I am interested in the topic of rape because it is a very big issue in today’s society, and I know too many people that have been affected by it. Rape is nothing to joke about, and if you were to ask, most people don’t even know how to define rape. I’m going to discuss the importance of what rape really is, and why victims are usually blamed in almost all sexual assault cases. My audience is not necessarily those involved in rape culture, but those who enforce rape culture. Rape culture essentially is blaming victims for any sort of sexual assault, and normalizing male sexual violence. I think it is important to speak to this audience because it will help them understand why they should never take the blame for being raped or sexually assaulted, and it will also help them understand the motives behind the rape situations. Almost every victim of rape feels as though he or she is guilty, and everyone needs to understand why he should not feel that way. I will not only discuss my findings of what the definition of rape really is, but also discuss scientific findings on why victims are not at fault, as well as stories of rape and how they have become worldly known, and what people are doing to draw attention to these situations. For example, the girl at Columbia who was raped carries around a mattress everywhere she goes, and she will continue to do so until her rapist does not attend Columbia University anymore. I have found many popular sources to be very effective in helping gather opinions throughout the rest of society that it is never the victims fault, but the evidence I need to prove it has always been found in any sort of academic article, journal, encyclopedia, etc.
As I begin my third paper, I am sort of confused on what I am going to write about for like, six pages, but I feel as though the farther I go into my research, the more I will comprehend. I want to talk about how rape victims are never at fault, but my problem is going to be how I am going to expand on the subject so much that it will be very thorough and talked about, and I will prove my point. I have some evidence, but I’m not sure if it will be enough to sway my audience, and regarding audience, I’m not even sure who that will be as of now. I’m thinking it will be people who have been victimized, and even people who have to decide who is responsible for any sort of case like this.
The purpose of this article is to inform the audience of why sexual assault is never the victim’s fault and why blaming the victim doesn’t help the cause at all. Robey-Phillips talks about the negative side effects of what happens when the victim is at fault, and how it has affected sexual assault cases all around the world. Robey-Phillips discusses the importance of changing our society into one that does not tolerate any sort of sexual violence, and what a girl is wearing or whether or not she is intoxicated should bother another person, or make him want to harm her in any way (6). The article doesn’t necessarily go into detail of why it is the attackers fault, but Robey-Phillips does speak to her audience and tries to convince them of her strong opinion by stating, “When we stop blaming victims, survivors will feel more comfortable telling people what happened. That will not only help survivors recover, but also make society increasingly aware of the problem. It will trigger our empathy and we will act” (2).
Robey-Phillips, Emily. Victim-blaming Obscures Gravity of Sexual Assault. Technique. 31 Jan. 2014. Web. 2 Oct. 2014.<http://nique.net/opinions/2014/01/31/ victim-blaming-obscures-gravity-of-sexual- assault/>.
I think you are asking us to do this assignment so that we can get a better understanding of how we can incorporate quotes and ideas from sources into our writing correctly. After all, practice does make perfect, and the more we practice including sources into our writing, the better we will become at it, and the more creative we will be with it.
In the introduction of the book “They Say/I Say”: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing, Gerald Godd and Kathy Birkenstein provide templates designed to structure an essay for someone. Specifically, Graff and Birkenstein argue that the the types of writing templates they offer will allow for a well written paper that holds a clear argument for the reader. As the authors themselves put it, “In our view, then, the best academic writing has one underlying feature: it is deeply engaged in some way with other people’s views.” Although some people believe that it is “possible to argue effectively without being in conversation with someone else,” Graff and Birkenstein insist that doing that “but it leaves out the important fact that in the real world we don’t make arguments without being provoked.” These types of arguments are very complex, and they require a lot of thinking and time.
I agree with their writings. I feel as though that the types of templates they provide are an excellent way to structure essays, and they will help create a strong argument in a paper. These types of templates that they provide will give the reader a clear set of “directions” where he would state his opinion, and analyze the opinion of others as well.
The purpose of chapter one is to discuss the importance of what others are saying as well as your own opinions. Don’t leave any important information out; you don’t want your audience guessing what your work is about. If something important is left out of a paper, then it is confusing and is worth nothing, so people need to make sure that people who have no idea what the author is talking about at first can understand the message he is trying to give through his work.
“Remember that you are entering a conversation and therefore need to start with ‘what others are saying,’ as the title of this chapter recommends, and then introduce your own ideas as a response.” (pg 20-21)
“This story illustrates an important lesson; that to give writing the most important thing of all-namely, a point-a writer needs to indicate clearly not only what his or her thesis is, but also what larger conversation that thesis is responding to.” (pg 20)
“The point is to give your readers a quick preview of what is motivating your argument, not to drown them in details right away. ” (pg 21)
I feel as though this depends on the topic that someone is writing about…However, if someone is reading a paper, they want to know what it is about before they read it, or even the first couple of sentences in, so if we talk about the people’s opinions first, what is going to draw the reader in to read more?
