to equal academic opportunities where they are able to increase their intellectual development from a younger age. This would benefit their self-esteem and confidence because they would feel included within their group and be aware of what is happening around them.

Child poverty is linked with a wide range of health problems and negative educational outcomes which has affected around half of the children within and schooling. According to Poverty and child health 2016, they believe that a child’s education can be negatively affected due to poverty because of their standards of living. Children would be exposed to diseases such as coronary heart disease, asthma, and lung cancer. This can affect a child’s intellectual development and would leave them falling behind a year from where they should be expected at. Goodman A (2010), suggests how a child who suffers from poverty can be linked with structural differences in several areas of brain development which can be held accountable for the differences in academic achievements. Schools within are able to help benefit themselves and the children by allowing children to take part in the Eleven Plus exam which was created as part of the 1944 Butler education act. This system was introduced to test the development of the children and to understand which type of school children would need to attend.

Another effective way schools can help to reduce any issues of poverty is by providing access to free school meals to young children which would help benefit their families. Those who are entitled to Free School Meals are if their parents receive some sort of income support or child tax credit etc. Free School Meals are important because according to ‘Article 27’ – the United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of the Child suggests how children should be able to live a life that ensures their physical and mental state is remaining positive and not affected by the lack of no adequate food or housing. The National Education Union, believe children who have access to free school meals are more likely to leave school with a high grade in their GCSEs than other children. This is because, on average, low-income families eat less vegetables and basic nutrition which children should mainly intake but would consume more fast food and processed meats. Studies have shown how Free School Meals have been helpful for families and children because, by them providing healthy meals, schools can improve their educational outcomes which would support the closure of the attainment gap between students from disadvantaged families and the wealthier families. Free school meals are not seen as equivalent to poverty because according to the Government website, they state how a child may be able to receive free school if they have any of the following: income support, working tax credit, universal credit, or all children in reception, years 1 and 2 at state school.

Jensen (2009) explains how children living in poverty spend less time caring about anything happening in the world. He states, ‘their households are more crowded, noisy and physically deteriorated and they contain a greater amount of safety hazards’. This indicates how underprivileged children suffer from social exclusion because, by them attending school, is a form of escape from the chaos they go through at home. They may exclude themselves from their peers as they might be afraid of getting bullied or feeling different than the rest. This can have an impact on the child’s emotions and affect their education because they are unable to concentrate. To prevent this from occurring or increasing, schools could raise their standards on what they could expect from the children. They should consider what the child would prefer rather than forcing them to a certain task that they themselves are aware they are unable to complete.

Poverty can be identified in many ways; it is complex and can be strongly influenced but parents and their socioeconomic positions. Children’s attitudes towards the poor have a special meaning to children growing up in economic austerity, because their perceptions of the reasons for poverty may have an effect on how they treat the vulnerable

Bullock (1999) and Hakovirta and Kallio (2016). Examples that can be used to justify this would be children from poorer families do not have the money to buy new clothes regardless of if they are torn or dirty. However, the children who are considered well-off are provided with new clothes and the latest technology. Relating this back to the question, schools are able to help take responsibility for reducing the chances of poverty minimizing the days of non-uniform through the years because they can suffer from peer pressure and low self-esteem. Prescribing uniforms to children is a dress code that extracts the burden and pressure of appearance and can introduce a form of equality within the school. This can help minimize the chances of the children getting bullied or frowned upon by others as they would automatically be classed into a category which would lead to decreasing their self-esteem and mindset of attending school.

In the 18th century, the elementary education act was introduced in order to make education compulsory for children aged between 5 to 13. The act known as ‘The Forster Act’ was able to allow local education boards to inspect the schools to ensure they were up to the expected standards; the parents must pay for the children’s education unless those who are unable to afford it, would get funded by the government and that the schools should be publicly funded. Booth (1902) explains how poverty has been caused by the feudal society where the class of people with only their labor has the power to sell. Booth and Rowntree (2018) both conducted research on the poverty line where they believe ‘the poor include anyone living below the line’. This may include the argument of Novak (1995) as he also believes that poverty has been stuck in an empiricist paradigm. This all shifts to relative poverty which is poverty for those who experience social exclusion and not the lack of basic living. He argues how the voices and the needs of poor children are being ignored.

Education is seen as a way for individuals to get away from poverty. Schools are able to help reproduce the social conditions within the wider society because it is evident how children from poorer backgrounds experience their social conditions in school. Social reproduction can be linked to education with the process of middle-class children who are more likely to succeed in education and go further in receiving well-paid jobs and the same for working-class children. According to Bourdieu (2015), his studies show that a child is able to present themselves on account of their social background through their academic content. He developed the concept of habitus which can be referred to as the lifestyle or the expectations of being a part of particular groups. ‘individuals’ dispositions are a reflection of their lived trajectories and justify their approaches to practice’ (Bourdieu, 2000, page 138). This suggests how individuals would react in a certain way depending on the terms of the behavior.

Poverty is not restricted to one dimension, e.g., income, but it manifests itself in all domains of life, such as housing, education, and health. (Deleeck et al. 1992, 3). According to Francis Devine (2022), the statistics show that 8.8 million people suffer from absolute poverty and 2,2 out of that percentage are children. This highlights that children who suffer from absolute poverty experience a lack of basic needs to be able to survive. For example, they do not have the appropriate food, shelter, or the right education. Due to their background, children are unable to receive the stimulation and the capability to learn social skills for their future. Schools are able to help tackle child poverty by creating a positive atmosphere. This would allow the children to feel more respectful and considerate towards one another without having to judge. However, Busby (2019), in her article, states how children are avoiding the fear of being bullied in schools due to their worn-out clothes or lack of equipment. This can lead to children not attending school or any occasions such as their own clothes day as they would feel like they would receive unkind comments which would decrease their self-esteem and confidence.

Individuals who grow up being surrounded by poverty can put their future lifestyle at risk. Schools have recently been made aware of children avoiding taking letters home about trips or any missed payments for their parents as they are aware of the stress their parents go through. A recent article written by Westwater (2022) shows that the costs of schools are becoming a worry and causing mental health issues for parents because some have reported that they had to borrow money to help fulfill the wishes of their children and to prevent them from feeling embarrassed. Schools are able to help tackle this issue However, a disadvantage for schools to help break poverty is that if they accept many children from deprived areas, they will need to accept the problems and issues that come with it such as poor lifestyle, poor health and daily nutrition’s which could eventually end up increasing the costs of the schools to help deal with it.

A concept that would help to reduce the issues of poverty within schools is the increase in quality teaching. Hnard and Roseveare (2012), describe quality teaching as the use of learning new techniques in order to come out with positive and outstanding outcomes for students. Schools in disadvantaged areas would require more importance on attracting teachers to come and guide students. Relating this back to Sutton Trust Report in 2014, they believe that effective teaching leads to improved student achievements. If a child is constantly being provided with knowledgeable teachings, this would improve a disadvantaged child’s performance because they would be gaining knowledge on skills they would require for their future. If this policy or concept was not put into place within the school environment, the children would become deprived of gaining basic knowledge and behind in their development. This would mainly begin in the children’s homes from the age of 19 months because their development starts from the knowledge they would inherit from their parents.

To conclude, it is vital that we consider the idea of how schools should be responsible and find ways how to help tackle poverty within schools. The pinnacle issue explained throughout this essay argues how education improved the knowledge, skills, and attitude toward children. This essay also established how the downside of education, can affect unfortunate children, that suffer from poverty and could be treated differently than those not affected by poverty. One of the main examples to this point was school trips and the funding they would receive. The children who suffer from absolute poverty is the deprivation of the basic needs an individual would desire to live a healthy lifestyle. However, some children could suffer from relative poverty, in which their families would have an amount of money but still are unable to afford anything above the basic needs such as the latest technology or latest clothing. Schools are able to provide the children with the basic needs because they understand their income situation with their parents struggling to help provide for their children. After analyzing all of the above, schools would need to consider their limitations on how far they can go to help underprivileged children.

The debate over slavery can be a very sensitive topic to read about but it is very informative to read both sides and gain all the information you can about a topic. Reading both sides of an argument, especially in history, can give you more insight into why things happened the way they did. This debate in particular is quite interesting to read both sides of the argument because it can be difficult to read things you don’t personally agree with. When this is done though you have all the information about a subject instead of just one side and this is more beneficial when creating an opinion and becoming knowledgeable about difficult and sensitive topics.

