Thesis statement options for argumentative research paper.
1) "Locker room talk" leads to violence against women.
2) The acceptance of "Locker room talk" points to a larger issue of acceptance of violence against women.
Monday, November 7, 2016
Wednesday, October 19, 2016
The prevailing attitude that "men will be men" is why 1 in 5 women will be raped in their lifetime.
Donald Trump and his supporters would like you to believe that "men will be men" and "locker room talk" as they call it is harmless but here’s why it’s not. 1 in 5 women will be raped in their lifetime. 1 in 5, that means 1 girl in every 2 average american households will be raped. 1 in 5 means 5 girls in an average 4th grade class in California will be raped. This kind of loose talk of assaulting women should be horrifying to any thinking person. It should be abhorrent to any feeling person. This kind of talk should make any woman’s stomach turn and any man cringe. Yet there are people who defend this disgusting behavior saying, "this was a private conversation" and "The comment was lewd, sure, but I've said worse." You have? What's wrong with you? This is exactly the kind of misogynistic and violent speech that propagates the acceptance of violence against women that pervades our culture. When Brock Turner was sentenced to a paltry 6 months in county jail for 3 counts of sexually assaulting an unconscious woman the judge stated as part of his reasoning that a prison sentence would have "severe impact" and "adverse colateral consequences" Really? Severe impact? So waking up to discover that you have been penetrated by a foreign object behind a dumpster will just have a moderate impact? The mandatory minimum sentence for possessing ANY amount of marijuana is one year. One year. One year for having a joint. One year for taking a bong load at a party. Yet Brock Turner gets 6 months for raping an unconscious woman for 20 minutes.
What is wrong with this picture? When subjects like these arise at parties and dinners I notice the men bristle and squirm in their chairs. I notice that people start to look around as if anyone who gets upset by this appalling state of affairs must hate men. Personally I feel quite the contrary. I expect more from men. I expect they will be just as outraged as I am when they hear this kind of degrading talk about women in the "locker room", or in any room. I believe that Judges will condemn men who violently force themselves on unconscious women to the maximum punishment the law will allow. Yet again and again I am proved wrong. If men who hold the highest positions of authority so easily denigrate and undercut the severity of sex crimes against women then how can we expect our citizens to walk a higher moral ground? Shouldn’t our leaders be leaders? Talk about trickling down. If the man who hopes to be president of this country thinks it is funny to talk about being able to "Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." because "when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything." than we shouldn’t be surprised when young boys rape unconscious girls behind a dumpster. It falls to all of us, men and women to reject this acceptance of violence against women. Until we do we can expect that approximately 4 women in this class have been or will be raped in their lifetime.
Donald Trump and his supporters would like you to believe that "men will be men" and "locker room talk" as they call it is harmless but here’s why it’s not. 1 in 5 women will be raped in their lifetime. 1 in 5, that means 1 girl in every 2 average american households will be raped. 1 in 5 means 5 girls in an average 4th grade class in California will be raped. This kind of loose talk of assaulting women should be horrifying to any thinking person. It should be abhorrent to any feeling person. This kind of talk should make any woman’s stomach turn and any man cringe. Yet there are people who defend this disgusting behavior saying, "this was a private conversation" and "The comment was lewd, sure, but I've said worse." You have? What's wrong with you? This is exactly the kind of misogynistic and violent speech that propagates the acceptance of violence against women that pervades our culture. When Brock Turner was sentenced to a paltry 6 months in county jail for 3 counts of sexually assaulting an unconscious woman the judge stated as part of his reasoning that a prison sentence would have "severe impact" and "adverse colateral consequences" Really? Severe impact? So waking up to discover that you have been penetrated by a foreign object behind a dumpster will just have a moderate impact? The mandatory minimum sentence for possessing ANY amount of marijuana is one year. One year. One year for having a joint. One year for taking a bong load at a party. Yet Brock Turner gets 6 months for raping an unconscious woman for 20 minutes.
