Disciplina · Linguagens
Questões de Inglês, da área de Linguagens, com gabarito em cada página.
LIBERALS AND ISLAMISTS
By Shadi Hamid
Adapted from Time, August 12, 2013.
LIBERALS AND ISLAMISTS
By Shadi Hamid
Adapted from Time, August 12, 2013.
TEXT
For a $14.95 monthly membership, the website Lumosity promises to “train” your brain with games designed to stave off mental decline. Users view a quick succession of bird images and numbers to test attention span, for instance, or match increasingly complex tile patterns to challenge memory.
While Lumosity is perhaps the best known of the brain-game websites, with 50 million subscribers in 180 countries, the cognitive training business is booming. Happy Neuron of Mountain View, Calif., promises “brain fitness for life.” Cogmed, owned by the British education company Pearson, says its training program will give students “improved attention and capacity for learning.” The Israeli firm NeurMuch of the focus of theonix is developing a brain stimulation and cognitive training program that the company calls a “new hope for Alzheimer’s disease.”
Much of the focus of the brain fitness business has been on helping children with attention-deficit problems, and on improving cognitive function and academic performance in healthy children and adults. An effective way to stave off memory loss or prevent Alzheimer’s — particularly
The problem, Dr. Doraiswa if it were a simple website or video game — is the “holy grail” of neuroscience, said Dr. Murali Doraiswamy, director of the neurocognitive disorders program at Duke Institute for Brain Sciences. The problem, Dr. Doraiswamy added, is that the science of cognitive training has not kept up with the hype. “Almost all the marketing claims made by all the companies go beyond the data,” he said. “We need large national studies before you can conclude that it’s ready for prime time.”
For centuries, scientists believed that most brain development occurred in the first few years of life — that by adulthood the brain was largely immutable. But over the past two decades, studies on animals and humans have found that the brain continues to form new neural connections throughout life. But questions remain whether an intervention that challenges the brain — a puzzle, studying a new language or improving skill on a video game — can really raise intelligence or stave off normal memory loss.
A series of studies in recent years has suggested that certain types of game training can improve a person’s cognitive performance. In February 2013, however, an analysis of 23 of the best studies on brain training, led by the University of Oslo researcher Monica Melby-Lervag, concluded that while players do get better, the increase in skill hasn’t been shown to transfer to other tasks. In other words, playing Sudoku or an online matching game makes you better at the game, but it doesn’t make you better at math or help you remember names or where you left your car keys.
But other studies have been more encouraging. Last September, the journal Nature published a study by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, that showed a driving game did improve short-term memory and longterm focus in older adults. The findings are significant because the research found that improvements in performance weren’t limited to the game, but also appeared to be linked to a strengthening of older brains over all, helping them to perform better at other memory and attention tasks.
In addition, brain monitoring during the study showed that in older participants, game training led to bursts in brain waves associated with attention; the patterns were similar to those seen in much younger brains.
Earlier this year, the National Institutes of Health invited applications to more rigorously test brain fitness training to stave off cognitive decline. Researchers say they hope the effort will help establish a consistent standard for determining whether a brain-training intervention works.
But while the science remains unclear, entrepreneurs have seized on what is likely to be a sizable marketing opportunity. In May, hundreds of researchers and businesses will gather in San Francisco for the NeuroGaming Conference and Expo to explore the latest research and the newest technology.
While there is no real risk to participating in the many unproven brain-training games available online and through smartphones, experts say, consumers should know that the scientific jury is still out on whether they are really boosting brain health or just paying hundreds of dollars to get better at a game.
“I’m not convinced there is a huge difference between buying a $300 subscription to a gaming company versus you yourself doing challenging things on your own, like attending a lecture or learning an instrument,” Dr. Doraiswamy said. “Each person has to personalize for themselves what they find fun and challenging and what they can stick with.”
From: www.nytimes.com, March 10, 2014
According to a study conducted by Monica Melby-Lervag at the University of Oslo, applying oneself to an activity such as playing SudokuTEXT
Clifford the Big Red Dog looks fabulous on an iPad. He sounds good, too — tap the screen and hear him pant as a blue truck roars into the frame. “Go, truck, go!” cheers the narrator. But does this count as story time? Or is it just screen time for babies? It is a question that parents, pediatricians and researchers are struggling to answer as children’s books, just like all the other ones, migrate to digital media.
