Rhetorical Happiness

“The Spoils of Happiness”, written by David Sosa of the New York Times, consists of a commentary on happiness: its attributes, and how to attain it. Digging deep into what causes happiness, Sosa concludes that happiness is not a state of mind, but rather depends on external influence. Happiness, a complex issue, can be very difficult to write about in an influential way; the irrational nature makes it very difficult to create any generalization about the issue. Sosa takes on this challenge by using strong rhetorical techniques such as a sympathetic tone, intellectual diction, powerful rhetorical questions, emotional analogies and insightful allusions to establish a strong ethos, pathos and logos: ultimately increasing the believability and overall strength of his complex claim, happiness is not a state of mind.

Happiness is a state of mind or feeling characterized by contentment, love, satisfaction, pleasure, or joy.^[1] A variety of biological, psychological, religious, and philosophical approaches have striven to define happiness and identify its sources.

Allusion: connecting with the reader

The article begins with a historical example based off an experiment done by Robert Nozick. Sosa describes this experiment as a machine that could give a person any experience desired by changing her perception of reality. After immersing the reader in this radical scenario, Sosa ends sharply with his thesis for the article. By suddenly concluding the opening paragraph with the claim “Happiness is not a state of mind.”, the reader, still unaware of where the article is going, feels inclined to read on, desiring to find out how this scenario pertains to happiness. Sosa’s initial use of this analogy plays as not only the base source for his argument, but as a subliminal device used to draw on the ignorance of the reader about the subject matter.

Sosa continues the article by alluding to things such as “The Matrix”, in order to better bring his claim down to the eyes of the reader. By contrasting the abstract experimental scenario to something as simple and popular as “The Matrix”, Sosa is able to first, draw on the reader’s ignorance--establishing ethos--to later bring his argument to a more emotional level that contains things more familiar and personnel to the reader. By placing both of these allusions right at the beginning of the article, he is able to depend heavily on early pathos and ethos in his claim, allowing him to get the most out of a powerful transition into the logos required to prove his abstract point.

The Opinion Shaping Rhetorical Question

Sosa begins his next paragraph with a strong, somewhat ambiguous question: “What is happiness?”. A strong ethos already established, he uses newly introduced questions to get the reader thinking. By specifically designing his questions to push towards a certain opinion, Sosa allows the reader to draw guided conclusions based upon questions the reader can answer in her mind (rather than giving an outright explanation of his hypothesis). The creative process incorporated by the reader, involving thinking up her own question-guided conclusion, helps further Sosa’s ethos as well as the argument’s pathos. The use of rhetorical questions allows the reader to feel as if, she, on her own, thought up the conclusion; this makes the issue much more personnel to the reader when Sosa seems to agree.

Likewise, Sosa also goes on to use rhetorical questions as a way to put pressure on the reader to make up her mind. By planting three complicated questions in a row, the reader feels pressure to have some sort of opinion formed on the issue. Immediately after placing new pressure on the reader, Sosa provides a common answer to the questions: one that parallels his claim. Sosa first flusters the reader into desiring her own, personnel, opinion then gives a common answer; he plays on the minds of readers who are, at the time, undecided on the issue. By providing a logical answer right after stirring up a need for a decision, most readers tend to follow the “common” opinion: the one expressed in the article. In turn, Sosa uses rhetorical questions to spark emotion in the reader, motivating her to make a conclusion about the issue. Relying heavily on his previously established ethos, Sosa uses the rhetorical question to further increase the pathos of the issue.

Simplifying Through Analogy

As the article continues, Sosa begins to introduce analogies in order to further the logos of the argument; the effectiveness of this new turn plays heavily on the already established pathos and ethos. The reader, after already feeling as if she is being taught by a superior, is hit yet again by a device that further simplifies the claim, better helping to bring the idea down to the reader’s level. Sosa plays on the simplistic logic of his analogies (such as in a fire saving your neighbor or your pencil, but not both) to highlight the seemingly rational aspect of his claim. As a result, the reader seems to disregard the irrationality of the subject when forming a, seemingly apparent, “logically sensical” opinion.

Sosa goes on to relate the difference between pleasure and happiness by comparing it to the life of a drug addict. By using an analogy with powerfully negative connotations, Sosa is able to play on the emotional and logical aspect of proving his point. Readers find it easier to agree with reasons to not act like a drug dealer than reasons to agree with the claim of the article, yet by bringing the same logic in through analogous terms, readers are much more inclined to sympathize with the writer. However, this strategy of analogous logic would not have worked had it not been for the effective ethos priorly established. Sosa relies on his stature and superior image to persuade the reader that his claim is, in essence, just as logical as any one of his analogies. In this article, the use of the analogy is the most important technique employed for establishing the magnitude of logos required to convince readers of this irrational, abstract claim.

Tone: The Relationship Between Writer and Reader

Furthermore, Sosa uses a sympathetic tone to better improve the audiences’ feelings towards the issue. He portrays his argument in a very relatable way by drawing on both the abstract nature of his argument, and the general connection human beings with desiring happiness. Since most readers have little actual qualification concerning the discussion of the true science behind happiness, Sosa is able to sacrifice some ethos by using a less formal, yet more relatable tone--hereby greatly increasing pathos. By continually guiding the reader to express unique personnel beliefs, not generalizing opinions, and using a style of language typical to an informal, relaxed conversation, Sosa is able to present his opinion in a way that makes an emotional impact without forcing ideas on people. The tone choice allows the article, as a whole, to feel as if it were a simple day-to-day conversation between people of equal stature and knowledge. This allows the reader to feel unintimidated by the speaker, and sympathetic to the authors ideas; the reader and the author seem to feel as if they are going through the same struggle to find happiness. The use of such sympathetic diction allows the reader to better connect to Sosa’s writing, increasing the likelihood the reader will want to believe the claim. By creating a positive association with the reader, Sosa is able to increase his rhetorical influence, further increasing the pathos of the argument.

A Perfect Balance is Not Always the Answer

Overall, Sosa constructed his claim and argument very well. Sosa chose to focus his tactics primarily on gaining pathos. Perhaps the biggest reason why he did this is the complexity of the claim made. Since happiness is an irrational feeling, it seems logical to play most heavily on readers’ emotions. Sosa also noticed the importance of establishing a good ethos. This came up as crucially important to make up for what little logos was established. Had Sosa maintained no ethos, the few logical reasons for his claim could easily have gone undermined, or disregarded. Logos lacked immensely in the argument, yet didn’t seem to change the effectiveness of the claim. Sosa’s style makes it evident that he believes the presence of such an irrational claim makes it difficult, and rather unnecessary to provide immense logical support. While not completely rounded, Sosa’s claim, through use of numerous obscure and powerful rhetorical devices, proves incredibly effective in establishing a good opinionated argument concerning a very complex and irrational claim: happiness is not a state of mind.

HRC Petition

Sex, politics, and religion are three topics that should not be discussed at the dinner table (or anywhere else for that matter.) It is very rare that one can express his or her opinion on one of these issues without accusations, disagreements, and plain misunderstanding from the opposing side. On October 4, 2010, the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) filed a petition including 150,000 signatures, which spoke out against a talk given by Elder Boyd K. Packer, a leader in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. In his talk, Packer reinforced the Church’s viewpoint that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God. Although Packer intended for his words to inspire and remind Mormons to keep the commandments of God, many people misunderstood his intentions. His words were misinterpreted and many viewed his remarks as detrimental towards gays and lesbians.

In the HRC petition, David Melson, Executive Director of Affirmation: Gay and Lesbian Mormons, said, "Elder Packer's remarks in General Conference were not only ill-advised and contrary to fact, but were mean-spirited and will be perceived by many as bullying. We see no potential for good coming from his words and much possible damage, to the Church, to individuals, and to families. The LDS Church should be a source of love, compassion, and conciliation, and not of fear and unfeeling petty hatred."

