For many years it was common in the United States to associate Chinese Americans with restaurants and laundries. People did not realize that the Chinese had been driven into these occupations. The first Chinese to reach the United States came during the California Gold Rush of 1849. Like most of the other people there, they had come to search for gold. In that largely unoccupied land, the men staked a claim for themselves by placing marks in the ground. However, either because the Chinese were so different from the others or because they worked so patiently that they sometimes succeeded in turning a seemingly worthless mining claim into a profitable one, they became the scapegoats of their envious competitor. They were harassed in many ways. Often they were prevented from working their claims; some localities even passed regulations forbidding them to own claims. The Chinese, therefore, started to seek out other ways of earning a living. Some of them began to do the laundry for the white miners; others set up small restaurants. (There were almost no women in California in those days, and the Chinese filled a real need by doing this "woman’s work".) Some went to work as farmhands or as fishermen. In the early 1860’s many more Chinese arrived in California. This time the men were imported as work crews to construct the first transcontinental railroad. They were sorely needed because the work was so strenuous and dangerous, and it was carried on in such a remote part of the country that the railroad company could not find other labourers for the job. As in the case of their predecessors, these Chinese were almost all males; and like them, too, they encountered a great deal of prejudice. The hostility grew especially strong after the railroad project was complete, and the imported labourers returned to California—thousands of them, all out of work. Because there were so many more of them this time, these Chinese drew even more attention than the earlier group did. They were so very different in every respect: in their physical appearance, including a long "pigtail" at the back of their otherwise shaved heads; in the strange, non-Western clothes they wore; in their speech (few had learned English since they planned to go back to China); and in their religion. They were contemptuously called "heathen Chinese" because there were many sacred images in their houses of worship. When times were hard, they were blamed for working for lower wages and taking jobs away from white men, who were in many cases recent immigrants themselves. Anti-Chinese riots broke out in several cities, culminating in arson and bloodshed. Chinese were barred from using the courts and also from becoming American citizens. Californias began to demand that no more Chinese be permitted to enter their state. Finally, in 1882, they persuaded Congress to pass the Chinese Exclusion Act, which stopped the immigration of Chinese labourers. Many Chinese returned to their homeland, and their numbers declined sharply in the early part of this century. However, during the World War Ⅱ, when China was an ally of the United States, the exclusion laws were ended; a small number of Chinese were allowed to immigrate each year, and the Chinese could become American citizens. In 1965, in a general revision of our immigration laws, many more Chinese were permitted to settle here, as discrimination against Asian immigration was abolished. Chinese Americans retain many aspects of their ancient culture, even after having lived here for several generations. For example, their family ties continue to be remarkably strong (encompassing grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins and others). Members of the family lend each other moral support and also practical help when necessary. From a very young age children are imbued with the old values and attitudes, including respect for their elders and a feeling of responsibility to the family. This helps to explain why there is so little juvenile delinquency among them. The high regard for education which is deeply embedded in Chinese culture, and the willingness to work very hard to gain advancement, are other noteworthy characteristics of theirs. This explains why so many descendants of uneducated labourer have succeeded in becoming doctors, lawyers, and other professionals. (Many of the most outstanding Chinese American scholars, scientists, and artists are more recent arrivals, who come from China’s former upper class and who represent its high cultural traditions. ) Why would so many Chinese Americans in California be involved in the occupations of restaurants and laundries in the 19th century
A. Because they were good at these jobs.
Because there were few women to do those jobs at that time.
C. Because of the prejudice and discrimination against the Chinese, they had no other choices.
D. Because they could not find gold in mines.
查看答案
The book from which "all modern American literature comes" refers to______.
A. The Great Gatsby
B. The Sun Also Rises
C. Moby Dick
D. The Adventures of Huckberry Finn
Sue Kirchofer got a preview of what was to come when she tried to change the beneficiary on her life insurance policy at work from her mother to her partner in early 1994. She was told that wasn’t an option. Kirchofer had worked at the industrial packaging and supply company in Seattle for nearly three years by then but was just beginning to come out about her sexuality. "They basically told me to remain invisible," she says. Kirchofer duly kept mute about her sexual orientation at work. But a few months later, word got out that Kirchofer, a skilled soccer player, would be playing in the Gay Games in New York, an international competition that attracted more than 11,000 athletes from around the world. When she returned to work the week after the games, she was told she no longer had a job. Kirchofer had always received good marks on her job performance reviews, and had even been promoted. "I offered to take another job within the company at a lower salary, since (the owner) said the money he was paying me was causing the company to take a loss," she recalls, though she says she knew what he said wasn’t true. The owner’s response, according to Kirchofer, "We don’t want you in any capacity at this company. " Kirchofer was terminated, effective immediately—without severance or warning. "I was blindsided," she says, "Even as I relay it now, it is still a devastating thing to recount. To fire someone based only on sexual orientation, not job performance, is a horrific thing to have happened. " However, last week, a Senate panel passed a bill whose first version appeared more than 25 years ago and which has since been reincarnated in various forms, including legislation that failed by one vote in the Senate in 1996. This time, there are 43 cosponsors in the Senate for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which specifically prohibits employment discrimination of any kind on the basis of sexual orientation. The bill also has 190 cosponsors in the House of Representatives, 21 of them Republicans. And it has received endorsements from an unprecedented number of major U.S. corporations ranging from Microsoft to Harley- Davidson. Records show Kirchofer’s case was reviewed by the city’s human-rights department in 1995, which found in her favor. Bronstein could not reveal more details but Kirchofer says her company was asked to pay her $ 1,000, which she donated to charity. Her ex-employer was also required to attend a diversity workshop. Kirchofer says she felt vindicated by the city’s support. Without a federal law, say Kirchofer and other advocates, many employers know that they can get away with discrimination without fear of much penalty. More than half of all Fortune 500 companies have adopted a policy against sexual-orientation harassment or discrimination, says Jon Davidson, senior counsel at Lamba Legal, a national organization that promotes civil rights for homosexuals. "It shows that they support the concept, which is great," he adds. " But in terms of whether the policies are efficient, well, there’s not much you can do about it if the internal procedures are inadequate. " Last year, Lamba Legal reported nearly 700 phone calls in with complaints related to sexual-orientation discrimination at work—second only to calls related to family matters. And Davidson says that number is just a fraction of the actual cases out there, as many people don’t report incidences of harassment or discrimination against them, feeling that filing a complaint would be futile. "One of the needs for a national law is that in the states where discrimination is most prevalent, you are least likely to get an antidiscrimination law passed," adds Davidson, "Right now, we have a patchwork of protections, and it’s not right that people could be subjected to discrimination in some parts of the country without any redress. We need a national law that protects all workers—no employee should be denied equal treatment at work because of whom they love. " Most Americans seem to agree. In a Newsweek poll last week, 85 percent of Americans said there should be equal rights for gays and lesbians in terms of job opportunities—up from 59 percent in a Newsweek poll conducted in 1982. And a nationwide Harris Interactive poll taken in June 2001 found that 61 percent of Americans favored a federal law prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation. The 2001 survey also found that 42 percent of adults surveyed believe that such a law currently exists. Which of the following statements is INCORRECT concerning the needs for a national antidiscrimination law
