In class lab: textual analysis

In class Lab: Textual Analysis

1.       Who published these ads?

The ads are published by different animal rights groups such as PETA (people for the ethical treatment of animals), Freedom for animals, and Mercy for animals, and American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals.  These are all humanitarian groups that fight cruelty to animals such as testing of beauty products on animals, fashion designers using animal fur in clothing and the treatment of animals in butchering from large grocery chains like Walmart.

2.       Who are these texts intended for?

They are intended for all the consumers.  I believe they are intended to educate consumers on where the products that they value so much are coming from and who or what is being abused to get them.  In these articles it is talking about cruel animal treatments to provide consumers with their favorite products. I think a lot of consumers are unaware or ignorant of how their favorite clothing styles or beauty products are created. So these texts are there to make consumers aware and hopefully help them change what they are using and fight for animal rights.

3.       How can we tell that?

The slogans on the ads are a clear sign of what the ads are trying to communicate. The very first ad is a picture of a famous actor and a dog and the slogan says “If you wouldn’t wear your dog….please don’t wear any fur” and then it has the PETA logo at the bottom of the ad, which is a well know animal rights support group.  That makes it very obvious of what they are trying to say and who they are trying to say it to.

4.       What is the purpose of these texts? What are their creators wanting to change or make happen?

They are trying to educate consumers on what their most valued products are made of and how they are made, through cruel treatment to animals. They want to show the general public that it is not made without some kind of harm. They want to get people to start doing research on what their products are made of and start using food that is organic from companies that do not abuse the animals to get their food, fancy clothes or beauty products.  They would like the consumer to start buying products that are not tested on animals.

5.       How do they seem to be working toward that purpose? What beliefs and values do they address?

The third ad, that says “do you support cruelty to animals, Walmart does” has a website walmartcruelty.com on the ad. I went to that website and the home page has a video of a bunch of men beating pigs with large hammers, throwing things at them like pieces of the gates. It has them in tiny, crammed up dirty pens where they can hardly move.  I watched part of the video, I could not watch it all the way through without getting nauseous and heartbroken.  The video is hard to watch, but it is necessary to show that to people who may be ignorant of how animals are treated at butchering farms. I think they are using those videos to turn consumers away from buying meat from places like that and encourage maybe spark emotions in the consumers that will help the animal rights activists fight companies who allow animals to be abused for this kind of use. The ad with the puppy carrying a ball using the dog’s name and stating “I am waiting to love you” sparks emotion in consumers with statements like that and the publishers (ASPCA) of that ad are using that to encourage people to adopt animals instead of buying from breeding farms and to educate consumers on laws and bills that need to be passed or fought for fair treatment of animals.

6.       What evidence from the texts (images, phrases, etc.) can you provide to support your answers?

The first ad has an image of an attractive famous actor that will immediately draw interest from some of his fan base and makes the statement “If you wouldn’t wear your dog. Please don’t wear any fur” which personalizes it for people who have their own animals. The second ad Shows a picture of a model with animal fur on her head next to her really pretty, well groomed hair and the comment on that one says “For luxuriant hair this is how 300,000 lab animals suffer each year” this educates consumers that the beauty products they love are texted on animals and are harmful to animals, and that they should use organic products that are not tested on animals. The third add is of a pig behind bars with the slogan “do you support animal cruelty, Walmart does” and then has a website that shows the animals being beaten.  This educates us on the treatment of our food at butcher farms. All of these are meant to get a reaction out of the consumer about some of their favorite products.

7.       Can you come up with a statement that would indicate what the ads do as a group?

The ads, as a group, are meant to educate, without being sensitive to how they do it.  They are working to educate consumers on all the ways that cruelty to animals is tied in with our favorite products. I believe they hope to get consumers to switch products to ones that don’t test animals or mistreat and help fight back against the companies that do.  