Contrary to the Melson’s belief, the LDS Church is in fact a source of love and compassion. On October 12, 2010, Michael Otterson, a representative of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, gave an address regarding the petition. Through his words, he successfully expressed the viewpoints of the Church and its’ position regarding the issue through a variety of rhetorical tactics. By focusing on love, using doctrinal references, and reaching a common ground between different groups in the audience, Otterson was able to deliver his address in an effective and successful manner.

Otterson states that the doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is based on love and this become an underlying theme in his address. True to the Faith, an informational resource book published by the LDS Church, reminds that we are all children of God. The world is full of many different types of people, but if we remember that we are all brothers and sisters, this realization can “transcend all boundaries of nation, creed, and color.”

Because there are varying types of people, there are some who claim that they are attracted to the same sex and that those feelings were inborn. However, a key point to Otterson’s address is that there is a difference between having these feelings and acting upon them. Although the feelings may in fact be inborn, in the end, it is our decision whether or not we are going to act on those feelings and give in to temptation. Corinthians 10:13 says we will not be tempted more than we can handle. This means that even if someone is born with an attraction to the same sex then they are able to overcome these feelings. However, this is easier said than done. Otterson acknowledges this by saying, “There is no question that this is difficult, but Church leaders and members are available to help lift, support and encourage fellow members who wish to follow Church doctrine.” He emphasizes that although life is full of difficulties, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is one to help others through these difficulties.

Despite the strict viewpoints of the LDS Church, Otterson recognizes that everyone is able to make their own decisions and not everyone will choose to follow the Church’s established guidelines. By doing this, he recognizes that the Church’s standards won’t be accepted by all, yet the Church will be acceptant of all people. Jesus Christ, whom member of the Church believe in and follow teachings of, commanded to love one another. Otterson reminds that this is one of the underlying concepts of the Church. Throughout the address, the example of Christ is brought up and the reminder that the LDS Church focuses on love is emphasized. Because a lot of people are in favor of showing love, this is a rhetorical strategy used by Otterson.

Throughout the address, Otterson establishes a ground of credibility that clearly gives justification for the words spoken by Elder Packer. He directly states the Church’s doctrinal belief which outlines to non-member’s why we have the viewpoints that we do. He says, “As a church, our doctrinal position is clear: any sexual activity outside of marriage is wrong, and we define marriage as between a man and a woman.” These beliefs come from The Family: A Proclamation to the World. This proclamation given by leaders of the LDS Church blatantly says that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Members of the Church aren’t simply making up their own ideas of what’s “right”, they are following the words of counsel given by their prophets. This rhetorical strategy gives credibility to Otterson. Because he is a representative of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, he is acting under the direction of the Church’s prophet and therefore the things he is saying are true.

Even though Otterson uses an abundance of religious references, he balances out his claims with mentioning the HRC as well. Because he is speaking to a wide audience, he is careful to appeal to each type of person. Otterson does a good job of staking a common ground between members of the LDS Church and the rest of the world, especially gays and lesbians. In his introductory remarks, he acknowledges that there have recently been “tragic deaths across the country as a result of bullying or intimidation of gay young men.” Although the Church does not agree with homosexuality, Otterson says that that should never be the cause of unkindness. The LDS Church does not support any level of cruelty “whether those differences arise from race, religion, mental challenges, social status, sexual orientation or for any other reason.” By making it clear that Mormons are accepting of all types of people, Otterson is able to get his point across in a more effective and all-encompassing manner. Instead of people simply being upset at the Mormons because they are Mormon, they can be more understanding that we have good intentions. After recognizing this, others can make a more educated stand on the viewpoints of the religion.

In Michael Otterson’s address in regards to the HRC petition, many rhetorical tactics were used to get his point across. He acknowledged that not everyone will agree with the Church’s standpoint but states that “We (as a Church) hope that any disagreement will be based on a full understanding of our position and not on distortion or selective interpretation.” By accurately explaining the viewpoints of the Church while focusing on love, using a doctrinal approach, and reaching a common ground between the members of the audience, Otterson is successfully able to deliver his address and increase awareness of the issue at hand.

Dove Critique

So here’s the visual formatting vision that has yet to be implemented: each section will be bolded and sectioned off with some kind of visual image next to it. I may mess around with the order as well.

Dove Movement for Real Beauty

Use of Visuals To Influence Audience and how it’s tailored to that audience
Colors:
this website used a predominantly light blue color scheme. The blue serves to link this page with Dove’s larger one that is a darker blue (link here). Also, because it is a light blue, it is associated with children as all pastels are (source and link). Infact, the color blue itself is associated with trust, serenity, and communication (souce and link). The only extremely noticeable instance where blue is not used is the hyperlink to a video, where the font color is pink. This is clearly meant to draw the eye.

Shapes:
The basic layout for the site consists of a blank shaded background. On top of this are boxes that hold the actual content. Each of these boxes has rounded edges. Again, this creates a softer look to encourage nurturing, motherhood, etc. Additionally, each of these boxes has a border to help it pop out against the background as well as drop shadows. Additionally, where the background is almost white with subtle grey shading, the boxes, where white, are pure white to create contrast.

All of these boxes are spaced according to the law of threes [link text to a site about this] (for whatever reason, groupings of three are more appealing to the eye). There is then a hierarch of size and place on the page in order of importance (or what the web designers want you to see/do first). The largest and most central box is that with the logo and image that implores you to “join the movement” with a few lines of text and a photo. The next largest is centrally located, but below the larger box. It links the viewer to a short video illustrating the need for this movement.

Other:
There is a column (? it’s horizontal) in the middle with moving text that lists women who have “just joined the movement”. The moving text draws the eye.
There is an image of a woman and child, to clearly implicate that it is mothers who need to be good role models and help their children have high self esteem. Actually, there are two of these images, on of a caucasian woman and child and another of an African American mother and child, so multiple ethnicities are included. Not included in ethnicities shown are Asian and Hispanic (in fact, the dove website only has an English and a French version for the US and Canada, no Spanish. This severely limits the number dove is able to reach with the large Hispanic population in the US).
One recurring image that does not relate to children of self esteem is a dandelion whose seeds are blowing away in the wind. This is a useful graphic because, by using the flying seeds, you can direct the viewers eye to follow the line created by the seeds. As an image, it demonstrates simplicity and beauty. Despite its beauty however, the dandelion does not have the clear link to the subject matter that the photos of people do and is not truly relevant.
The Argument
The mission of Dove Movement (link) is to build the self esteem of young women, specifically 13-year-olds. They want you to join (link text of join)! But should you? Has their use of multi media rhetoric been so masterful that you are helpless in the sight of the blue text that will bind you to this organization after a quick questionnaire on your age and email? After breaking down the rhetoric of this website, I found that there was definitely room for improvement, but I will admit, I joined them in the end.

The strongest appeal that Dove makes is to pathos, relying on mothers’ (and most women’s) urge to nurture and care for others, especially children. The single most persuasive tool on this website is a short video (put video along side text here) that depicts a mother and two young girls. This video clearly shows the problem (a five-year-old who’s embarrassed to have dimples), but then shows the solution (another 5-year-old tells the first that she thinks her dimples are cute). Through out the video, a mother (or adult woman who’s watching the children in any case) presides over this.

This video shows us two ways in which we can “get involved with the movement”, by teaching children to love their selves (both their outward appearance and their selves as people) and by creating environments where we can have these conversations. Also, because the children are younger (most of the text on the website actually refers to 13-year-olds) we are naturally more protective of them (link for a source that supports this statement).

