Present Progressive Tense of Spanish

The present progressive tense of Spanish is formed with the simple present tense of estar followed by a present participle, also known as a gerund. Differences Between Progressive and Simple Tenses Thus, the present progressive forms of comer are: Estoy comiendo. I am eating.Està ¡s comiendo. You are eating.Està ¡ comiendo. You/he/she are/is eating.Estamos comiendo. We are eating.Està ¡is comiendo. You are eating.Està ¡n comiendo. You/they are eating. Something you may notice right away is that the simple present tense can also be translated the same way. Thus comemos can also mean We are eating. So whats the difference? The main difference is that, like the other progressive verb forms, the present progressive (also known as the present continuous) tense emphasizes the process, or that something is in progress, more than the simple present does. The difference can be a subtle one, and there isnt always a big difference in meaning between the simple present and the present progressive. Again, the matter is one of emphasis. You may ask a friend,  ¿En que piensas? or  ¿En que està ¡s pensando? and they both would mean What are you thinking about? But the latter places more emphasis on the thinking process. In some contexts (but not all), the connotation of the Spanish progressive might be conveyed in a sentence such as What are you thinking? where the English verbal emphasis gives a slight change of meaning. How the Present Progressive Is Used Here are some examples of sentences where the in-progress nature of the verbs action can be seen: Estoy escribiendo el plan de negocios para mi empresa. (I am writing the business plan for my enterprise.)Estamos estudiando la posibilidad de hacerla bianualmente. (We are studying the possibility of doing it biannually.) ¿Le està ¡n saliendo sus primeros dientitos? (Are his first baby teeth growing out?)Me estoy rompiendo en pedazos. (Im falling apart. Literally, Im breaking in pieces.)Los libros electrà ³nicos està ¡n ganando popularidad. (Electronic books are gaining popularity.) The present progressive can suggest that something is happening right now, and sometimes it can indicate that the action is something unexpected or likely to be of short duration:  ¿Quà © es esto que estoy sintiendo? (Whats this Im feeling now?)No me molestes. Estoy estudiando. (Dont bother me. Im studying.) ¿Ãƒâ€°sto es lo que està ¡s diciendo? (This is what youre telling me?)Puedo ver que està ¡s sufriendo. (I can see youre suffering.) And sometimes, the present progressive can be used for almost the opposite, to indicate that something is constantly happening over and over, even though it may not be happening at the moment: Sabemos que estamos comiendo maà ­z transgà ©nico. (We know we are constantly eating genetically engineered corn.)Las unidades se està ¡n vendiendo ilegalmente en los Estados Unidos. (The units keep on being sold illegally in the United States.)Los barcos de aluminio satisfarà ­an bien si usted està ¡ pescando mucho en los rà ­os. (The aluminum boats would be quite suitable if you are fishing all the time in rivers.) Keep in mind that while many of the sample sentences here are translated using the present progressive in English, you shouldnt habitually translate that English form to Spanish that way. Spanish students frequently overuse the progressive, partly because it is used in English in ways that it isnt in Spanish. For example, the English sentence We are leaving tomorrow, would be nonsensical if translated using the Spanish present progressive, as Estamos saliendo would typically be understood to mean We are leaving now or We are in the process of leaving. Other Progressive Tenses Progressive tenses can also be formed by using the other tenses of estar. Although some of the tenses are seldom used, they are used much like their English counterparts. As with the present tense, the use of a progressive rather than simple tense puts an emphasis on the continuing nature of the action. An example is the preterite progressive, which indicates that an action continued over a period of time but came to a definite end. This can be seen in this sentence: La compaà ±ia estuvo comprando derechos de agua. (The company was buying water rights.) The same sentence could be reworded into the imperfect progressive (La compaà ±ia estaba comprando derechos de agua) without a change in translation, but its meaning would change slightly. In the imperfect, the sentence doesnt clearly indicate that the purchasing came to an end. Progressive tenses can even be formed using the perfect tenses of estar. For example, the future perfect progressive is used in this sentence: Habrà © estado viajando aproximadamente 24 horas. (I will have been traveling about 24 hours.) Key Takeaways The progressive tenses are formed by combining a form of estar with the present participle or gerund.The progressive tenses emphasize the continuing nature of the action.English speakers should be careful not to overuse the progressive tenses in Spanish, which uses them less frequently than English does.