Mad Men textual analysis Page 175

1. Havrilesky understands that the American dream is just that, a dream.  She talks about how what is advertised and what is expected to be the perfect life, it is the opposite.  It is a sad lifestyle to constantly be thinking that you need the next upgrade to be happy and not be content with the life you create for yourself.  An unrealistic view of life where nobody is really who they want to be and everyone is striving to be the same type of person with the perfect house, the perfect spouse perfect kids and perfect homey-high class life style, otherwise you are not succeeding.  Her very last sentence says "The birth of of the advertising age coincides with the directly with the birth of our discontent as a nation and what got lost in the hustle was our souls".  She also states in her opening that we are constantly in search of upgrades that it is a sickness that is infused into our blood.  Those alone are strong statements about what her opinions of this lifestyle means. 
2. She is a television critic at Salon.com, a journalism website.  That background asserts her authority on this subject and any other subject related to the analysis of television shows and their meaning.  She adds a lot of detail about the show and background on the characters.  This offers the reader confidence in the writers knowledge of the show and and what she is writing about. 
3. She uses great detail in statements like "the divine beauty and grace of everyday existence-the glimmer of sunshine on the grass, the blessing of a cool breeze on a summer day" these statements help us picture and appreciate those things when they come to mind.  She talks about childhood expectations and fairy tales which gives the reader the chance to think about our own lives and evaluate what we value and find important in our lives. 
4. I was not familiar with this show.  She gave a lot of detail about the show and each of the characters.  To me, it sounds like a lot of drama.  Which what draws a lot of people into choosing a show to watch. However, I do not enjoy shows like that. Her writing definitely gave me a good view of what the show is about.  I am sure that people enjoy the show because it depicts what the writer was talking about, the "American Dream" and that is what the show may help them feel connected to that dream by watching it played out by actors, it creates a small amount of reality for a bit. 

Analysis in every day use. Page 141

Analysis in everyday use

Bass Pro Shop and Cabela’s: Fishing Gear

                My son and I both enjoy fishing and spend the majority of our free time on lake fishing.  So I chose to analyze the fishing gear sections on the Cabela’s and Bass Pro Shop websites.  

Cabela’s:

                After using both websites several different times to shop for different items we each needed for our tackle boxes, I have decided that I prefer the Cabela’s website when shopping online.  When you go to www.Cabelas.com the home page immediately draws your attention with beautiful pictures of the outdoors and lots of pictures of gear that they have on sale or is the main advertisement for that week.  They always have great sales on the home page also. There advertisements are very flashy and which draw the consumer in and make you want to look through the main page before even searching for whatever it is you have gone to the website for.  Then once you do get to the items page that you are interested in the search menu is very clean and organized and easy to find what you are looking for.  It is very simple to navigate and the colors on the menu and the pictures of what you are searching for help the consumer be interested in their website and what they have for sale.

Bass Pro Shop:

                When you search www.basspro.com and get to the website, it has no pictures and very little color or detail on the home page.  It looks more like a directory than a website to shop on.  You can chose your store and it gives you all the details of that store that you chose.  There is no separated menu on the home page to look through what they are retailing. The first time I ever went to the website to search fishing lures, I spent at least 5 minutes trying to find a menu to search what they had.  I ended up typing in a search bar at the top of the page that was for “website search”.  I typed in fishing gear and it took me to a list of fishing supplies and then you chose what you want.  It is a very straightforward, simple site where you can find exactly what you need without flashy advertisements of pictures to draw you into the site. It is definitely not “consumer oriented”.

                Through my analysis, I think that Cabela’s appeals more to the emotional consumer with the flashy details that will catch your eye before offering information and that Bass Pro Shop appeals more to the logical thinker by offering exactly what you need in a clear straightforward manner.  I might add a bit more color and detail to the Bass Pro Shop site and make the search easier to locate and navigate. I definitely prefer the Cabela’s website to the Bass Pro Shop website.  However, when I am going to shop in person for fishing gear, I prefer Bass Pro Shop over Cabela’s.  Bass definitely has more in their store and you can tell the store is very consumer oriented in the way it’s decorated and with the setup of what they are selling. 

