题目内容
Have all-male clubs lost their cachet A decade ago, the testosterone fortress of the Augusta National Golf Club in Georgia was a battlefront of the feminist movement. Now, as the club contemplates a historic first offer of membership to a woman—Virginia "Ginni" Rometty, Chief Executive Officer of IBM, which is a sponsor of this week’s Masters Tournament—the most remarkable part of the story is that this time there’s a near-universal consensus."A lot is different now," says Ilene Lang, President and Chief Executive Officer of Catalyst, a global firm that studies women in business. "To most people looking at this, it just seems silly." Yet silly or not, Lang says it’s about time Augusta got on the distaff side of history. "It is still discrimination," she says, "and it’s ridiculous."Rometty has stayed mum on whether she’ll get—or even covets—the boxy green blazer that the club has awarded to her four predecessors at IBM. At a press event Wednesday, Augusta Chairman Billy Payne, who called Tiger Woods a disappointment for his 2010 sex scandal, dodged questions about Rometty. Meanwhile, President Obama and Mitt Romney said they believe women should be admitted, and Callista Gingrich expressed interest in becoming a member.The notion of women fighting to get into the old boys’ club seems almost quaint now, when every socioeconomic indicator shows female fortunes on the rise, while men, it seems, devote more and more time to sexting naughty photos. Augusta is one of the few remaining bastions of a particularly anachronistic kind of male privilege, where men of means enjoy golf, whisky, and whatever other private pleasures they take in the company of their own sex.Less than one percent of America’s golf clubs are still closed to women. Most big-city social groups have opened their doors, as have most country clubs and secret societies. Those that haven’t carry enough stigma that politicians regularly resign from them before running for office—as Mike Bloomberg did with New York’s Brook Club before he ran for mayor."Certainly, I think the mainstream is less accepting of this kind of discrimination," says Sally Frank, a law professor who successfully sued Princeton’s all-male eating clubs while a student at the university in the 1980s. Furthermore, the social aspect of male-only clubs is hardly as tantalizing as it once was. Does any powerful woman actually long to participate in the ritualistic cross-dressing that passes for entertainment at VIP man-camp Bohemian GroveStill, admission for Rometty does matter. Says Martha Burk, who led the campaign against Augusta in 2002: "What I fear is that [Augusta will] come up with some kind of half-baked ’solution,’ such as not letting her in now but maybe waiting a year or two when all this female stuff blows over."But the "female stuff" likely won’t blow over. Rometty, whose true passion is scuba diving, is in increasingly feminine company in the C-suite, which includes the CEOs of HP, Xerox, and Pepsi. If Augusta National clings to its no-estrogen policy, will it really be able to maintain its white-hot power status for much longer You can’t make deals on the back nine when all the CEOs are at the bottom of the ocean, swimming with sharks. (From Newsweek; 572 words) What is Rometty’s attitude towards joining Augusta().