For years, child development experts have advised parents to read to their children early and often, citing studies showing its linguistic, verbal and social benefits. In June, the American Academy of Pediatrics advised doctors to remind parents at every visit that they should read to their children from birth, prescribing books as enthusiastically as vaccines and vegetables.
On the other hand, the academy strongly recommends no screen time for children under 2, and less than two hours a day for older children.
At a time when reading increasingly means swiping pages on a device, and app stores are bursting with reading programs and learning games aimed at infants and preschoolers, which bit of guidance should parents heed?
The answer, researchers say, is not yet entirely clear. “We know how children learn to read,” said Kyle Snow, the applied research director at the National Association for the Education of Young Children. “But we don’t know how that process will be affected by digital technology.”
Part of the problem is the newness of the devices. Tablets and e-readers have not been in widespread use long enough for the sorts of extended studies that will reveal their effects on learning.
Dr. Pamela High, the pediatrician who wrote
the June policy for the pediatrics group, said
electronic books were intentionally not addressed.
“We tried to do a strongly evidence-based policy
statement on the issue of reading starting at a very
young age,” she said. “And there isn’t any data,
really, on e-books.”
But a handful of new studies suggest that reading to a child from an electronic device undercuts the dynamic that drives language development. “There’s a lot of interaction when you’re reading a book with your child,” Dr. High said. “You’re turning pages, pointing at pictures, talking about the story. Those things are lost somewhat when you’re using an e-book.”
In a 2013 study, researchers found that children ages 3 to 5 whose parents read to them from an electronic book had lower reading comprehension than children whose parents used traditional books. Part of the reason, they said, was that parents and children using an electronic device spent more time focusing on the device itself than on the story (a conclusion shared by at least two other studies).
“Parents were literally putting their hands over the kids’ hands and saying, ‘Wait, don’t press the button yet. Finish this up first,’ ” said Dr. Julia Parish-Morris, a developmental psychologist at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and the lead author of the 2013 study that was conducted at Temple University. Parents who used conventional books were more likely to engage in what education researchers call “dialogic reading,” the sort of back-and-forth discussion of the story and its relation to the child’s life that research has shown are key to a child’s linguistic development.
Complicating matters is that fewer and fewer children’s e-books can strictly be described as books, say researchers. As technology evolves, publishers are adding bells and whistles that encourage detours. “What we’re really after in reading to our children is behavior that sparks a conversation,” said Kathy Hirsh-Pasek, a professor of psychology at Temple and co-author of the 2013 study. “But if that book has things that disrupt the conversation, like a game plopped right in the middle of the story, then it’s not offering you the same advantages as an old-fashioned book.”
Of course, e-book publishers and app developers point to interactivity as an educational advantage, not a distraction. Many of those bells and whistles — Clifford’s bark, the sleepy narration of “Goodnight Moon,” the appearance of the word “ham” when a child taps the ham in the Green Eggs and Ham app — help the child pick up language, they say.
There is some evidence to bear out those claims, at least in relation to other technologies. A study by the University of Wisconsin in 2013 found that 2-year-olds learned words faster with an interactive app as opposed to one that required no action.
But when it comes to learning language, researchers say, no piece of technology can substitute for a live instructor — even if the child appears to be paying close attention.
Patricia K. Kuhl, a director of the Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences at the University of Washington, led a study in 2003 that compared a group of 9-month-old babies who were addressed in Mandarin by a live instructor with a group addressed in Mandarin by an instructor on a DVD. Children in a third group were exposed only to English.
“The way the kids were staring at the screen, it seemed obvious they would learn better from the DVDs,” she said. But brain scans and language testing revealed that the DVD group “learned absolutely nothing,” Dr. Kuhl said. “Their brain measures looked just like the control group that had just been exposed to English.
The only group that learned was the live social interaction group.” In other words, “it’s being talked with, not being talked at,” that teaches children language, Dr. Hirsh-Pasek said.
Similarly, perhaps the biggest threat posed
by e-books that read themselves to children, or
engage them with games, is that they could lull
parents into abdicating their educational
responsibilities, said Mr. Snow of the National
Association for the Education of Young Children.
