To tell the truth, the questions like this are somewhat baffling. The term “exploitive” here presupposes that women who participate in them are exploited because they are graded by the looks of their bodies without taking into account what good persons they are. The winners are exploited because they are given the sense of false superiority. The losers are exploited because they feel inferior.
Throughout the last two centuries the world was growing more and more secular, and it was correspondingly expressed in the way public education has been formed. One of the questions belonging to this theme that has led to the most controversy is this – should creationism be taught in public schools? The opponents of the idea state that secular society shouldn’t finance religious education. The supporters say that it is not so much as religion but the inherent part of culture and to remove it would be disastrous.
One of the things people like to do most is to blame. No matter whom, no matter for what, no matter in what respect. Whom they don’t like to blame is themselves. It is not surprising, as it is always much easier and more pleasant – in a certain perverted sense – to shift the responsibility for – something, anything – onto somebody else. It is easier to denounce than to think and try to improve yourself or, in fact, simply apply an effort.
It always remained a mystery why people are so eager to denounce somebody for being paid too much while doing nothing to improve their own living conditions. For them, it is this overpaid person who steals their rightful possessions. How come somebody can be so rich while being honest? No, he must be robbing me, otherwise where could he get all this money?
Throughout the history, there always existed and exists a kind of people who would rather count somebody else’s money than earn a little bit of their own. The difference between the past and the present is that previously this idea was called “envy” and was treated correspondingly; nowadays it is called something like “just redistribution of wealth” and is used as a kind of religion by leftist politicians.
When contraceptives such as condoms became widely available, those who supported this kind of thing from the very beginning supposed that this is going to bring an end to all the problems of humanity in the sphere of sex – both in what concerns unwanted pregnancy and venereal diseases. The facts, however, do not speak in favor of such an idea.
Many people tend to believe that teenagers are going to have sex anyway, that’s why it’s better to provide an easier access to condoms. In some European countries condoms are even handed out at schools for free. However, is this measure really helpful in achieving the main purpose of the campaign– to decrease the rates of teen pregnancy and venereal diseases?
Today we can often hear about the immorality of commercial companies that treat children as the target audience of their products. They don’t have right to lure poor little children into… what? Buying something? Spending their money? Wasting their time?
To begin with, the definition “poor little children” is wrong inherently. I don’t know where its authors have seen these poor little ones, but I didn’t; according to my own observations, children don’t know either and use this lenient attitude of grown-ups skillfully and whenever it is possible.
It is natural tendency for human beings to place the unreachable Eden somewhere in the vague past, when everything had been better: trees greener, sky bluer, people more kind, food tastier, and children politer than they are now. This can be understood in two ways: either the situation in this world really slowly, yet distinctly, deteriorates with every passing year, or it is just the usual longing for the past. And, however alluring the first variant may be for pessimists, it hardly can be so. If we believe in it, we should believe that the happiest people who have ever lived were the cavemen several tens of thousands years ago, who enjoyed all the benefits of the greenest trees, bluest sky, tastiest food and the most polite children in history. Yet, as far as we can know, it was hardly so.
A “throw-away society” is a term with highly negative evaluative connotation that means the same as the more neutral “consumer society”. Both terms, however, in the course of time acquired that negative tinge which everybody is supposed to express when pronouncing them; it is fashionable to denounce our society for being a consumer society rather than… no one actually knows rather than what.