What is wrong with this picture? When subjects like these arise at parties and dinners I notice the men bristle and squirm in their chairs. I notice that people start to look around as if anyone who gets upset by this appalling state of affairs must hate men. Personally I feel quite the contrary. I expect more from men. I expect they will be just as outraged as I am when they hear this kind of degrading talk about women in the "locker room", or in any room. I believe that Judges will condemn men who violently force themselves on unconscious women to the maximum punishment the law will allow. Yet again and again I am proved wrong. If men who hold the highest positions of authority so easily denigrate and undercut the severity of sex crimes against women then how can we expect our citizens to walk a higher moral ground? Shouldn’t our leaders be leaders? Talk about trickling down. If the man who hopes to be president of this country thinks it is funny to talk about being able to "Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything." because "when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything." than we shouldn’t be surprised when young boys rape unconscious girls behind a dumpster. It falls to all of us, men and women to reject this acceptance of violence against women. Until we do we can expect that approximately 4 women in this class have been or will be raped in their lifetime.
Friday, October 7, 2016
https://vimeo.com/185625717
Pantsuit Power! This video came up on my Facebook feed after our class discussion on the argument. I was immediately moved and then asked myself why. What is this video trying to say? What are these people trying to convince me of?
The creators of this video are using Pathos to appeal to people on behalf of Hillary Clinton on a few different levels.
First off, much time and print have been devoted to discussing Mrs. Clintons choice of wardrobe. Here are just a few examples: http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/08/youre-fashionable-enough-hillary/493877/, https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2016/08/11/hillary-clinton-has-left-her-fashion-critics-behind-along-with-pantsuits/aGxCruR3IoaHyQ785iEqdP/story.html, http://nypost.com/2016/08/25/criticizing-hillarys-age-and-pantsuits-doesnt-make-me-sexist/. So putting men and women in bright colored pants suits immediately says "We're with her!" It's an immediate nod to Madame Secretary.
Next, much has been said of Hillarys' woodenness and inauthenticity as well as concerns about her health. These bright happy, agile humans attempt to give her some young, fresh energy by association. Maybe as people watch them joyfully dancing they will subconsciously begin to equate these attributes with Hillary.
Lastly there are no political slogans, no attacks, no hate speech, just aesthetic beauty, dance and music. I think they are tapping into peoples fatigue with all the negative ads on both sides. So they are offering something different in hopes of appealing to people who would like a break from all the "noise."
So there it is people. The pantsuit pathos appeal.
Pantsuit Power! This video came up on my Facebook feed after our class discussion on the argument. I was immediately moved and then asked myself why. What is this video trying to say? What are these people trying to convince me of?
The creators of this video are using Pathos to appeal to people on behalf of Hillary Clinton on a few different levels.
First off, much time and print have been devoted to discussing Mrs. Clintons choice of wardrobe. Here are just a few examples: http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2016/08/youre-fashionable-enough-hillary/493877/, https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2016/08/11/hillary-clinton-has-left-her-fashion-critics-behind-along-with-pantsuits/aGxCruR3IoaHyQ785iEqdP/story.html, http://nypost.com/2016/08/25/criticizing-hillarys-age-and-pantsuits-doesnt-make-me-sexist/. So putting men and women in bright colored pants suits immediately says "We're with her!" It's an immediate nod to Madame Secretary.
Next, much has been said of Hillarys' woodenness and inauthenticity as well as concerns about her health. These bright happy, agile humans attempt to give her some young, fresh energy by association. Maybe as people watch them joyfully dancing they will subconsciously begin to equate these attributes with Hillary.
Lastly there are no political slogans, no attacks, no hate speech, just aesthetic beauty, dance and music. I think they are tapping into peoples fatigue with all the negative ads on both sides. So they are offering something different in hopes of appealing to people who would like a break from all the "noise."
So there it is people. The pantsuit pathos appeal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)