“There’s the possibility for e-books to become the TV babysitters of this generation,” he said. “We don’t want parents to say, ‘There’s no reason for me to sit here and turn pages and tell my child how to read the word, because my iPad can do it.’ ”
But parents may find it difficult to avoid resorting to tablets. Even literacy advocates say the guidelines can be hard to follow, and that allowing limited screen time is not high on the list of parental missteps. “You might have an infant and think you’re down with the A.A.P. guidelines, and you don’t want your baby in front of a screen, but then you have a grandparent on Skype,” Mr. Snow said. “Should you really be tearing yourself apart? Maybe it’s not the world’s worst thing.”
“The issue is when you’re in the other room and Skyping with the baby cause he likes it,” he said. Even if screen time is here to stay as a part of American childhood, good old-fashioned books seem unlikely to disappear anytime soon. Parents note that there is an emotional component to paper-andink storybooks that, so far, does not seem to extend to their electronic counterparts, however engaging.
From: www.nytimes.com, OCT. 11, 2014
TEXT
Clifford the Big Red Dog looks fabulous on an iPad. He sounds good, too — tap the screen and hear him pant as a blue truck roars into the frame. “Go, truck, go!” cheers the narrator. But does this count as story time? Or is it just screen time for babies? It is a question that parents, pediatricians and researchers are struggling to answer as children’s books, just like all the other ones, migrate to digital media.
For years, child development experts have advised parents to read to their children early and often, citing studies showing its linguistic, verbal and social benefits. In June, the American Academy of Pediatrics advised doctors to remind parents at every visit that they should read to their children from birth, prescribing books as enthusiastically as vaccines and vegetables.
On the other hand, the academy strongly recommends no screen time for children under 2, and less than two hours a day for older children.
At a time when reading increasingly means swiping pages on a device, and app stores are bursting with reading programs and learning games aimed at infants and preschoolers, which bit of guidance should parents heed?
The answer, researchers say, is not yet entirely clear. “We know how children learn to read,” said Kyle Snow, the applied research director at the National Association for the Education of Young Children. “But we don’t know how that process will be affected by digital technology.”
Part of the problem is the newness of the devices. Tablets and e-readers have not been in widespread use long enough for the sorts of extended studies that will reveal their effects on learning.
Dr. Pamela High, the pediatrician who wrote
the June policy for the pediatrics group, said
electronic books were intentionally not addressed.
“We tried to do a strongly evidence-based policy
statement on the issue of reading starting at a very
young age,” she said. “And there isn’t any data,
really, on e-books.”
But a handful of new studies suggest that reading to a child from an electronic device undercuts the dynamic that drives language development. “There’s a lot of interaction when you’re reading a book with your child,” Dr. High said. “You’re turning pages, pointing at pictures, talking about the story. Those things are lost somewhat when you’re using an e-book.”
In a 2013 study, researchers found that children ages 3 to 5 whose parents read to them from an electronic book had lower reading comprehension than children whose parents used traditional books. Part of the reason, they said, was that parents and children using an electronic device spent more time focusing on the device itself than on the story (a conclusion shared by at least two other studies).
“Parents were literally putting their hands over the kids’ hands and saying, ‘Wait, don’t press the button yet. Finish this up first,’ ” said Dr. Julia Parish-Morris, a developmental psychologist at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and the lead author of the 2013 study that was conducted at Temple University. Parents who used conventional books were more likely to engage in what education researchers call “dialogic reading,” the sort of back-and-forth discussion of the story and its relation to the child’s life that research has shown are key to a child’s linguistic development.
Complicating matters is that fewer and fewer children’s e-books can strictly be described as books, say researchers. As technology evolves, publishers are adding bells and whistles that encourage detours. “What we’re really after in reading to our children is behavior that sparks a conversation,” said Kathy Hirsh-Pasek, a professor of psychology at Temple and co-author of the 2013 study. “But if that book has things that disrupt the conversation, like a game plopped right in the middle of the story, then it’s not offering you the same advantages as an old-fashioned book.”
Of course, e-book publishers and app developers point to interactivity as an educational advantage, not a distraction. Many of those bells and whistles — Clifford’s bark, the sleepy narration of “Goodnight Moon,” the appearance of the word “ham” when a child taps the ham in the Green Eggs and Ham app — help the child pick up language, they say.