Another interesting page (buried amid the boring toolbar next to press contact information and partners) is the blog (link). It is here that Dove issues the challenge to spend 60 minutes with a girl and talk about beauty/self esteem. This is effective because it appeals to logos “only sixty minutes” (use of diction”only” makes it seem like less time, as does using minutes instead of hours). It also shares interesting stories that Dove has selected (and written in some cases) personal narratives about self esteem. While a wonderful page, the navigation to get here is terrible! The design of the homepage has a clear hierarchy, using colors, graphics, and size to draw the eye. This link has only a plain blue (not even bolded) link to “blog” in the corner.

Unfortunately, the Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page is less effective [link FAQ page]. The questions are well chosen (they were certainly the questions that I had), but they are not well answered. Instead of specific detailed answers, all that dove has to offer is a reiteration of the general goal of the movement. For example “What does joining the Movement actually do?”(link text) the answer (paraphrased) is ‘you will become part of a community making a difference on issues of self-esteem and real beauty’. While true, this statement is so general that it has next to no meaning! Without context we could even assume that Dove is purporting that cosmetics for younger children is the answer! Clearly, this is not the case, and the FAQ section could be strengthened and clarified.

The Action
The goal of the Dove Movement is to foster awareness and encourage dialogue about self esteem and “real beauty”. Because of this, it differs from several other websites that seek community involvement. For example, Doctors With Out Borders [link] has pages upon pages detailing what they are doing where encouraging you to join and donate. In contrast, Dove authors a modest website with around ten pages total. The only active thing you can do from the site is to post “what would you tell a 13-year-old” or “What Do You Wish You’d Known at 13?” in 125 characters or less or find a self esteem seminar (for October 22-24). From there it is up to the viewer to “take the challenge” and move the discussion off of the internet and to the women in their lives. At first, I found this strategy annoying, because I wanted something I could do without getting up from my computer. This is not Dove’s goal! Their website is designed as a short pep talk to get people out there. Whether or not it is effective is up for debate.

Let Them Eat Cake!

Introduction:

                Cake. Contained in that one, four-letter word is a myriad of meanings, memories, and magic that nearly everyone can identify with. Cake is a band, hygiene is helped along by cakes of soap, tests are (hopefully) a piece of cake. However, the greatest and most recognizable form of cake is that of the most versatile dessert in the world. Birthday cake, Bundt cake, get-well-soon cake, wedding cake, cupcakes, and on and on and on.

                That’s one of the beauties of cake: versatility. Chocolate, yellow, red velvet, white, Devil’s food, carrot. It can be decorated for Halloween, baby showers, Christmas, spring, Mother’s Day, or reunions. You can choose buttercream frosting, royal frosting, fondant, or ganache. Accents could be sprinkles, edible flowers, plastic figures, candles, and photos printed on edible icing-paper with food coloring. Seriously, I could go on making lists and series until next November. Cake, when decorated well, can celebrate anything.

                And when it’s decorated badly, it can be highly entertaining.

                Enter Jen Yates, mastermind behind food blog phenomenon Cake Wrecks. It all started with one photo, a bakery-ordered cake with badly mangled wording (Best Wishes Suzanne/Under Neat that/We will miss you) that happened to be circulating the viral email track. Yates decided to put it on a blog with a witty caption and since then, the project exploded.

                Most of the cakes featured on Cake Wrecks are reader-submitted, meaning that all Yates has to do is sit around, check her email, and then formulate some of the funniest and wittiest commentary on badly-decorated cakes the internet has ever seen. Of course the big draw is the funny photos, but it’s the captions that really make the blog one you will want to visit again and again.

Thesis:

                Outside of the overarching rhetorical use of visuals, Jen Yates makes the photographs of badly-decorated cakes even more hilarious through her use of allusion, sarcasm, and dialogue.

Examples:

                Allusion – Far Side of the Wreck http://cakewrecks.blogspot.com/2010/07/far-side-of-wreck.html

                Sarcasm – Come on Barbie, Let’s go Partyhttp://cakewrecks.blogspot.com/2009/02/come-on-barbie-lets-go-party.html

                Dialogue – USB Cake http://cakewrecks.blogspot.com/2009/01/problem-with-phone-orders.html

Thousands of Girls Match Description of Missing Sorority Sister

Television newscasts have long been seen as a convenient, and accessible medium for the American public to stay informed and up –to-date. Trusted networks such as Fox and CNN deliver news stories that range from political updates to social phenomena. Most of these news sources choose to deliver their newscasts both on television and in an online digital format, allowing for greater ease of access and therefore increased exposure. The Onion, one such online news provider, enables its audience to experience a refreshing take on today’s current events in both print and video formats.

Recently, the Onion News Network (or ONN) featured a video entitled “Thousands of Girls Match Description of Missing Sorority Sister.” Presented in this video format, the story takes on a familiar feel, as the viewers take in a serious and professional reporter framed by a very realistic looking newsroom. Just as one would expect, a series of updates stream across the bottom of the screen, boasting such titles as “TYLER PERRY MARRIES HIMSELF DRESSED AS A WOMAN,“ “HAPPENING NOW IN SEATTLE: TERRIFIED SPIDER SCREAMS RIGHT BACK AT WOMAN,” and “BLACK & DECKER INTRODUCES PAPER SHREDDER SHREDDER FOR EXTREME PARANOIDS.”

The story addresses the difficulty facing the Columbus Police Department in finding a missing Ohio State University student. Jessica Hagan is described as a member of the Kappa Alpha Theta sorority who was last seen wearing “a tank top, Ugg boots, and blue Victoria Secret pajama pants with the word pink written across the back.” The report continues by noting that the police had received over 13,000 tips, all of which had led them to other students matching the exact same description. If there is one thing to be said about the Onion, they get to the point. The website is full of stories that are characterized by extraordinarily blunt messages, presented in manner that takes the opposing side, yet leaves no doubt about the real message.

By virtue of navigating to theonion.com, it is assumed that one will have a sense of humor, and will most likely be relatively young. College students would therefore be one subset of the target audience, and would almost certainly find a great deal of humor laced with undeniable truths in this video. While only artificial appeals to ethos, pathos, and logos are evident within the story itself, the result is one of real rhetorical influence on viewers. In quoting various “reliable” sources, the onion establishes an excess of logical appeals. One quote notes that the Columbus Police had come to the conclusion that they would release Jessica’s complete DNA sequence, as they had determined that “at a certain point, it literally becomes the only way to tell.”

It is fairly common knowledge that truly great humor stems from observations based on real life experiences and known truths. Seinfeld, a show about nothing, features the day-to-day lives and comedian Jerry Seinfeld and his friends. Many of Jerry’s most well-known quotes are simply well-said observations.

“I once had a leather jacket that got ruined in the rain. Why does moisture ruin leather? Aren't cows outside a lot of the time? When it's raining, do cows go up to the farmhouse, "Let us in! We're all wearing leather! Open the door! We're going to ruin the whole outfit here!" 


Everyone knows those girls, and everyone can appreciate the humor in the police descriptions of Jessica Hagan. After the initial list of Jessica’s attributes only led police to thousands of girls fitting the exact same description, they managed to create a list that further narrowed down the search, allowing police to sift through the multitudes of girls who turned themselves in thinking they might be Hagan. The new list is displayed on the screen and features things like “always ready to have fun but is also really organized,” “bedazzled iphone case,” and “describes herself as ‘such a dork.’” Just as the caption on the screen informs viewers that, “sightings place Jessica at hundreds of possible locations within 15 minutes disappearance,” it is easy for people to think of multiple people that would easily fit Jessica’s descriptions.

At some point, however, it is necessary to look deeper than the surface level humor, and uncover what this video really says about our culture and society. At best, this “news story” is an entertaining portrayal of the absurdity and one-dimensionality of today’s young women; at worst, a disturbing commentary on an increasing trend that represents the decay of female decency, maturity, and intellectuality. No matter how you choose to look at it, there is certainly something to be said for the accuracy of the story as a moral and societal commentary.