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
You might think they would have learned their lesson by now. At the end of 2005 Republicans in the House of Representatives passed a bill that cracked down on illegal immigration, while doing nothing to regularise the position of the 12m or so people, mostly of Hispanic origin, who were living and working inside the United States without the proper papers, or to create a mechanism for allowing in people from Mexico and other southern neighbours to work with temporary permits. The bill never became law, but its one-sided nature helped stamp the Republicans (92% of whom voted for it in the House) as an anti-immigrant party. In April 2006 Latinos organised a day of protests in more than 100 cities; more than 500,000 people marched in Los Angeles alone. In the 2008 election 67% of Hispanics voted for Barack Obama.Now it is all happening again. Until now, the detection of illegal immigrants has invariably been a matter for the federal authorities.Republican-governed Arizona has just enacted a tough new law of its own: it requires state police to check the papers of anyone whose immigration status they have "reasonable" cause to doubt. Opponents say this is sure to lead to racial profiling. The bill is popular with angry white locals, so much so that the previously reform-minded John McCain, who is running for re-election to the Senate in Arizona, has not dared to oppose it. But in a country that is turning Hispanic at a rapid rate (by mid-century white Anglos will be another minority), the Republicans are once again hellbent on being on the wrong side of demography. The backlash will surely last longer than any bump in popularity gained by looking tough. The marches have begun again: on May 1st, up to a million people across the country took to the streets, by no means all of them Hispanic.For those who yearn for America to have a sensible immigration policy, the Arizona bill is a reason for both despair and hope. The first is easier to spell out. By any measure, Arizona’s offering is deeply illiberal. It would require all non-U. S. citizens to carry documents proving their immigration status, and would require police to check those papers in any contact with anyone who might be illegal. The obvious danger is that it would lead to the systematic harassment of brown-skinned people, including legal immigrants. As for illegals, it would simply drive even more of them underground. It would also criminalise anyone who shelters or helps illegals. Even the plan’s fans acknowledge that this is the toughest such bill ever passed in America.Paradoxically, the reason for hope is much the same. The bill is such a shocker that it is restarting the national debate. The Arizona law passed largely because the government is failing to do its job. The border is not secure; employers can and do hire people who have no legal right to be in America; and cross-border crime is on the rise. Better enforcement is needed. But on both political and moral grounds, better enforcement can only he part of a comprehensive immigration reform. The 12m illegals cannot be wished away, but must be given a chance to earn their citizenship; a guest-worker programme is needed to match the demands of employers with the desire of Mexicans and others to work. Mr. Obama’s administration has talked a lot about an immigration bill. It is now long past time that they produced one. Otherwise, expect to see more Arizonas. Which of the following statements is INCORRECT().
下面是一个类的定义程序，请将程序补充完整。 注意：不改动程序结构，不得增行或删行。 public class______ int x,y; My Class (int i,______) x=i; y=j;
An interview with Helena Norberg-Hodge, about her work in a pristine, ancient Himalayan culture as it faced the siren song of western-style development. Share International US editor Monte Leach spoke with Norberg-Hodge on her recent visit to the San Francisco Bay Area.Share International: How did you first get involved with helping to preserve the Ladakhi cultureHelena Norberg-Hodge: I trekked into remote valleys and spoke to Ladakhi people everywhere. I saw quite a remarkable self-reliant wealth and above all an amazing self-esteem of people who were models of what it means to feel completely secure in their own identity and place. They seemed to be the most open, happy and humble people. And they told me they had never known hunger. They had a standard of living much higher than I would have expected, none of it from so-called progress.SI: How did their way of life begin to be underminedHNH: The Indian Government had a territorial dispute with the Chinese, and decided to develop this area as a way of ensuring that it became a closer part of India. Their approach to development was based on a Western model which had nothing to do with local knowledge and resources. This included pushing chemical fertilizers and pesticides, including DDT and other outlawed pesticides. It meant subsidizing white rice and white sugar from the outside. These subsidies for imported food were destroying local food production, and creating a total dependence on imports. It was making the region very vulnerable. Subsidized fossil fuels like kerosene and coal being brought in to heat houses also led to subsidized transport. It meant that roads the government was building were actually destroying the local economy.Tourism also became part of the Indian Government’s plan to develop the area. Nearly every foreigner who came there was just amazed by how peaceful, happy and beautiful the place and people were. The foreigners would say: "Oh, what a paradise. What a pity it has to be destroyed." When I heard this for something like the 100th time, something within me snapped. I was closely involved with the local people, and I knew not a single one of them thought of this as destruction. Not a single local person ever said: "What a pity we have to be destroyed." I realized the foreigners had seen that in the rest of the world this type of economic growth could be very destructive. I also realized the local people knew nothing about it. Around that time I read a book called Small is Beautiful. It gave me the conviction that things could be done differently and meeting the outside world didn’t have to mean destruction.I started talking to the local people about what development had meant in other parts of the world. I realized riley were getting a completely wrong view of what life was like in the West. They were saying: "My God, you must be incredibly wealthy." They were getting an impression that we never need to work, that we have infinite wealth and leisure. It is not that they were unintelligent, but they had limited information about this other world.That led me to realize that I could do work which would provide more accurate information. My goal was not to tell the Ladakhis what to do, not even to tell them that they should stay exactly the way they were, but to provide as much information as possible on what life is really like in the West. That included information on our problems of pollution, unemployment, and poverty, and that a lot of the poverty in the so-called Third World was due to our wealth in the developed world. I also wanted to show that many Westerners who ended up a part of this system were struggling in their own country to find a more environmentally and socially equitable way of living. I gave examples that some people were using solar energy and growing food organically, and implementing a range of more sustainable and equitable alternatives.SI: What kind of response did you get from the LadakhisHNH: On the whole the information was received with great interest and appreciation. The end result was that the message showed them they need not feel ashamed about who they were, or think they were backward or primitive. There were also modernized young men who for a while thought this approach would hold them back, but they have on the whole now changed. I think the support now for this work is tremendous, and growing all the time in Ladakh. Which word is not used by Norberg-Hodge to describe the Ladakhi people().