Should Marijuana Be Legalized - 943 Words

With progressive advances in technology, advances in medicine and an understanding of the human body have also consistently increased. New drugs are available for safe consumption to combat a plethora of illnesses and disorders ranging from attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) to chronic depression. As a result of the growing options for prescribed remedies to health complications, there has been a blur on the line distinguishing beneficial medicine to recreational drug use. The growing call in the United States for a legalization of recreational marijuana has led to much criticism of apparent double standards between medications and marijuana. Critics of the current ban in most U.S. states claim that there is no substantial difference to medical pills and smoking marijuana for some sort of health benefit, but the primary use of marijuana is for leisure only and has copious negative health effects as a result. Medications legal in the U.S. all have a medical purpose that r ecreational weed falls short on in addition to chances of addiction without proper guidance from medical professionals that often come with many legalized pills; over the counter, or prescribed. The satirical cartoon does not effective describe any contradiction in the thinking of those that do not support marijuana. Many critics of the prohibition on marijuana argue that the difference between weed and prescribed, or over the counter drugs is extremely miniscule. Millions of Americans takeShow MoreRelatedShould Marijuana Be Legalized?849 Words   |  4 Pageswhether marijuana should be legalized. Around 23 states have legalized marijuana for medical and recreational use. In the state of Illinois, medicinal use of marijuana has been passed on April 17, 2013. Since January 2014, patients are able to obtain marijuana with a doctor s recommendation. The new debate is whether marijuana should be legalized for the general public as a recreational drug. Although some believe that marijua na is harmless, and that it has beneficial medicinal uses, marijuana shouldRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized?1715 Words   |  7 PagesMarijuana in Society Cannabis, formally known as marijuana is a drug obtained from the tops, stems and leaves of the hemp plant cannabis. The drug is one of the most commonly used drugs in the world. Only substances like caffeine, nicotine and alcohol are used more (â€Å"Marijuana† 1). In the U. S. where some use it to feel â€Å"high† or get an escape from reality. The drug is referred to in many ways; weed, grass, pot, and or reefer are some common names used to describe the drug (â€Å"Marijuana† 1). Like mostRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized?1489 Words   |  6 Pagescannabis plant or marijuana is intended for use of a psychoactive drug or medicine. It is used for recreational or medical uses. In some religions, marijuana is predominantly used for spiritual purposes. Cannabis is indigenous to central and south Asia. Cannabis has been scientifically proven that you can not die from smoking marijuana. Marijuana should be legalized to help people with medical benefits, econo mic benefits, and criminal benefits. In eight states, marijuana was legalized for recreationalRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized?1245 Words   |  5 PagesMarijuana is a highly debatable topic that is rapidly gaining attention in society today.   Legalizing marijuana can benefit the economy of this nation through the creation of jobs, increased tax revenue, and a decrease in taxpayer money spent on law enforcement.   Ã‚  Many people would outlaw alcohol, cigarettes, fast food, gambling, and tanning beds because of the harmful effects they have on members of a society, but this is the United States of America; the land of the free and we should give peopleRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized?1010 Words   |  5 PagesThe legalization of marijuana became a heated political subject in the last few years. Twenty-one states in America have legalized medical marijuana. Colorado and Washington are the only states where marijuana can be purchased recreationally. Marijuana is the high THC level part of the cannabis plant, which gives users the â€Å"high† feeling. There is ample evidence that supports the argument that marijuana is beneficial. The government should legalize marijuana recreationally for three main reasonsRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized?1350 Words   |  6 Pagespolitics in the past decade would have to be the legalization of marijuana. The sale and production of marijuana have been legalized for medicinal uses in over twenty states and has been legalized for recreational uses in seven states. Despite the ongoing support for marijuana, it has yet to be fully legalized in the federal level due to cultural bias against â€Å"pot† smoking and the focus over its negative effects. However, legalizing marijuana has been proven to decrease the rate of incrimination in AmericaRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized?1231 Words   |  5 Pagesshows the positive benefits of marijuana, it remains illegal under federal law. In recent years, numerous states have defied federal law and legalized marijuana for both recreational and medicinal use. Arizona has legalized marijuana for medical use, but it still remains illegal to use recreationally. This is absurd, as the evidence gathered over the last few decades strongly supports the notion that it is safer than alcohol, a widely available substance. Marijuana being listed as a Schedule I drugRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized? Essay1457 Words   |  6 PagesSHOULD MARIJUANA BE LEGALIZED? Marijuana is a drug that has sparked much