As if the overlying theme of a lack of identity for today’s young adults (“Jessica was last seen with OSU fraternity brother: either this man, this man, this man, this man... or this man”), the story subtly gets to the heart of another problem in our society- the decline of familial relationships. Although it plays a small part in the story, and would be easily missed by many, the caption that reads “Jessica’s Mother: ‘Please help us find Jen, I mean Jess,” speaks volumes. While an extreme example, this appeal to ethos invokes an initial response of laughter, followed soon after by the realization that, as with all things Onion, there is some measure of truth behind the humor. The statement by Jen, I mean Jess’s mother could be taken to mean a variety of things. Certainly it furthers the representation of Jessica Hagan as a girl without an identity - someone who no one can seem to recognize. In addition, however, it sheds light on the ignorance of parents with regards to their children’s whereabouts and goings-on.

The fact of the matter is that the Onion has taken audience awareness to a whole new level. The writers of these news stories know what it is their readers care about, what will make them laugh, what will make them think, and what will make them come begging for more. In their crusade to capture the hearts and funny bones of their audience, the Onion displays a mastery of rhetorical devices and strategies that allow for a greater level of success in the online world. Rich with irony, and satire, it is not a source to which one would go for an accurate and straightforward representation of current events. On the contrary, the Onion would most likely be the last place someone would look on such occasions. If, however, a reader were looking to experience and enjoy a fresh twist on social, political, and a variety of other issues, this would be an excellent source to seek out. It is not an easy thing to effectively deliver a message using blatant satire and sarcasm. In fact, it takes a considerable amount of rhetorical proficiency, and the Onion has proved their qualifications on this note time and time again.

a home and a house

America is a land built upon foundations of hard work and the sacrifice many generations have made before present day. It is a country proud of its heritage, which is filled with heroes and heroines that have changed many lives, the present and future, by their inspirational actions. Many of these heroes have arisen because an outside force required it of them. They had to adapt to the situation to survive. Great people can arise from the dust of catastrophe and hurt. The Great Depression, Pearl Harbor, and 9/11 are just a few examples of a crisis that produced heroes and in way unified the American people behind a single banner. Throughout these catastrophes one powerful documenting technique has set itself apart from writing and reporting. That is, the power of photography. Photography had played a huge role in major events since the discovery of the camera. Mother of Seven, Rosenthal’s picture of the flag raising of Iwo Jima, and other pictures have had a change on the very fabric of the crisis and influenced it for the better. However, a crisis has arisen in present that is hard to photograph. That is, the recession that America’s economy has suffered and to some degree is still experiencing. Paul Reyes writes about this difficulty and the difference between the housing crisis and other crises. It is harder to capture images of a recession in where most of it is happening in banks and on computer screens than it is to picture homeless people on the street. He focuses on one aspect that has shown some positive results in the photography section of reporting. It is that of the housing crisis.

Paul Reyes is a writer for the New York Times. His means of getting his message across to the general public are about as good as it gets. His article speaks to such large audience, printed for the entire nation through a prestigious paper. He does an excellent job of orienting the reader with how photographers have documented crisis in the past, such as the Great Depression. He cites historical examples of many photos and photographers that transformed photography into an art. He uses common images and paints the pictures in the reader’s minds, powerful pictures that show much more that what is on the paper. With that still fresh in the brain of the reader, he goes into the harder to picture great recession.

The article then speaks of how in times past, inspirational pictures have come from images of humans. In this instance, it comes from the half completed houses and the empty ones. This speaks to the nature of humanity. Ever since the beginning of time, home and safety have been a priority. In Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, home provides the first two needs: food and safety. Only then can the other needs and other levels be achieved. This need for a home base to recharge and regroup to go back in to the world is achieved with a house. The first thing a newlywed groom does is carry his bride over the threshold of their new home. Homes are associated with happiness and success. People put hundreds of thousands of dollars into homes, with features such as pools, king sized beds, and walk in closets. In terms of financial spending, it is one of the most expensive investments that every person tries to make. In American society today, houses stand for much more than just a house. It represents family, security, a place of rest, and a place of relaxation. It almost goes against human nature to see a empty homes. An empty shell can speak much to a passerby. Paul Reyes focuses on this. While this recession is not one of breadlines and gas lines, it is a recession that can speak just as powerfully as the Great Depression. Bare walls. Half finished homes- and dreams. This appeals to a sensitive side of the reader. When thinking of what I want in my life, a house is near the top of the list. I see the pictures and read the article and worry what is to become of me and my future family. This is what Paul Reyes is trying to do. His audience is the American, and the New York Times is well suited to carry it to every one of us. His tone is one of somberness, but of beauty. His purpose in writing is to find something beyond the empty homes, the holes in the wall, and the scratches on the table. Every person has a story, and every house has had a person. His article suggests that this theme of being half completed impacts the reader more than a picture where everything seems to be explained. The viewer’s mind is left to wonder who walked through the doors of a foreclosed house. What kids played in the yard. How many memories that were made in that very room? Again, Paul Reyes is an excellent writer, in that he gets to the very heart of the reader. He talks of something that appeals so much to the reader they are forced to care.

He goes on and analyzes different photographer’s takes on the crisis. Some focus on the whole house, while some focus on little parts in houses. What speaks more to the reader? It depends on the reader’s experiences with what is being pictured. Some photographers focus on the house as a whole. Again, this appeals to the reader in a way nothing else could. When first turning the corner of the street where my house is, by little sister exclaims with excitement. The image of our house is burnt into her mind as a place of refuge. Some photographers focus on little things in the house. The example is given in the article of an empty room with a lone lamp standing in the corner, or a plastic hanger laying in the carpet. These forgotten homes speak of forgotten dreams, rudely awakened by the harsh reality of the housing crisis. The sequence of pictures is also very important too. Showing a shot of the outside of a house does not clue the reader into what is inside, while shots of the inside do not show the true framework of the house. Some shots are even arranged. Whatever the case, all try to influence the viewer just as any movie or book would.

This crisis is tragic. As a college student, this article speaks to me as well. I am about to go into a profession where I want to be successful. Success can be defined many different ways. For me, part of success is providing a decent home for my family to live together in. A place where they can feel safe and sound, and know there is love there. Obviously a house is essential to this plan.

Love: The Greatest Form of Rhetoric

On October 13, 2010 the Human Rights Commission delivered a petition with over 150, 000 signatures opposing the comments made by President Boyd K. Packer of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in the recent October Semi-Annual General Conference. President Packer’s comments concerning gay marriage came at a sensitive time for many individuals, especially within the United States. The Church released a statement proclaiming their determination to not back down on their position but also expressing their love and respect for all individuals involved. By using love as the motivation for their message and an effective form of rhetoric, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints strove to portray themselves to the world not as a hateful body of anti-homosexuals but as a respectful, honorable and Christian organization.

Michael Otterson, managing director of Public Affairs for the LDS church, delivered the statement to a room of reporters. Dressed in a modest suit and tie, Otterson typified the type of individual whom the church wanted the world to associate with the LDS faith. Dignified and respected worldwide, Otterson expressed the church’s point of view with sincerity. The choice of Otterson as deliverer of the response to the HRC was a rhetorical move by church leadership, whether intended or not. Otterson has a reputation among the press of being fair and just in his judgments. Besides his position in the LDS church, Otterson is also the author of a blog published by the Washington Post. When Otterson stood to deliver the church’s message, the press viewed the statement in a new light. There stood one of their own, one whom they knew by reputation and, for many, personally. Besides the reputation of the church, Otterson’s reputation now backed the words he said.