The first article to take a look at is “The Universal Law of Slavery,” by George Fitzhugh. This is a Pro-Slavery article that makes many points about why slavery should exist. He starts the article by saying “He the Negro is but a grown-up child and must be governed as a child, not as a lunatic or criminal. The master occupies toward him the place of parent or guardian.” Fitzhugh also believed that the African American race would become a burden to society and society had the right to prevent it. Fitzhugh believed that the only way to prevent this was by subjecting people to domestic-based slavery. He then goes on to say that “We would remind those who deprecate and sympathize with negro slavery, that his slavery here relieves him from a far more cruel slavery in Africa.” After he says this he makes a bunch of points of why American slavery is better than African slavery. These points include cannibalism, the killing of females, and moral condition. The last point that Fitzburg makes in the article is “The negro slaves of the South are the happiest, and, in some sense, the freest people in the world.” He said this because they are not oppressed, the women didn’t work hard, the males work in good weather for no more than nine hours, and they have holidays including the sabbath off from work. These are the points that George Fitzhugh made about why slavery was not a bad thing.

The next article that promotes slavery is “Diseases and Peculiarities of the Negro Race” by Dr. Cartwrig. This article talks about diseases and other peculiarities that made the negro people act the way they did. This article first talks about diseases that cause slaves to run away. This disease was called Drapetemonia and was the reason that slaves would run away according to Dr. Cartwrig. Dr. Cartwig made the point that this disease was triggered when the slave owner did anything such as “by being cruel to him, or punishing him in anger, or by neglecting to protect him from the wanton abuses of his fellow servants and all others, or by denying him the usual comforts and necessaries of life, the negro will run away” Cartwig also made the point that if the owner treated the slaves well they would stay, but if they were treated badly they had to try and run away because of the mental illness they had. Overall this article talked about how slavery is perfectly fine if the slaves are treated okay.

The last article to go over on the pro-slavery side of the debate over slavery is “The ‘Mudsill’Theory,” by James Henry Hammon. This article comes from a speech given to the U.S. Senate on March 4, 1858. The speech starts off by saying that there is a need for someone to do menial duties in all social systems. He claimed that the people best fit to do that is “a class requiring but a low order of intellect and but little skill” He then proceeded to say that the South had found a perfect way of doing things because a whole race had adapted to the needs of the social system. Later he made the point that no matter if you call a slave a slave they are a slave if that is the work they are doing. Hammond made points of why american slavery was so great. He said that “None of that race on the whole face of the globe can be compared with the slaves of the South. They are happy, content, unaspiring, and utterly incapable, from intellectual weakness, ever to give us any trouble by their aspirations.” Hammond made points that because slaves weren’t white they weren’t the people’s blood and brothers, slaves don’t have any political power, and that there was balance in the social system because of this. These are the points James Henry Hammond made about why slavery shouldn’t be abolished.

The first article analyzed from the abolitionist’s point of view is “David Walker’s Appeal”. This is a very passionate article with a lot of bible metaphors used to make his points. He compares slaves in America to the Egyptians and the Roman slaves. He makes the point of the American people being Christians but yet they are treating people inhumanely. Walker says, “The whites have always been an unjust, jealous, unmerciful, avaricious and blood-thirsty set of beings, always seeking after power and authority.” These are the points David Walker makes about why slavery should be abolished.

Next on the list of articles from the view of the abolitionists is “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July? By Frederick Douglass. He starts by defining the Fourth of July by saying exactly what it is, a celebration of political freedom. He then goes deeper into it though. He states, “his Fourth [of] July is yours, not mine. You May rejoice, I must mourn.” Douglass then explains that they have to mourn because as slaves they do not have any political freedom so there is no point in rejoicing during this celebration of political freedom. He explains while all these white Americans are celebrating all he hears is the mourning of millions of slaves who wish to be free. He goes on to make points about why black people should be considered equal. These points he makes include all the wonderful skills the slaves had such as mechanical skills, construction skills, writing abilities, lawyers, doctors, and so much more. He also argues that “There is not a man beneath the canopy of heaven, that does not know that slavery is wrong for him.” He finishes his speech by saying “What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer: a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim.” These are the points Frederick Douglass made about why slavery should be abolished.

The last article about why slavery should be abolished is the “Declaration of Sentiments” from The American Anti-Slavery Society. This article starts with the argument that “’all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, LIBERTY, and the pursuit of happiness.” The article then goes on to talk about how one-sixth of the american people are enslaved. This article also makes the argument that “freeing the slave is not depriving them of property, but restoring it to its rightful owner; it is not wronging the master, but righting the slave—restoring him to himself.” These are just some of the points made about why slavery should be abolished in the eyes of The American Anti-Slavery Society.

All of the arguments made in these six articles reviewed had their points to make. Everyone may not agree with the points made by one side but that’s just how life is. The pro-slavery articles had their arguments about what they believed was right and the abolitionists did too. Everyone can benefit from reading both sides of this debate even if it is difficult to do so. I am glad I got the opportunity to look further into both sides of the debate over slavery because it is something I never would have done on my own and I have definitely learned a lot.

Bibliography

1. American Anti-Slavery Society, DECLARATION OF SENTIMENTS OF THE AMERICAN ANTI-SLAVERY CONVENTION. , Philadelphia, December 6th, A. D.1833.
2. Cartwrig, Dr., “Diseases and Peculiarities of the Negro Race,” De Bow’s ReviewSouthern and Western StatesVolume XI, New Orleans, 1851AMS Press, Inc. New York, 1967
3. Fishel Jr., Leslie H., and Benjamin Quarles, Scott, Foresman, and Company“The Universal Law of Slavery” by George Fitzhugh, The Black American A Documentary History, Third Edition, Illinois, 1976,1970
4. Foner, Philip S., Frederick Douglass: Selected Speeches and Writings, ed. (Chicago: Lawrence Hill, 1999), 188-206
5. Hammon, James Henry, The ‘Mudsill Theory,”, March 4, 1858
6. Hill, Sean Wilentz and Wang, David Walker’s Appeal, In Four Articles: Together With A Preamble To The Coloured Citizens Of The World, But In Particular, And Very Expressly, To Those Of The United States Of America, Revised Edition, New York, 1995A Division of Farrar, Straus, and Giroux

Racial profiling is something that has always been a problem ever since humans were on Earth. This is an issue that people can’t figure out when it’s really not that hard to do. Racial profiling dates back all the way to slavery times. Eventually, in 1880, the Jim Crow Laws were made and these gave black people more rights and better opportunities to stand up for themselves. In the 1960’s most of these laws were repealed, and now resurfacing. Racial profiling has always been an excuse for law enforcement to approach citizens that are assumed to be criminals. If a person of color is approached and asked to show I.D. and they didn’t have any on them, this could’ve led to them being sold into slavery. Most times they would just be sent to jail, and only released if a white person could come on their behalf. This is still an issue today and people are even dying because of the racial profiling issues that still go on.

It’s hard to only have 2 different strong opinions on this topic, it’s not very one way or another because there are so many different opinions to have about racial profiling. A few examples from someone that believes racial profiling is a bad thing would be things like racial profiling doesn’t ever work. It’s also been proven that black suspects are no more likely to have drugs or illegal weapons in cars than white people. Another thing that I found that would support this is that it’s proven that 70% of drug abusers are white, 15% are black, and only 8% are Latino. Somebody from the opposite point of view would probably view statistics of those who are already imprisoned, which shows that only 26% of drug abusers in prison are white, 21% are Latino, and 45% are black. It’s also proven that colored people are pulled over dramatically more than white people. This turns into an argument making law enforcement the bad guys because they are the ones racially profiling colored people.

Racial profiling is not only a super controversial topic, but it’s also something that leads to a lot of violence and a lot of hate. Racial profiling also leads to communities not wanting to work with law enforcement. Another big thing racial profiling leads to is people will have more and more hate towards each other because of our opinions and situations in that racial profiling has been involved. A big issue right now is black people getting shot by white police because they assume that black people carry weapons on them. This leads to so much conflict between police and citizens. Racial profiling also often leads to acts of violence and people participating in dangerous protests.

I don’t think in any situation it would ever be okay to racially profile anyone. I think we should all be judged differently on the type of human being we are rather than the color of our skin. Society nowadays has so many issues, and I for sure think this is one of the worst. To racially profile someone, is the exact same as being racist.

