翻译硕士英语阅读理解专项强化真题试卷29
(总分100,考试时间60分钟)
阅读理解
Beauty has always been regarded as something praiworthy. Almost everyone thinks attractive people are happier and healthier, have better marriages and have more respectable occupations. Personal consultants give them better advice for finding jobs. Even judges are softer on attractive defendants. But in the executive circle, beauty can become a liability.
While attractiveness is a positive factor, for a man on his way up the executive ladder, it is harmful to a woman.挫折英语
Handsome male executives were perceived as having more integrity than plainer men; effort and ability, were thought to account for their success.
遇见什么作文工作电脑壁纸
Attractive female executives were considered to have less integrity than unattractive ones; their success was attributed not to ability but to factors such as luck.
俄罗斯需要签证吗 All unattractive women executives were thought to have more integrity and to be more capable than the attractive female executives. Interestingly, though, the ri of the unattractive overnight success was attributed more to personal relationships and less to ability than was that of attractive overnight success.
Why are attractive women not thought to be able? An attractive woman is perceived to be more feminine and an attractive man more masculine than the less attractive ones. Thus, an attractive women has an advantage in traditionally female jobs, but an attractive women in a traditionally masculine position appears to lack the "masculine" qualities required.
This is true even in politics. " When the only clue is how he or she looks, people treat men and women differently. " says Anne Bowman, who recently published a study on the effects of attractiveness on political candidates. She asked 125 undergraduate students t
o rank two groups of photographs, one of men and one of women, in order of attractiveness. The students were told the photographs were of candidates for political offices. They were asked to rank them again, in the order they would vote them.
The results showed that attractive males utterly defeated unattractive men, but the women who had been ranked most attractive invariably received the fewest votes.
菱歌泛夜1. 1.The underlined word "liability" in Paragraph 1 most probably means______.
A. misfortune
B. instability
C. disadvantage
D. burden
2. 2.In traditionally female jobs, attractiveness______.
A. reinforces the feminine qualities required
深圳地铁时刻表B. makes women look more honest and capable
C. is of primary importance to women
D. often enables women to succeed quickly
3. 3.Bowen's experiment reveals that when it comes to politics, attractiveness______.
A. turns out to be an obstacle men
B. affects men and women alike
C. has as little effect on men as women
D. is more of an obstacle than a benefit to women
4. 4.It can be inferred from the passage that people's views on beauty are often______.
A. practical
吃虾可以喝酸奶吗B. humorous
C. funny
D. radical
5. 5.The author writes this passage to______.
A. discuss the negative aspects of being attractive
B. demand equal rights for women
C. give advice to job-ekers who are attractive women in executive and political circles
D. emphasize the importance of appearance
富强福字图片 In recent years, nonhuman animals have been at the center of an inten philosophical debate.
In particular, many authors have criticized traditional morality, maintaining that the way in which we treat members of other species is ethically indefensible. We routinely u ani
mals as means to our ends—in fact, we treat them in ways in which we would deem it profoundly immoral to treat human being. Though they are "moral patients" , that is, beings who treatment may be subject to moral evaluation—their status is infinitely inferior to ours. Are such double standards warranted? And, if so, on what grounds?
While not **pletely overlooked by philosophers, the first justification offered is powerful and widespread at the societal level, mainly due to its simplicity. To the question of what divides us from the other animals, the answer is; the fact that they are not human. On such a view, what makes the difference is the posssion, or lack, of a genotype characteristics of the species Homo sapiens. Is this a good reply? No. Tho appealing to species membership work within the framework of the human egalitarian paradigm. And it is just the line of reasoning that supports human equality that implies, by denying the moral relevance of race or x membership, the rejection of the idea that species membership in itlf can make a difference in moral status. If one claims that biological characteristic like race and x cannot play a role in ethics, how can one attribute a role to another biological characteristics such as species membership? Moral views that, whil
e rejecting racism and xism, accept "speciesism"—the view that grants members of our own species special moral status—are internally inconsistent.