The United States has recently been hit by an emerging wave of disturbing effects from anti-gay and anti-lesbian bullying. It has resulted in several suicides and pain for many individuals and their families. It was into this environment that President Boyd K. Packer’s comments were broadcast, and many immediately took offense. Blunt and powerful, many interpreted his remarks as insensitive and cruel. The LDS church opened their statement with an expression of sympathy and love towards all those who have suffered because of their sexual orientation. It is followed by words of condemnation for those who inflict pain upon anyone because of their differences.

Mormons are different. The church states that the LDS people have long felt the same type of suffering that many homosexuals feel. Isolation and loneliness, the victims of misconceptions and stereotypes, these are all things that Mormons have experienced. Love is again brought into play. Everyone has felt the deep connection that comes from shared experiences. By calling to attention these mutual experiences, the LDS church strives to find common ground with victims who have taken offense and help them see that they aren’t so different after all. With common ground, individuals are more willing to hear the words being said with an open mind.

At the same time, church leaders were addressing those members of the church who might have uncharitable feelings towards homosexuals. A common saying in Mormon culture is that the church is true, but the people sometimes aren’t. By making statements such as these, church leadership encourage Latter-day Saints everywhere to share the same stance, to not judge but to love.

After making appeals to the gay community, the church then uses the ultimate example of love and compassion, Jesus Christ, to appeal to Christians in general. Many Christians believe that Mormons are going against the doctrine of Christ by speaking out against homosexuals and gay marriage. Many former Mormons, who left the church because of their sexual orientation, feel that the Church is being hateful towards them and therefore hypocritical in their own beliefs. Love again enters the rhetoric of the conversation. After firmly stating the fact that Christ Himself spoke out against same-sex attraction and sexual relations, the press release immediately followed with words of love. Christ was never cruel, and Mormons, according to church leadership, should not be and, as a policy, are not either. While disagreeing with an individual’s actions, the goal of the LDS church is to not respect that individual or love that individual any less than they would if their sexual preferences and choices were different. True Christ-like love is unconditional. While none of us is perfect, LDS leadership showed through their references to Christ that they are striving to keep his commandment to love one another. By clarifying their determination to love, the statement portrayed LDS to other Christians not as hypocrites but as disciples of Christ.

In response to the Human Rights Commission’s demands that The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints retract the statement’s made by President Boyd. K, Packer, the church made it very clear that it was in no way backing down on its position or denying its beliefs and doctrine. The statement declares, “Any sexual activity outside of marriage is wrong, and we define marriage as between a man and a woman.” This stance has caused much negative publicity to arise concerning the LDS church in recent years. The vote that took place on the infamous Proposition 8 in California is one instance where homosexuals felt the church was attacking their lifestyle and their rights. Otterson, on behalf of the church, reminds those who harbor grudges against the Mormons that although they do not support gay marriage, they do support other rights for those who feel same-sex attraction. This was a rhetorical attempt to show individuals that not only does the church feel love for them, but it will also put that love into action when their rights are in danger. However, there are no apologies given for what the church has said and done in opposition of gay marriage, and there is no inclination shown to give any.

It may seem odd to look at refusal to apologize as an expression of love or rhetorical technique; however, it is an effective tool that is sometimes forgotten or overlooked. The individuals that we most respect in life are those that never back down. Many times, we admire people we disagree with personally because they are so strongly devoted to their cause. Respect is a form of love, and indeed as humans we tend to eventually love those we most respect. The firm statements given concerning the irreversible doctrine of the LDS church are meant to clearly explain the doctrine to the world in hopes that when understood, it will foster respect not resentment.

Many who signed the Human Rights Commission’s petition were in disagreement with Mormon doctrine. Ironically enough, just as many homosexuals are the victims of misconceptions, the LDS church is often cited for believing in doctrine that doesn’t actually exist. One purpose of the press release is obviously to clarify and define church doctrine officially and then respond with love. While explicitly stating that same-sex attraction is against church doctrine, the statement offers up ways that individuals who feel this attraction can still be active participants in the church and receive loving help and guidance from church leaders.

The final sentence of the LDS response sums up the entire outlook of church officials: “We hope and firmly believe that within this community, and in others, kindness, persuasion and goodwill can prevail.” Kindness, persuasion and goodwill – all mean showing love. The Human Rights Commission’s petition was sent because individuals felt that the church was expressing feelings of hate. The purpose of the response was to assure these individuals that the Mormons strive to feel only feelings of love towards the homosexual community. Love is said to overcome all boundaries, and there are times that no amount of rhetoric can replace what occurs because of love. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints’ response to the HRC petition shows that love is indeed a form of rhetoric.

Prison or Pardon?

The Thesis: The author uses a variety of techniques of ethos, pathos, and logos to convince his audience to be in favor of the plight of two sisters currently petitioning for a pardon from incarceration.

The Hook: The New York Times article “The Mississippi Pardons” by Bob Herbert, is an editorial trying to persuade the reader that the release of Jamie and Gladys Scott by Mississippi governor Haley Barbour from serving double life sentences in prison is not only an act of compassion, but morally correct and absolutely necessary.

The Story: The sister were said to have persuaded two men to a rural area outside of Forest, Mississippi in 1993 where the men were robbed by three teenagers who Jamie and Gladys knew. A total of $11 dollars were taken and no one was harmed.

Why we care: Governor Barbour has already pardoned 5 men, all with charges of murder, from their life sentences. They had all previously been a prison program that let them help out at the Governor's mansion. If he's already pardoned these men, why not the two sisters??

What rhetorical devices are at play?

Ethos:

• The information in the article is not specific, with few direct quotes. This could lead to decreased credibility because of the ambiguous sources of information. Your average Joe might not car, but your average New York Times reader will. They might not really care about the issue if they don't think the information is reliable. However, the New York Times has also been described as a more liberal paper, so the readers could have strong opinions for the sisters to be released because of the type of information they are used to seeing in the paper.

Pathos:

• The first emotional appeal comes in the author's noting that one of the sisters, Jamie, is suffering severely from medial problems, with both her kidneys having failed. The sisters are pleading that Jamie will most likely die in prison because of her health problems. This may strike a chord with the readers, because almost everyone knows someone with a horribly painful medical condition and knows the hardship that the situation puts you in. More people will want to root for the sisters release because they want them to have time to live before she dies.

• Another well employed appeal to the emotions of the readers is the quote at the end of the article form the sisters' mother, saying, “I wish they would just hurry up and let them out. I hope that is where it is leading to. That would be the only justified thing to do.” Everyone has a mother or a mother-like figure in their lives that they respect and admire, a woman they would do anything for. By putting the mother's quote in the article, the author reaches into that sentimental pocket and pulls out a deep emotional pull that the readers feel, making them want to sympathize with the mother and help her get her children back.

• The diction that the author uses make his opinion clear, and also helps to persuade the reader that there is “only one real choice.” Phrases such as “unconscionable and grotesquely inhumane,” “unquestionably committed shockingly brutal crimes,” “dangerous abuses of executive power,” and “beyond disturbing” are examples of the type of writing the author uses to make his point. These words put the situation in a “black or white” light, displaying good and evil, with no gray in between. These make the reader feel like it is their moral responsibility to favor the sisters and support them however they can. Readers that do not immediately take the sisters' side might even be criticized as cruel and without a heart.

• I was interested to see that this author did not add a quote from Benjamin Jealous, the president of the NAACP who said, “It is a travesty that in the state of Mississippi, the lives of two Black women are valued at little more than 11 dollars.” I think the author did this for a purpose. To me, I feel this is a little outrageous. Yes, the sisters are African American, but I'm hoping that doesn't have a whole lot to do with the matter and is irrelevant to the case. Also, as president of the NAACP, I'm pretty sure he has to say something to that effect.