A. Without a national law, many employers know that they can get away with discrimination without any penalty.
B. Some states where an antidiscrimination law is most needed are unable to have it passed.
C. It should be redressed if there are people subjected to discrimination somewhere.
D. Most American people believe a federal law prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation is a moral necessity.
Sue Kirchofer got a preview of what was to come when she tried to change the beneficiary on her life insurance policy at work from her mother to her partner in early 1994. She was told that wasn’t an option. Kirchofer had worked at the industrial packaging and supply company in Seattle for nearly three years by then but was just beginning to come out about her sexuality. "They basically told me to remain invisible," she says. Kirchofer duly kept mute about her sexual orientation at work. But a few months later, word got out that Kirchofer, a skilled soccer player, would be playing in the Gay Games in New York, an international competition that attracted more than 11,000 athletes from around the world. When she returned to work the week after the games, she was told she no longer had a job. Kirchofer had always received good marks on her job performance reviews, and had even been promoted. "I offered to take another job within the company at a lower salary, since (the owner) said the money he was paying me was causing the company to take a loss," she recalls, though she says she knew what he said wasn’t true. The owner’s response, according to Kirchofer, "We don’t want you in any capacity at this company. " Kirchofer was terminated, effective immediately—without severance or warning. "I was blindsided," she says, "Even as I relay it now, it is still a devastating thing to recount. To fire someone based only on sexual orientation, not job performance, is a horrific thing to have happened. " However, last week, a Senate panel passed a bill whose first version appeared more than 25 years ago and which has since been reincarnated in various forms, including legislation that failed by one vote in the Senate in 1996. This time, there are 43 cosponsors in the Senate for the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which specifically prohibits employment discrimination of any kind on the basis of sexual orientation. The bill also has 190 cosponsors in the House of Representatives, 21 of them Republicans. And it has received endorsements from an unprecedented number of major U.S. corporations ranging from Microsoft to Harley- Davidson. Records show Kirchofer’s case was reviewed by the city’s human-rights department in 1995, which found in her favor. Bronstein could not reveal more details but Kirchofer says her company was asked to pay her $ 1,000, which she donated to charity. Her ex-employer was also required to attend a diversity workshop. Kirchofer says she felt vindicated by the city’s support. Without a federal law, say Kirchofer and other advocates, many employers know that they can get away with discrimination without fear of much penalty. More than half of all Fortune 500 companies have adopted a policy against sexual-orientation harassment or discrimination, says Jon Davidson, senior counsel at Lamba Legal, a national organization that promotes civil rights for homosexuals. "It shows that they support the concept, which is great," he adds. " But in terms of whether the policies are efficient, well, there’s not much you can do about it if the internal procedures are inadequate. " Last year, Lamba Legal reported nearly 700 phone calls in with complaints related to sexual-orientation discrimination at work—second only to calls related to family matters. And Davidson says that number is just a fraction of the actual cases out there, as many people don’t report incidences of harassment or discrimination against them, feeling that filing a complaint would be futile. "One of the needs for a national law is that in the states where discrimination is most prevalent, you are least likely to get an antidiscrimination law passed," adds Davidson, "Right now, we have a patchwork of protections, and it’s not right that people could be subjected to discrimination in some parts of the country without any redress. We need a national law that protects all workers—no employee should be denied equal treatment at work because of whom they love. " Most Americans seem to agree. In a Newsweek poll last week, 85 percent of Americans said there should be equal rights for gays and lesbians in terms of job opportunities—up from 59 percent in a Newsweek poll conducted in 1982. And a nationwide Harris Interactive poll taken in June 2001 found that 61 percent of Americans favored a federal law prohibiting job discrimination based on sexual orientation. The 2001 survey also found that 42 percent of adults surveyed believe that such a law currently exists. Which of the following statements CAN NOT be inferred in Paragraph 5
A. In 1996, the anti-ENDA won in the Senate by a narrow margin.
B. The ENDA is directed towards sexual discrimination.
C. Some major American companies have shown support for ENDA.
D. Things are going to change soon.
According to Simon, what is the truth concerning numerous rules of dos and don’ts
A. They indicate class and status.
B. They are trip-wires for everybody.
C. They should be known by all.
D. They are complicated and dull.