Questões de Concurso
Sobre interpretação de texto | reading comprehension em inglês
Foram encontradas 12.903 questões
Culture is ordinary. Every human society has its own shape, its own purposes, its own meanings. Every human society expresses these, in institutions, and in arts and learning. The making of a society is the finding of common meanings and directions, and its growth is an active debate and amendment under the pressures of experience, contact, and discovery, writing themselves into the land. The growing society is there, yet it is also made and remade in every individual mind.
The making of a mind is, first, the slow learning of shapes, purposes, and meanings, so that work, observation and communication are possible. Then, second, but equal in importance, is the testing of these in experience, the making of new observations, comparisons, and meanings.
A culture has two aspects: the known meanings and directions, which its members are trained to; the new observations and meanings, which are offered and tested. These are the ordinary processes of human societies and human minds, and we see through them the nature of a culture: that it is always both traditional and creative; that it is both the most ordinary common meanings and the finest individual meanings.
We use the word culture in these two senses: to mean a whole way of life ⸺ the common meanings; to mean the arts and learning ⸺ the special processes of discovery and creative effort. Some writers reserve the word for one or other of these senses; I insist on both, and on the significance of their conjunction. The questions I ask about our culture are questions about our general and common purposes, yet also questions about deep personal meanings.
Culture is ordinary, in every society and in every mind.
Raymond Williams. Culture is Ordinary. In: R. Williams.
Resources of Hope: Culture, Democracy, Socialism.
London: Verso, 1989. p. 3-14 (adapted).
Based on the grammatical and semantic aspects of the preceding text, judge the item that follow.
The statement "The making of a society is the finding of common meanings and directions" (fourth sentence of the first paragraph) can be correctly rephrased as A society is formed through the discovery of everyday meanings and directions, without this changing the original meaning of the text.
Culture is ordinary. Every human society has its own shape, its own purposes, its own meanings. Every human society expresses these, in institutions, and in arts and learning. The making of a society is the finding of common meanings and directions, and its growth is an active debate and amendment under the pressures of experience, contact, and discovery, writing themselves into the land. The growing society is there, yet it is also made and remade in every individual mind.
The making of a mind is, first, the slow learning of shapes, purposes, and meanings, so that work, observation and communication are possible. Then, second, but equal in importance, is the testing of these in experience, the making of new observations, comparisons, and meanings.
A culture has two aspects: the known meanings and directions, which its members are trained to; the new observations and meanings, which are offered and tested. These are the ordinary processes of human societies and human minds, and we see through them the nature of a culture: that it is always both traditional and creative; that it is both the most ordinary common meanings and the finest individual meanings.
We use the word culture in these two senses: to mean a whole way of life ⸺ the common meanings; to mean the arts and learning ⸺ the special processes of discovery and creative effort. Some writers reserve the word for one or other of these senses; I insist on both, and on the significance of their conjunction. The questions I ask about our culture are questions about our general and common purposes, yet also questions about deep personal meanings.
Culture is ordinary, in every society and in every mind.
Raymond Williams. Culture is Ordinary. In: R. Williams.
Resources of Hope: Culture, Democracy, Socialism.
London: Verso, 1989. p. 3-14 (adapted).
Based on the grammatical and semantic aspects of the preceding text, judge the item that follow.
In the last sentence of the text ⸺ "Culture is ordinary, in every society and in every mind" ⸺, "every" can be replaced with either each or all without compromising grammatical correctness or altering the overall meaning, but the change nonetheless alters the emphasis of the original wording.
Culture is ordinary. Every human society has its own shape, its own purposes, its own meanings. Every human society expresses these, in institutions, and in arts and learning. The making of a society is the finding of common meanings and directions, and its growth is an active debate and amendment under the pressures of experience, contact, and discovery, writing themselves into the land. The growing society is there, yet it is also made and remade in every individual mind.
The making of a mind is, first, the slow learning of shapes, purposes, and meanings, so that work, observation and communication are possible. Then, second, but equal in importance, is the testing of these in experience, the making of new observations, comparisons, and meanings.