Logos:

• The author readily puts forth his opinion of the matter: it's ridiculous that the woman aren't out of jail yet. He thinks of the sentence as ridiculous and says that the choice for the governor should be an easy one. He shows the ridiculousness of the whole scenario by giving us the facts that mitigate the involvement of the sisters in an order that starts with the main idea, showing the big picture, getting us on the sisters' side, then filling in the details, which only add to the sisters' case.

• Another appeal to logic is the governor's track record – he's already pardoned 5 convicted murderers. Why then would he have a problem releasing two middle-aged women who were only accomplices to the robbery? It also brings up a point of controversy that further weakens the governor: all the pardoned men had been in a program that allowed them to wor in the governor's mansion. This bit of information leaves us to wonder whether the governor pardoned them for aboveboard reasons.

• The juxtaposition of the sisters' double life sentence to the sentence of the teens who actually robbed the victims (2 years) serves to further the authors point that the sentence placed upon the sisters is ridiculous and that it should be rescinded as soon as possible. In my opinion, the author is so against the sentence placed upon these sisters, that after the governor has pardoned the sisters, he should make them homemade cookies and write an apology letter as well.

• The way the information in the article is presented is a logical appeal in itself. After the first paragraph, the odds are already stacked in favor of the two sisters. We are already in the rhetorical clutches of the author, who has set up his article in the best way possible to keep our interest and our opinion in his plan; he reels in his readers by telling them the obvious solution, then uses supporting information to back it up while subtly attacking the opposing side of the situation. This grabs the reader from the start and doesn't let them go until they are thoroughly convinced of the author's opinion and hold it as well.

The Verdict: The author did a great job using rhetorical appeals to convince his audience, the readers, and an even broader audience of average people, to side with the incarcerated sisters in their petition for a pardon. Despite the authors use of ethos by giving ambiguous information could be possibly detrimental, his use of pathos and logos more than made up for it. The emotional appeals of reader association and diction were used effectively to make the audience feel connected to the sisters and their plight. The logical appeals of organization and background information serve to satisfy the intellectual reader by bringing up new points proven by fact to help further the argument. I'd say the article is effective because, hey, I'm convinced.

Picturing the Crisis: Rhetorical Analysis

Rhetoric is found everywhere, whether it be on a billboard, in a literary text, or even on a grocery advertisement. It’s used every day in the form of speech: in arguments, in conversations with a friend, in stories told around a campfire, in texting or TV commercials, in an appeal to a parent for the use of the family car. Rhetoric is what convinces an audience to agree with the speaker or writer. It is vital in establishing credibility as well. Rhetoric helps a reader understand where the writer wants to go with their opinion and how to get to that point of understanding. Along with that, rhetoric is used to describe a point of view and offer solutions in how to solve the issue. In Picturing the Crisis, an online commentary from the New York Times, the writer Paul Reyes establishes rhetoric through the emotions, or pathos, and also with ethos by posting stirring photos, recalling significant memories from United States history, and providing interesting commentary that shows the reader how foreclosures are an increasing problem in American society and need to be addressed.

Foreclosure is a major issue facing our nation right now. New stories are posted in the news daily, and even more go unnoticed. Foreclosure can mean different things to different people, however. For some, it is just a bad word—something to avoid at all costs. For others, it’s a house being abandoned, belongings being repossessed, cardboard boxes, constant worry and tears. In Picturing the Crisis, pictures and visuals are really what set the tone and bring the meaning to life. The very first thing that is brought to the reader’s attention when first opening the article is a picture of a kitchen. At first glance, it’s just a kitchen. There is no significance or meaning. Reyes generally asks, “…would the images resonate the same way without knowing beforehand that you were looking at a foreclosed home? Probably not” (Reyes). However, the first lines states, “One of the ways we remember an economic crisis is through images” (Reyes). Immediately, the reader stops and re-evaluates the image. What’s the significance with the photo now? They notice that the kitchen is empty. There are no furnishings, no food, no people, and no color. The cupboards are open, the refrigerator is out of place, and the floor is filthy (Brownlee). Only then does the reader begin to realize what’s going on. Things start to connect in a way that wasn’t as apparent before. Reyes is definitely using ethos through the use of visuals and the descriptions connected to them. He knows that they will catch some attention. Throughout the rest of the document, there are links posted (underlined and highlighted in blue). Not only do those attract attention all by themselves, but when clicked on, they come up with more images that support the author’s theme. These include Migrant Mother by Dorothea Lange, Now Let us Praise Famous Men by Walker Evans, Fort Myers and Detroit by Bruce Gilden, and Anthony Suau’s Cleveland. Now, even more photographers are covering foreclosures in America and bringing them to the surface in order to help citizens understand the effects. He’s taken recent artists and pinpointed their work in one common place. It’s the connection between these pieces that create such an overwhelming feeling of seriousness. It’s not just one person’s focus. Many people are beginning to make this the focus of their work. They see it as a serious problem as well and want to make it more known to the general public. “And while it remains to be seen if it achieves the social and artistic impact of the Depression-era work, foreclosure photography has already helped define an era that will mark American society for decades to come” (Reyes). By including these images in his writing and bringing them all together in one place, Reyes applies to the visual senses of the reader which in turn makes things more realistic and understandable.

Not only does Capturing the Crisis use images to capture attention, but it adds compelling emotional appeals as well. Great events are mentioned throughout the writing: The Great Depression, Wall Street problems, Dow plunges, the oil crisis of the 1970’s, (and more recently) the Great Recession, September 11th, and Hurricane Katrina. Each name has a powerful significance, but none have a positive connotation associated with them. They were each a time of hurt and depression in our history. Many homes were lost and lives affected. People died as a result of all of these tragedies. During the Great Depression, people lost their jobs so they weren’t able to afford proper food, clothing, housing, or schooling. The Depression, along with the Wall Street problems and the plunge of the Dow, led to, essentially, depression! Many people couldn’t handle the situations they had been thrust into and found suicide a welcome alternative to the pain they felt in their situations. This had a great impact on big and small communities alike. As the more recent crises have occurred, many families have found themselves in the center of economic downturn once again. This essentially leads to a foreclosure on their homes. The past seems to repeat itself, and this is no exception. Depression is still a major problem in the United States. Reyes sees this is as a key recurring issue in our society, and he wants to bring some light on the situation in order to inform readers of the recent harmful trend. He wants this trend to stop and for people to find hope! For this reason, he’s brought all these elements together and given foreclosures a new outlook.

In the mixture of all the rhetoric through pictures and events, Reyes uses interesting and compelling commentary to add the final touches to his argument. For example, he includes comments like this: “But in viewing foreclosure interiors, a curious thing happens: the voyeuristic awkwardness passes, and one begins to piece together the missing characters. We already know the circumstances, generally; but why was a wallet-sized snapshot of children left behind? What left the holes in the wall? Through these questions that flit behind the scanning eye, the portraits become a kind of forensic study” (Reyes). The reader is here left to think for him or herself. This is the take home message, or the point where the reader really has to start forming an opinion of the issue. The issue becomes more real and compelling. What can be done to help this situation? The author did this simply by asking a question that digs a bit deeper below the surface.

A viewer is able to connect to a piece of writing through elements of ethos, all of which were presented in Paul Reyes’ Picturing the Crisis. He sums up the point of his rhetoric with this take home message: “In a single image it’s difficult to illustrate the size and enormity of the problem [of foreclosures]. But they all come from the same idea, and the result is the same in the end” (Reyes). By linking compelling photos, mentioning significant events from United States history, and providing interesting commentary, Reyes shows the reader how foreclosures are an increasing problem in American society and need to be reversed. Hopefully, his readers will feel compelled to help the problem be resolved and restore peace to this nation.

