Questões de Inglês

THE PERILS OF POLYGAMY

[1]     Men in South Sudan typically marry as often as their wealth—often measured in cattle—will allow. Perhaps 40% of marriages are polygamous. “In
[our] culture, the more family you have, the more people respect you,” says William, a young IT specialist in search of his second wife (his name, like some
others in this article, has been changed). Having studied in America and come back to his home village, he finds that he is wealthy by local standards. So
why be content with just one bride?
[2]     Few South Sudanese see the connection between these matrimonial customs and the country’s horrific civil war. If you ask them the reason for the
violence, locals will blame tribalism, greedy politicians, weak institutions and perhaps the oil wealth which gives warlords something to fight over. All true,
but not the whole story.
[3]     Wherever it is widely practised, polygamy destabilizes society, largely because it is a form of inequality which creates an urgent distress in the hearts,
and loins, of young men. If a rich man has a Lamborghini, that does not mean that a poor man has to walk, for the supply of cars is not fixed. By contrast,
every time a rich man takes an extra wife, another poor man must remain single. If the richest and most powerful 10% of men have, say, four wives each,
the bottom 30% of men cannot marry. Young men will take desperate measures to avoid this state.
[4]     This is one of the reasons why the Arab Spring erupted, why the jihadists of Boko Haram and Islamic State were able to conquer swathes of Nigeria,
Iraq and Syria, and why the polygamous parts of Indonesia and Haiti are so turbulent. Polygamous societies are bloodier, more likely to invade their
neighbours and more prone to collapse than others are. The taking of multiple wives is a feature of life in all of the 20 most unstable countries on the Fragile
States Index compiled by the Fund for Peace, an NGO. Because polygamy is illegal in most rich countries, many Westerners underestimate how common it
is. More than a third of women in West Africa are married to a man who has more than one wife. Plural marriages are plentiful in the Arab world, and
fairly common in South-East Asia and a few parts of the Caribbean. The cultures involved are usually patrilineal: ie, the family is defined by the male
bloodline. And they are patrilocal: wives join the husband’s family and leave their own behind. Marriages are often sealed by the payment of a brideprice
from the groom’s family to the bride’s. This is supposed to compensate the bride’s family for the cost of raising her.
[5]     Brideprice societies where wealth is unevenly distributed lend themselves to polygamy—which in turn inflates the price of brides. By increasing the
brideprice, polygamy tends to raise the age at which young men get married; it takes a long time to save enough money. At the same time, it lowers the
age at which women get married. All but the wealthiest families need to “sell” their daughters before they can afford to “buy” wives for their sons; they
also want the wives they shell out for to be young and fertile. In South Sudan “a girl is called an old lady at age 20 because she cannot bear many children
after that,” a local man said. A tribal elder spelled out the maths of the situation. “When you have 10 daughters, each one will give you 30 cows, and they
are all for [the father]. So then you have 300 cows.” If a patriarch sells his daughters at 15 and does not let his sons marry until they are 30, he has15 years
to enjoy the returns on the assets he gained from brideprice. That’s a lot of milk.

Adapted from The Economist, December 23, 2017. 