It is hard to conceive of a language without nouns or verbs. But that is just what Riau Indonesian is, a researcher says at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, in Leipzigstates. Dr. Gil has been studying Riau for the past 12 years. Initially, he says, he struggled with the language, despite being fluent in standard Indonesian. However, a breakthrough came when he realized that what he had been thinking of as different parts of speech were, in fact, grammatically the same. For example, the phrase "the chicken is eating" translating into colloquial Riau is "ayam makan". Literally, the phrase means "chicken eat". But the same pair of words also have meanings as diverse as "the chicken is making somebody eat", or "somebody is eating where the chicken is". There are, he says, no modifiers that distinguish the tenses of verbs. Nor are there modifiers for nouns that distinguish the definite from the indefinite. Indeed, there are no features in Riau Indonesian that distinguish nouns from verbs. These categories, he says, are imposed because the languages that Western linguists are familiar with having them.This sort of observation flies in the face of conventional wisdom about what languages is. Most linguists are influenced by the work of Noam Chomsky—in particular, his theory of "deep grammar". According to Dr. Chomsky, people are born with a sort of linguistic template in their brains. This is a set of rules that allows children to learn a language quickly, but also imposes constraints and structure on what is learnt. Evidence in support of this theory includes the tendency of children to make systematic mistakes which indicate a tendency to impose rules on what turn out to be grammatical exceptions (e. g. "I dided it" instead of "I did it"). There is also the ability of the children of migrant workers to invent new languages known as creoles out of the grammatically incoherent pidgin spoken by their parents. Exactly what the deep grammar consists of is still not clear, but a basic distinction between nouns and verbs would probably be one of its minimum requirements.Dr. Gil contends, however, that there is a risk of unconscious bias leading to the conclusion that a particular sort of grammar exists in an unfamiliar language. That is because it is easier for linguists to discover extra features in foreign languages, for example, tones that change the meaning of words, which are common in Indonesian but do not exist in European languages than to realize that elements which are taken for granted in a linguist’s native language may be absent from another. Despite the best intentions, he says, there is a tendency to fit languages into a mould. And since most linguists are Westerners, that mould is usually an Indo-European language from the West.It needs not, however, be a modern language. Dr. Gil’s point about bias is well illustrated by the history of the study of the world’s most widely spoken tongue. Many of the people who developed modern linguistics had had an education in Latin and Greek. As a consequence, English was often described until well into the 20 century as having six different noun cases, because Latin has six. Only relatively recently did grammarians begin a debate over noun cases in English. Some now contend that it does not have noun cases at all; others argue that it has two while still others maintain that there are three or four cases.The difficulty is compounded if a linguist is not fluent in the language he is studying. The process of linguistic fieldwork is a painstaking one, fraught with pitfalls. Its mainstay is the use of "informants" who tell linguists, in interviews and on paper, about their language. Unfortunately, these informants tend to be better-educated than their fellows and are often fluent in more than one language. Which of the following statements is NOT true of Riau Indonesian().
微信支付 
支付宝支付