In class Lab: Page 138

Decision	Area of life affected	Research done	Final decision
Should I start school again.	Family, financial, social, health, work, future.	Class times, financial aid, work schedule, my sons school and baseball schedule, bills.	I am typing this up in my college English class, so I think my decision on this is clear!!
When to get out of bed in the morning.	Health, Family, social, school, work.	What time my son has to be at the bus, what time I actually wake up, how much homework or studying I have, if I have to be at class or work, is it the weekend, am I hungry.	Most mornings I get up early enough to get my son to the bus. It really depends on the day when I decide to get out of bed.
Moving back home to Poulsbo and transferring my son to a new school in the move.	Family, social, school, emotional, financial.	I researched the elementary schools in our area, how it would affect us financially, how it would affect school for him and me.	We ended up moving to Poulsbo from Covington.

In Class Lab: Taking Stock of Your Analysis

1.      How did you go about analyzing the text? What methods did you use and which ones were most helpful?

Evidence drawn from close analysis of the subject. I spent a lot of time doing research on statistics regarding Marriage Equality in the U.S. and included my findings in my paper. I felt that it needed that solid foundation to be able to educate people on the facts about this subject. I appreciate when I am listening to an educated argument, that there are facts involved to show the truth of the argument, not just somebody's assumption of what they are arguing. I am more likely to listen and believe what someone is arguing when they know what they are talking about and have the facts to back it up. Insight gained from your analysis. The research and data that I included in my paper gives the reader a true and honest background on the subject.  Being able to read the argument and have the facts to back it up gives the argument more power. 

2.      How did you go about drafting your essay?

The In class lab that we did “Developing your argument” really made a difference. I was able to answer each of those questions with a good solid answer and that gave me a base for my argument. After answering those questions, I had a good idea of the order that I wanted to put my paper in and that helped me get started. Then I spent a few days reading articles for and against marriage equality to be able to have an educated view from both sides of the argument to be included in my paper. I spent some time after that researching facts and statistics online to be able to support my argument and add to my paper. After I had all that, I feel like it came together nicely.

3.       How well did you organize your written analysis?  What, if anything, could you do to make it easier to read?

I think it is in pretty good order. I started it off with facts regarding the issue and then addressed them with my stance and my argument. I included some arguments that I read that the opposition had and addressed those with my rebuttal and then ended the paper with why it matters so much to me and should matter to everyone else. I also included some statistics as to why the subject is so important in the closing.

4.       Did you provide sufficient evidence to support your analysis?

I spent several days reading other articles on this subject. I read articles that were for and against marriage equality so that I had an idea of what the opposition was arguing and what their point was. I also spent several days researching statistics and data on marriage equality and the effect it has on families and the community. I included a lot of what I found in my research into my paper to be able to educate my readers with facts that they may not know. I did not know a lot of the statistics before I did the research, so writing this paper has given me more knowledge on something I am already very passionate about and know I have more information to back my argument and my views on marriage equality.

5.       What did you do especially well?

I incorporated a lot of what I found in my research into my paper to be able to educate my readers with facts that they may not know. I did not know a lot of the statistics before I did the research, so writing this paper has given me more knowledge on something I am already very passionate about and now I have more information to back my argument and my views on marriage equality. I used pathos to offer the emotional side of the argument, from my point of view emotionally as well as a lot of the community’s emotional thoughts on it. I also used logos to appeal to the logical side of the argument for people like me who are more factual and prefer knowledge and truth in an argument.

6.       What could still be improved?

It was not as long as I would have liked it to be. We have a 1200-1500 word limit and my paper is sitting at 1269. I would like to add more, I could really argue on this subject all day, but it is hard to continue on with a word limit. In the next week until it is do I plan to do a bit more research and read over my paper a few more times as well as have a few people in my group of friends/family read through it and offer opinions and see if there is any more I could add to it to perfect it.

7.       Did you use any visuals, and if so, what did they add? Could you have shown the same thing with words?

I did not add any visuals to mine.  I really did not see a need for visuals in my argument and am not really sure what kind of visual I would add anyways.

8.       How did other reader’s responses influence your writing?

I have not really had anyone else read my paper yet. I sent it to my girlfriend who reads all papers and would have a biased opinion anyways and my mother and mother in law. I got positive responses from all of them and that gave me some more confidence in my writing.  However I am looking forward to a response from someone who is not close to me and biased on the subject or the writer.