An important area to look at when deciding whether women need women representatives is the relationship between descriptive and substantive representation. Substantive representation looks at whether representatives ‘act for women’ in the policies that are articulated within political institutions. Descriptive representation occurs when representatives mirror the backgrounds of the represented. In some countries such as Sweden, Argentina, and Rwanda, women have made remarkable progress in participation and representation. However, in other countries, women either lack the right to vote as is the case in Saudi Arabia, or are entirely represented by male legislators in countries such as the United Arab Emirates. As of June 2006, women comprised just 17% of national parliaments around the world. The question I am going to address is whether women need women representatives. This essay will outline a number of reasons why I believe women do in fact need women representatives as well as looking at the opposing view that they can indeed just be represented by men. However, after researching this question in a large amount of detail, I feel strongly that women need women representatives to ensure their interests are aired and their position in society continues to grow.

Critical mass theory suggests that the substantive representation of women will come about as a result of there being a ‘critical mass’ of women in a legislature (Allen & Childs, 2018). Kanter is cited in (Paxton, et al., 2007) and talks about how the size of the minority group matters. Once a group reaches a certain size, between 15-40% of women, the minority starts to assert itself which results in a ‘tipping point’ whereby women can state their influence in politics (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). The most common assumption in the critical mass theory literature is that as women grow more numerous in legislative chambers, they will increasingly be able to form strategic coalitions with one another to promote legislation related to women’s issues (Childs & Krook, 2009). This view is further backed up by (Childs, et al., 2008); ‘Numbers matter: an increase in women’s descriptive representation in parliaments will generally translate into an increase in substantive representation of women.’ An example of this can be seen when looking at women being elected to Congress which promoted women’s interests. House floor speeches were analyzed which were speeches in which congresswomen could voice the ‘uncrystallized interests’ of women’ (Pearson & Dancey, 2011) .30,000 one-minute speeches from 1993 to 2008 were analyzed and the results found that congresswomen in both the Democratic and Republic party were far more likely than men to discuss women in their speeches (ibid). The results show that congresswomen’s speeches enhanced women’s representation as they drew attention to women’s interests and so signifies the importance of women having female representatives.

However, It has often proved difficult to demonstrate that the representation of women’s interests necessarily follows from the presence of women representatives. Research across a number of countries has found limited evidence that there is a relationship between the percentage of women present and women representatives acting for them. Childs and Webb cited in (Campbell, 2015), argued that substantive representation of women is more complex than primarily focusing on the number of women present. Irene Diamond, the first empirical political scientist to investigate in depth the actions of women legislators reported for example that in New Hampshire the state with the highest percentage of women legislators, most women legislators did not see themselves as ‘acting for women’ (Mansbridge, 1999). Further, the entry of more women politicians into the House of Commons in 1997 generated high expectations of what they could achieve by using their increased power to improve women’s interests (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). However, many appeared more quiescent towards the leadership, less willing to rebel than men, and therefore unlikely to make much of a contribution to the legislative agenda (ibid). Criticism became particularly strong when labor cuts for lone mothers were more likely to be supported by women than men MPs (ibid). The focus on female representatives ‘ignores important differences among women, at the same time that it overlooks men as potential actors on behalf of women as a group’ (Escobar-Lemmon & Taylor-Robinson, 2014). This view is further backed up by (Campbell, 2015) who claims that ‘impact depends not only on numbers but acts.’ These views suggest that having more women representatives alone is not sufficient to ensure women are represented but instead, women need representatives who want to improve the position of women.

Further O’Regan cited in (Paxton, et al., 2007) finds that the percentage of women in the legislature is related to policy relevant to women. For example, once female MPs moved from being a minority group in the New Zealand House of Representatives in 1984, there was an increase in the level of debate on issues such as parental leave and childcare, and female politicians claimed a greater stake in these debates (Grey, 2006). A rise in the number of women present may force male and female legislators to pay more attention to women’s issues (Childs & Krook, 2009). An example of this can be seen when analyzing MPs’ voting patterns on reproductive health and marriage equality in the House of Commons and the Australian House of Representatives (Plumb, 2017). This revealed that reforms were achieved sooner and conservative restrictions were opposed more effectively than would have been the case if fewer women were present (ibid). This further clarifies the significance of women representatives. As (Abzug & Edgar, 1972) summarised more women in positions of power will result in fewer women being discriminated against and more women represented.

Once again it should not be noted that having women representatives is not always beneficial for women. Many female candidates tend not to initiate discussion of women’s issues because they often believe ‘too much emphasis upon women’s issues in a campaign might generate speculation that the candidate is too narrow in her concerns and will not adequately represent all the people’ (Sapiro, 1981). As Drude Dahlerup records, ‘Women as politicians are caught between conflicting expectations. They have to prove they are just like male politicians and that they will make a difference when elected. There are also problems if women politicians are seen to represent only ‘women’s interests’ (or perhaps ‘feminist interests’)’ (Grey, 2006). An example of this can be seen in Susan Carroll’s study of candidates for state legislative seats (Sapiro, 1981). She found that women who did not discuss women’s issues at all during their campaigns fared somewhat better than those who discussed the issues (ibid). Due to this many women fear representing other women in politics as they feel it may hinder their political careers. Irwin Gertzdog reported that many ‘saw gender as a potential political liability, and they avoided identification with what were generally considered to be ‘women’s issues’ (Reingold, 2000) Additionally, some female politicians may be more interested in other aspects of politics rather than focusing on improving the position of women. For example, it has been stated that Margaret Thatcher, the first female politician in the United Kingdom, had little impact on improving women’s political opportunities and it was even stated by some that she had a negative impact (Campbell, 2015). This clarifies that having women representatives does not necessarily result in greater opportunities for women.

Nonetheless, researchers have argued that the growing number of women appointed to public office provides a great opportunity for further progress on women’s issues and women’s political representation (Reingold, 2000). In United States state legislatures, women have been more successful than men in getting bills passed that are directly related to women, children, and families (Paxton, et al., 2007). Wangnerud showed how women’s presence in the Riksdag led to women’s interests becoming more central in politics (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). She revealed how it was the articulation and mobilization of female politicians that resulted in women’s interests becoming more prominent (ibid). Women have also played a large role in Colombia, Argentina, and Costa Rica, with women initiating 11% more women’s issues bills than men (Paxton, et al., 2007). Female officeholders also are more concerned about issues involving women, children, and families, Compared to their male colleagues, women are more likely to initiate and propose policies and more likely to take active leadership roles in securing the passage and implementation of policies involving women, children and families (Sapiro, 1981). These examples above illustrate how in a number of different countries across the globe, having women representatives has resulted in greater substantive representation of women.

A number of authors have further believed that women do not need to be represented by other women. The primary function of representative democracy is to represent the substantive interests of the represented through both aggregation and deliberation (Mansbridge, 1999). Thus, descriptive representation should be judged primarily on this. When non-descriptive representatives have a greater ability to represent the substantive interests of their constituents, this is a major argument against descriptive representation (ibid). One of the main criticisms of descriptive representation emphasizes that descriptive representatives will be less able than others to perform the task of the substantive representation of interests: ‘No one would argue that morons should be represented by morons’ (ibid).’ The representatives may and almost certainly will likely differ from those they act for, not only in their social and sexual characteristics but also in their understanding of where the ‘true’ interests of their constituents lie (Philipps, 1998). ‘What matters is whether my representative is ‘acting in the interest of the represented, in a manner responsive’ to me’ (Sapiro, 1981). In current electoral systems, many of those who run for election have chosen law-making as their vocation. They have spent a large amount of their lives acquiring the skills needed for the job (Mansbridge, 1999). The voters then select among these individuals those that they believe have the greatest ability to get their views across and improve their lives. This suggests that women can just choose the politician that they believe will represent them best irrespective of their gender.

However, although men have the potential to represent women and improve their position in society, women are best fit to represent other women because they know what it is like to be a woman, and often, ‘male representatives are not always aware of how public policies affect female citizens’ (Campbell, et al., 2009) Women politicians are seen to be not only ‘standing as’ women but also ‘acting for’ women as a group once elected (Grey, 2006). This is because it is assumed that due to their particular life experiences in the home, workplace, and public sphere, women politicians prioritize and express different types of attitudes, values, and policy priorities (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). As Melissa Williams puts it: ‘The representative who is capable of acting as an advocate for women’s interest must have some understanding of the ways in which the lives of her constituents are shaped by the privilege of men, and the most effective starting-point for that knowledge is the fact of her own experience of exclusion and subordination’ (Grey, 2006). Even when it appears that male and female officeholders share preferences on women’s issues, it is often up to the women to do the real legislative work (Sapiro, 1981). Although sympathetic attitudes are useful, legislative work is essential highlighting the importance of women representatives. In Britain, reports suggested that women MPs work effectively on behalf of women behind the scenes, for example in influencing party policies or articulating women’s concerns in discussions with ministers (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). As one scholar has surmised: ‘Research evidence over the last ten years supports the belief that many women politicians are different because they see things differently, because they understand the needs of women in society in a way that men cannot, and because many, if not most of them, will try to make the nation a better place for women and their families’ (Reingold, 2000).