controversy over the past decade as to whether or not it should be legalized. People once thought of marijuana as a bad, mind-altering drug which changes a person’s personality which can lead to crime and violence through selling and buying it. In the past, the majority of citizens believed that marijuana is a harmful drug that should be kept off the market and out of the hands of the public. However, a recent study conductedRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized?1596 Words   |  7 Pages But what needs to be known before a user can safely and completely make the decision if trying Marijuana is a good idea? Many do not want the drug to be legalized because they claim that Cannabis is a â€Å"gateway drug†, meaning it will cause people to try harder drugs once their body builds up a resistance to Marijuana, because a stronger drug will be needed to reach a high state. This argument is often falsely related to the medical si de of the debate over legalization. It is claimed that this wouldRead MoreShould Marijuana Be Legalized?985 Words   |  4 PagesLegalize Marijuana Despite what people believe about marijuana, it hasn’t once proved to be the cause of any real issue. It makes you wonder what the reason as to why there is a war on drugs. Why is marijuana the main concern? Since the time that alcohol and tobacco became legal, people wonder why marijuana isn’t legal yet. The fact that marijuana is illegal is mainly caused by the amount of money, jobs, and pride invested in the drug war. Once the government starts anything, they stick to it. At

How useful is the term ‘cultural revolution’ when applied to the sixties Free Essays

The sixties are definitely remembered by its generation as a time of significant change. Many associate the period fondly with memories of groups such as The Beatles and The Kinks, at the same time remembering the many protests and movements that hoped to change the ideas and values of society. In answer to whether the term ‘cultural revolution’ is useful when applied to the sixties, study of these disciplines is most certainly necessary. We will write a custom essay sample on How useful is the term ‘cultural revolution’ when applied to the sixties? or any similar topic only for you Order Now Despite the period of study being only a matter of decades from present day, we still face the same problems any historian would face given the same question applied to a time centuries ago. The validity of the sources is of utmost importance; fortunately in regards to the music of the sixties we have records from the time, and charts to show the popularity of groups and artists. In regards to the field of science, there is a great variety of primary source material due to the nature of the profession. One could safely assume that the documented research and findings were indeed accurate and reliable information from educated professionals. Science in the sixties is very much associated with protests, surprisingly not only by rebellious radicals but respected public figures and people at the top of their fields and professional careers. With figures such as Eisenhower raising concerns regarding the dominance and excess of military weapons the public had to stand up and listen. People’s faith in the government was undermined by the disillusionment of events that happened in the Vietnam War. The sixties almost certainly contributed to the changing in attitudes towards authority, leading the way for if not a cultural revolution, then a shift in peoples thinking, and an intolerance for civilians to be left in the dark. People were willing to stand up for what they believed in, which resulted in a number of forces converging to cause traditional values to be thrown aside. However, at the same time we must acknowledge that these concerns that were being voiced in the early sixties were primarily a result of the military development in technological warfare in the forties and fifties such as the atomic bomb. The question was, why had these concerns taken so long to be voiced? A major part in the many protests and movements had to be the media; both television and radio were in the position to sensationalize an issue and selectively control the information they presented. Therefore, people began to be driven more by drama than by tradition and reflection. Images of devastation from around the world were transmitted into people’s living rooms and for the first time they were able to see for themselves the devastation of war and military arms. If we understand the term ‘cultural revolution’ as a transformation in the attitudes towards authority and a change in the everyday lives of people then television had to be at the forefront of this revolution. It was a huge influence behind the protests at MIT opposing America’s involvement in the Vietnam War. These images outraged people and this rage ignited movements to oppose the war and resist the conscription. Attitudes to authority changed, there was an outrage against a government who were sending the sixties youth to their deaths for a war that didn’t involve America. As a result of scientific research in aid of war, the sixties saw the introduction of chemical warfare; biological weapons such as DDT were developed and used to kill vegetation and crops that the Vietcong were using as groundcover and as food sources. This was a huge revolution and advancement in scientific development but further fuelled the concerns of movements of two kinds, those that were anti-science, and those that were not against science; but the practices of scientists in the late sixties. The revolution also affected the way in which scientists carried out their work, they had lost their intellectual freedom; the military governed what research they conducted and prohibited