Whenever I imagine revisiting my writing, the author is right, I am always frustrated because I feel like I worked hard the first time so there couldn’t possibly be anything wrong with it. However, though, once I actually start looking at my old writing, I can see some mistakes that I could fix or even a better idea than the one I originally used. By revising my work, I learned that there is definitely more than one way to do something, and by going back and revising what I have already written, it is easy to brainstorm from there. For example, the rough draft is sort of like an outline for me, and it helps me to think of other ways to write things or even other things to write about in the paper. I think revising is just about what better words I could write somewhere, or even a different idea to write about instead of the one I wrote about which only sort of applies to a topic, whereas editing to me is looking for grammatical errors and things like that. Proofreading would just be to not necessarily make changes to the words of a paper, but just move things around and check one final time for any grammatical errors that need to be fixed in one’s writing.
I agree with Brock Dethier’s piece on revision a lot! I think he does have a good point about how we need to change out attitude on revision for it to even become useful. I love how he created lists about how people normally say they feel about revision and things like that. I already really liked how he added his one work in there and made it a more personal piece, and he let the audience know that he has struggled with revision himself too. The only one I really agreed with him with was number one, because I always seem to have a problem with it. It stated
1. Revision is trivial, the nitpicky correcting of superficial niceties.
Revision can include editing and polishing, but it means, after all, reseeing, so in extreme cases (as you’ll see later in this chapter) it can mean rescrambling every paragraph of a paper or throwing out everything except the conclusion. Naturally, if you think of revision as concentrating on surface errors, you’ll dis- like it; few people enjoy having to focus on their own mistakes.”
This one pertains to me because I hate having to look at my work and be like “oh, wow, what was I thinking when I wrote this? Is it really that bad?” I hate having to throw away work that I’ve done, or even just realize the mistakes I have made, because it makes me feel inferior because I could have done so much better to start with.
After I read through both articles, I decided to dissect each one alone then compare the two of them. I discussed what each one’s purpose was, as well as the audience, tone, and many other things. I also looked at the many different types of media that was used in the articles, how they affected the article, and how they compared to one another. I spent a lot of time on Friday analyzing both of the articles, and I think I have a really good understanding of what I’m going to write about and how I’m going to write it.
Annotated Bibliography for Source #1
“College Women: Stop Getting Drunk”
Annotated Bibliography for Source #2
“Alcohol and Sexual Assault: The Connection”
Annotated Bibliography for Source #3
“Actually, the Link Between Sexual Assault and Alcohol Isn’t As Clear As You Think”
Annotated Bibliography for Source #4
“Victim-blaming Obscures Gravity of Sexual Assault”
extra, possible sources:
“Wall Street Journal Columnist: Rape Victims Are Just As Guilty As Rapists If They’re Both Drunk
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/30/us/california-law-on-sex-consent-pleases-many-but-leaves-some-doubters.html (comm, actual article)
For my formal analysis, I plan on writing about sexual consent on college campuses. Specifically, I will be analyzing news articles about a bill that was just passed in California stating how affirmative consent must occur before any sexual contact between two people occurs. The two articles I will be analyzing discuss their views on the bill being passed and how they both think it will affect society, especially students on college campuses. This topic motivates me because it is a big issue in today’s society, and it affects students that are around the same age as I am. I know people who have personally been affected by situations such as rape and sex without consent, so that is another reason that motivates me to learn more about this topic. California is the first state that passed a law about this topic, and although many people doubt it, there are many supporters also, and I want to know why each one believes what he believes. This law has already held many doubts, and many people believe that it will just create more stress for people, especially those in a relationship, so I want to learn more about this to discover why people think these things. The only questions I have about the assignment are what are we specifically talking about in our rhetorical analysis? Are we discussing both the articles and the incidents, or are we only focusing on the articles themselves and how they have different views from one another? Also, we aren’t allowed to state our opinions, right? I feel like I need an example, and that I’m making this more complicated than it actually is, hahaha.
“The Rhetorical Situation” by Bitzer
In “The Rhetorical Situation,” Bitzer discusses rhetoric as a whole and asks the audience the question “What really is rhetoric?” and “What is a rhetorical situation?” Bitzer talks about a situation and that “a work is rhetorical because it is a response to a situation of a certain kind.” He gives the reader an example of rhetoric occurring in a situation, and then he concludes with statements that altogether explain what situational rhetoric is. Along with that argument, Bitzer describes the three main characteristics of a rhetorical situation, which include exigence, audience, and constraints, and he discusses how each of these affect a situation and make it rhetorical. Bitzer concludes his argument with another set of statements that help organize his thoughts and knowledge of why a situation is rhetorical.
Bitzer did a great job in explaining how a situation can become rhetorical and why that is. My favorite part was when Bitzer stated that “rhetoric is a mode of altering reality, not by the direct application of energy to objects, but by the creation of discourse which changes reality through the mediation of thoughts and action. The rhetor alters reality by bringing into existence a discourse of such a character that the audience, in thought and action, is so engaged that it becomes mediator of change. In this sense rhetoric is always persuasive. (3-4) ” I liked this the most because it describes how rhetoric and a situation are one and the same. I also like how he touched on the three characteristics, and I agree with him in that aspect because all three characteristics affect one another, and without one, rhetoric wouldn’t be rhetoric.
If there is no response to rhetoric, then does that mean the rhetoric itself wasn’t good enough?
Emma Watson’s speech about Feminism
The exigence in Emma Watson’s speech target feminism in general and how women are mistreated in society today. Emma’s direct audience was the United Nations, but it was also meant for everyone around the world. The constraints regarding her speech include anti-feminists and people who didn’t take her seriously because she is an actress in today’s society.