Discover Top Posts Tagged with #rhetorical analyses

Gender/Sex/Sexuality... Lets get learning

In Garbacik’s Introduction she discusses the fact that most social issues that have people’s priority recently are connected, in some way, by gender.

She also finds it important that the youth culture in the United States actually helps adults to understand or better prioritize some of these issues, even when most people defined as adult seem to see youth in the US as lazy or unmotivated (of course I'm editorializing).

In the 21st century these issues are very prevalent. Garbacik’s exploration of these ideas is well timed, especially because of the strong involvement of youth culture in issues of gender and sexuality. In her introduction she does a very good job of establishing herself as a stakeholder in these social issues, whether as an ally of the LGBT world or falling somewhere on the spectrum of sexuality she has an understanding of.

Garbacik shows a very good understanding of the importance of youth involvement, and the diversity of ways in which these issues present themselves. Because of the title, I assume that this book tends to be read by young adults, and for this reason I feel that she is very able to create the correct voice to reach the reader effectively. She strongly appeals to the emotions of the reader by discussing suicide rates of people within the “LGBTQIA” world, and that, though statistics show high suicide attempt rates of the youth in this community, they are in fact higher because of the inability of some to discuss or choose sexuality or gender of the deceased.

By discussing this, Garbacik also shows the importance of opening up this discussion on a global scale.

(Rhetorical analysis of Garbacik's Introduction in Gender and Sexuality for Beginners)

#rhetorical analyses

We Will Not Shut Up and Go Away

In Gender & Sexuality for Beginners, Jaimee Garbaick introduces the reader to the motivation behind and the purpose of her writing, in an upfront and informative way. She shares information about the current social standing of members within the LGBTQIA community in order to raise awareness, inspire discussion, and evoke change.

The rhetorical situation Garbacik is responding to:

Garbacik is speaking on behalf of the oppressed- the disabled, the poor, the youth, and especially those within the LGBTQIA community. She wants to raise awareness about the societal injustices LGBTQIA individuals face, and the damaging consequences of such discrimination, to ultimately bring change through recognition and discussion. Garbacik wants to make LGBTQIA issues a talked-about topic, especially amongst the country’s youth.

The rhetorical strategies Garbaick employs:

Garbaick structures a logical argument by including statistics about suicide rates amongst America’s youth. She notes that the leading cause of death amongst gay, lesbian and bisexual individuals between the ages of fifteen to twenty five is suicide. These facts are multifaceted, as they touch the heart and open the mind of the reader.

While writing the book Garbaick mentions that she “interviewed service providers and academics, activists and many queer young people.” She also identifies as a member of the LGBTQIA community. These tidbits of information mark Garbaick as a credible and informed researcher and author.

At the same time, Garbaick also acknowledges that this book is an not an all-encompassing, fail-safe rulebook to gender and sexuality. She simply hopes that her book “catapults further exploration” into LGBTQIA issues. Through this modest statement, the author identifies with, and inspires the reader, evoking pathos and furthering her credibility.

The "writer's identity" Garbacik sets up for herself:

Garbacik immediately aligns herself with the oppressed- she identifies as a member of LGBTQIA world. To Garbacik, the topics at hand are pressing, important, and deeply personal. Her tone is urgent, and her voice persuasive, as she states “LGBT issues can no longer be ignored” within the first few lines of her book. She presents herself as a well-informed and experienced activist, speaking on behalf of the millions of oppressed individuals like (and unlike) herself.

#rhetorical analyses

they can't hear us

Issues of human rights are in a constant flux, waxing and waning as society takes notice of different inequalities. In Gender and Sexuality for Beginners, Jaimee Garbacik argues that our generation will be defined by the current LGBTQIA movement. The struggle for a voice, she writes, has been gaining momentum in the saddest of ways since the 1960s.

Garbacik points to the increasing rate of (known) queer teen suicides to say that this has gone far enough. The time is ripe for education, and understanding the interactions of race, class and gender will aid us in promoting equality for all.

Rhetorical Situation

As mentioned above, Garbacik released this book in response to the growing problems associated with the fight for gender and sexuality rights. People are dying over these issues, and she wants everyone to know! She aims to educate her readers, particularly adults, in order to save queer children and promote a new, positive atmosphere for human rights.

Garbacik also places emphasis on Feminism and the role it plays in matters of sexuality. She implores us to think more deeply about constructed gender roles and how we perceive others.

I expect Garbacik will lay everything out for us in these two filters. Judging by the titles of the next few chapters, I imagine she will use facts to persuade readers to stand up for what's right and intervene in what's clearly wrong.

Rhetorical Strategies

In just a few pages, Garbacik brings many solemn images to mind: unnecessary hatred, suicide, exclusion. She appeals to the paternal instincts of readers by citing facts about teen suicide, using numbers to scare us.

She even pulls out the guilt card, stating that society didn't deem queer suicide a problem until rich kids made attempts.