Discover Beauty

Dove is empowering woman to be their best selves. For thousands of years women across the globe have gone to great lengths to look more beautiful: Eleventh century Chinese women binding their feet, Victorian women removing ribs for smaller waists, and young girls today starving themselves to obtain the look to be beautiful. Everywhere women of today are bombarded by media that implies messages that we are not beautiful enough. Dove has taken a stand and has said enough is enough. It is time for us to see that beauty comes from inside each of ourselves and as Italian actress Sophia Loren shares,“Beauty is how you feel inside, and it reflects in your eyes. It is not something physical.”
The first thing I saw when I opened the Dove website was an invitation to join the self esteem movement across the nation and a link to it’s own website. It was not a picture advocating one of their many products, but an invitation to help each of their consumers find the inner beauty inside themselves. This says a lot about their commitment to this project. Many companies do their part to better the world and support good causes, but only a sincere few would welcome viewers into their website with such an invitation. Dove is taking their campaign seriously.
One of the first times I heard of their campaign for beauty was when my friend emailed me a commercial from the Superbowl in 2006. Companies spend tremendous amounts for a few seconds of airtime in between plays; dove was one of those companies. However, instead of directly selling their products to America, they employed pathos and warmed the hearts of women and girls everywhere. Their commercial which was less than a minute encourages girls to show their “true colors...because every girl deserves to feel good about herself.” By focusing on the girls true beauty, Dove accomplished two purposes: one, helping the audience feel better about themselves and two, setting themselves apart.
Dove has continued to set itself apart from other beauty companies and it shows through their campaign for true beauty. Other companies market products that will erase wrinkles or cover up bad spots while Dove is proclaiming to women of all ages that they are already beautiful, a clever marketing technique. Naturally, women appreciate sincere compliments and reassurances of self worth which Dove provides. Rather than buy products from a company that tells you beauty comes after buying their goods, Dove tells their customers that they are already beautiful. On their website, there is a link that tells “how your purchase helps build self-esteem.” Not only do they tell women of their natural beauty, they donate a portion of their profits to charitable organizations such as Girl Scouts of America that helps build self worth in young women. Not only can we buy products from a company that celebrates our natural beauty, our money spent with them goes to help other women reach the same understanding.
Pathos is further employed through the emotional connection to their consumers can be seen by interviews and commercials with everyday women. They establish credibility not from experts or statistics, but from normal women with normal struggles. They put themselves on the same level as their rather than an idea image which women can only achieve through professional make up artists and computer programs (as seen in another commercial). The commercial ends with the words, “No wonder our perception of beauty is distorted” and follow up with an invitation to “take part in the Dove Real Beauty Workshop.”
Dove utilizes various multimedia forums to get their message across. Besides televison commercials, Youtube has a plethora of videos from the Dove Foundation with similar messages: discover real beauty. There is an entire website dedicated to promoting their self esteem campaign (http://www.dovemovement.com/). The website is the central hub of activity and is easily accessible to anyone with internet access. It is chalked full of articles, quotes, sayings, and movies that help anyone to feel good about themselves; I have never felt so uplifted after doing research for a paper as I have reading the Dove website. When I clicked on the link to the page, I was greeted by a video of two sweet little girls playing hand games and giggling. A few seconds later one of the adorable girl says she does not like her dimples because people make fun of them. Hearing that tears at my heart strings! Who has the right to tell anyone, especially this precious girl radiating with beauty that her dimples are ugly? The directors at Dove assumed this would be our reaction and wanted the viewers to realize the harmful affect our words can have.
To fight the affects of hurtful words, when signing up for the movement, they ask for advice we would like to give to girls that we wished we knew at 13. On one of the pages, there is hundreds of tidbits people have shared to help young girls feel better about themselves. Even though I am not in the vulnerable times of middle school, I too found the advice to lift my spirits and encourage me to be my best self. Jen said, “Follow your dreams and never let anyone tell you you can't do something because of the way you look. You are perfect!” Regina said, “You matter- you are smart, pretty, not just outside, but inside. Your heart is tender and also compassionate. Love yourself!” April shares, “Beauty is far more about the way we treat others and how we handle the way others treat us. [Beauty is a] positive attitude toward life.” Sara shares my favorite advice, “the things that made me feel so *different* then are the very things that I love the most about myself now.” Reading these words helps me realize that I can be who ever I want to be and that I am beautiful just the way I am.
Other features of the website include quizzes, self-esteem tutorials, announcement of nation-wide conferences, online workshops, and global studies. There is something for everyone from the little girl to the elderly woman. Reading the study’s findings amazed me; only three out of ten girls happily view themselves while the other seven do not believe they measure up; 75% of girls with negative self esteem harm their bodies through cutting, drugs, smoking, drinking, and disordered eating to name a few (compared to the 25% of girls with high self esteem). These statistics establish how big of a problem this is. Not only do American teens deal with these issues, but women of all nationalities. As you enter Dove’s site, it is necessary to pick a certain country to get to the website specifically tailored for each region establishing the fact that we are not alone--women of around the globe are going through similar struggles.
Dove uses the media to spread their message far and wide: women, we are beautiful! Through television ads, youtube videos, and a useful and interactive website, their message is reaching a wider audience everyday. While they may be using the pathos to help sell their products, I am going to support their noble cause because “every girl deserves to feel beautiful.”

The Other Side

The Church recently made an official statement on the controversial talk by President Boyd K. Packer where he said, now famously, "why would God do that to anyone?" The statement was cool, reasonable, and had a strong emphasis on the fact that we have love for everyone, but cannot accept homosexuality in any form.

Recent events have critically damaged much of what we as a church stand for; our inability to accept what is "new" has pegged us as old fashioned and outdated. What we stand for is the family, the happy home with loving parents who rear children. Homosexuality makes this impossible, and President Packer's controversial statement about our inability to accept it has once again made waves in the national arena. Almost immediately after it aired gay rights activists were demanding a retraction and proclaiming it as incorrect and false. The response to this then, was a statement of our beliefs and our steadfastness in our love of everyone; as well as our denial of homosexuality as a lifestyle.

. This is a very pertinent and “Hot Button” issue for many people in this day and age. I do not wish to offend anyone, but our Church, and the Church of Christ has always been against Homosexuality in all forms, and it will remain so because: 1. It mocks the plan our Heavenly Father has for us here on Earth, to learn of him, to become married to a member of the opposite sex for the purpose of creating children. 2. This life style is not conducive to the happiness of another person but is based upon selfish lusts and desires.

I know that these statements have the potential to be very offensive, but I want to say that we as a church do not judge or discriminate against these people either. As stated in Agency, we believe all men have a choice to live as they desire. We love these people and pray for their return to righteousness, and we befriend them and serve them as we can. I believe people of different views can disagree and still be friends; this is the foundation of our government in America, our melting pot. While I stand absolutely behind every word in this pamphlet, I would never judge another person as “wicked” or “evil”. Judgment is reserved for those who have committed no sin, and I have committed sin, so therefore I cannot judge. I believe that it stems from pornography, which is the greatest evil of our age. I fight against pornography in all forms for the degradation and total abuse of these beautiful children of God used in such despicable and evil ways for the monetary gain of another.

Defending Truth and Right

In a press conference held at the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Days Saints’ Headquarters in Salt Lake City, Michael Otterson, speaking on behalf of Church leadership, delivered a message in response to The Human Rights Campaign’s recent submission of 150,000 petitions against statements from President Boyd K. Packer of The Church’s Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the October General Conference.These petitions, accompanied by public statements by HRC executives and leaders of many other so-called equality associations, took a firm stand against Pres. Packer’s talk, “Cleansing the Inner Vessel,” which was given to a world-wide audience of Church members just a week prior.