A culture has two aspects: the known meanings and directions, which its members are trained to; the new observations and meanings, which are offered and tested. These are the ordinary processes of human societies and human minds, and we see through them the nature of a culture: that it is always both traditional and creative; that it is both the most ordinary common meanings and the finest individual meanings.
We use the word culture in these two senses: to mean a whole way of life ⸺ the common meanings; to mean the arts and learning ⸺ the special processes of discovery and creative effort. Some writers reserve the word for one or other of these senses; I insist on both, and on the significance of their conjunction. The questions I ask about our culture are questions about our general and common purposes, yet also questions about deep personal meanings.
Culture is ordinary, in every society and in every mind.
Raymond Williams. Culture is Ordinary. In: R. Williams.
Resources of Hope: Culture, Democracy, Socialism.
London: Verso, 1989. p. 3-14 (adapted).
Based on the grammatical and semantic aspects of the preceding text, judge the item that follow.
In the passage "The growing society is there, yet it is also made and remade in every individual mind" (last sentence of the first paragraph), "yet" could be replaced with and yet without altering the overall meaning of the fragment.
Culture is ordinary. Every human society has its own shape, its own purposes, its own meanings. Every human society expresses these, in institutions, and in arts and learning. The making of a society is the finding of common meanings and directions, and its growth is an active debate and amendment under the pressures of experience, contact, and discovery, writing themselves into the land. The growing society is there, yet it is also made and remade in every individual mind.
The making of a mind is, first, the slow learning of shapes, purposes, and meanings, so that work, observation and communication are possible. Then, second, but equal in importance, is the testing of these in experience, the making of new observations, comparisons, and meanings.
A culture has two aspects: the known meanings and directions, which its members are trained to; the new observations and meanings, which are offered and tested. These are the ordinary processes of human societies and human minds, and we see through them the nature of a culture: that it is always both traditional and creative; that it is both the most ordinary common meanings and the finest individual meanings.
We use the word culture in these two senses: to mean a whole way of life ⸺ the common meanings; to mean the arts and learning ⸺ the special processes of discovery and creative effort. Some writers reserve the word for one or other of these senses; I insist on both, and on the significance of their conjunction. The questions I ask about our culture are questions about our general and common purposes, yet also questions about deep personal meanings.
Culture is ordinary, in every society and in every mind.
Raymond Williams. Culture is Ordinary. In: R. Williams.
Resources of Hope: Culture, Democracy, Socialism.
London: Verso, 1989. p. 3-14 (adapted).
Based on the grammatical and semantic aspects of the preceding text, judge the item that follow.
According to the author of the text, every member of society is cultured, refined, and, through social experience and discovery, plays a role in shaping cultural development, both individually and collectively.
In recent years, awareness has grown of the scope and scale of violence and discrimination directed at lesbian, gay, bi, trans (LGBT) and intersex people around the world ⸺ including killings, torture, arbitrary detention and widespread discrimination in access to health care, education, employment and housing.
United Nations, regional and national human rights bodies have identified critical gaps in the implementation of international standards to address these and related violations, and have issued a plethora of recommendations, including, among them, the repeal of discriminatory legislation and measures to protect LGBT and intersex people from discrimination, violence, torture and ill treatment, and safeguard rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.
Increasingly, governments are taking action ⸺ whether in the form of legislation and policy measures or through targeted social and education programmes. At the United Nations Human Rights Council, more than one hundred countries from all regions around the world have voluntarily committed to take measures to end violence and discrimination linked to sexual orientation and gender identity, based on recommendations generated during the first two cycles of the Universal Periodic Review.
However, serious challenges remain. While many countries have taken encouraging steps, in most cases, these efforts have fallen short of the concerted strategy required to tackle violence and discrimination against LGBT and intersex people. Even in countries that have arguably recorded the most progress in respect of the rights of gay men and lesbians, there has been far less attention given to protecting the rights of trans people and only incipient attention to the rights of intersex people.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
Living Free and Equal: What States are doing to tackle violence and
discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people. (2016).
Internet: <www.ohchr.org> (adapted).
Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the previous text, judge the following item.
It is correct to infer from the text that the United Nations’ engagement with the problem of violence and discrimination against LGBT and intersex people favored the expansion of access to preferential policies of government-mandated, legalized advantage, thereby benefiting a larger number of people from this group on a global scale.