The belief that women politicians will have a substantive effect on political decision-making is found within debates about the ‘politics of presence’ (Grey, 2006). When women are present in legislatures the nature of the issues discussed is more likely to include the concerns and perspectives of women (Allen & Childs, 2018). Philipps argues that women have a distinctive group identity based upon shared interests on issues such as childcare, abortion, or equal opportunities in education and the labor force (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). There are particular needs, interests, and concerns that arise from women’s experience, and these will be inadequately addressed in politics that is dominated by men (Philipps, 1998). Women have at least some interests distinct from or even in conflict with men (ibid). ‘The argument from interests does not depend on establishing a unified interest of all women: it depends, rather, on establishing a difference between the interest of women and men’ (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003). As a result, women need representatives who are the same gender as them as they may have conflicting aims with men. , ‘Regardless of whether the issue is foreign aid, the budget, or the environment, women are more likely than men to consider the possible impact of the policy on the lives of women and children’ (Poggione, 2004).

Nevertheless, there are further limitations that reduce women’s effectiveness at representing other women. Some studies have found that party affiliation is more important than gender (Reingold, 2000). It is very often women of parties on the left of the political spectrum rather than all women representatives who make the largest effort to raise women’s issues and concerns (Campbell, et al., 2009). ‘The likelihood of women representatives ‘acting for women’ and delivering women’s substantive representation is mediated by a myriad of factors, including their newness, party identity, and institutional marginalization’ (Allen & Childs, 2018). Lipset and Rokkan cited in (Lovenduski & Norris, 2003), argued that crosscutting cleavages such as those of social class, ethnicity, religion, and ideological divisions may override any interests associated with gender. It is very often women members of left-leaning parties rather than all women representatives who make the most effort to raise women’s issues and concerns (Campbell, et al., 2009). These examples demonstrate that although having women representatives may help to improve women’s interests, overall there are other factors that are more important in determining whether women as a whole have their views aired in politics.

Although there are times when women representatives struggle to help women’s interests, they help to overcome male domination and so are the best solution to improve women’s position in society. A repeated theme in the discussion of trade unions has been the neglect of women’s interests by the organizations of the labor movement. For example, according to Cockburn, ‘trade unions, which are male-dominated, have played an important part in maintaining segregation in the labor market and demarcation and segmentation at work’ (Heery & Kelly, 1988). Coote and Campbell cited in (Heery & Kelly, 1988) believed, ‘The most obvious case of the failure to improve the lot of women, is that women themselves still have no real power in their unions. They have little or no control over the making and implementation of policy.’ One crucial sphere of trade union activity where it is felt women’s interests have been subject to particular neglect is collective bargaining. According to Cockburn, cited in (Heery & Kelly, 1988), women’s issues such as equal pay, parental leave, sexual harassment, and women’s health have tended to be given low priority by trade union bargainers. Peter Allen and Sarah Childs look at how having women’s organizations helped to ensure that women’s interests were heard (Allen & Childs, 2018). They focused on the Parliamentary Labour Party Women’s Committee. Its members wanted to ‘act for women’ by influencing the party and the government. Three of the four topics related to women’s substantive representation including issues of violence against women and women’s bodily integrity, care and caring, pensions, and the broader gendered nature of the economy (ibid). This suggests that by having more women representatives, women’s views will not be pushed to the back of the agenda and instead women can improve their position in society.

Finally, the increased representation of people who ‘look like’ women will affect powerful symbolic changes in politics (Sapiro, 1981). Women and men continue to think of politics as a male domain (ibid). When more women candidates are elected, their example is said to raise women’s self-esteem, encourage others to follow in their footsteps, and dislodge deep-rooted assumptions about what is appropriate for women and men (Philipps, 1998). Can we consider a governing system to be representative of women if women are not considered ‘representative’ of governance (Sapiro, 1981)? More women in office will increase the acceptability of women in government (ibid). For example, New Zealand Member of Parliament, Christine Fletcher said, ‘There is a greater number of women in Parliament, and that allows us- as we approach the new millennium- to finally begin to debate some of the issues, which I see as the hard issues’ (Grey, 2006). This example illustrates how women need women representatives in Parliament as this means they can have their views aired.

Why do people think that video games cause shootings? Video games have been around since the early 1970s. These massive shootings have only been happening for multiple years now. First Person Shooter (FPS) games were one of the first video games created. Video games don’t cause violence; Instead, they just help people escape the real world and just have fun. It can be for competitiveness, entertainment, or they are just bored and have nothing better to do. People in their right mind don’t play games to plan to hurt people, it’s just a getaway for kids or adults.

People play video games to escape the real world. The people who play video games do this because of multiple reasons. The first reason why people play video games is for entertainment. They play for entertainment because they worked all week and all they want to do is sit back and play games for fun. Another reason why people play video games is they like competition. Some of my friends play video games for money and play competitively, and they make good money off of it. Another reason people play video games it takes them away from their bad or boring life and makes it fun. One of my friends is always on Xbox because he has nothing better to do all day because he only works a part-time job, so he doesn’t get many hours he also doesn’t enjoy going out. People don’t get on and play video games because they are mad and want to kill someone. People don’t get on just to shoot people because they want to do it in real life.

There have been several studies that conclude that violent video games don’t lead to a violent person. Whitney DeCamp and Christopher J. Ferguson, both in the Department of Sociology at Western Michigan University, conducted research about kids who play violent video games and kids who are exposed to a violent family background, and they concluded that “A meta-analysis consolidating these effects indicated that increased time playing violent video games does not significantly affect the risk of violent behavior. Rather, it is the social and familial background that seems to play a larger role in determining the risk of violent behavior instead of video games” (13). In their research, they took all different ethnicities and asked them if they played violent video games, then they ask them if there is parental enforcement, home yelling, home violence, and have been hit by adults. They grouped all the kids who played video games and figured out if they ever hit someone, the children who have been exposed to home violence were the ones that hit people, more than the very little children who play violent video games and hit someone. There is not enough evidence to prove that violent video games are directly correlated to violence within the person.

The whole violent video games cause violence in children and young adults caused by moral panic. A moral panic is a feeling of fear spread among many people that some evil threatens the well-being of society; it usually spreads because of the media coverage that it gets, most people watch the news every day. According to Patrick M. Markey professor of psychology at Villanova University and Christopher J. Ferguson a Psychologist “However, it was not until the close of the 1990s after a series of school shootings perpetrated by white suburban kids that “blame the game” really took off” (102). This is a great example of a moral panic the investigators didn’t know why all these kids were shooting other people. So right away because children that played violent video games in the past are used as an example of why they shot all these innocent people because video games encourage rage and violence. In the same article, it states that “The number of published research articles examining video games increased nearly 300 percent in the wake of Columbine” (104). So the media started covering the topic more often. 300 percent more published research articles on violent video games caused this shooting and anger in this child. Just after one shooting, it’s just crazy because the child playing video games didn’t make him violent. It had to do with something at home and not gaming. If it wasn’t for the Columbine shooting, there would still be very few articles on violent video games being the cause of violent kids and young adults. This moral panic made people also think differently about the gaming industry and the government got involved. The government got involved because they started to do more regulations with the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) to make Mature-Rated or M-Rated games harder to get by increasing the age to buy them to eighteen years old or have a parent/guardian with you that is above the age of eighteen so they can purchase it.

There is no direct correlation between video games causing violence. There are articles out there that say that video games do cause violence. When looking at this research I agree that you can get pissed off in a video game and be mad after you lost when you should have won. Then it can lead to very little “violence” like hitting your desk or throwing your controller. The people who do these researches say that video games lead to mass shootings when in reality all they say is it leads to “violence”. People look at violence differently I see violence being hitting, punching, or killing a person while others see violence as someone who throws their controller at a couch or screams at the game when they are mad, and people who think video games cause violence to conclude that as “violence”. As someone who plays violent video games at least three times a week, I don’t think I am violent, I care for people no matter what game I am playing even if I am mad at them I don’t want to hurt them

I personally play violent video games such as Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty, and Counter-Strike Global Offensive. I have never shot a gun in my life other than online on a game, I also never plan on shooting a gun because I don’t have a desire to shoot one even though I play violent video games. I also never got into a fight with another kid in school. All my friends that I play with play those exact video games and have also never been in a fight in school. We have been playing these games since 2009 which was in third and fourth grade for us. None of us have been the violent type. I do agree that video games can get people mad, most people don’t like losing games but it doesn’t make the person violent towards other people. Most people think that someone getting mad at a video game automatically makes them violent person because they scream or hit their controller on something. There have been multiple times I have gotten mad at a game and it’s just a reaction to yell something just so you feel better. Just like in sports when someone misses a catch they scream something random because they’re mad they didn’t get the catch.