them from publishing their findings in journals and publications. These were definitely the results of a technological revolution. The irony is, that whilst the government and military funded expensive scientific research, putting not only finances but also great amounts of control and trust into the scientists, it was these scientists who had the most power over the country. Opposition to military involvement wasn’t the only counter-movement regarding scientific research in the sixties; there was also huge objection in the roles of women in scientific study. The grievance was more than the issue that there were few women working in the science field, but also that the majority who had been successful in pursuing a career in science weren’t able to sustain their posts. A study by Rossi in 1965 showed that compared to males, more females across a range of occupations voluntarily left their posts, more so in the field of science. The study also showed that women counted for only 10% of individuals who worked in science. It was findings like this that began movements for the cause of ‘women’s liberation’ and were a sign of changing times and a revolution in the role of women who sought for the same rights to education and employment opportunities as men. It was also two women in science who played a major role in revolutionizing ideas about the human embryo. Lenz and Kelsey’s research went against all that previously been believed about pregnant women and their unborn children. They’re research tackled and exposed the ignorance of traditional practices; primarily challenging the idea at the time, that what didn’t harm the pregnant mother, couldn’t harm her child. Through their insistence that babies react differently to drugs, nicotine, alcohol etc, they radically transformed neonatal studies. When applied to the struggle for women to be acknowledged in the field of science, the term ‘cultural revolution’ is extremely useful, because movements in the sixties paved the way for more women into education. For example, the demand for advanced education to be more accessible to women saw the number of women graduate in primatology go from zero in the 1960’s to eight out of ten students in the 1990’s. This was clearly an outstanding achievement that shows the impact of the sixties. Music was another field that underwent a radical transformation during the sixties. It wasn’t simply a case of new trends being introduced however. The sixties music scene was about existing trends, the revival of early music and the introduction of original sounds. In terms of music, the sixties could be seen as a cultural revolution. The variety of styles contributed to challenging existing ideas about music, and showed the importance for them to co-exist to establish a rich and lively music scene. The sixties music scene is renowned for being associated with the Beatles and rebellious figures such as Jimi Hendrix and The Kinks, however, at the same time existing trends were still hugely popular as was the early music revival. It was the co-existence of the three that made the sixties revolutionary. Bands and artists embraced the rich and diversified music styles, and the sixties saw much experiment with lyrics and instruments. Not least, among these were The Beatles, their shift from usual music styles is evident in Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band. Heavily influenced from eastern styles, this was nothing innovative; however, it was a relatively unheard style among the British fans. It appealed to the sixties generation who sought alternative lifestyles and the blending of cultures set to challenge pre-conceived ideas of Brit-pop. Jimi Hendrix was also at the forefront of the sixties music revolution, with erotic and suggestive mannerisms he appealed to the generation who consumed sexual liberation. His rebellious and aggressive music was something that protesters and anarchists at the time could identify with, finding their own voice in this expressive form. The early music revival, although established in the late fifties, was at its most prevalent in the sixties. This interest in a period of music that had previously been ‘forgotten’ demonstrated a transformation in the tastes of the sixties generation. Although classic composers such as Handel and Bach had been popular in earlier periods, there was one main difference in the appreciation of early music during the sixties. The emphasis of the early music revival was the desire for authenticity; the sixties saw a change to how these compositions were performed; which led to experimentation in tempo, instruments and styles of singing. It is argued that the sixties were not an isolated period for cultural change; and that the sixties merely followed on from what had began in the late fifties. The changes that were seen to happen in the sixties could just as well be attributed to the upshot of the end of the war. Families had experienced a great disruption in their lives; many had been killed in the war and had left families shattered. The women’s liberation could be a reaction to women resenting their return to domestic duties and pre WWII lifestyle, after having filled the roles of men in the workplace when manpower was limited. The seventies also played their part in this cultural change; despite the rise of feminism and gay rights initiating in the late sixties, they didn’t fully come into fruition until the seventies. However, in spite of the roles the fifties and seventies played in what is seen as a ‘cultural revolution’, the sixties is undoubtedly synonymous with all that was radical and new at that time. In conclusion, having only looked at two disciplines, it leaves us limited to answer whether the sixties were indeed a ‘cultural revolution’. However, in regards to the examples we’ve seen in both the fields of music and science, there is certainly proof that the sixties were a significant time for change. Its impossible to know for certain whether these changes would have taken place if not for situations and circumstances that arose during the sixties, and whether they were in fact just a consequence of a nation recovering from war. Despite this, the term ‘cultural revolution’ is certainly useful when applied to the sixties in a number of examples; attitudes to authority were challenged, women gained greater access into education and music appeared to unite and give voice to rebellious protesters who sought a change in ideas and values. How to cite How useful is the term ‘cultural revolution’ when applied to the sixties?, Papers