In recent years, awareness has grown of the scope and scale of violence and discrimination directed at lesbian, gay, bi, trans (LGBT) and intersex people around the world ⸺ including killings, torture, arbitrary detention and widespread discrimination in access to health care, education, employment and housing.
United Nations, regional and national human rights bodies have identified critical gaps in the implementation of international standards to address these and related violations, and have issued a plethora of recommendations, including, among them, the repeal of discriminatory legislation and measures to protect LGBT and intersex people from discrimination, violence, torture and ill treatment, and safeguard rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.
Increasingly, governments are taking action ⸺ whether in the form of legislation and policy measures or through targeted social and education programmes. At the United Nations Human Rights Council, more than one hundred countries from all regions around the world have voluntarily committed to take measures to end violence and discrimination linked to sexual orientation and gender identity, based on recommendations generated during the first two cycles of the Universal Periodic Review.
However, serious challenges remain. While many countries have taken encouraging steps, in most cases, these efforts have fallen short of the concerted strategy required to tackle violence and discrimination against LGBT and intersex people. Even in countries that have arguably recorded the most progress in respect of the rights of gay men and lesbians, there has been far less attention given to protecting the rights of trans people and only incipient attention to the rights of intersex people.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
Living Free and Equal: What States are doing to tackle violence and
discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people. (2016).
Internet: <www.ohchr.org> (adapted).
Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the previous text, judge the following item.
The statement made in the last sentence of the text stops short of making a categorical claim that the countries referred to have achieved the greatest progress in protecting the rights of gay men and lesbians.
In recent years, awareness has grown of the scope and scale of violence and discrimination directed at lesbian, gay, bi, trans (LGBT) and intersex people around the world ⸺ including killings, torture, arbitrary detention and widespread discrimination in access to health care, education, employment and housing.
United Nations, regional and national human rights bodies have identified critical gaps in the implementation of international standards to address these and related violations, and have issued a plethora of recommendations, including, among them, the repeal of discriminatory legislation and measures to protect LGBT and intersex people from discrimination, violence, torture and ill treatment, and safeguard rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.
Increasingly, governments are taking action ⸺ whether in the form of legislation and policy measures or through targeted social and education programmes. At the United Nations Human Rights Council, more than one hundred countries from all regions around the world have voluntarily committed to take measures to end violence and discrimination linked to sexual orientation and gender identity, based on recommendations generated during the first two cycles of the Universal Periodic Review.
However, serious challenges remain. While many countries have taken encouraging steps, in most cases, these efforts have fallen short of the concerted strategy required to tackle violence and discrimination against LGBT and intersex people. Even in countries that have arguably recorded the most progress in respect of the rights of gay men and lesbians, there has been far less attention given to protecting the rights of trans people and only incipient attention to the rights of intersex people.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
Living Free and Equal: What States are doing to tackle violence and
discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people. (2016).
Internet: <www.ohchr.org> (adapted).
Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the previous text, judge the following item.
Throughout the text, references to violence and discrimination against LGBT and intersex people highlight violations characteristic of state actors, as well as others that may also result from the actions of private individuals.
In recent years, awareness has grown of the scope and scale of violence and discrimination directed at lesbian, gay, bi, trans (LGBT) and intersex people around the world ⸺ including killings, torture, arbitrary detention and widespread discrimination in access to health care, education, employment and housing.
United Nations, regional and national human rights bodies have identified critical gaps in the implementation of international standards to address these and related violations, and have issued a plethora of recommendations, including, among them, the repeal of discriminatory legislation and measures to protect LGBT and intersex people from discrimination, violence, torture and ill treatment, and safeguard rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.
Increasingly, governments are taking action ⸺ whether in the form of legislation and policy measures or through targeted social and education programmes. At the United Nations Human Rights Council, more than one hundred countries from all regions around the world have voluntarily committed to take measures to end violence and discrimination linked to sexual orientation and gender identity, based on recommendations generated during the first two cycles of the Universal Periodic Review.
