Thursday, March 29, 2012

Week Twleve

This week we started our group projects. I'm kind of excited for the project and hope people pick my question. I think this project is going to allow everyone to really write how they feel about the topics we discuss. This is kind of a free write group project and I like that.
Theme: Address visibility or indivisibility of Black-Native Americans
My Question: As an African American does claiming to have Native American heritage change how one is perceived by American people in general?
Claim: If one appears to be African American, as in by the color of their skin, other people will treat them accordingly regardless of their percentage of native American blood. The Black perception is skin deep and blood heritage will not change that.

Aside from the group project, the reading we had on Monday was sort of interesting. It was about women and how they are represented in the hip-hop and rap industry. All i want to say in regards to this is as a female I am well aware of how the type of clothes I may wear, the language I use, how my hair and nails are done etc. will be perceived. Knowing this I make careful choices about how I carry myself. I think women need to let it go and instead of arguing about what is said by male hip-hop/rap artist make sure they themselves are portraying what the men talk about and therefore the stereotype doesn’t apply to them. If you carry yourself in a certain way you will be perceived accordingly, and if you're presenting yourself in a positive way it won't matter what Lil Wayne says because it wouldn’t apply to you.

Week Eleven

This week we read a piece by Susan Brownmiller titled From Against Our Will: Men, Women, and Rape. Judging by the title one would assume this essay would be about rape and the horror it brings. Funny thing is that it is about pornography. As a reader my first turn-off to Susan’s argument was her comparing porn to rape. Rape is serious crime and a devastating violation to a person’s body, comparing that to legal, high paying recordings of people having “relations” to arouse the consumer is utterly ridiculous, and quite frankly an ignorant comparison. Through Susan’s eyes porn is no different but she forgot two crucial pieces that would disprove her argument. One, people who do porn get paid, and in some cases such as Jenna Jamison or “Pinky” make millions from being involved in the industry. Point two, which is most important, is the fact that most pornography participants are choosing and have volunteering their bodies to advertisement. Honestly her essay just aggravated me because there were so many holes in her argument and she was truly being reckless with that comparison.

Friday, March 2, 2012

Week Eight (Analyze Catigorical, Defintional and Causal Arugments)

Categorical-The basic idea of the categorical is simply to explain why one thing doesn’t belong in a group with another. It’s easiest to explain with an example. Claim: Marijuana isn’t a harmful drug therefore it should be legal. Explain what a harmful drug is: i.e. highly addictive or unhealthy physically and mentally. Explain why Marijuana isn't highly addictive or unhealthy.

Definitional-Argument that tries to piece together an already understood definition. Most of the time the writer is trying to persuade the reader to see a definition in another way. They can do this by trying to make a point using an unusual perspective. It is important to format this type of essay by first: introducing the claim second: Present criteria (include the opposition) third: Present a match

Causal- There is three ways you can go about writing a causal argument. You can use speculation or ideas/theories of what caused a particular event to occur. Secondly there is to use a unexpected approach to the cause of an event. The idea is to surprise the reading using unknown or uncommon information. Lastly prediction, this allows the author to persuade the author to give into their ideals to normally prevent what they predict. All of these ways can be explain step by step in an essay or through the use of inductive reasoning.