Not all video games are subject to violence. There are millions of games out there that contain no violence like Animal Crossing. This is a game where you are a small-town mayor. The objective of the game is simply to live the kind of life you want to live, which generally involves building up your town, making new friends, catching fish, and chasing bugs. Sports games like NHL and Madden where you create a player and play the sport as if you are in or the head coach in the NHL or NFL with your controller and friends. There are also games out there that contain content that is physically impossible to do what they are doing in the game and recreate it. All games come with warning labels saying not to attempt anything illustrated inside of these games. Grand Theft Auto might look like the real world but there are many warnings before launching the game not to attempt anything you see in these games. So it is not like the companies are going out there saying go buy an assault rifle and go somewhere with a lot of people and shoot them the video game companies are very clearly telling you not to try this stuff you see in the game.

Why do people think that video games cause shootings? People look at violence in a different way than other people do. When talking about video games and violence there are two ways to look at it either they cause violence or don’t cause violence. The answer is video games don’t cause violence. Video games just help people escape the real world and just have fun they do it for entertainment and some people do it for competitiveness and to make money. No one plays video games as a simulation of the real world and shoots people on there and then repeats in the actual world.

What about Steak n’ Shake attracts my attention and taste buds, as appose to other fast food restaurants? My boyfriend went on a rant about the fact that I had never heard of the restaurant, assuring me that once I tried the burger I would fall in love. When I walked into the restaurant for the first time the air conditioner blew on my face and the rich smell of burgers and fries marched into my nostrils; it made my mouth drool and my stomach immediately start growling. I started savoring the moment in which I would finally take that first bite of my choice of burger. Every single time I ask myself “What do I want to eat today?” since that day, the first thing that comes into mind is a Steak n’ Shake burger. The taste of a Steak n’ Shake burger is exquisite—unlike any other burger I have had it is so incredibly juicy, the kitchen is open in plain sight; therefore, if you would like you can sit and watch your food be prepared right before your very eyes, and also because an entire meal can fill up your stomach and fill you up with such satisfaction all for less than ten dollars.

In the past I have eaten a variety of burgers: from the most inexpensive burgers to the most talked about pricey ones; and still, there is not one that suppresses my taste buds like the savory Steak n’ Shake burgers. There is something about the steak meat—it has a richer taste than the rest—its flavors are more intricate, as well as the burger simply stands up better and does not turn into mush. Out of the many burgers on the menu my favorite so far is the “Jalapeno Crunch”: containing pepper jack cheese, chipotle mayo, fresh salsa, and jalapenos, all topped with fried onions. This burger truly has a great mix of textures and flavors— crunch from the crispy fried onions, a spicy kick, and an awesome balance of acidity; a trace from the jalapenos, freshness from the salsa, also bringing more heat from the chipotle mayo and pepper jack cheese. The combination of the burger with their fries is one of a kind, I am a lover of thin and crispy fries. I take the first bite of fry and can hear the satisfying crunch through the crispy outer layer, with the seasoning so distinct you can feel it leaping onto your tongue; the fluffy, soft inside is a magical combination of potato that somehow manages to taste a million times better than the raw starch. They are so warm and satisfying that before I know it the entire box is gone. It has vanished! Which leaves me wanting more: from the savory first bite to the last unforgetting ending.

When I order my meal, I sit and watch the chef prepare my order, the kitchen is visually open for customers to watch; which for me, is a habit to sit there and observe the chef work his magic with ingredients to perfect his craft. They are so precise and very determined in being certain my burger is just right, especially in preparing the steak burger meat. The chefs that cook the meat follow a timer, making sure that it has had enough time to cook before it is served to its customers. You can see the entire show of their food preparation methods, the time they take to make sure the bread is golden toasted on the edges, and that the crispy and thin fries are well-fried. My thought about them having the kitchen open in their customer’s sight is that they want us to trust that they care to give the best customer experience, if it is made in sight it must be right. I appreciate that about Steak n’ Shake, it is one of the best things about it, the dedication they have to give the best quality burgers they know they can give is demonstrated in the way the kitchen is open for all eyes to see.

Finally, the prices of the menu at Steak n’ Shake offers is incomparable for the amazing quality of choices—from the burgers to the shakes they freshly make for their customers makes them unbeatable. Their most expensive meal does not go over ten dollars making it more obvious to want to choose them over other burger places, especially for the quality of the meal you will get from them. In comparison to many places I am filled up with satisfaction and do not pay as much for a meal that will only fill me up for a more expensive price with nowhere near the quality I will get at Steak n’ Shake. In total, what I pay for a “Jalapeno Crunch” meal is five dollars and forty-seven cents. How great is that! Anytime I am craving a tasty burger, I will choose Steak ‘n Shake in a heartbeat.

In conclusion, as illustrated and exemplified in the proceeding discussion, the taste of a Steak n’ Shake burger is exquisite, the restaurant is open in plain sight, and the price is just right — a reasonable price I do not question the great quality of food. For these reasons; in my opinion, Steak n’ Shake is the place that serves excellent burgers, having been brought to this restaurant was probably one of the best things to happen to me. I truly did fall in love with the burger and the whole experience within itself.

Tipping, make it mandatory, or ban it?

“Jesus Christ I mean, these ladies aren’t starving to death. They make minimum wage. You know, I used to work minimum wage and when I did I wasn’t lucky enough to have a job that society deemed tip worthy.” This is part of Mr. Pink’s argument for not tipping waitresses in the opening scene of Quentin Tarantino’s Reservoir Dogs. He argues that he doesn’t tip because society says we should tip waitresses but we shouldn’t tip fast food restaurant employees when they both do the same thing, he also argues that we should only tip for impeccable service and it shouldn’t be an automatic thing like it has become. A lot of people may agree with Mr. Pink and those people are calling for tipping to be abolished for his reasons and/or a number of other things going on in the restaurant industry however a lot would view not tipping as “stingy”, “cheap”, “miserable, etc and tip as a way of respecting and thanking the person serving their food and drinks and for some servers tips make up the majority of their income. For these reasons, people want tipping to become mandatory. The founder of Shake Shack fast food chain, Danny Meyer stated that tipping will no longer be accepted in his restaurants and said that he will increase his staff’s wages and increase the prices on his menus. Kevin Reddy has also banned tipping at his fast food chain restaurants, Noodles and Co. Is this a step in the right direction?

Tipping drags waiters into poverty. This issue is more common in America as in most states restaurants are allowed to pay less than minimum wage ($2.13) because customers are expected to give 20% to 30% tip. This expectancy drives severs into poverty because fewer and fewer people are leaving even a 15% tip or they aren’t leaving a tip at all, a survey conducted by Vouchercloud, a coupon site revealed that when asked how much they tip or what percentage of the bill they pay, a mere 23% out of 2,600 adults from across America said that when they go out to eat they leave a tip that is 20% of the bill. Half of the people surveyed said that due to being in a poor financial situation they tip a lot less now than they would have 5 years ago. Another study carried out by CreditCards.com stated that one in five customers don’t leave any tip at a restaurant. Tipping is a great thing for the restaurant industry because in all but 7 states restaurants are allowed to pay servers less than the minimum wage because of tips this means when servers do not get tips they are still being paid under the minimum wage which leads to them and their families having to survive off of welfare. Servers are 3 times more likely to live in poverty than people with other occupations and their families are at a significantly higher chance of having to rely on benefits from the government to survive.

Sylvia Allegretto, who is a research economist at the University of California, Berkeley, and also previously worked as a waitress said, “Tipped workers are heavily reliant on public subsidies to help make ends meet,’ ‘Who helps them bridge the gap? Taxpayers.’

Waiting tables is a difficult job and you don’t have to be one to imagine how hard it is. Long hours and a lot of pressure make a stressful job and on top of that, have to deal with horrible customers and there is a lot of them. Serves receive a lot of abuse during their shifts and it is not uncommon for waiters to experience sexual harassment and experience racism which they will put up with so they can get more tips. Most people are aware of how hard the job is and leave a good tip for a decent service because they think it is the right thing to do. A study has found that waitressing and other jobs are the most damaging to mental and physical health. The study was carried out by scientists at Southern Medical University in Guangzhou, China and they found that waiters and waitresses are 22 more tones likely to have a stroke, and for women, this figure rises to 33%. The study revealed that a job will be less stressful if you are in control and respected more. So waitressing is not a candidate for a stress-free job.