However, serious challenges remain. While many countries have taken encouraging steps, in most cases, these efforts have fallen short of the concerted strategy required to tackle violence and discrimination against LGBT and intersex people. Even in countries that have arguably recorded the most progress in respect of the rights of gay men and lesbians, there has been far less attention given to protecting the rights of trans people and only incipient attention to the rights of intersex people.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
Living Free and Equal: What States are doing to tackle violence and
discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people. (2016).
Internet: <www.ohchr.org> (adapted).
Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the previous text, judge the following item.
The second and third paragraphs point out that human rights bodies, together with the United Nations, succeeded in compelling a number of countries to amend their discriminatory legislation.
In recent years, awareness has grown of the scope and scale of violence and discrimination directed at lesbian, gay, bi, trans (LGBT) and intersex people around the world ⸺ including killings, torture, arbitrary detention and widespread discrimination in access to health care, education, employment and housing.
United Nations, regional and national human rights bodies have identified critical gaps in the implementation of international standards to address these and related violations, and have issued a plethora of recommendations, including, among them, the repeal of discriminatory legislation and measures to protect LGBT and intersex people from discrimination, violence, torture and ill treatment, and safeguard rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.
Increasingly, governments are taking action ⸺ whether in the form of legislation and policy measures or through targeted social and education programmes. At the United Nations Human Rights Council, more than one hundred countries from all regions around the world have voluntarily committed to take measures to end violence and discrimination linked to sexual orientation and gender identity, based on recommendations generated during the first two cycles of the Universal Periodic Review.
However, serious challenges remain. While many countries have taken encouraging steps, in most cases, these efforts have fallen short of the concerted strategy required to tackle violence and discrimination against LGBT and intersex people. Even in countries that have arguably recorded the most progress in respect of the rights of gay men and lesbians, there has been far less attention given to protecting the rights of trans people and only incipient attention to the rights of intersex people.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
Living Free and Equal: What States are doing to tackle violence and
discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people. (2016).
Internet: <www.ohchr.org> (adapted).
Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the previous text, judge the following item.
The word "gaps", as used in the second paragraph, refers to shortcomings or failures in the implementation of international human rights standards.
In recent years, awareness has grown of the scope and scale of violence and discrimination directed at lesbian, gay, bi, trans (LGBT) and intersex people around the world ⸺ including killings, torture, arbitrary detention and widespread discrimination in access to health care, education, employment and housing.
United Nations, regional and national human rights bodies have identified critical gaps in the implementation of international standards to address these and related violations, and have issued a plethora of recommendations, including, among them, the repeal of discriminatory legislation and measures to protect LGBT and intersex people from discrimination, violence, torture and ill treatment, and safeguard rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.
Increasingly, governments are taking action ⸺ whether in the form of legislation and policy measures or through targeted social and education programmes. At the United Nations Human Rights Council, more than one hundred countries from all regions around the world have voluntarily committed to take measures to end violence and discrimination linked to sexual orientation and gender identity, based on recommendations generated during the first two cycles of the Universal Periodic Review.
However, serious challenges remain. While many countries have taken encouraging steps, in most cases, these efforts have fallen short of the concerted strategy required to tackle violence and discrimination against LGBT and intersex people. Even in countries that have arguably recorded the most progress in respect of the rights of gay men and lesbians, there has been far less attention given to protecting the rights of trans people and only incipient attention to the rights of intersex people.
United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
Living Free and Equal: What States are doing to tackle violence and
discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex people. (2016).
Internet: <www.ohchr.org> (adapted).
Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the previous text, judge the following item.
The excerpt "awareness has grown of the scope and scale of violence and discrimination" (first sentence of the text) means that awareness has grown from a better understanding of the scope and scale of violence and discrimination
Cyber issues have become increasingly central in international affairs and the breadth of issues discussed under this rubric has grown, including questions of peace and conflict, the fight against cybercrime and controversies around internet governance. In this context, three issue characteristics have affected the practice of cyber diplomacy.