Importantly, Garbacik explicitly states that she is no expert in this field. She simply conducted interviews and compiled information to persuade readers to take action. The book is intended to bring some discussions into light and encourage queer youth.

Writer's Identity

Although it is difficult to tell from the introduction alone, I think Garbacik may have chosen to pursue this topic because of her personal experiences. She referred to herself and the LGBTQIA movement as "us" a couple of times, and that's why I think getting these stories out means a lot to her.

Under this assumption, I'll say she writes from the perspective of someone who has experienced the inequalities of race, class, gender, and sexuality first hand. She means to evoke feelings of sadness and guilt, but she doesn't want the audience to feel attacked.

I also assume she will write simply enough for anyone to read, but sound educated enough to add strength to her arguments. Her intended audience is a rather broad category, after all.

#rhetorical analyses

Don't Shut that Exclusivity Door

The book stood on my wooden shelf, looking at me, taunting me, it's been there for a little over a month now and has yet to be touched. Today, however, it's time has come. I knew I had to read this book and I knew my homework was to write about. Book you are going down (and by going down I mean I'm going to read you and then write a short summary and analyze you)! There, no more staring contests!

For homework this week we were to read both Issue 3: Writing Identities in Understanding Rhetoric and the intro of Gender and Sexuality for Beginners by Jaimee Garbacik.

Garbacik tells us that she is in the LGBTQIA community by lumping herself in with other LGBTQIA people early on (beginning of the 3rd paragraph), showing that she is more on the side of the LGBTQIA people and will probably be more sympathetic to their issues. However Garbacik also says that she is not a scholar of these issues which kind of hurts her credibility. To fix this Garbacik says that she has interviewed service providers, academics, activists, and many queer young people showing how she has done research on these topics giving her more credibility. She also says that she is trying to provide a balanced, accessible, and on-the-ground way of writing about these issues which make her sound a little more credible.

Now that you know about the author it's time for a summary about the introduction as well as a surprise analysis!

Inclusion and exclusion were the main themes of the introduction as Garbacik and she talked about how when we create groups some people always tend to be left out (she uses how hard it is to achieve inclusivity in LGBTQIA groups as an example). Garbacik makes an effort to talk about young people and how they have some good ideas and know more than adults give them credit for.

The reason Garbacik is writing this book now seems to be due to the fact that more people are paying attention to queer youths. Looking through this book I think that it will take an educating stance referencing people all across the LGBTQIA spectrum (most probably youths) as well statistics from institutions. This book will also take a critical look at our society and is probably pushing for an agenda of inclusiveness.

Garbacik employed many rhetorical strategies throughout this introduction, she uses ethos to tell people about her as well as how she interviewed many people. Garbacik uses logos when she gives statistics of queer youth and suicides, which ties into pathos in how we are to feel about queer youths.

#rhetorical analyses #week 6 #sunday

to be genderless

I decided to analyze a new article for my revision this week.

The article I chose discusses the implications of a Canadian family who chose to raise their newborn, Storm, without a gender identity.

The article is a few years old, but I’ve noticed this type of story has been gaining momentum in the last five years or so.

To start my analysis, I have to say that the authors bring very little credibility (ethos) to this topic. I can’t see their past work when I click on their names, so I’m not sure if they report on topics like these often enough to actually be engaged in the subject. That being said, if ABC News is paying attention to this story, they must deem it important.

Most of the credibility for this article stems from the authors’ use of logos. They provide specific examples of other families with genderless babies, various quotes from child psychologists, and one statistic about new parents wanting to know the gender of their child.

In particular, they use the psychologists to sway you towards thinking that Storm’s family is harming him/her psychologically. One quote is especially harsh: ”To raise a child not as a boy or a girl is creating, in some sense, a freak.”

The authors carefully wrote this article to make the reader feel (pathos) resentful toward Storm’s family. They don’t speak of the unfairness of the backlash the family is receiving, but they keep adding more and more until the purpose of the story is clear. The article wants you to think this Canadian family is freakish, and that their ideas of non-conformative child rearing are wrong, terrible, and “potentially disastrous.”

Personally, I did get mad about this article. But I got mad because they called the baby an “it.” I’m annoyed that Storm’s parent’s are subjecting him/her to this kind of treatment. But it’s even worse that psychologists are willing to say that this baby will have problems in the future. So unprofessional.

#rhetorical analyses

You Better Think Twice..

Rhetorical Analysis: Revisited and Revised.

This article contains very few words but carries a very powerful message.

By simply posting two different drawings, the illustrator argues that women are overly sexualized in the media in comparison to men. The author uses rhetoric to send this message to viewers.

Pathos: By posting Spiderman’s body “unmasked,” the illustrator shocks the audience. The “shock” of seeing the exposed male body plays with the emotions of viewers. The seer experiences a sense of aversion while viewing the male adaptation of the original sketch.

Viewers must then ask themselves why the female sketch is more visually acceptable than the masculine adaptation. This brings viewers to reflect on how desensitized we’ve become to female nudity as a society- a strategic play on pathos by the illustrator.