With a lot of waitresses surviving on minimum wage or less tips are vital for just living, taking care of children, and getting through university/college so a lot of women are having to put up with sexual harassment in their workplace because they need money.in America, women make up two-thirds of waiting staff, and a survey carried out revealed that out of 700 serves across 38 states most (90%) had experienced sexual harassment from coworkers, customers, and even management. Tipped workers, those recovering below minimum wage are far more likely to be subject to harassment because they rely on those tips. less harassment is reported in places where the minimum wage is higher e.g. California. So maybe if tipping were banned waiting staff wouldn’t put up with harassment from customers.

For some waiters their job is far more than serving food, they can start hours before the restaurant even opens, cleaning bathrooms, wiping tables, washing dishes, making drinks, setting everything up, and can end hours after the restaurant closes repeating these tasks. A lot of servers don’t receive the benefits many other jobs offer e.g. paid sick leave. So a waitress doing all these tasks without tip and eating minimum wage would only be making about $10 a day which is not enough to live on so even a $15 would make all the difference in a server’s income and life. To some people, this is enough to make tipping be mandatory in every restaurant. Some say a tip of 25% should be made to every server.

A lot of the time when you tip it doesn’t even go to the server, the manager can take these tips, or else a more common practice is that all tips from every server are collected and divided evenly between the servers. So if you leave a really good tip for a server you felt gave excellent service, it might not even go to them, this does motivate some people to not bother leaving a tip. However, if all tips are divided evenly it might eliminate inequality in the workplace. Sadly in this society, there have been many cases of people not leaving a tip for someone simply because of their race, just one example of this is in October of last year, a waitress called Jasmine Brewers left a note on the receipt which read “we don’t tip black people”, this horrified her and her mother who she showed it to. This disgusting attitude and behavior isn’t uncommon at all and there are countless other cases of this happening all the time. Website, Eater’s analysis of the Current Population Survey shows that white servers were paid a considerable amount more than their Latin, Asian, and black counterparts.

After researching and writing this essay I have had to rethink tipping waiters and waitresses. I have always left a tip when I visit a restaurant even if I didn’t enjoy the food except when I feel the service hasn’t been up to standard. A lot of people tend not to and I always think bad of them for it. There are more reasons not to tip and I might actually be doing servers a favor by not tipping, but will I continue leaving a tip? I still don’t think I could leave a restaurant without leaving one.

The video game is an extraordinary piece of equipment that changes the whole surroundings and allows you to move to the virtual world and experience things you can not experience in real life. So how does it affect people?

Being a gamer could allow you to improve your mental and physical abilities, because you may get motivated while playing, so you will move and jump, also you must be concentrated and try to memorize everything during the game, the instruction, how to win, some strategies or you wouldn’t enjoy it and wouldn’t love the game.

If you feel bored or free you can play video games to enjoy and entertain. Two of the fabulous things about it are that it doesn’t have a time limit and you don’t need to change your position. Also, if you turn into a professional in one game you could bring some money from it. Moreover, some video games allow you to play online with your friends, also you can make a friendship over the internet and get along so fast because you both chose and love the same game. I saw people married because of video games, so who knows maybe your partner is waiting for you. Video games also improve the person’s ability to make decisions, because some video games allow you to determine and rewrite the end, from the options you select during the game so it is your responsibility if the end was happy or sad. Furthermore, some hospitals use video games as a medication, to let patients forget the real dark world, forget their misery and move to the virtual world to play and have some fun. It also could change your look to your environment and let you think deeply before doing anything and begin to imagine how the second party is thinking, so, this will make you one step ahead of anyone.

Also, one of my favorite benefits for me is that it encourages teamwork because you can not play all the games independently, and you have to communicate with your squad and understand them and try to solve any problem together. You can also learn how to be a leader for a group and put every person in your team in their perfect position, because of that every partner will increase his personal skills and that will also help to improve the level and strength of the group. Furthermore, some countries use video games in education and some studies prove that if you learn something and enjoy it, you would love to learn more and more, therefore you will become a master of that thing.

Disadvantages

But nothing is perfect, it has also its harmful effect. Because video games will be a waste of your time, you won’t realize the time that you lost on it and you will become a lonely person who just wants to be alone with his games. Also, it will affect your sight and force you to wear eyeglasses because of the rays that enter your eyes from the screen, and more and more you will lose your sight or have to do surgery.

And that will also make you fat because you don’t do anything except press on the controller. Your muscles will decrease and you will lose your physical strength and your bones will become weaker because you are closing on yourself inside the room and that will not allow the sunlight to enter so, you won’t get vitamin D.

Video games have a classification of age because adults would not enjoy playing kids’ games and some games are prohibited for children, because of violent, bloody, negative thoughts, or pornography. Some children become aggressive after playing violent games, they make fight without a reason, and they think that everyone wants to insult them and make them a joke. The negative thoughts tell the kids to kill themselves or steal from their families or leave their houses and start taking drugs.

Addiction won’t let you live unless you have video games. That will affect your academic performance, and leave a lot of hobbies because you have a new different hobby and it is playing video games, because of that hobby some gamers are playing not for entertainment but as a career.

Now, what do you think about video games? In my opinion, I think it is good but, you have to control and manage your time, time for family, time for education, time for friends, and most importantly time for yourself.

Chipotle: Diving to the Middle of the Burrito

Chipotle’s foundation is built upon its mission of “Food with integrity.” With an array of 2300 stores across the United States, Chipotle is aspiring to be one of the most healthy and influential businesses in the modern era. Steve Ells, Chipotle’s original founder, and co-CEO, intended the company to create, produce, and manufacture locally. From day one, Ells remained committed to serving food that is ethically and naturally produced (Page). Famously known as the ‘Burrito Empire’, Chipotle has purposefully had an incredibly integrated and diligent marketing strategy. Chipotle, positioned for prosperity, uses its history and growth to reflect upon its business portfolio, and through these sustainable company practices, Chipotle’s impact on the consumer experience is astronomical.

Mission, History, and Growth of Chipotle

Bubba: Chipotle’s mission is to deliver the highest quality food to everyone. They stress their loyalty to providing fresh vegetables and free-roaming animals for their meat. The company states in its “Our Values” page on its website that they are committed “to vegetables grown in healthy soil, and pork from pigs allowed to freely root and roam outdoors or in deeply bedded barns.” (citation) They also want to relate as closely to their customers as possible, stating, “We’re committed because we understand the connection between how food is raised and prepared, and how it tastes…With every burrito we roll or bowl we fill, we’re working to cultivate a better world,” (citation). What sets Chipotle apart from other restaurants is its use of ingredients with no added colorings, flavors, or preservatives. By doing this, they end up spending more time and money. Nevertheless, they achieve that high-quality standard that they do so crave by doing so.

In 1993, a man by the name of Steve Ells opened the first Chipotle restaurant. Taking what he learned from the Culinary Institute of America, along with his skills developed as a line cook at Jeremiah Tower at Stars in San Francisco, he hit the ground running. In order to be profitable at the Denver, Colorado establishment, they needed to sell at least 107 burritos a day. After one month, they were selling over 1000 burritos daily. The history of Chipotle is one of only a single blemish. This blemish, however, is more of a dramatic scar in the company.

From late 2015 to early 2016, multiple customers of Chipotle establishments across the country were sent to the hospital as a result of an E.coli outbreak. This made the stock value of Chipotle decrease by nearly 50% within two months. They also reported a 13.3 percent drop in revenue in 2016 to the previous year and a drop in net income from $475.6 million in 2015 to $22.9 million in 2016 (citation). Though they experienced quite the loss in the few months transitioning from 2015 to 2016, they’ve come back strong by raking in their greatest revenue in their history this past quarter at $1.434 billion (citation). Their net income, though not back to 2015 numbers, is climbing back up. The future for Chipotle is bright. With new menu items and growing financials, this company has much more to offer the public in the coming years.

Sustainable Marketing

Caitlin: Chipotle has capitalized on its commitment to creating “Food with Integrity.” The company uses “Food with Integrity” to focus on issues of sustainable food and human farming conditions. The campaign emphasizes the importance of transparency and sustainability within the food industry. Chipotle’s commitment to “Food with Integrity” has launched many campaigns in an effort to cultivate a better world.