THE PERILS OF POLYGAMY

[1]     Men in South Sudan typically marry as often as their wealth—often measured in cattle—will allow. Perhaps 40% of marriages are polygamous. “In
[our] culture, the more family you have, the more people respect you,” says William, a young IT specialist in search of his second wife (his name, like some
others in this article, has been changed). Having studied in America and come back to his home village, he finds that he is wealthy by local standards. So
why be content with just one bride?
[2]     Few South Sudanese see the connection between these matrimonial customs and the country’s horrific civil war. If you ask them the reason for the
violence, locals will blame tribalism, greedy politicians, weak institutions and perhaps the oil wealth which gives warlords something to fight over. All true,
but not the whole story.
[3]     Wherever it is widely practised, polygamy destabilizes society, largely because it is a form of inequality which creates an urgent distress in the hearts,
and loins, of young men. If a rich man has a Lamborghini, that does not mean that a poor man has to walk, for the supply of cars is not fixed. By contrast,
every time a rich man takes an extra wife, another poor man must remain single. If the richest and most powerful 10% of men have, say, four wives each,
the bottom 30% of men cannot marry. Young men will take desperate measures to avoid this state.
[4]     This is one of the reasons why the Arab Spring erupted, why the jihadists of Boko Haram and Islamic State were able to conquer swathes of Nigeria,
Iraq and Syria, and why the polygamous parts of Indonesia and Haiti are so turbulent. Polygamous societies are bloodier, more likely to invade their
neighbours and more prone to collapse than others are. The taking of multiple wives is a feature of life in all of the 20 most unstable countries on the Fragile
States Index compiled by the Fund for Peace, an NGO. Because polygamy is illegal in most rich countries, many Westerners underestimate how common it
is. More than a third of women in West Africa are married to a man who has more than one wife. Plural marriages are plentiful in the Arab world, and
fairly common in South-East Asia and a few parts of the Caribbean. The cultures involved are usually patrilineal: ie, the family is defined by the male
bloodline. And they are patrilocal: wives join the husband’s family and leave their own behind. Marriages are often sealed by the payment of a brideprice
from the groom’s family to the bride’s. This is supposed to compensate the bride’s family for the cost of raising her.
[5]     Brideprice societies where wealth is unevenly distributed lend themselves to polygamy—which in turn inflates the price of brides. By increasing the
brideprice, polygamy tends to raise the age at which young men get married; it takes a long time to save enough money. At the same time, it lowers the
age at which women get married. All but the wealthiest families need to “sell” their daughters before they can afford to “buy” wives for their sons; they
also want the wives they shell out for to be young and fertile. In South Sudan “a girl is called an old lady at age 20 because she cannot bear many children
after that,” a local man said. A tribal elder spelled out the maths of the situation. “When you have 10 daughters, each one will give you 30 cows, and they
are all for [the father]. So then you have 300 cows.” If a patriarch sells his daughters at 15 and does not let his sons marry until they are 30, he has15 years
to enjoy the returns on the assets he gained from brideprice. That’s a lot of milk.

Adapted from The Economist, December 23, 2017. 

THE PERILS OF POLYGAMY

[1]     Men in South Sudan typically marry as often as their wealth—often measured in cattle—will allow. Perhaps 40% of marriages are polygamous. “In
[our] culture, the more family you have, the more people respect you,” says William, a young IT specialist in search of his second wife (his name, like some
others in this article, has been changed). Having studied in America and come back to his home village, he finds that he is wealthy by local standards. So
why be content with just one bride?
[2]     Few South Sudanese see the connection between these matrimonial customs and the country’s horrific civil war. If you ask them the reason for the
violence, locals will blame tribalism, greedy politicians, weak institutions and perhaps the oil wealth which gives warlords something to fight over. All true,
but not the whole story.
[3]     Wherever it is widely practised, polygamy destabilizes society, largely because it is a form of inequality which creates an urgent distress in the hearts,
and loins, of young men. If a rich man has a Lamborghini, that does not mean that a poor man has to walk, for the supply of cars is not fixed. By contrast,
every time a rich man takes an extra wife, another poor man must remain single. If the richest and most powerful 10% of men have, say, four wives each,
the bottom 30% of men cannot marry. Young men will take desperate measures to avoid this state.
[4]     This is one of the reasons why the Arab Spring erupted, why the jihadists of Boko Haram and Islamic State were able to conquer swathes of Nigeria,
Iraq and Syria, and why the polygamous parts of Indonesia and Haiti are so turbulent. Polygamous societies are bloodier, more likely to invade their
neighbours and more prone to collapse than others are. The taking of multiple wives is a feature of life in all of the 20 most unstable countries on the Fragile
States Index compiled by the Fund for Peace, an NGO. Because polygamy is illegal in most rich countries, many Westerners underestimate how common it
is. More than a third of women in West Africa are married to a man who has more than one wife. Plural marriages are plentiful in the Arab world, and
fairly common in South-East Asia and a few parts of the Caribbean. The cultures involved are usually patrilineal: ie, the family is defined by the male
bloodline. And they are patrilocal: wives join the husband’s family and leave their own behind. Marriages are often sealed by the payment of a brideprice
from the groom’s family to the bride’s. This is supposed to compensate the bride’s family for the cost of raising her.
[5]     Brideprice societies where wealth is unevenly distributed lend themselves to polygamy—which in turn inflates the price of brides. By increasing the
brideprice, polygamy tends to raise the age at which young men get married; it takes a long time to save enough money. At the same time, it lowers the
age at which women get married. All but the wealthiest families need to “sell” their daughters before they can afford to “buy” wives for their sons; they
also want the wives they shell out for to be young and fertile. In South Sudan “a girl is called an old lady at age 20 because she cannot bear many children
after that,” a local man said. A tribal elder spelled out the maths of the situation. “When you have 10 daughters, each one will give you 30 cows, and they
are all for [the father]. So then you have 300 cows.” If a patriarch sells his daughters at 15 and does not let his sons marry until they are 30, he has15 years
to enjoy the returns on the assets he gained from brideprice. That’s a lot of milk.