First, cybersecurity retains a strong technical undercurrent that not only poses a challenge to conventional diplomatic skills but also introduces a distinct temporal quality. Reflecting broader trends in digital connectivity, cybersecurity evolves at the speed of technology, contributing to the transient nature of diplomatic practices, the limits of which are "constantly being renegotiated". These conceptual ambiguities have imbued cyber governance with a distinct political dynamic, offering ample opportunity for varied policy solutions to find "rhetorical shelter".
Second, perceptions of the stakes involved are equally evolving, with initial concerns about cyber war and cyberterrorism being supplemented with a focus on attacks below the level of armed attack. Relatedly, dichotomies across cybercrime and international security are blurring as cybercriminals are enlisted in state-sponsored campaigns.
Third, cyber issues exhibit a cross-cutting nature that breaches institutional and epistemic boundaries, calling into action a swath of actors across the public-private divide and requiring coordination across knowledge domains, including technical, legal and policy knowledge.
Johann Ole Willers, Lars Gjesvik. Cybersecurity as an issue of international affairs.
In: Diplomacy in the age of expertise: the case of cyber diplomacy.
International Affairs, Oxford University Press, fev./2026.
Internet: <academic.oup.com> (adapted).
Based on the ideas presented in the preceding text, as well as on its linguistic aspects, judge the following item.
In "issue characteristics" (second sentence of the first paragraph), the word "issue" can be correctly replaced with key without altering the meaning of this expression.
Cyber issues have become increasingly central in international affairs and the breadth of issues discussed under this rubric has grown, including questions of peace and conflict, the fight against cybercrime and controversies around internet governance. In this context, three issue characteristics have affected the practice of cyber diplomacy.
First, cybersecurity retains a strong technical undercurrent that not only poses a challenge to conventional diplomatic skills but also introduces a distinct temporal quality. Reflecting broader trends in digital connectivity, cybersecurity evolves at the speed of technology, contributing to the transient nature of diplomatic practices, the limits of which are "constantly being renegotiated". These conceptual ambiguities have imbued cyber governance with a distinct political dynamic, offering ample opportunity for varied policy solutions to find "rhetorical shelter".
Second, perceptions of the stakes involved are equally evolving, with initial concerns about cyber war and cyberterrorism being supplemented with a focus on attacks below the level of armed attack. Relatedly, dichotomies across cybercrime and international security are blurring as cybercriminals are enlisted in state-sponsored campaigns.
Third, cyber issues exhibit a cross-cutting nature that breaches institutional and epistemic boundaries, calling into action a swath of actors across the public-private divide and requiring coordination across knowledge domains, including technical, legal and policy knowledge.
Johann Ole Willers, Lars Gjesvik. Cybersecurity as an issue of international affairs.
In: Diplomacy in the age of expertise: the case of cyber diplomacy.
International Affairs, Oxford University Press, fev./2026.
Internet: <academic.oup.com> (adapted).
Based on the ideas presented in the preceding text, as well as on its linguistic aspects, judge the following item.
It is correct to conclude from the text that, when the authors state that the limits of diplomatic practices are 'constantly being renegotiated' (second sentence of the second paragraph), they mean that diplomatic boundaries are not fixed but are continually revised as political and technological conditions evolve.
Cyber issues have become increasingly central in international affairs and the breadth of issues discussed under this rubric has grown, including questions of peace and conflict, the fight against cybercrime and controversies around internet governance. In this context, three issue characteristics have affected the practice of cyber diplomacy.
First, cybersecurity retains a strong technical undercurrent that not only poses a challenge to conventional diplomatic skills but also introduces a distinct temporal quality. Reflecting broader trends in digital connectivity, cybersecurity evolves at the speed of technology, contributing to the transient nature of diplomatic practices, the limits of which are "constantly being renegotiated". These conceptual ambiguities have imbued cyber governance with a distinct political dynamic, offering ample opportunity for varied policy solutions to find "rhetorical shelter".
Second, perceptions of the stakes involved are equally evolving, with initial concerns about cyber war and cyberterrorism being supplemented with a focus on attacks below the level of armed attack. Relatedly, dichotomies across cybercrime and international security are blurring as cybercriminals are enlisted in state-sponsored campaigns.
Third, cyber issues exhibit a cross-cutting nature that breaches institutional and epistemic boundaries, calling into action a swath of actors across the public-private divide and requiring coordination across knowledge domains, including technical, legal and policy knowledge.
