Rhetorical Analysis Of Meg Jay's 'The Downside Of Living Together'

Cohabitation Rhetorical Analysis

“In the United States cohabitation has increased to more than 7.5 million since 1960” (411). But if cohabitation leads to divorce or unhappy relationships why do so many young adults continue to live together before marriage? Meg Jay, a clinical psychologist and the author of “The Downside of Living Together” brings you in to the topic of cohabitation, and makes you want to think twice before deicing to move in with a romantic partner. The author is nor for or against cohabitation. She states, “I am not for or against living together, but I am for young adults knowing that, far from safeguarding against divorce and unhappiness, moving in with someone can increase your chances of making a mistake-or of spending

too much time on a mistake” (413). The author states her neutrality on the topic, to avoid offending any couples who are currently living together. She wants to be able to persuade her audience without attracting a negative reaction to her argument.
The author uses many rhetorical devices throughout the essay to really allow the readers to connect, feel and understand.

Weather you believe that living together before marriage is right or wrong, it is a matter of opinion for everyone. Meg Jay, the author of “The Downside of Living Together” states her opinion with facts and logic. She uses one of her many clients as a prime example for her readers to rely on, on why cohabitation before marriage will eventually lead to unhappiness and more often than not, divorce. I believe the author used her client Jennifer to send out a message to young adults who decide to live together before marriage. The author wants to let her audience of young adults in relationships, to know about someone’s real life experience with cohabitation. One of the facts the author states is, “About two-thirds said they believe that moving in together before marriage was a good way to avoid divorce. But that belief is contradicted by experiences. Couples who cohabit before marriage (and especially before an engagement or an otherwise commitment) tend to be less satisfied with their marriages and more likely to divorce then couples who do not” (411). The author uses her job experience as a clinical psychologist to motivate her audience and establish her

credibility.
The authors tone in this essay is worried and understating. She is worried that many young adults in relationships are rushing into living together before marriage without knowing the negative outcomes it brings later on. She wants to help her audience avoid heartbreak and unhappiness. The author states, “Cohabitation is here to stay, and there are things young adults can do to protect their relationships from the cohabitation effect. It’s important to discuss each person’s motivation and commitment level beforehand and, even better view cohabitation as an international step toward, rather than a commitment test for marriage or partnership” (423). She believes that many young adults are moving in together for all the wrong reasons. But she also understands why many couples decide to move in together before they are married, “Living together can be fun and economical, and the set up costs are subtly woven in” (412). She uses her client’s life experiences with cohabitation as her credibility towards her audience. The author’s knowledge thanks to her client’s real life experiences with cohabitation makes her trustworthy and convincing towards her audience.
The author makes sure her audience feel emotion from her client’s life experiences with cohabitation. Her clients talk about their experience with living with a romantic partner before marriage and many of them state “they wished they hadn’t sunk their 20s into relationships that would have only lasted moths if they were not living together” (412). Her clients express how living with their partner made them feel. Her client Jessica shares her emotions towards cohabitation, “I felt like I was on this multiyear, never ending audition to be his wife” (412). This rhetorical appeal of pathos allows her audience to feel a type of emotion for the way cohabitation has left her client Jessica feeling. The author uses this rhetorical appeal towards her audience to successfully bring out similar emotions between her audience and her client’s. This rhetorical appeal helps her audience connect with her client’s and agree with her argument at the same time.
Meg Jay the author of “The downside of living together” effectively closed her case on cohabitation.

She successfully motivates young couples to discuss their commitment level before deicing to live together. Through the effective use of rhetorical tools and mindful arrangement of this essay, Meg Jay persuades her audience that it is possible to avoid the negative outcomes of cohabitation. She builds a relationship with both sides of argument and establishes her authority without portraying herself as superior. She establishes her credibility through her client’s personal experiences with cohabitation. She uses the emotional appeal of her client’s experiences to make a lasting impression on her audience. Through the use of motivational language the author was able to appeal to the audience’s state of mind. She leaves her audience with a reminder stating “as a mentor of mine used to say, ‘the best time to work on someone’s marriage is before he or she has one,’ and in one’s era, that may mean before cohabitation” (413). Meg Jay does a great job persuading and influencing her

audience.