9.       What would you do differently next time?

I would honestly pick another subject that was easier.  I did not expect to struggle through writing this paper so much because it is a subject that is so close to me and that I live with every single day. I had a really hard time starting this paper because it is such a sensitive subject and most opinions on it are purely emotional responses with no data or background. It was difficult to recognize the opposition’s arguments because I did not find them educated or rational at all and a few of them were honestly insulting. So it was hard to write a paper that was not filled with frustration and me just lashing out at my oppositions ignorant and uneducated arguments.

It took me a few days to read through the opposition’s argument and figure out an appropriate way to respond without also being rude, ignorant or disrespectful of the opposition’s opinions.

10.   Are you pleased with your analysis? What did it teach you about the text you analyzed? Did it make you want to study more works by the same writer or artist?

I am pleased with what I wrote.  Like I said, I struggled through it and being able to finish it was a good thing for me. It offered me a lot of information doing the research and I have a lot more knowledge on the subject, which I always appreciate. I definitely want to study more. I could write a novel on my argument for marriage equality and the rebuttals to the opposition.

11.   What are the skills and processes you can take from this assignment into future writing situations?

Research is key when you are developing an argument. From start to finish, what I have to offer in my argument has changed so much. Being able to include data and statistics makes a huge difference to an argument and there is so much to know about this. Most peoples arguments on marriage equality are seriously uneducated, and as I stated before, based on emotion. So offering details like that adds a lot of power to an argument, which I will keep in mind in all future writing assignments.  Writing about something you care about and knowing what you are writing about and then including that into that paper, is very important. I am much more likely to appreciate a writing that includes details and facts and information. 

Rough draft for Position Paper on Same Sex Marriage

According to an article on marriageequlity.org, there are currently 14 states that have anti-marriage laws in the U.S.  37 states including Washington D.C. allow same sex marriage. As of October 2014 17 Countries allow same sex couples to marry nationwide.  As of March 2015 there are 700,000 Americans married to a same sex spouse.  55% of Americans think it should be legalized nationwide.

My opinion on this is quite biased, and exactly that, my opinion. However, I hope with this argument to educate on the subject of same sex marriage from the point of view of someone who is in a same sex relationship. I have been in a same sex relationship for nearly two years.  I absolutely think that same sex marriage should be legalized everywhere, not just in our nation.  The power to say who gets to be with whom and who loves who belongs to no one. I have also been in support of it for as long as I can remember, well before I entered in to any of the same sex relationships I have been in.  I have a son who is nearly 8 years old and was with his father for ten plus years and even then I believed that living in a free country, everyone should be free to chose who they want to be with and who they love.  No one should be told "no you cannot marry who you chose to.” Love does not segregate and it is a basic human right to love and be loved.

Above and beyond the emotional arguments for same sex marriage, there is the technical part of a same sex couple who wishes to marry to be able to financially and medically care for each other. Finances are a challenge whether straight or same sex, not being able to legally line up finances, homeownership or parenting because of a marriage ban is frustrating.  According to the US Government Accounting Office marriage offers 1,138 federal benefits and responsibilities.  With marriage, a couple has the ability to be treated as an economic unit and to file joint tax returns and obtain joint health, home and auto insurance policies.  Statistical economic research from the Williams Institute shows that states benefit economically from marriage equality in addition.  So there is a financial benefit to the couple and to the state allowing the marriage.

Andrew Koppelman is a professor of law and politics at Northwestern University.  He recently wrote an article for Salon on the verdict for same sex marriage that the Supreme Court Justice is currently working on.  We should have an answer on this verdict sometime in June.  He states in this article “Yesterday’s Supreme Court hearing showed as clearly as anything could have that same sex marriage will prevail, not only because of the strength of its argument, but because those arguments meet no resistance.  The opposing view has become incomprehensible.”