Johann Ole Willers, Lars Gjesvik. Cybersecurity as an issue of international affairs.
In: Diplomacy in the age of expertise: the case of cyber diplomacy.
International Affairs, Oxford University Press, fev./2026.
Internet: <academic.oup.com> (adapted).
Based on the ideas presented in the preceding text, as well as on its linguistic aspects, judge the following item.
By stating that "cybercriminals are enlisted in state-sponsored campaigns" (last sentence of the third paragraph), the text suggests that they are officially classified as threats to national security.
Cyber issues have become increasingly central in international affairs and the breadth of issues discussed under this rubric has grown, including questions of peace and conflict, the fight against cybercrime and controversies around internet governance. In this context, three issue characteristics have affected the practice of cyber diplomacy.
First, cybersecurity retains a strong technical undercurrent that not only poses a challenge to conventional diplomatic skills but also introduces a distinct temporal quality. Reflecting broader trends in digital connectivity, cybersecurity evolves at the speed of technology, contributing to the transient nature of diplomatic practices, the limits of which are "constantly being renegotiated". These conceptual ambiguities have imbued cyber governance with a distinct political dynamic, offering ample opportunity for varied policy solutions to find "rhetorical shelter".
Second, perceptions of the stakes involved are equally evolving, with initial concerns about cyber war and cyberterrorism being supplemented with a focus on attacks below the level of armed attack. Relatedly, dichotomies across cybercrime and international security are blurring as cybercriminals are enlisted in state-sponsored campaigns.
Third, cyber issues exhibit a cross-cutting nature that breaches institutional and epistemic boundaries, calling into action a swath of actors across the public-private divide and requiring coordination across knowledge domains, including technical, legal and policy knowledge.
Johann Ole Willers, Lars Gjesvik. Cybersecurity as an issue of international affairs.
In: Diplomacy in the age of expertise: the case of cyber diplomacy.
International Affairs, Oxford University Press, fev./2026.
Internet: <academic.oup.com> (adapted).
Based on the ideas presented in the preceding text, as well as on its linguistic aspects, judge the following item.
When the text points out that dichotomies across cybercrime and international security are blurring (last sentence of the third paragraph) and that institutional and epistemic boundaries are being breached (fourth paragraph), it indicates that previously distinct concepts and domains are becoming less clearly separated and increasingly overlap.
Available at: https://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/2026/02/24
After the father asks, “Couldn’t Calvin be left for a couple hours unsupervised?”, the parents immediately burst into laughter. This reaction suggests that:
Read the text to answer question.
The Tipping Point.
Last week at my neighborhood coffee shop, the barista flipped that dreaded tablet toward me. Three tip options glared back: 18%. 22%. 25%. For a $3.50 latte I was picking up. That took thirty seconds to make. I’ve hit my breaking point with tipping culture.
Growing up, tipping was simple: 15–20% for sitdown restaurants, maybe your hairdresser. Now it’s an expected tax on every transaction. The frozen yogurt shop where I serve myself wants 20%. Self-checkout kiosks are asking for tips. This is insane.
When I traveled Europe last summer, I paid exactly what was on the menu. No guilt, no calculations, no awkward pressure. Servers were paid living wages and the service was excellent.
Meanwhile, I’m expected to subsidize corporate America’s refusal to pay fair wages while their CEOs pocket millions in bonuses.
It’s 2025, and American tipping culture has spiraled out of control. It’s hurting workers, stressing customers, and letting profitable businesses guilt-trip their own customers into covering payroll. When I worked retail years ago, my employer paid my full wage. I didn’t expect customers to subsidize my paycheck because my boss decided to pocket the difference. Yet somehow in 2025, we’ve normalized corporations outsourcing their payroll responsibility to guilt-ridden customers. 72% of U.S. adults say tipping is expected in more places today than it was five years ago. But even as Americans say they’re being asked to tip more often, only about a third say it’s extremely or very easy to know whether (34%) or how much (33%) to tip for various services.
[...] The confusion is real and it’s intentional. Companies benefit from our uncertainty because confused customers tend to over-tip rather than risk social judgment.
