Rhetorical Analysis Of Gender Games By David Sadker

According to the textbook, David Sadker wrote “Gender Games.” His profession involves teaching at American University and the University of Arizona. He specializes in academic affairs. In his article, he challenges the “girls versus boys” controversy.

Sadker used to believe that this whole debate was an interesting way to determine school fairness. Later, he found out that this was a serious issue to where the boys were the victims. In Sadker’s claim, he stated that the article “Girls Rule,” and the book, The War Against Boys, were out to make schoolboys look like dupes. Although Sadker made his concession, his refutes look at the bigger picture.

David Sadker sets his tone in his refutations. He makes his logical points: grades and tests, enrollment, athletics, interactions, and career preparation. I would not describe his tone of

comparing and contrasting. I believe he is somewhat annoyed, but curious. He is trying to break up the idea of separation. The tone Sadker is uses is persuasion because he tries to deduct the fallacies of which gender is superior.
Schoolboys and schoolgirls both illustrate various strengths and weaknesses, and have different needs.

So where are we in terms of the progress made for both girls and boys in school today? Sadker teaches us the facts of gender bias in his writing. For elements a) through f), I believe he presented facts, observation, and analysis.

Sadker’s challenge is strong. You could say the flow of his analytical statements won me over. I still have questions about employment opportunities and academic interactions. Could it be that feminism plays a part in this? Of course, feminism is involved in this matter of gender war. In an article I read a while back, it said that schools nowadays are mostly directed by male principals and superintendents. It included something the feminists not being generals because of the huge male influence.

Sadker implies that there is a phony gender war, and Sommers’ bestows upon the public a fake sense of girl supremacy that stirs up heated exchanges between the people. In Sadker’s conclusion, he believes the debate is a waste of time for the educational

system.
In choosing for who’s right, I believe the reasonable choice is Sadker. I’m not big on choosing sides. Christina Hoff Summers and David Sadker expressed their opinions! It is up to the reader whether to agree with that opinion or formulate a new conclusion that suits them. That is my usual method when reading a persuasive topic.
How ironic that the gender debate, once thought to be synonymous with females, now hinges on how well boys are doing in school. And in the end, reframing gender equity to include boys may prove to be a very positive development. For now, it is up to America’s educators to duck the barrage of the gender war crowd, and to continue their efforts to make schools fairer and more humane environments for all our students.