5.

Great many youngsters are of the opinion that their attitude towards food and dress culture is a matter of choice, and it is not a matter of concern that such cultures change as time passes by.

• Do you agree or disagree with the view? Support your view/s with examples from your life or surroundings.

Change, no matter what it is, is the order of human life. However, certain things do need to be kept free from changes. Food culture and dress culture are two such things. Undermining these is a matter of some concern.

It is a matter of concern that modern generation finds it alright to undermine food habits and dress cultures. The primary concern is that the food culture is something unique to all cultures. For example, in our culture, a set of white dhothi and shirt is the typical outfit goes with men at auspicious occasions. The same way women have their own; like saree and all that come with it. So is the case with food culture. Three times traditionally prepared food is the order of our culture. And occasional changes in this have always been welcome, though.

On the contrary what happens if all cultures happen to endorse the view that it is a matter of choice! This will create wrong precedents, and the coming generation may happen to be dependent on alien foods which may not be in line with their metabolic requirements. For example, the health indices of a community hinge at its traditional food habits. Wrong food leads to health risks. The story will be a little murkier with regard to dress. Dress culture identifies itself with people and it happens the other way round too. A generation simply cannot turn its coat saying it is a matter choice. It is a concern indeed.

In short, looking at the changing attitude towards food and dress cultures, I am inclined to say, the food culture of a populace determines their health status itself. When it comes to dress, it is right to add that it often proclaims one’s culture too.


285 words
Ajaypeesdoc
28.8.011

2.
Bigger families are passé (old fashioned) and smaller families are in practice. This family order is more disadvantageous than advantageous.

• Try to prove that it is true.
You may take example/s from your surroundings to prove your point?

We are in a world of great changes, and such changes are seen in social structure too. As a result, what we have now are nuclear families in the place of bigger joint families. Unfortunately, the former one is at more disadvantages than the latter.

Though nuclear family structure looks attractive in several different ways, it is suffering a lot many disadvantages compared to their counterparts of the past. Primarily, small families are basically selfish and more demanding. This is no good social sign. Secondly, children in nuclear families are deprived of many genuine qualities that would have inherited from their grandparents. Thirdly, today, many such families suffer from isolation, lack of mature counsel and consultation. Above all these, these families happen face divides in society like, rich-poor, young-old, productive-unproductive, better educated-poorly educated and so goes the list.

When we position these factors with the old, bigger families, what we find is greater social, personal and familial satisfaction. For example, there were great counsel and guidance from the elders of the family. Children were safer, stronger and independent. Obviously, the younger generation always had a kind of moral support for everything they did. If we look at the social atmosphere itself, we can see there were great possibilities for mutual help, participation and understanding. Selfishness was almost a crime, greed was almost non-existent and, above all, life was more social than individual or self centered.

So it is proved that bigger families stand to gain greater advantages than smaller families of our times. However, since there is no ‘U’ turn from this shift of family structure, it is a good idea to make the most out of smaller families.

270 words
Jaypeesdoc. 8.7.11