There is some evidence to bear out those claims, at least in relation to other technologies. A study by the University of Wisconsin in 2013 found that 2-year-olds learned words faster with an interactive app as opposed to one that required no action.
But when it comes to learning language, researchers say, no piece of technology can substitute for a live instructor — even if the child appears to be paying close attention.
Patricia K. Kuhl, a director of the Institute for Learning and Brain Sciences at the University of Washington, led a study in 2003 that compared a group of 9-month-old babies who were addressed in Mandarin by a live instructor with a group addressed in Mandarin by an instructor on a DVD. Children in a third group were exposed only to English.
“The way the kids were staring at the screen, it seemed obvious they would learn better from the DVDs,” she said. But brain scans and language testing revealed that the DVD group “learned absolutely nothing,” Dr. Kuhl said. “Their brain measures looked just like the control group that had just been exposed to English.
The only group that learned was the live social interaction group.” In other words, “it’s being talked with, not being talked at,” that teaches children language, Dr. Hirsh-Pasek said.
Similarly, perhaps the biggest threat posed
by e-books that read themselves to children, or
engage them with games, is that they could lull
parents into abdicating their educational
responsibilities, said Mr. Snow of the National
Association for the Education of Young Children.
“There’s the possibility for e-books to become the TV babysitters of this generation,” he said. “We don’t want parents to say, ‘There’s no reason for me to sit here and turn pages and tell my child how to read the word, because my iPad can do it.’ ”
But parents may find it difficult to avoid resorting to tablets. Even literacy advocates say the guidelines can be hard to follow, and that allowing limited screen time is not high on the list of parental missteps. “You might have an infant and think you’re down with the A.A.P. guidelines, and you don’t want your baby in front of a screen, but then you have a grandparent on Skype,” Mr. Snow said. “Should you really be tearing yourself apart? Maybe it’s not the world’s worst thing.”
“The issue is when you’re in the other room and Skyping with the baby cause he likes it,” he said. Even if screen time is here to stay as a part of American childhood, good old-fashioned books seem unlikely to disappear anytime soon. Parents note that there is an emotional component to paper-andink storybooks that, so far, does not seem to extend to their electronic counterparts, however engaging.
From: www.nytimes.com, OCT. 11, 2014
TEXT
RIO DE JANEIRO — Pope Francis on Thursday
delivered some of his most politically provocative
remarks since his papacy began this year, hopping
from his popemobile to walk through a slum in this
city before urging young people to fight against
corruption, a leading grievance behind the huge
street protests that shook dozens of Brazilian cities
in June.
“Do not grow accustomed to evil, but defeat
it,” Francis said at the favela, or slum, of Varginha,
in an area that has commonly been known here as
the Gaza Strip for its gun battles and drug trafficking
in the past. “Do not lose trust, do not allow your
hope to be extinguished,” he added, acknowledging
that it was common for some to “grow disillusioned
with news of corruption.”
By singling out corruption in a folksy visit to a
Brazilian favela on his first trip abroad as pope,
Francis, an Argentine-born Jesuit, emphasized his
aim to refocus the Roman Catholic Church on the
neglected margins of society, especially in Brazil and
other parts of Latin America where the popularity of
evangelical churches has surged among the poor in
recent decades.
In a nod to the Brazilian political authorities
who have warmly welcomed him, Francis also
praised the government’s antipoverty programs and
did not specifically mention the anti-establishment
protests in Brazil. But he did critique Rio de Janeiro’s
so-called pacification project in the city’s slums, in
which security forces assert control over lawless
areas.
“No amount of pacification will be able to last,
nor will harmony and happiness be attained in a
society that ignores, pushes to the margins or
excludes a part of itself,” the pope said in Varginha,
a slum that has recently been subjected to
pacification. In a remark that could resonate in Latin
America and in the United States, which is also
grappling with the widening disparity between the
haves and the have-nots, Francis said that a society
“impoverishes itself” by perpetuating such
inequality.
Care for the poor and marginalized is an
integral part of Catholic teaching, and a concern of
many popes and encyclicals, including those by
Francis’ predecessor, Benedict XVI. But Francis has
made it a hallmark of his young papacy, telling
journalists in Rome days after his election, “How I
would like a church that is poor and for the poor.”