Adapted from The Economist, December 23, 2017. 

NORTHERN TIMBER RATTLESNAKES
By Niki Wilson 

[1]   In the rugged terrain of the Adirondack Mountains in New York State, biologist William Brown of Skidmore College has spent 36 years getting to know
a local population of timber rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus). He has traveled through gnarly forests and up rubble-filled slopes to find these snakes near
the same dens [tocas] year after year, sometimes curled up in the leaf litter, other times basking [tomando sol] on stony outcroppings near shelter rocks.
[2]   Timber rattlesnakes are members of the pit viper family, meaning they have temperature-sensitive openings or "pits" on the sides of their heads. Though
venomous, they are shy snakes, preferring to crawl away rather than strike. They hibernate in their dens during the colder months, mating in the late
summer. The breeding habits of this species have particularly captured Brown's attention, as understanding the rattlesnakes' reproductive behavior is key
in determining how to protect them.
[3]   Last fall, armed with decades of data, Brown revealed some of his long-term findings. One of the biggest surprises was the average age of first
reproduction in females, something not previously confirmed, and an important piece of the lifecycle puzzle.
[4]   Whereas females of other rattlesnake species, and even certain southern populations of timber rattlesnakes, begin reproducing around age three,
Brown showed that northern female timber rattlesnakes are roughly ten years old before they bear young for the first time. "They seem to have one of the
oldest ages of sexual maturity known in rattlesnakes," says Brown, adding that their age of first breeding varies significantly by population and geographic
location.
[5]   Not only is it a long wait to mate, but many females – about 60% of those studied – will only have the energy to reproduce once in their lifetime. When
they do have sufficient reserves to carry a pregnancy, sometimes up to 20% of the litter (which normally totals between four and ten young) will be
undeveloped or dead at birth. Pregnancy and birth take an enormous toll on the mother, says Brown. “If she survives, several years may be needed for her
to build up the energy stores to do it again, if at all.
[6]   Knowing how vulnerable the females are makes the protection of their core habitat critical. For example, Brown has found that timber rattlesnakes
require about a two-kilometer radius of undisturbed basking habitat around their dens while pregnant. The New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation is currently in the process of identifying such areas in an effort to develop a formal recovery plan.
[7]   The snakes need it. Though currently stable, this population's future is far from secure. It is listed as "threatened" in New York State. In the past, numbers
dwindled due to poaching [caça ilegal] and the now-illegal collection for the pet trade. However, according to Brown, "The main threat most recently, at
least in New York State, is residential development up against timber rattlesnake range.”
[8]   Brown has also discovered new information about the snake's lifespan. One memorable day last year, he re-captured a female snake he had first tagged
in 1981. She was roughly fifteen years old back then, meaning that last year, she was around age fifty. ''I'd always assumed they lived until they were
about twenty to thirty," he says. "Prior to this study, most herpetologists wouldn't have believed they could live this long.”
[9]   It's another surprising and important piece of the lifecycle puzzle, one that can only come from a lifetime of work on a single population.
Adapted from Natural History, April 2017.