Murdock, Jeff. Why Is Tipping Culture Out of Control in 2025? Medium. 16 Jun. 2025. Disponível em:<https://medium.com/@frat1309/why-is-tipping-cultureout-of-control-in-2025-im-done-subsidizing-corporategreed-76ba74887b82>
Read the text to answer question.
The Tipping Point.
Last week at my neighborhood coffee shop, the barista flipped that dreaded tablet toward me. Three tip options glared back: 18%. 22%. 25%. For a $3.50 latte I was picking up. That took thirty seconds to make. I’ve hit my breaking point with tipping culture.
Growing up, tipping was simple: 15–20% for sitdown restaurants, maybe your hairdresser. Now it’s an expected tax on every transaction. The frozen yogurt shop where I serve myself wants 20%. Self-checkout kiosks are asking for tips. This is insane.
When I traveled Europe last summer, I paid exactly what was on the menu. No guilt, no calculations, no awkward pressure. Servers were paid living wages and the service was excellent.
Meanwhile, I’m expected to subsidize corporate America’s refusal to pay fair wages while their CEOs pocket millions in bonuses.
It’s 2025, and American tipping culture has spiraled out of control. It’s hurting workers, stressing customers, and letting profitable businesses guilt-trip their own customers into covering payroll. When I worked retail years ago, my employer paid my full wage. I didn’t expect customers to subsidize my paycheck because my boss decided to pocket the difference. Yet somehow in 2025, we’ve normalized corporations outsourcing their payroll responsibility to guilt-ridden customers. 72% of U.S. adults say tipping is expected in more places today than it was five years ago. But even as Americans say they’re being asked to tip more often, only about a third say it’s extremely or very easy to know whether (34%) or how much (33%) to tip for various services.
[...] The confusion is real and it’s intentional. Companies benefit from our uncertainty because confused customers tend to over-tip rather than risk social judgment.
Murdock, Jeff. Why Is Tipping Culture Out of Control in 2025? Medium. 16 Jun. 2025. Disponível em:<https://medium.com/@frat1309/why-is-tipping-cultureout-of-control-in-2025-im-done-subsidizing-corporategreed-76ba74887b82>
Read the text to answer question.
The Tipping Point.
Last week at my neighborhood coffee shop, the barista flipped that dreaded tablet toward me. Three tip options glared back: 18%. 22%. 25%. For a $3.50 latte I was picking up. That took thirty seconds to make. I’ve hit my breaking point with tipping culture.
Growing up, tipping was simple: 15–20% for sitdown restaurants, maybe your hairdresser. Now it’s an expected tax on every transaction. The frozen yogurt shop where I serve myself wants 20%. Self-checkout kiosks are asking for tips. This is insane.
When I traveled Europe last summer, I paid exactly what was on the menu. No guilt, no calculations, no awkward pressure. Servers were paid living wages and the service was excellent.
Meanwhile, I’m expected to subsidize corporate America’s refusal to pay fair wages while their CEOs pocket millions in bonuses.
It’s 2025, and American tipping culture has spiraled out of control. It’s hurting workers, stressing customers, and letting profitable businesses guilt-trip their own customers into covering payroll. When I worked retail years ago, my employer paid my full wage. I didn’t expect customers to subsidize my paycheck because my boss decided to pocket the difference. Yet somehow in 2025, we’ve normalized corporations outsourcing their payroll responsibility to guilt-ridden customers. 72% of U.S. adults say tipping is expected in more places today than it was five years ago. But even as Americans say they’re being asked to tip more often, only about a third say it’s extremely or very easy to know whether (34%) or how much (33%) to tip for various services.
[...] The confusion is real and it’s intentional. Companies benefit from our uncertainty because confused customers tend to over-tip rather than risk social judgment.
Murdock, Jeff. Why Is Tipping Culture Out of Control in 2025? Medium. 16 Jun. 2025. Disponível em:<https://medium.com/@frat1309/why-is-tipping-cultureout-of-control-in-2025-im-done-subsidizing-corporategreed-76ba74887b82>
The pedagogical orientation described aligns most closely with:
Conheça nossos planos