Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Misrepresentation of woman in female writing
Gender in literature
Gender in literature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
1. What is Tannen claiming, specifically about male and female behavior? Tannen claims that men carefully choose their words to persuade women into doing as they want and need. Women give in too easily. 2. What is Brooks arguing? Is his argument limited to boys? Brooks argument is not just limited to boys. This same issue pops up for girls as well. He argues that children are confined to acting a certain way when they are still developing and should be acting as children. 3. What evidence does Tannen offer to support her claims? Tannen uses situations as her evidence. 4. At what point does Brooks begin using evidence? How does he use that evidence? Brooks brings in the evidence in the beginning of the article. His evidence is more like a scenario. 5. …show more content…
18. Based on the biographies you read at the beginning of this module, does each author have appropriate background to write with authority about these issues? Yes, each other has an appropriate background to write with authority about thes 19. What does Tannen’s style and language tell the reader about her? Tannen’s style of language tells the reader that she is a smart women that isn’t messed with by men. 20. What does Brooks’s style and language tell the reader about him? Brooks language reveals that he is an ambitious man. His article shows that he may have even been one of those boys in class that couldn’t stand still. 21. Do the authors seem trustworthy? Why or why not? The authors seems trustworthy in the sense that they bring in their own thought. The readers are able to follow without much confusion. 22. Do the authors seem deceptive? Why or why not? No, the authors seems to be true to their words. They each have credible backgrounds. 23. Do the authors appear to be treating the issue seriously? Does Brooks or Tannen seem to be more serious? Yes, both authors write seriously about their arguments. Questions about Emotions
However, the good is outweighed by the bad in that this article has almost no factual support. Worley seems to be venting her thoughts without any outside factual support. It is difficult to label this article as effective due to the lack of any factual support and evidence to back up her arguments. That is exactly what needs to change in the article. Worley must use more sources for information to back up her points, then the article may be more convincing and worth
Women respond very well to tone and word choice, which Tannen uses to her advantage. She uses personal experience to relate with her more female audience. For example, in the criticism section she uses a scenario that occurred between a male and female editors. Tannen “appreciated her tentativeness” that she gave Tannen when wanting to cut out part of her story(301). In contrast to that her male editor gave her a much different response, saying “call me when you have something new to say”(301). By stating a scenario with two very different outcomes, she falls more bias to women. This is effective to her more female audience because it paints women in a positive light and paints the men in a very negative light. The obvious bias towards women can arguably hurt her more than it could help her. Tannen automatically outs her male audience at a very awkward side, and makes it impossible for them to feel sympathy towards her. This hurts Tannen’s opportunity for having a broad audience, but for what she wrote it for she is very effective. If we are simply talking about how effective it was for women then Tannen hit home with them. Tannen’s choice of using what men say is also very smart, and helps with her effectiveness. She heard a man say, that after working for two women he realized neither of them have a sense of humor(304). By using examples like these
Brooks argues that male and female brains work and experience things differently. He suggests that this theory is also the reason as to why young girls are surpassing their male counterparts in school settings. He incorrectly assumes that by separating males and females, males will be allowed to break free from gender stereotypes. Brooks strengthens his argument with results of brain research on sex differences. But, Brook’s argument is unpersuasive. He categorizes all young males, and suggest that single sex-schools are the best solution for them. He wants to apply a black-and-white solution to something that is just not that simple. While Brooks uses comparisons and surveys to convince the reader, his argument simply does
Although this can often be a clever tool to use in order to get readers to think for themselves, I think that in this aspect as well she has gone too far. In attempting to provoke thought, she has left the chapter unfortunately devoid of many hard facts. Her highly subjective interviews and imaginary scenarios point to many different directions, but that is not what the point of the rest of her book is. In this she is attempting to present, wholesale, a scarring and shocking experiment on human nature, but she does not present enough of the context and subsequent debunking/reinforcement that surely occurred after the experiment. Surely progress has been made in this area after 1968, but she does not see fit to reference or explain it. Of course, her technique is very useful in other parts of the book, in which she does not go over board in order to shock and
...roduction, my thoughts were proven wrong. I was amazed at the spectacular findings that Sapolsky gathered in his book. As I was surfing the web for the book’s review, they were all mainly 5 stars. A review written by Joseph Graham left on Amazon was “Sapolsky is smart like a scientist but writes like a writer. Often not giving final answers on his subjects but laying out the entire subject so you can enjoyably understand how problematic most of reality is.” I cannot agree with this person any less, Sapolsky is a true expert in both areas. He elaborates about a simple topic, yet turning it into a profound statement that can be easily understood for his readers.
Ezekiel has many good points in his article but is he right? He has several main points in this article, one of his best is the fact
Boys are influenced by many of their coaches in life; brothers and fathers telling them they must be tough and show no pain, teachers who expect them to work hard at everything they do, and in the back of their minds are their mothers who worry about them over extending and getting hurt. Kimmel asked a few men in their 20’s, “where do young men get these ideas” (the Guy Code), they all gave the same answers: their brothers, fathers, and coaches. One mentioned that his father would always be riding him, telling him that he must be tough to make it in this world, another said his brothers were always ragging on him, calling him a “pussy” because he didn’t want to go outside and play football with them. He just wanted to stay in and play Xbox. Yet another said that whenever he got hurt his coach would mock and make fun of him because he was showing his feelings. The world is a very competitive for men, they believe they must always prove themselves to other men. Men get pressured into doing things they don’t want to do. Men shouldn’t be pressured they should be able to do what they want to
Is the information consistent with the information found in print sources, other Web sites, newsgroups, or mailing lists? Is the evidence contained within the source sufficient, reliable, and relevant to your topic? I have seen some of the same info from this site on other sites. It does match.
In her essay, Tannen analyzes how the actions that women make will mark them in some way. Her point is that everything a woman does is somehow sending a message. Tannen notes that, “The unmarked tense of verbs in English is the present” and
That alone provides a great source of credibility to the paper. The idea that this is an author who has done the research, gathered the numbers, and analyzed the data, allows the reader to rest in the idea that they are reading a valid article, and receiving good, hard, evidence. Twenge also uses a very logical tone throughout her article, maintaining the idea that the data is as clear as day, and that there is no disproving it; the numbers show true facts.
She appeals to the emotions of both men and women. When appealing to men she writes about the "identity crisis" which men had endured in recent years. "The identity crisis, which has been noted by Erik Erikson and others in recent years in the American man, seems to occur for lack of, and be cursed by the finding of work, or cause, or purpose, or purpose that evokes his own creativity" (Friedan). Thus, successfully draws out the emotions of men and grabs their attention. This is effective because to convince a population you would not want to leave out roughly 50% of the population. Friedan captures the attention of women by drawing attention to the frustrations of many women by implying that women have scarce job opportunities. "How many of them have been deceived, or have deceived themselves into clinging to outgrown, childlike femininity of "Occupation: Housewife"?"(Friedan). She describes housework as boring and sedentary- to which many people may agree. Her skill in the usage of pathos captures the attention of a large
The two articles written by Jeremy Kohler and Ben Quiggle not only oppose each other
Evidence: In expalning the communication differences between men and women, Tannin explores the cause of these differences. How does this infromation strengthen the reading?
Reading the passage and selecting a spacific perspective, is quite challenging. Personally, I agree with both of the topics at hand, but each study has their own opinion mixed in.
Throughout this news analysis I will be referring to articles written by Choe Sang-Hun and Richard C. Paddock in the New York Times as well as an article published by the BBC.