He has demonstrated that ideal by living relatively
humbly as pope: in a communal guesthouse rather
than the opulent papal apartment, wearing a
pectoral cross of iron instead of gold, flying
commercial. He recently told priests that they should
not drive fancy cars, and he has traveled around Rio
this week in a compact Fiat.
“He is helping to wake people up,” said Natalia
Morais, 21, a nursing student from Minas Gerais
State who traveled to Rio to see the pope as part of World Youth Day, a conference attended by
hundreds of thousands of Catholic youth. “When the
pope talks, political leaders listen, and that’s what’s
needed in Brazil, where our protests are about their
corruption,” Ms. Morais said.
Reaching beyond Brazil, Francis told
Argentines who came here for the conference that
“the church must be taken into the streets” in a
struggle against complacency. “Stir things up, cause
confounding, but do not diminish faith in Jesus
Christ,” he said in Spanish.
In each of Francis’ public appearances, he has
been accorded a rock-star reception. On an
uncommonly cold and rainy morning, hundreds of
residents lined the narrow, muddy sidewalks of the
Varginha favela to glimpse the first pope from the
Americas, who obliged by stopping often to touch
and bless people.
Many onlookers had made their own shirts to
commemorate the event, with a photo of Francis.
Others draped themselves in Brazilian flags and
waved banners bearing his image. Residents darted
in and out of their homes, checking their televisions
and radios to learn the pope’s whereabouts and
calling the information out to their neighbors
standing on wet rooftops to get a better view.
Sônia Curato, 48, a manicurist, said the
pope’s visit was different from that of other leaders.
“Politicians come all the time. They make promises
and leave,” she said. “He is a very simple person.
You can tell that. He has charisma. He speaks to the
people, doesn’t like going around in an armored
car.”
By Simon Romero and Taylor Barnes
Published: July 25, 2013
www.nytimes.com
TEXT
Hundreds of studies have assessed leadership styles, mainly by having employees report on how their managers typically behave. Researchers have also collected information on how effective managers are. After large numbers of such studies became available, reviewers aggregated them quantitatively to discover what kinds of leadership are effective.
One conclusion that has emerged based on the research of the past 30 years is that a hybrid style known as transformational leadership is highly effective in most contemporary organizational contexts.
A transformational leader acts as an inspirational role model, motivates others to go beyond the confines of their job descriptions, encourages creativity and innovation, fosters good human relationships, and develops the skills of followers. This type of leadership is effective because it fosters strong interpersonal bonds based on a leader’s charisma and consideration of others. These bonds enable leaders to promote high-quality performance by encouraging workers rather than threatening them, thus motivating them to exceed basic expectations.
By bringing out the best in others, transformational leaders enhance the performance of groups and organizations.
Transformational leadership is androgynous because it incorporates culturally masculine and feminine behaviors. This androgynous mixing of the masculine and feminine means that skill in this contemporary way of leading does not necessarily come naturally. It may require some effort and thought.
Men often have to work on their social skills and women on being assertive enough to inspire others. It is nonetheless clear that both women and men can adapt to the demands of leadership in the transformational mode.
One of the surprises of research on transformational leadership is that female managers are somewhat more transformational than male managers. In particular, they exceed men in their attention to human relationships. Also, in delivering incentives, women lean toward a more positive, reward-based approach and men toward a more negative and less effective, threat-based approach. In these respects, women appear to be better leaders than men, despite the double standard that can close women out of these roles.
Why are women leaders more transformational when they are less likely to become leaders in the first place? One reason is that the double standard that slows women’s rise would work against mediocre women while allowing mediocre men to rise. As a consequence, the women who attain leadership roles really are better than the men on average.
It is also true women generally avoid more domineering, “command and control” behavior because of the backlash they receive if they lead in this way. Men can often get away with autocratic behavior that is roundly disliked in women. Ironically, this backlash against domineering women may foster good leadership because the androgynous middle ground is more likely to bring success. Leaders gain less from ordering others about than from forming teams of smart, motivated collaborators who together figure out how to solve problems and get work done.
From: http://www.nytimes.com/ 2013/03/20
TEXT
Hundreds of studies have assessed leadership styles, mainly by having employees report on how their managers typically behave. Researchers have also collected information on how effective managers are. After large numbers of such studies became available, reviewers aggregated them quantitatively to discover what kinds of leadership are effective.
