The Rights Of Woman Response

I really enjoy the fact that she wants to encourage women to make themselves equal to man. Its really important to stress that women dont have to always be cared for by the man, in reality i believe thats its more the woman taking care of the man than the other way around. Wives are supposed to cook for the man clean and even clean the mans laundry so what if he brings a paycheack home to pay the bills, women are the ones that do all of the reall work. In reality though most women do have a job and dont stay home these days and have just as much will power as men to be just as sucsessfull as them. Just because some decide that they are not as equal as men doesnt mean that females should belittle themselves by saying " oh im too weak to lift this" or 'im not smart enough to do that" they should try thier best to be equals and ask for help when they truly need it. Women should be able to hold themselves equal with men because if not then we are almost no better than slaves to be ordered around.  Wollstonecraft's use of words confused me though, probably because it was written in 1792 and i just dont understand the dialogue fully, but thats ok because i understood the concept she was trying to get across. Her essay aslo brings to my attention the reaction this must have brought to the women of her time. They must have been appaled by the idea of being equals with men, and thought it imposible to change the role of women. I think womens desire to be equal was in evitable, and is still going on today. Soon there wont be any more descrimination between genders, and it may even take a couple generation to fully be that way.

Response On Signs And Symbols

In Signs and Symbols there is major differences in how animals and humans use signs and symbols. Langer states that " a signs causes us to think or act in face of the thing signified, whereas a symbol causes us to think about the think symbolized." She also explains how we use both signs and symbols and how animals only use signs to communicate and read thier surroundings. I believe this to be very true, and it is amazing to think that we can still communicate with an animal even though the do not speak, thanks to signs. It's also curious to me why can't animals use symbols too? What makes them not understand the concept of symbols? Or if there is any possible way for them to learn symbols? It may just be that animals simply cannot grasp language which most definitly separates humans from animals. As Langer says " The birth of language is the dawn of humanity." By using our words to symbolize a feeling or concept humans can easily communicate and acually think and contemplate over something. Which is trully great because it sets us apart form any living thing on this planet, and makes each and every one of us different because we can think about different things and like different things. It's scary to think, what if we couldn't use symbols? The human race would probly resemble any animal group found in the world. It really makes me think about the other differences humans and animals have. One difference I especially like is how animals evolve to suit thiere needs in the wild, whereas humans evolve the things around us to adapt to our needs. Its possible that humans are able to adapt the things around us because we can use symbols in such a way that we find new ways to do things by thinking or talking about the problem that faces us to make our lives more comfortable. For me i think this essay really stresses the importance of language and where humans would be without it, and also the differences in how animals and humans comunicate and understand things using signs and symblos. 

The Cove

The Cove was an intense documentary. I believe that they structured the film in such a way to capture the attention of people and to make them feel strongly that dolphin slaughter is very wrong on many levels. The director filmed the scenes more like an action movie more than the typical "boring" "not-very-exciting" documentary. They used night vision scenes to pull viewers in and depict danger as the people were sneaking into the dolphin coves to plant their rock cameras to uncover the unethical killing of dolphins. The film makers probably left out the not so exciting scenes because they wanted to have their audience on the edges of their seats. Also every time they drove somewhere they were always being followed by other vehicles which also contributed to the action factor of the movie. By making the film more action based i think the movie was very successful in getting viewers to want to get involved and feel passionate towards eradicating killing of dolphins.
A New York Times reviewer described the film as a "trojan horse" I think the writer used this term because they used cameras disguised as rocks to infiltrate the cove to get real sound and video footage with out being noticed. Just like the trojan horse the cameras were used to bypass the coves barriers and reveal information to the public.
I think the over all reaction of the Japanese would by total shock. Little to no Japanese residents probably knew that dolphins were being slaughtered and being sold for their meat (disguised as whale meat). I would hope that the Japanese people would jump at the chance to stop the slaughter since it is very unethical and because the meat isn't even good to eat because it has such high mercury levels. Yet even the Japanese head of whale protection was in denial that dolphins are being slaughtered there. I believe that many Japanese would also be in denial upon watching The Cove.