Looking at the information ICM provided about relationship between neighbours, it is evident that there is a huge difference between the quantities of good neighboring relationships in different age groups, for example, from the total number, 47358, only 1031, which mearns 18% claims to have a very good relationship with their neighbours, and by the age group 65+, this number increases to 59%, which mearns 5820 people, which mearns times more “good neighboring” relationships then at the first age group.
Also from the first age group 645 from 1031 claims that they don`t have a good relationships with neighbours, but in the other age group I am examining, only 498 says the same, which is only 5% of the total number. After looking at the table in whole, it can be seen clearly how numbers increase together, which is a pattern: the number of good relationships increase with growing age. I have also found an interesting anomaly when examining the question about how much time neighbours spending together, the numbers do not increase proportionally.
As a matter fact the 25-34 age group decreases time spent with other neighbours by 2% compared to the 18-24 age group, then after increasing again by the age of 54, it goes down again by 1%, which mearns number of relationships are not permanent, and they change many times in a human`s life. The other table shows how relations formed according to regional and social class based data, with the same questions as in table 1.
Upper and middle classes seem to socialize more than skilled, or unskilled workers, they have a better relationship with neighbours than those who are possibly on a lower income. It is interesting that the members of skilled worker class (C2) claim to know all their neighbours more than members of the upper, or middle class do (AB), but still, both classes claim they know the names of their neighbours, even if the C2 class does speak rarely to people around them, and it is a regional pattern to know each-others names between neighbours.
Sum of it all, neighbours in different regions who are from the upper, and skilled worker class mostly know each-others names, and socialize more by the time passes, and only a low number comparing to totals are claiming that they live in an unfriendly neighborhood, and also with growing age most people have better relationships with their neighbours, and know more about them, and also older people think more they live in a friendly community.
It is also interesting that twice as more from the upper class (AB) is neutral about neighboring,(4%) and claims they do not have any relationships with neighbours, than the worker class, from which only 2% answered the same. 457 words. Self reflection:
This was probably the most difficult task for me so far, because working with numbers was always hard for me, I have understood the question, but to bond the data in sentences was also difficult, (as English is not my mother tongue) the main patterns were the numbers which were increasing with growing aged groups, and also I think in more crowded places such as South-East, “unfriendliness “ is more common.
It was interesting to see how ppercentages can differ as well in different age groups. c2711493 Part 2: Examine the argument that `Good fences make good neighbours` witnesses. About the two killings,`The whole issue was not about what the bystanders thought, or felt at the time of the murder, but about the failure to act. (Making Social Lives, p 274) It is one of the biggest concerns in our minds, when to get involved in other peoples conflicts, about when the situation is serious enough to act, also when we see a family, or people who seems to be a family, we just simply would not like to get involved, and this is also a reason why James Bulger died. Being neighbours is one of the most important from ordered type of relationships in our lives, it is ordered, because mostly we do not choose who becomes our neighbour, so separation and constantly working to improve these connections is truly important.
In the 19th century with the enormous growth of cities, with urbanisation, when people from rural places were seeking for better life circumstances, could only afford the cheapest accommodation in streets where it was not even enough space for two people to walk next to each other, was almost impossible to have privacy, for example they could only move beds away from walls, so this way reducing intrusion made by sounds of intimate activities. Engels, who is the author of The condition of the Working Class in England, investigated how these members of the community lived poorly in cottages, with cellars used as dwellings.
These cottages had three, or four rooms, built tthroughout in England, the streets were filled with vegetable and animal refuse, without sewers or gutters. (Engels, 2005 , p71) These often diseased places, according to him were well separated with high walls, and simply on the other side of these `back streets` were shop fronts, and bypassing streets for the real `beneficiaries of urbanisation`. This was a systematic act to separate classes, the rich, and the poor working class, so the one above could not see the poverty, and remain untroubled by the sights, smells, and sounds of the poor and unemployed. Making Social Lives, p218) For the working class, the urbanisation was disruptive, and produced great inequalities, thus it made neighboring habits more like issues, so during the industrial capitalism in the mid 1800`s to form friendly relationships was harder than ever. In our age the neighborhood does not only mean only a roof above our heads, but something more. The author`s experience with buying their new home also suggests that a neighborhood mearns relationship with other people living in the same street, solidarity, security, helpfulness.
We expect the same from individuals, as from the neighborhood as a place. Neighbours are expected to have a general disposition towards friendliness, while at the same time, respecting others need to privacy and reserve (Willmott, 1986, p55). Keeping distance is as important as being friendly with others, and this is also true in our everyday life, not only when interacting with our neighbours. In most occasions, when relationships break down, the main reason is intrusiveness, disturbing others` privacy. As there is no code of conduct eing a good neighbour, the boundaries between friendliness, and intrusiveness are subject to interpretation, and it is hard to decide when to make a formal complaint about someone`s intrusive, or disturbing behavior. Elizabeth Stokoe (2006) for example examines transcripts from recordings from a mediation involving complaints about c2711493 intimate noises. It is difficult to talk about these kind of subjects, as it can be seem infringing the neighbour`s right to whatever he or she wants in her own home, and for the other person can be accused with excessive curiosity and nosiness.
In this case it was not really about the aactivity itself, but about failing to make it less intrusive, or less obvious to others. Interpreting what is intrusive, or disturbing, also boundaries can be different in different cultures, referring to the anthropologist Stanley Brandes` experience when travelling to Spain to a rural place because of his research, his neighbours entered his house without invitation, or hesitation and offered their help with packing out, and they seemed to be like a large family. People who live in a big city often have a misleading, exotic image about far away small communities, and about their life circumstances.
The reality is more complex, as in poor places, such as the Spanish village, people have to rely on one- another, for work, chores, et cetera. They need each-other to survive. Behind the exotic image is a fear of stealing, surveillance, and mistrust. His research shed light how different cultures are, and also things that are not always obvious about everyday life. As there is no code of conduct for being a good neighbour, also there are some cases when we can`t decide if we should act about an argument between other neighbours, or when seeing conflicts on the street.
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more