One conclusion that has emerged based on the research of the past 30 years is that a hybrid style known as transformational leadership is highly effective in most contemporary organizational contexts.
A transformational leader acts as an inspirational role model, motivates others to go beyond the confines of their job descriptions, encourages creativity and innovation, fosters good human relationships, and develops the skills of followers. This type of leadership is effective because it fosters strong interpersonal bonds based on a leader’s charisma and consideration of others. These bonds enable leaders to promote high-quality performance by encouraging workers rather than threatening them, thus motivating them to exceed basic expectations.
By bringing out the best in others, transformational leaders enhance the performance of groups and organizations.
Transformational leadership is androgynous because it incorporates culturally masculine and feminine behaviors. This androgynous mixing of the masculine and feminine means that skill in this contemporary way of leading does not necessarily come naturally. It may require some effort and thought.
Men often have to work on their social skills and women on being assertive enough to inspire others. It is nonetheless clear that both women and men can adapt to the demands of leadership in the transformational mode.
One of the surprises of research on transformational leadership is that female managers are somewhat more transformational than male managers. In particular, they exceed men in their attention to human relationships. Also, in delivering incentives, women lean toward a more positive, reward-based approach and men toward a more negative and less effective, threat-based approach. In these respects, women appear to be better leaders than men, despite the double standard that can close women out of these roles.
Why are women leaders more transformational when they are less likely to become leaders in the first place? One reason is that the double standard that slows women’s rise would work against mediocre women while allowing mediocre men to rise. As a consequence, the women who attain leadership roles really are better than the men on average.
It is also true women generally avoid more domineering, “command and control” behavior because of the backlash they receive if they lead in this way. Men can often get away with autocratic behavior that is roundly disliked in women. Ironically, this backlash against domineering women may foster good leadership because the androgynous middle ground is more likely to bring success. Leaders gain less from ordering others about than from forming teams of smart, motivated collaborators who together figure out how to solve problems and get work done.
From: http://www.nytimes.com/ 2013/03/20
TEXT
Hundreds of studies have assessed leadership styles, mainly by having employees report on how their managers typically behave. Researchers have also collected information on how effective managers are. After large numbers of such studies became available, reviewers aggregated them quantitatively to discover what kinds of leadership are effective.
One conclusion that has emerged based on the research of the past 30 years is that a hybrid style known as transformational leadership is highly effective in most contemporary organizational contexts.
A transformational leader acts as an inspirational role model, motivates others to go beyond the confines of their job descriptions, encourages creativity and innovation, fosters good human relationships, and develops the skills of followers. This type of leadership is effective because it fosters strong interpersonal bonds based on a leader’s charisma and consideration of others. These bonds enable leaders to promote high-quality performance by encouraging workers rather than threatening them, thus motivating them to exceed basic expectations.
By bringing out the best in others, transformational leaders enhance the performance of groups and organizations.
Transformational leadership is androgynous because it incorporates culturally masculine and feminine behaviors. This androgynous mixing of the masculine and feminine means that skill in this contemporary way of leading does not necessarily come naturally. It may require some effort and thought.
Men often have to work on their social skills and women on being assertive enough to inspire others. It is nonetheless clear that both women and men can adapt to the demands of leadership in the transformational mode.
One of the surprises of research on transformational leadership is that female managers are somewhat more transformational than male managers. In particular, they exceed men in their attention to human relationships. Also, in delivering incentives, women lean toward a more positive, reward-based approach and men toward a more negative and less effective, threat-based approach. In these respects, women appear to be better leaders than men, despite the double standard that can close women out of these roles.
Why are women leaders more transformational when they are less likely to become leaders in the first place? One reason is that the double standard that slows women’s rise would work against mediocre women while allowing mediocre men to rise. As a consequence, the women who attain leadership roles really are better than the men on average.
It is also true women generally avoid more domineering, “command and control” behavior because of the backlash they receive if they lead in this way. Men can often get away with autocratic behavior that is roundly disliked in women. Ironically, this backlash against domineering women may foster good leadership because the androgynous middle ground is more likely to bring success. Leaders gain less from ordering others about than from forming teams of smart, motivated collaborators who together figure out how to solve problems and get work done.
From: http://www.nytimes.com/ 2013/03/20
As to the leadership pattern that requires attitudes based on features of both male and female behaviors, one may infer that it