NORTHERN TIMBER RATTLESNAKES
By Niki Wilson 

[1]   In the rugged terrain of the Adirondack Mountains in New York State, biologist William Brown of Skidmore College has spent 36 years getting to know
a local population of timber rattlesnakes (Crotalus horridus). He has traveled through gnarly forests and up rubble-filled slopes to find these snakes near
the same dens [tocas] year after year, sometimes curled up in the leaf litter, other times basking [tomando sol] on stony outcroppings near shelter rocks.
[2]   Timber rattlesnakes are members of the pit viper family, meaning they have temperature-sensitive openings or "pits" on the sides of their heads. Though
venomous, they are shy snakes, preferring to crawl away rather than strike. They hibernate in their dens during the colder months, mating in the late
summer. The breeding habits of this species have particularly captured Brown's attention, as understanding the rattlesnakes' reproductive behavior is key
in determining how to protect them.
[3]   Last fall, armed with decades of data, Brown revealed some of his long-term findings. One of the biggest surprises was the average age of first
reproduction in females, something not previously confirmed, and an important piece of the lifecycle puzzle.
[4]   Whereas females of other rattlesnake species, and even certain southern populations of timber rattlesnakes, begin reproducing around age three,
Brown showed that northern female timber rattlesnakes are roughly ten years old before they bear young for the first time. "They seem to have one of the
oldest ages of sexual maturity known in rattlesnakes," says Brown, adding that their age of first breeding varies significantly by population and geographic
location.
[5]   Not only is it a long wait to mate, but many females – about 60% of those studied – will only have the energy to reproduce once in their lifetime. When
they do have sufficient reserves to carry a pregnancy, sometimes up to 20% of the litter (which normally totals between four and ten young) will be
undeveloped or dead at birth. Pregnancy and birth take an enormous toll on the mother, says Brown. “If she survives, several years may be needed for her
to build up the energy stores to do it again, if at all.
[6]   Knowing how vulnerable the females are makes the protection of their core habitat critical. For example, Brown has found that timber rattlesnakes
require about a two-kilometer radius of undisturbed basking habitat around their dens while pregnant. The New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation is currently in the process of identifying such areas in an effort to develop a formal recovery plan.
[7]   The snakes need it. Though currently stable, this population's future is far from secure. It is listed as "threatened" in New York State. In the past, numbers
dwindled due to poaching [caça ilegal] and the now-illegal collection for the pet trade. However, according to Brown, "The main threat most recently, at
least in New York State, is residential development up against timber rattlesnake range.”
[8]   Brown has also discovered new information about the snake's lifespan. One memorable day last year, he re-captured a female snake he had first tagged
in 1981. She was roughly fifteen years old back then, meaning that last year, she was around age fifty. ''I'd always assumed they lived until they were
about twenty to thirty," he says. "Prior to this study, most herpetologists wouldn't have believed they could live this long.”
[9]   It's another surprising and important piece of the lifecycle puzzle, one that can only come from a lifetime of work on a single population.
Adapted from Natural History, April 2017.

U.S. IMPEACHMENT

By Ursula Hacket

[1]   President Donald Trump’s business dealings, unhinged [malucos] tweets and conflicts of interest, coupled with lurid sexual allegations and whispers
of Russian links have led some to dream that impeachment could be just around the corner. The chatter started even before he took office, and by January’s
end half a million people had signed the “Impeach Trump Now” petition. It’s all very wishful thinking.
[2]   Article II, Section 4 of the US Constitution states: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers… shall be removed from office on impeachment
for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” The House of Representatives must vote upon an impeachment resolution
and the Judiciary Committee conduct an investigation. If the House then accepts the impeachment charges, the action moves to the Senate, where a trial
takes place. To convict an impeached president a full two-thirds of the Senate must find him guilty. The first of these steps (Committee investigation) has
taken place three times: in 1868 (President Andrew Johnson), 1974 (Richard Nixon) and 1998 (Bill Clinton). The second (House vote and Senate trial),
twice— for Presidents Johnson and Clinton, but not Nixon, who resigned before trial. The third (conviction) has never taken place.
[3]   In conscious opposition to the ancient maxim "the king can do no wrong," the Founding Fathers created a presidency that was not shielded from
responsibility for wrongdoing. In early Constitutional drafts only treason and bribery were impeachable. One founder – George Mason – suggested adding
"maladministration," but James Madison objected that this loose formulation would hand a weapon to politically-motivated enemies of the president.
They compromised with "high crimes and misdemeanors." But Madison's fears proved well founded: impeachment has never truly been a legal process,
and always a political one. The political battleground? Defining "high crimes and misdemeanors.”
[4]   Unlike well-defined treason or bribery, the "high crimes" test is entirely elastic. The President's supporters take a restrictive view, his opponents an
expansive one. Presidents may wish things were clearer, and sometimes claim that they are. "You don't have to be a constitutional lawyer to know that
the constitution is very precise in defining what is an impeachable offence," whimpered a besieged Nixon in 1974. But he was wrong: the Founders did not
specify a list of specific offences, nor even require any actual criminal offence be proved. His successor, Gerald Ford, was closer to the truth when he claimed
that "an impeachable offence is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history." Impeachable
"misdemeanors" could include inaction, chronic ineptitude and abuse of powers, especially when aggregated into a pattern of behaviour. All this makes
impeachment a fundamentally political act – defined in terms dictated by partisan actors – and thus, where those actors are sufficiently hostile, a more
plausible outcome.
[5]   Partisanship and political calculation, then, are all-important – not formal legal standards. For example, both Johnson’s and Clinton’s impeachment
votes split along party lines. Democratic Senator Robert Byrd even stated at Clinton’s trial that although he was certain the Democratic president had
committed perjury, his vote would be cast “in the best interest of the nation.”
[6]   Impeachment efforts have always occurred when rival tribes control the White House and Capitol Hill [site of the U.S. Congress]. And the Republican
Trump will not be impeached unless most members of a Republican-dominated House of Representatives and a supermajority of a Republican-dominated
Senate judge it to be in their own best interests.
Adapted from Prospect, March 2017.