To promote the future of food with integrity Chipotle launched the Chipotle Aluminaries Project. This project was designed to “drive positive change in the food industry by offering eight growth-stage ventures the resources needed to grow and make a positive impact at scale” (Schalow). Brian Niccol, chief executive officer at Chipotle spoke about the Chipotle Aluminaries Project, sharing “By sponsoring the Chipotle Aluminaries Project, we’re looking to advance the work of the next generation of entrepreneurs who are disrupting the food landscape.” Chipotle’s investment in the customer-generated marketing project was designed to be a platform to create momentum and change.

Chipotle, in an effort to reduce its environmental footprint, unveiled its Gloves to Bags Campaign. Chipotle identified that “95% of all gloves used in restaurants end up in a landfill,” (citation). Due to the lack of options to recycle gloves, “Chipotle teamed up with Revolution Bag in Salinas, California to start a pilot program turning plastic gloves into trash bags,” (citation). The goal of the Gloves to Bags Campaign was to make Chipotle a more sustainable company and increase its transparency. In addition, Chipotle has vowed to reduce waste by 50% by 2020.

Chipotle unveiled its “Behind the Foil” campaign to publicize its commitment to transparency. The documentary-style video series features behind-the-scenes footage of Chipotle restaurants to “pull back the foil.” The very relevant campaign produced a lot of buzz around Chipotle’s commitment to being transparent with how they prepare and get their food. Chipotle capitalizes on its ability to create ads that get people talking about it, which in turn moves toward change.

SWOT: Company Analysis

Daisy: Chipotle Mexican Grill serves as one of the most recognized, fast-casual chain restaurants in the United States. Because of its popularity among fast food chains, Chipotle continuously faces a risk of external threats and or opportunities that either reflect poorly on the company or in some cases, benefit the company. These external forces are categorized as Threats and Opportunities, and a Company’s response to these forces either highlights an internal strength or weakness of the company. This breakdown is commonly known as a SWOT analysis, evaluating the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats of a company.

Chipotle was founded in 1993, but the company went public in 2006. After going public, Chipotle has grown very quickly and has reported positive annual revenue and earnings growth every year since its IPO. Over the years, exemplified strengths of Chipotle include rapid growth, good financial strength, fresh ingredients, and innovative outlooks. For example, In 2015, Chipotle was threatened with an E.coli outbreak and a total of 55 people were hospitalized and reported as infected after eating at Chipotle. This outbreak threatened Chipotle’s reputation and one of its main core values of the company, to serve fresh and quality ingredients. Chipotle lost many loyal customers but retaliated against this threat by improving its food safety practices. Chipotle planned to commit $10 million to help local farmers to meet its food and safety standards and started using DNA testing to identify harmful bacteria before they enter its supply chains. (Publishing) Ironically, this also reflected poorly as one of Chipotle’s weaknesses. Because Chipotle prided itself in serving safe, fresh food, its values were being questioned by scared customers. Chipotle focused too heavily on safer food production and practices, that they were failing to restore trust in their customers. After this, many customers stopped purchasing from Chipotle and this resulted in Chipotle losing millions of dollars worth of potential profit from customer equity.

Chipotle faces opportunities and threats every day. Forces from the macro-environment and the company’s responses to these forces shape Chipotle’s volatility in the market. Chipotle needs to stay updated and constant with these forces and trends in order to survive. Not just to survive, but so Chipotle can maintain a constant state of optimization. Chipotle fails to take on two main opportunities: Expanding internationally and entering a new product market. Aside from a few restaurants in Europe and Canada, Chipotle fails to expand into emerging, international markets. Also considered as a weakness, another opportunity for Chipotle is to enter a new product category. Because Chipotle has a very limited menu, the company could focus on other Mexican dishes that could expand sales. Currently, Chipotle offers a small selection of burritos, tacos, burrito bowls, and salads.

One of the largest threats that Chipotle faces is its competition. The fast food market is highly competitive and requires constant adaptations as the macro environment changes. Primary competitors include other franchises and local family-owned restaurants. Taco Bell and McDonald’s are considered to be Chipotle’s top fast food competitors, which offer low prices and more convenience as most of these restaurants have drive-throughs, unlike Chipotle. (Department)

Chipotle strives to excel in the fast food market by adapting to the external forces that shape the market. Chipotle aims to promote company strength and leadership, but at times this can be misconstrued by society as weaknesses. To achieve optimization, Chipotle must assess each strength, weakness, opportunity, and threat the company faces and improve in these areas to create a better name and brand for the company.

Chipotle: Segmentation, Targeting, and Positioning Strategies

Michael: Chipotle studies demographics and behaviors in order to further develop the company’s success and goal of hitting specific markets. Although popular among several groups of people, millennials, born between 1982 and the early 2000s, have become the primary customers in Chipotle restaurants (Diego). In order to persuade millennials into going to and or returning to their restaurant, they advertise the idea of a fresh and healthy meal. While they avoid the typical forms of advertising, television (only had one) and written (newspaper), Chipotle does a great job of commanding a strong online and social media presence. In order to capture and preserve the audience it is intending, Chipotle is focusing simply on food sourcing and its organic methods for producing food. In between caring for their customers and caring about what they consume their bodies, Chipotle does an excellent job of putting the customer first, and truly addressing their needs (Diego).

Known as one of the most successful restaurants in the “fast casual” industry, Chipotle is consistently making a dent in the global market, forcing people to question the food they put into their bodies from other businesses. Located heavily in urban, developing areas, healthy conscientious people find Chipotle perfect for providing alternative food items. The customer will sleep happy at night, after a meal from Chipotle, knowing that the items put into their body, will not harm them because they are GMO-free, Cage Free, and locally farm-grown (Diego).

Strong brand loyalty and regular customers are only some of the factors to attribute to Chipotle’s success. Word of mouth, instead of traditional advertising, has proven to help Chipotle thrive in this marketplace. When opening a new Chipotle, Chipotle works with local farmers and producers to provide the freshest ingredients and vegetables, in order to promote local businesses. This action in turn promotes the opening of new Chipotle restaurants, as well as promoting locally sourced food (Alhadlaq).

Known for its positioning strategy and philosophy, “Food with Integrity,” Chipotle stands tall for finding the best ingredients, saving the environment, and protecting the animals. Because locally sourced foods supply them with most of their ingredients, Chipotle regularly makes donations of old grills and food processors to help end the use of landfills (Alhadlaq).

Restaurants tend to have promotions throughout the year, in order to promote growth in their community, and in their business chain. Chipotle for example, annually hosts an event called “Boorito”, where discounts are given to customers who are dressed up in Halloween costumes. Similarly, supporting local sports teams and organizations, Chipotle relies on word of mouth to spread its philosophy, “Food with Integrity.”

Trends in the Market

Christian: While Chipotle has done an excellent job at establishing a strong brand, they have also adapted in accordance with current market trends. There are numerous examples of the restaurant chain changing its menu, sales, or general company policies to improve potential consumers’ perception of the company. Recently, Chipotle has made it a priority to promote healthier eating, environmental sustainability, and technology use. Marketing has evolved in the sense that having a great product is not enough anymore, and Chipotle has not only dealt with this shift but has used it to its advantage.

One of the biggest trends across the restaurant industry, in general, has been consumers making more health-conscious choices when ordering. In an article in Forbes Magazine, Nancy Gagliardi says “All demographics—from Generation Z to Baby Boomers–say they would pay more for healthy foods, including those that are GMO-free, have no artificial coloring/flavors and are deemed all natural” (Gagliardi). In response to this, Chipotle has placed an emphasis on their salad bowls, introducing “Lifestyle” bowls that satisfy the Keto, Paleo, and Whole30 dieting techniques. Additionally, Chipotle’s advertisements have started to focus on the quality of their ingredients. Chipotle prides itself on non-gmo ingredients and went as far as saying in a recent commercial, “The hardest ingredient to pronounce at Chipotle is Chipotle,” (citation).

Another massive change in the restaurant industry, specifically in regard to fast food, is the surge in delivery sales. Chipotle has been conducting research and testing different strategies in their restaurants to reduce friction for delivery services, whether it be their own app or third-party services. While convenience and speed were once a luxury, it is now a necessity for some consumers, and Chipotle has changed accordingly. In addition to their focus on the efficiency of delivery, they have introduced “Chipotlanes,” where customers can simply pay on their mobile device and pick up their food without leaving their car (citation). Initial results of these Chipotlanes have been very promising and Chipotle is looking to implement this technique in multiple locations.