In searching the opposition’s arguments, I found a lot of redundant argument, but nothing with any solid foundation.    The opposition argues that legalizing same sex marriage would lessen the protection of born and unborn children.  The SPUC states that marriage between a man and woman is the fundamental group unit in society.  They argue that same sex marriage lacks the basic elements of true marriage.  E.g. the complimentary sexual differences between spouses necessary for the procreation and healthy upbringing of children.  They also state that it represents an attempt to redefine marriage, thus undermining marriage.  They say that lessens the protection for unborn children which true marriage brings.

There is really no proof that same sex marriage puts the protection of born or unborn children at risk.  A Williams Institute analysis of census states that 31% of same sex couples who identified as spouses and 14% of unmarried are raising children. The majority of same sex couples who become parents with their partner have made the choice to be parents.  They have had to fight and work hard to become parents together. They have had to go through many expensive IVF treatments or lengthy and also costly adoption processes.  They do not become pregnant in a one night stand or without planning. These parents are not going to chose to give their child up for adoption or abortion.  Very likely they will work harder to be strong, stable parents because they have had to work so hard to become a parent; they are likely to appreciate it more.  A child who grows up with married parents benefits from the fact that his or her parents relationship is recognized by law and receives legal protection.  Another census analysis by the Williams Institute states that married same sex couples are five times more likely to be raising adopted or foster children than their different-sex counterparts and have more resources than unmarried same sex couples.  According to Planned Parenthood, in 2013 they performed 327,653 abortions; this is up from 2012 when they reported 327,166 abortions performed. Americanadoptions.com states in their 2007 breakdown of statistics that there were 677,000 domestic adoptions and 661,000 placed in foster care. These numbers are massive and a small percentage; if any of these children was a result of a same-sex relationship that decided to parent. 

The opposition also tries to argue that there will be a shocking impact on schools if same sex marriage is passed.  Another article the SPUC published, states that schools will become a focus for the promotion of radical and explicit homosexual material to school children.  In addition, they argue that same sex marriage will be used as a reason to silence objections by teachers and parents for explicit sex education.

Again, there is really no proof or background to this.  The idea that talking about same sex marriage or relationships leads to explicit material behavior and that heterosexual marriages and relationships do not is honestly, kind of ridiculous.  If they really do believe that only allowing same sex marriage to be legal and accepted will lead the children to explicit material or inappropriate behavior then they are exceptionally naive in their thinking of how things work now.  There is far more publicized explicit material and behavior in the media and schools today and passing a same sex marriage law will not change that or the way that explicit material is exposed to children. 

A large amount of bullying and suicides are the result of judgment on people in the LGBT community. According to a website called thetrevorproject.com, which gets its facts and statistics from the CDC among other sites; they state that Suicide is the 2nd leading cause of death among young people ages 10 to 24. LGB youth are 4 times more likely, and questioning youth are 3 times more likely, to attempt suicide as their straight peers. Suicide attempts by LGB youth and questioning youth are 4 to 6 times more likely to result in injury, poisoning, or overdose that requires treatment from a doctor or nurse, compared to their straight peers. Each episode of LGBT victimization, such as physical or verbal harassment or abuse, increases the likelihood of self-harming behavior by 2.5 times on average.  I hope that creating a community of tolerance and acceptance will greatly decrease those numbers if people feel they are free to be who they want to be and be with who they chose legally.  Marriage offers legal benefits and responsibilities that protect families.  It also provides emotional stability and benefits to the family unit. Studies have shown that married couples live longer, have higher incomes, engage less in risky behaviors, eat healthier and have fewer psychological problems than unmarried people. 

Marriage Equality and the Supreme Court

 

I chose an article on Salon.com about The Supreme Court passage of Marriage Equality. This is an important and sensitive subject for me, as I have been in a relationship with my girlfriend for close to two years. This affects us because we would like the choice to get married someday and do not believe that decision belongs to anyone else, and even if I was not, I believe everyone has the right to be with who they chose. I follow these articles closely.  The link for the article I chose to annotate is:

http://www.salon.com/2015/04/29/traditional_marriage_gets_a_scotus_smackdown_the_incomprehensible_right_wing_logic_thats_poised_to_go_down_in_flames/

Characteristic Features

 

