Rhetorical Analysis: The Myth Of The Gay Agenda

“Run for your heterosexual lives!” Homosexuality, a topic that gains misperception, and alienates people in a world of easily made stereotypes. In the TED talk entitled “The Myth of The Gay Agenda” presented by LZ Granderson. , the speaker’s presentation is mostly expressed most successfully with pathos while also using ethos and logos concerning the topic of proving to dispel the myth that there is a gay agenda. The title alone “The Myth of the Gay Agenda” invites the audience to think, to feel, to question; quite possibly some may even take a position before the lecture begins. Some may even argue that the driving force in this lecture are the points made through logos, however, even though these points carry much weight, it is the the pathos that grabs the listener and then keeps them engaged throughout the talk, that wins over the audience. Logos would most certainly fall on deaf ears if not for the

driving force of created emotion and empathy that begs for a deep human connection through shared experiences and the universal need for love and acceptance.
Lz Granderson presents his pathos by relating to his audience on a personal level. He starts his talk with “When I was sixteen years old” (Granderson) ... a phrase that when spoken almost instantaneously appeals to everyone’s sixteen year old self. He further engages his audience with a powerful quote from the movie “Torch Song Trilogy” He explains, “As humans we all want to be loved and respected”. This quote is the emotional hook that likely has his listeners unified in feeling one common and unifying emotion to feel loved and respected. This is clearly his intention as he moves on to explains we are all equal and have the same life problems and successes. As Granderson continues to speak, he successfully weaves humor into his talk about experiencing the simple mundane challenges that he, as a gay man, faces every day such as long lines at the airport, drinking coffee, watching American Idol with his partner, or cooking and cleaning. He suggests light heartedly that these actions must be the “evil deeds” of the gay population (Granderson). Granderson shares simple details of his family life as references to his son’s messy teen habits are brought into the conversation. Granderson uses humor to connect to his audience but most importantly, he uses relatable content to gain understanding and acceptance before driving his point home with undeniable facts. Some might feel that the logos in his argument is the driving force; however none of facts would resonate with the audience without Granderson’s effective use of pathos in the introduction and woven throughout the talk. Communicating with his audience in this way, unfies the room as a whole and emotionally endeared him to everyone in the room.
Granderson presents few but very powerful and compelling logos in the form of projections on the stage wall.

The most powerful of which is a copy of the The Constitution of the United States. It is dropped like a bomb of enlightenment at precisely the right moment during the talk. “This,” he Argues “is the Gay Agenda” (Granderson). While the slide is clearly logos, it is the emotional realization that he clearly wants to be felt and completely absorbed to the core of everyone's humanity. This is where logos becomes pathos. It is the revelation moment in the presentation and it is again intentional on the part of the speaker. “This document,” Granderson explains, “is how everyone should be able to have the fundamental human rights that are written in our laws.” He goes on to show evidence from the past of political activism when women and black people did not have the same rights as white male citizens. Granderson also uses maps showing Housing laws and policy by state, as well as a map on Nondiscrimination law across the United States. (List work cited on

maps).
Granderson’s ethos is evident by stating he is gay. He is clear about this in the beginning of the lecture, giving him credibility that what he is saying is relevant and just because he has experienced it. He shares openly experiences that are his own, with family life and how he is a father, a member of the LGBTQ community and most importantly the community as a whole. He also shares some of the misconceptions by the straight conservative population about those that are gay, such as how politicians and those lobbying against gay rights have compared the “Gay lifestyle” to terrorism. However he also effectively shows his audience that while is he is gay, he is still just like them on every human and community level.
Although he represented each appeal adequately there was one that is weaker than the others that could be made stronger. Granderson's representation of ethos is complicated. The majority of the lecture focused on making a point that himself and other gay people are no different from the rest of the population, counter acting his credibility. His platform he stands on for credibility is vague. When he says that he is no different from the rest of everyone it destroys his platform for making his point.