Particularly with millennials and Generation Z, there has been an increased awareness in regard to the environment. Food waste is obviously a major issue with all restaurants, and it will probably never be eliminated altogether, but Chipotle has set the lofty goal of increasing its waste diversion rate to 50% percent. To achieve this goal, Chipotle has trained staff not only to prepare food in the right quantities but also what other materials can be reused and recycled. Additionally, Chipotle has vowed that by 2020, 80% of its restaurants will participate in the Harvest Program, which donates leftover food to community organizations (citation). Whether it be recycling, composting, or donating, Chipotle is undoubtedly using the societal marketing concept to its advantage.

Introduction:

Whilst modern terrorism is assumed to be the ideology of states like IS, it expands further than that. Modern terrorism is sometimes expressed by those who feel cast away by society and act out of vengeance and hatred. An example of this is the Toronto Van Attack (John Paul Tasker, CBC 2018), which was a major tragedy last year and could be displayed as a direct attack on Canada’s civilization and a threat to civilization as a whole. The Toronto Van Attack (CBC 2018) caused extreme damage to the people of Canada, harming them emotionally and physically, whilst also heavily disrupting the business districts and the transport systems of Toronto. (Rozina Sabur, Telegraph 2018). Civilization is considered to be the stage in which society reaches an advanced level of social, science, industry, government development, and organization (Dictionary.com). The responses from political leaders at this time, especially Justin Trudeau, left a hallmark on how terrorism was regarded in the Western World. Terrorism is a current ongoing issue, and it will continue to occur due to it being an ideology that affects how people address each day and live out their lives, terrorism strikes fear into some people’s minds and it affects both young and old. Political responses and approaches will be analyzed. Firstly, how terrorism poses a constant threat to the modern world, especially the major countries and their systems, e.g. France. Secondly, the effects of radicalism on certain civilizations and how radicalism is one of the biggest contributions to modern terrorism. Thirdly, recent terror attacks will be analysed to view the reasons behind them, and also how the political governments prepared for the next attack or how they reduced the chance of another terrorist attack occurring.

Body:

Threat Levels

The threat that terrorism poses’ has constantly fluctuated, mainly due to the Syrian civil war and Iraq protests of their government (Ambassador Chas W. Freeman Jr, MEPC 2012). The Syrian civil war has contributed a large amount of the threat to the modern world since it began in 2011. It has caused around 470,000 deaths and still growing (Megan Specia, New York Times, 2018). There have been many different sides involved in the civil war that have risen and fallen, the Syrian Arab Republic government and the anti-Syrian Republic government. The largest threat that this civil war has created is the creation and birth of ISIS, Islamic State

In the UK threat levels posed by terrorism are measured in five different stages, all with different severity levels. Low – an attack is unlikely, Moderate – an attack is possible, but not likely, Substantial – an attack is a strong possibility, Severe – an attack is highly likely and Critical – an attack is expected imminently (Wikipedia). These are set by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre and the Security Service MI5 (GOV.UK). These threat levels are key in keeping the population of the UK safe, allowing them to be more cautious in times of Critical, Severe, and Moderate. The threat levels are also key to the government, it enables them to be able to expect a terrorist attack and increase security measures within the UK to prevent attacks. ‘Vigilance is vital regardless of the current national threat level…sharing national threat levels with the general public keeps everyone informed’ (M15, BBC, 2017). The problem with how the threat levels are measured is that they are not always accurate and sometimes can lead to a false prognosis. The current threat level in the UK, for international threats is sitting at severe, whilst threats from Northern Ireland are ranked at moderate (GOV.UK). These identifications could lead to mass destruction of industry, transport, and culture within the UK, an example would be the Manchester Arena attack (BBC, 2017).

Radicalization:

In 2018, a study was conducted to identify the demographic of people who use the Internet; 4.021 billion was the recorded demographic, which is a large portion of the world’s population (WeAreSocial, 2018). Arguably, the most easily manipulated audience within online communities is 6-18-year-olds. This is because of young people, especially teens, are susceptible to experiencing sensitivity. Within this bracket of sensitivity includes social acceptance, rejection and not belonging (PHYS.ORG, 2018). Teens are one of the largest audiences on the internet, especially on social media, spending mass amounts of periods browsing through posts and advertisements. This leads to extreme exposure to the potential threat of modern terrorism and its radicalization attempts. The use of propaganda on sites like Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube, has constantly been a problem for governments around the world to counter. In the UK since February 2010 a total of 95,000 propaganda posts have been removed from the internet, with new ones constantly popping up (GOV.UK, 2015). In 2013, a study was set out to find how radicalism/extremism uses the internet to radicalize people. They discovered that the internet creates more opportunities for people to be radicalized, and the internet creates an acceleration in the process of radicalism (Luke Gibbon, RAND, 2013).

Political speeches:

Theresa May, Prime Minister of the U.K., gave a speech on the London Bridge Terror attack of 2017 (Joshua Posaner, Politico, 2017). “An attack on the free world”. The London Bridge attack claimed 8 deaths and 48 injuries (BBC News, 30th May 2018). The Politico article only highlights a portion of Theresa May’s speech and is very brief in highlighting the details of the attack, compared to GOV.UK, which regurgitates the whole speech. GOV.UK is quite a reliable source due to it being the government’s website, and because it is recapturing the full detail of the speech on the London Bridge attack. The long-term plan in her speech is identifiable. “It will only be defeated when we turn people’s minds away from this violence – and make them understand that our values – pluralistic, British values – are superior to anything offered by the preachers and supporters of hate.” (GOV.UK). However, the short-term plan on how to deal with modern terrorism is unclear within the speech. From this part of the speech, we can identify that modern terrorism is of a high threat level and will be difficult to limit the threat. Another instance of where Theresa May has given a speech on the idea of modern terrorism is present in an online news article, (Robin Wright, New Yorker). In comparison, to the (Joshua Posaner, Politico, 2017) article, it goes into some depth and is explored and explained by a professional who gives their opinion on the matter of modern terrorism. Bruce Hoffman (Inside Terrorism), comments on how Theresa May was correct in deeming modern terrorism to be experiencing a new trend, “We believe we are experiencing a new trend in the threat we face”. The (New Yorker, 2017) can be viewed as a good source, due to it highlighting how Theresa May is aware of the dangers that modern terrorism may pose and how modern terrorism could be a huge threat to society’s functions.

Justin Trudeau, Prime Minister of Canada, gave a speech after the terrorist attack that took place in Toronto occurred. (John Paul Tasker, CBC, 2018), the attack resulted in 10 counts of first-degree murder and 13 attempted murders. “We need to continue to reflect on the changing situations in which we’re in and do everything we can to keep Canadians safe. But we cannot, as Canadians, choose to live in fear every single day as we go about our daily business”. (John Paul Tasker, CBC, 2018). The select part from Justin Trudeau’s speech acknowledges the urgency of the matter and how quickly modern terrorism is changing. It is also addressing the people on how they should lead their lives in the face of terrorism. The source is quite good because it explores how the PM of Canada is aiming to keep his people calm and strong. The van attack that occurred in Toronto caused problems within the city, which affected the civilization. One was that the bus and Toronto subway service were closed in that area and rerouted, which would have reduced the efficiency of transportation. The other problem was some of the business sectors that were nearby were shut down for the day. Both problems only fully resumed on the 25th of April 2018 (Toronto Van Attack, Wikipedia).

The attack that took place in Oslo and Utøya, Norway on 22 July 2011 is regarded as one of the worst cases of modern terrorism recorded (Peter Beaumont, The Guardian, 2011). In Oslo, a total of 8 people died in a bombing, and in Utøya 69 people (67 being shot). Most people who died in the Utøya attacks were 14-20 years of age. (Wikipedia/CNN, 2018). Jens Stoltenberg, the prime minister at the time of the attacks gave a speech, in which he stated “We are still shocked by what has happened, but we will never give up our value…Our response is more democracy, more openness, and more humanity…We will answer hatred with love”, (Richard Orange, The Guardian, 2012). This source presents a different approach towards modern terrorism compared to the CBC, Politico, and New Yorker articles. This article highlights the culture of Norway and the way they respond to impacting and damaging events.

In conclusion, I believe that modern terrorism is a high threat to civilization. I believe it is a high threat to civilization because it causes dismay amongst politicians and the amount of precautions they take to ensure that it has a lower chance to occur, yet it still occurs. Another reason I believe that it is of high threat is that the influence of radicalization on the youth is an ever-growing presence due to the increase in demand and use of online technology. It is easily accessible to modern terrorists who can influence young people to commit atrocities.

References:

1. John Paul Tasker, CBC (Toronto Van attack, 2018) 
2. Rozina Sabur, Telegraph (Toronto Van attack, 2018)