How useful is the term ‘cultural revolution’ when applied to the sixties Free Essays

The sixties are definitely remembered by its generation as a time of significant change. Many associate the period fondly with memories of groups such as The Beatles and The Kinks, at the same time remembering the many protests and movements that hoped to change the ideas and values of society. In answer to whether the term ‘cultural revolution’ is useful when applied to the sixties, study of these disciplines is most certainly necessary. We will write a custom essay sample on How useful is the term ‘cultural revolution’ when applied to the sixties? or any similar topic only for you Order Now Despite the period of study being only a matter of decades from present day, we still face the same problems any historian would face given the same question applied to a time centuries ago. The validity of the sources is of utmost importance; fortunately in regards to the music of the sixties we have records from the time, and charts to show the popularity of groups and artists. In regards to the field of science, there is a great variety of primary source material due to the nature of the profession. One could safely assume that the documented research and findings were indeed accurate and reliable information from educated professionals. Science in the sixties is very much associated with protests, surprisingly not only by rebellious radicals but respected public figures and people at the top of their fields and professional careers. With figures such as Eisenhower raising concerns regarding the dominance and excess of military weapons the public had to stand up and listen. People’s faith in the government was undermined by the disillusionment of events that happened in the Vietnam War. The sixties almost certainly contributed to the changing in attitudes towards authority, leading the way for if not a cultural revolution, then a shift in peoples thinking, and an intolerance for civilians to be left in the dark. People were willing to stand up for what they believed in, which resulted in a number of forces converging to cause traditional values to be thrown aside. However, at the same time we must acknowledge that these concerns that were being voiced in the early sixties were primarily a result of the military development in technological warfare in the forties and fifties such as the atomic bomb. The question was, why had these concerns taken so long to be voiced? A major part in the many protests and movements had to be the media; both television and radio were in the position to sensationalize an issue and selectively control the information they presented. Therefore, people began to be driven more by drama than by tradition and reflection. Images of devastation from around the world were transmitted into people’s living rooms and for the first time they were able to see for themselves the devastation of war and military arms. If we understand the term ‘cultural revolution’ as a transformation in the attitudes towards authority and a change in the everyday lives of people then television had to be at the forefront of this revolution. It was a huge influence behind the protests at MIT opposing America’s involvement in the Vietnam War. These images outraged people and this rage ignited movements to oppose the war and resist the conscription. Attitudes to authority changed, there was an outrage against a government who were sending the sixties youth to their deaths for a war that didn’t involve America. As a result of scientific research in aid of war, the sixties saw the introduction of chemical warfare; biological weapons such as DDT were developed and used to kill vegetation and crops that the Vietcong were using as groundcover and as food sources. This was a huge revolution and advancement in scientific development but further fuelled the concerns of movements of two kinds, those that were anti-science, and those that were not against science; but the practices of scientists in the late sixties. The revolution also affected the way in which scientists carried out their work, they had lost their intellectual freedom; the military governed what research they conducted and prohibited them from publishing their findings in journals and publications. These were definitely the results of a technological revolution. The irony is, that whilst the government and military funded expensive scientific research, putting not only finances but also great amounts of control and trust into the scientists, it was these scientists who had the most power over the country. Opposition to military involvement wasn’t the only counter-movement regarding scientific research in the sixties; there was also huge objection in the roles of women in scientific study. The grievance was more than the issue that there were few women working in the science field, but also that the majority who had been successful in pursuing a career in science weren’t able to sustain their posts. A study by Rossi