Ethos: Although the illustrator draws an exaggerated depiction of spiderman, his interpretation is justified. He intends to shock the audience into self-reflection. The artist establishes his credibility by creating an image that makes viewers compare and contrast… and then question. His simple sketch makes viewers THINK, and therefore, his power as an artist is evident.

Logos: The illustrator uses explicit images to make an implicit argument. Although he does not use words, the artist’s message is clear and effective. The audience is persuaded after their own self-reflection, inspired by the artist’s drawing. In this sense, the artist employs logos (persuasion by reason) implicitly.

Kairos: This artist released this picture to make a about statement our modern, over-sexualized culture. In this day and age, sexual images are used a marketing tool. This is quite contrastive to older forms of media- remember when married couples weren't even shown in the same bed? This artist's drawing is a testimony to how desensitized we've become to sexual images in our current culture.

#rhetorical analyses

Can photos be analyzed rhetorically?

Read this blurb and the accompanying posters...

http://www.upworthy.com/3-simple-posters-expose-3-simple-truths-all-women-understand-thats-not-a-good-thing?c=tkp1

So, this is difficult but I felt that, because we are using social media/blogging platforms that analyzing some posters that I found on Facebook rhetorically might be relevant. Bear with me on this, I'm sorry if it isn't exactly the spirit of the assignment.

These three posters have to do with the way women learn to avoid sexual assault. That's right, how women can AVOID sexual assault, not how men can help prevent it. While I do understand that gender inequality is not a one way street, the way that we are brought up as girls is to learn fear for being attacked, when it often seems as though we don't actively try to teach boys that they have the power to be the "good guys" (and I mean that in a superhero sort of way, not a gendered way).

Ethos: I believe some of the ethos behind this article comes from the fact that the quoted on the posters, and the writer of the blurb are all women themselves. While a man could certainly develop these opinions on his own, there really is something to living the experience yourself. I was instilled with the fear rather young, of leaving my drink unattended, or allowing a stranger to buy me a drink and not watching it be poured.

Pathos: I think the emotional content, or validity behind this, is fairly obvious. Some of these women have experienced the horror of sexual assault first-hand, or through a friend or family member. For the writer the emotion came from the shooting in Santa Barbara in May of this year. A young man from an affluent family shot and killed 7 people and injured more, and after his video diaries came out, it came to light that this man blamed women in general for his inability to find a date because he was the "nice guy."

Logos: I also feel that this portion of rhetorical analysis is fairly straight forward. The logic behind this piece is the importance behind understanding that this is a fact for ALL women, not just some. Just because you don't drink alcohol doesn't mean you are not at risk. Just because you don't walk home alone doesn't mean you are not at risk. Just because you are strong does not mean you will be able to fight off your attacker. It is a frightening fact but a fact that deserves some attention.

Kairos: While in my last analysis I had a decent grasp on the concept of Kairos in rhetorical analysis I am not quite sure if it is quite so straight forward as the other aspects I have already covered. I believe the posters came out sometime soon after the twitter hashtag campaign #yesallwomen, which is rhetorically significant. You can see at the bottom of all of the posters is this hashtag. All women must deal with this, all the time. Beyond the hashtag campaign I think the timing of this is not significant in the sense of when it was first posted but, that every single time a woman, or even a man, sees it on her/his news feed, it is a reminder that this is a serious issue.

#rhetorical analyses

You're never 100% done

You can always go the extra mile. I find it kind of enlightening to go back and look at my work to see how I could improve, even if it was something I wrote just last week! Here's my revised rhetorical analysis; a little more condensed to compensate for the necessary additions.

If We Talked About Straight People The Way We Talk About Gay People your typical Buzzfeed countdown article, meant for ordinary people, (probably of the younger age demographic). It’s meant to be funny, but also to get us to think.

Pathos: Showing pictures of excessively happy people who believe everything is a-okay is pathos working to illustrate that straight people can be oblivious to what they are insinuating. By making backhanded comments, they do not realize that they could possibly offend someone.

Kairos: Gender can be a sensitive topic to some, and this article addresses it head on. Because the article was published on buzzfeed (a widely read website), it is open to a large audience that can read it at any time (because it is published right on the page).

Ethos: I think we all see Buzzfeed articles as fairly reliable sources because most of the time, they are about situations we all experience as humans: things we find awkward, funny, etc. Finding common ground based on everyday subjects creates a feeling of reliability. We have all heard people say these things, so we can relate and apply what the author is communicating to our own lives.

Logos: By directly showing readers what it would sound like if gay people made comments like straight people, we are forced to see what it's like for gay people to experience this. We hear these comments all of the time, and by turning the tables, readers can see that it is truly not logical to say these things to anyone.

I thought this was an interesting article because it really turns our perspective around as readers. By condensing all of these little comments into one Buzzfeed post, straight people can see how these comments can affect gay people.

#rhetorical analyses