·        An Explicit Position

The author of this article, Andrew Koppelman, does not specifically state his stance on marriage equality. I believe he does this to cater to every reader’s values. However, the way the article is written, implies that he supports marriage equality. The article itself is written about the Supreme Court Justices and their opinions and arguments on this subject.  He quotes arguments from several of the Justices to support why he suspects the Marriage Equality bill will pass.  He states in regards to the Supreme Court meeting to argue this bill on April 28, 2015; “Yesterdays Supreme Court argument showed as clearly as anything could have, that same sex marriage will prevail.  Not only because of the strength of its argument, but because those arguments meet no resistance; the opposing view has become incomprehensible.”  That statement shows why he thinks this bill will pass and why he thinks it will, which I believe gives him a position on the subject.

 

·        A response to what others have said

Koppelman writes that the Justice Stephen Breyer finds it difficult to find anything to defer to.   When states try to justify denying same sex couples the right to marry, Justice Breyer states “the answer we get is; well people have always done it.”  Referring to marriage between a dominant male and a subordinate female and striking down same sex marriage. He states “that won’t do because it was also used as an argument to justify racial segregation.”  Another argument he hears is “because certain religious groups do think it’s a sin.”  He comments “that can’t justify a law either.” Breyer also states “when I try to look for arguments three, four, and five I don’t find them, where are they?”  There are not many rational or logical reasons as to why people cannot be free to love and marry who they chose, other than the opposer’s personal opinions as to why it is wrong.  Which does not seem to be enough to stand up in court and make a law against it?

 

·        Appropriate background information

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg states “traditionally, marriage was a relationship between a dominant male and a subordinate female” In recent decades, it has become less gender specific, and sexual satisfaction has become a more important part of it.  The older gender-specific understanding of marriage has faded so far that it is not merely rejected, it is not even understood.  He is explaining that in decades before, heterosexual male dominate marriages were the norm.  Same sex marriages aside, a lot of heterosexual marriages now do not follow that anymore.  There are many marriages with the stay at home father and the mother bringing in the income and going out for work and that is perfectly acceptable. So, arguing that marriage is meant just for a man and a woman, because that’s just the way it’s supposed to be, does not stand anymore.

 

·        A clear indication of why the topic matters

There are many people out there arguing why same sex couples should not be allowed to marry, but they have no real arguments as to why.  These days, we are more about what makes us happy and not so much about how things were 50 years ago.  We evolve and change as humans, so should our laws and how life is lived daily.  They should grow and evolve with us. There are more and more people coming out, not so scared to be harmed or judged.  There are many strong same sex couples who want to be able to marry and start a family, which would help immensely with the homeless children population. It seems odd to say that two women who love each other and are committed to each other cannot marry, however Brittany Spears can marry someone for 72 hours.  The arguments 50 years ago against same sex marriage no longer apply, because we live in a different time and it is a different world now. This article supports that and the arguments stated show that to be true.  It talks about the lack of strong, relevant opposing views. This also goes with the characteristic of good reasons and evidence.  I think he uses good reasons and evidence to explain why the topic matters.

 

·        Attention to more than one point of view

People either support same sex marriage or absolutely do not. I personally, have not experienced any in between arguments that say “I am okay with homosexuals and them getting married, however when that bill passes, I will not support them and I will not be at that wedding”.  Koppelman comments on the few opposing views, with the quotes from the Supreme Court Justices.  However, there aren’t many and it seems in his opinion, they aren’t rational and won’t stand up in court.

 

·        An authoritative tone

The author, Koppelman, uses quotes from the Supreme Court Justices that help give the article the authority necessary.  Naturally, the Justices have a lot of authority, so adding their personal quotes and opinions adds a lot to the article.  The author provides a lot of straightforward information, which gives the article a tone of authority.  It helps add background to the argument and gives it a strong foundation.

·        An appeal to readers’ values

People who chose to read this article have an interest in marriage equality, whether it is for or against it. He does a good job of not being too strong on one side of the argument.  He provides straightforward, unbiased information without picking on anyone’s opinions or values. He strictly provides information regarding this particular Supreme Court session and to educate what the argument is and the direction the argument is going.