in 1965 showed that compared to males, more females across a range of occupations voluntarily left their posts, more so in the field of science. The study also showed that women counted for only 10% of individuals who worked in science. It was findings like this that began movements for the cause of ‘women’s liberation’ and were a sign of changing times and a revolution in the role of women who sought for the same rights to education and employment opportunities as men. It was also two women in science who played a major role in revolutionizing ideas about the human embryo. Lenz and Kelsey’s research went against all that previously been believed about pregnant women and their unborn children. They’re research tackled and exposed the ignorance of traditional practices; primarily challenging the idea at the time, that what didn’t harm the pregnant mother, couldn’t harm her child. Through their insistence that babies react differently to drugs, nicotine, alcohol etc, they radically transformed neonatal studies. When applied to the struggle for women to be acknowledged in the field of science, the term ‘cultural revolution’ is extremely useful, because movements in the sixties paved the way for more women into education. For example, the demand for advanced education to be more accessible to women saw the number of women graduate in primatology go from zero in the 1960’s to eight out of ten students in the 1990’s. This was clearly an outstanding achievement that shows the impact of the sixties. Music was another field that underwent a radical transformation during the sixties. It wasn’t simply a case of new trends being introduced however. The sixties music scene was about existing trends, the revival of early music and the introduction of original sounds. In terms of music, the sixties could be seen as a cultural revolution. The variety of styles contributed to challenging existing ideas about music, and showed the importance for them to co-exist to establish a rich and lively music scene. The sixties music scene is renowned for being associated with the Beatles and rebellious figures such as Jimi Hendrix and The Kinks, however, at the same time existing trends were still hugely popular as was the early music revival. It was the co-existence of the three that made the sixties revolutionary. Bands and artists embraced the rich and diversified music styles, and the sixties saw much experiment with lyrics and instruments. Not least, among these were The Beatles, their shift from usual music styles is evident in Sergeant Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band. Heavily influenced from eastern styles, this was nothing innovative; however, it was a relatively unheard style among the British fans. It appealed to the sixties generation who sought alternative lifestyles and the blending of cultures set to challenge pre-conceived ideas of Brit-pop. Jimi Hendrix was also at the forefront of the sixties music revolution, with erotic and suggestive mannerisms he appealed to the generation who consumed sexual liberation. His rebellious and aggressive music was something that protesters and anarchists at the time could identify with, finding their own voice in this expressive form. The early music revival, although established in the late fifties, was at its most prevalent in the sixties. This interest in a period of music that had previously been ‘forgotten’ demonstrated a transformation in the tastes of the sixties generation. Although classic composers such as Handel and Bach had been popular in earlier periods, there was one main difference in the appreciation of early music during the sixties. The emphasis of the early music revival was the desire for authenticity; the sixties saw a change to how these compositions were performed; which led to experimentation in tempo, instruments and styles of singing. It is argued that the sixties were not an isolated period for cultural change; and that the sixties merely followed on from what had began in the late fifties. The changes that were seen to happen in the sixties could just as well be attributed to the upshot of the end of the war. Families had experienced a great disruption in their lives; many had been killed in the war and had left families shattered. The women’s liberation could be a reaction to women resenting their return to domestic duties and pre WWII lifestyle, after having filled the roles of men in the workplace when manpower was limited. The seventies also played their part in this cultural change; despite the rise of feminism and gay rights initiating in the late sixties, they didn’t fully come into fruition until the seventies. However, in spite of the roles the fifties and seventies played in what is seen as a ‘cultural revolution’, the sixties is undoubtedly synonymous with all that was radical and new at that time. In conclusion, having only looked at two disciplines, it leaves us limited to answer whether the sixties were indeed a ‘cultural revolution’. However, in regards to the examples we’ve seen in both the fields of music and science, there is certainly proof that the sixties were a significant time for change. Its impossible to know for certain whether these changes would have taken place if not for situations and circumstances that arose during the sixties, and whether they were in fact just a consequence of a nation recovering from war. Despite this, the term ‘cultural revolution’ is certainly useful when applied to the sixties in a number of examples; attitudes to authority were challenged, women gained greater access into education and music appeared to unite and give voice to rebellious protesters who sought a change in ideas and values. How to cite How useful is the term ‘cultural revolution’ when applied to the sixties?, Papers