In these statements, the HRC President Joe Solmonese told the senior apostle that his statements were, “both factually and scientifically wrong and that more importantly, they are dangerous and are putting millions of lives in great danger.” The two major points that the group wanted Pres. Packer to recant were: first, homosexuality is impure and unnatural, and second, that it can (and should) be changed. The HRC also was obliged to take some of Pres. Packer’s words out of context and simply fabricate some conclusions based on them. For example, officials in these organizations rashly accused Pres. Packer of saying that gay and lesbian children don’t deserve God’s love. They even go so far as to say in a very blunt way that Pres. Packer is a bully that needs to be stopped.

Despite this very heated and intense atmosphere surrounding the Church, it responded to these accusations and petitions in the usual way: with clarity, fortitude and love. The Church took this opportunity not to attack the HRC, but instead to point out the truth behind the matter and even build a relationship on the common ground we share.


Finding Common Ground
As stated, the address was given by a representative speaking in behalf of the Church leadership. While some may call this a snub, it does show the audience the fact that the Church is not worried by these petitions, it is simply responding in a calm way. Brother Otterson begins by stating that the Church and the HRC share a vast amount of common ground. To prove this fact, he states: “We join our voice with others in unreserved condemnation of acts of cruelty or attempts to belittle or mock any group or individual that is different – whether those differences arise from race, religion, mental challenges, social status, sexual orientation or for any other reason. Such actions simply have no place in our society.” The fact that he, and by extension Church leadership, even had to make this statement shows us something about the public perception of the Church. Public perception can and, in many cases, is much skewed. Many of the officials who made these statements of petition towards the Church don’t realize the fact that the Church truly is about equality. President Packer’s statements were not in any way against the people struggling with homosexual tendencies; they are, however, much against the act of homosexuality. In fact, Brother Otterson goes on to say, “Further, while the Church is strongly on the record as opposing same-sex marriage, it has openly supported other rights for gays and lesbians such as protections in housing or employment.” It is certainly not the goal of the Church, as stated in this article, to attack LGBT’s or their happiness or agency; it is their goal to uphold the institution that we hold to be most sacred: marriage between a man and a woman. Those who have the idea that the Church is anything but loving and tolerant towards those who have homosexual tendencies it simply wrong, and that is made very clear in this article.

Standing Firm in the Defense of Truth
The second fact that Brother Otterson makes clear is that the Church and its leadership stand by their statements. In a clear, didactic way, Brother Otterson states that, “As a church, our doctrinal position is clear: any sexual activity outside of marriage is wrong, and we define marriage as between a man and a woman.” Without equivocation, this statement – no different than the message found in President Packer’s original talk – responds to the heat of public opinion directly and unabashedly. The Church will not submit to calling good evil and evil good. The Church will not budge, squirm, buckle, or back down to confrontations. They will, however, preach against sin in any form – whether it be murder, dishonestly, pornography, or homosexuality. This Church has its doctrine and it is willing to keep it, despite any flack that may come.

A Doctrine of Love
The third fact – paramount to all other points made in the article – is that, “The Church’s doctrine is based on love. We believe that our purpose in life is to learn, grow and develop, and that God’s unreserved love enables each of us to reach our potential. None of us is limited by our feelings or inclinations. Ultimately, we are free to act for ourselves.” The fact is that the Church teaches love consistently and openly for all, no matter whom they are. Although not every member might be practicing this doctrine perfectly, the Church should not be held responsible because of tragic events that occur because of bullying and terrorism. The doctrine is clear: follow Christ. “Jesus Christ, whom we follow, was clear in His condemnation of sexual immorality, but never cruel. His interest was always to lift the individual, never to tear down.” Mean-spirited jokes and scathing remarks are not part of the acclaimed doctrine of the Church; however, the people in the Church are not perfect and the HRC must have gained this understanding after this response was made.

Speaking from Experience
Other interesting points made in this statement – ones that simply add to the ethos of the speaker – are also added. A quote is mentioned by Otterson that builds upon a seemingly forgotten fact: this Church is no stranger to unwarranted abuse. The Church knows what it is like to be belittled, scourged, torn-down, mobbed, hated, driven-out, and killed. This point, however true it is, was not made to provide an excuse for the behavior of select members. In fact, it is quite the opposite. “This Church has felt the bitter sting of persecution and marginalization early in our history... [We] should therefore, of all people, be especially sensitive to the vulnerable in society and be willing to speak out against bullying or intimidation whenever it occurs, including unkindness toward those who are attracted to others of the same sex.” Admitting this fact - the fact that Church members must work harder than they are now at loving all of God's children - is a sincere act of humility, one that should not go unnoticed by this audience.

Our True Message
The fact is that the Church’s true doctrine, the doctrine it preaches in the walls of its sacred chapels and indeed the doctrine explained in this reply to the HRC, is not “inaccurate” or “dangerous” in any way. It is clear: any sexual activity outside of marriage is wrong, and we define marriage as between a man and a woman. That is the simple truth. This doctrine is not in any way saying that those who are gay or lesbian, “don’t deserve love,” despite how anti-Church organizations have seemed to think. It is not one that should strike fear or terror in the heart of any young man or young woman. Instead, the doctrine in this news release and in President Packer’s talk should only inspire hope and peace in the hearts of all who listen. To quote President Packer, “Every soul confined in a prison of sin, guilt, or perversion has a key to the gate. The key is labeled “repentance.” If you know how to use this key, the adversary cannot hold you. The twin principles of repentance and forgiveness exceed in strength the awesome power of the tempter. If you are bound by a habit or an addiction that is unworthy, you must stop conduct that is harmful. Angels will coach you, and priesthood leaders will guide you through those difficult times.”

In this reply, Church leadership has managed to portray an increase of love while remaining firm in their beliefs. The Church was able to strike the perfect balance: a balance between love and fortitude, between mercy and justice. It is educational to the uninformed and resolute to the opposition. No unbiased reader – reading without the intent to destroy – can honestly misinterpret the facts outlined in this article. The Church is not at odds with The HRC; in fact, on this issue, it joins them in saying that terrorizing and victimizing is wrong. However, the Church holds true to its belief about the sanctity of marriage and is clear in this response that is will never let go. Ultimately, love is the guiding light for the Church’s doctrine, a love that comes from the fountain of all righteousness: Jesus Christ. Those who do bully and scathe LGBT’s are not living in accordance with the clearly stated standard. Encapsulating these facts beautifully in this well-delivered message, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints has managed to respond to the whirlwind of hate in a calm and clear way.

Related Articles:
"Cleansing the Inner Vessel" by President Boyd K. Packer
"Helping Those Who Struggle with Same-Gender Attraction" by Elder Jeffery R. Holland
The Family: A Proclamation to the World

Rhetorical Happiness

“The Spoils of Happiness”, written by David Sosa of the New York Times, consists of a commentary on happiness: its attributes, and how to attain it. Digging deep into what causes happiness, Sosa concludes that happiness is not a state of mind, but rather depends on surrounding events. Sosa uses a sympathetic tone, intellectual diction, powerful rhetorical questions, emotional analogies and insightful allusions to establish a strong ethos, pathos and logos: ultimately increasing the believability and overall strength of his claim, happiness is not a state of mind.

Sosa begins his article with a historical example, based off an experiment done by Robert Nozick. Sosa describes this experiment as a machine that could give a person any experience he desires, by changing his own perception of reality. After immersing the reader in this radical scenario, Sosa ends sharply with his thesis for the article. By suddenly concluding his opening paragraph with his claim “Happiness is not a state of mind.”, the reader, still unaware of where the article is going, and feels inclined to read on, wishing to figure out reasons for incorporating the scenario described. Sosa’s initial use of this analogy plays as not only the base source for his argument, but as a subliminal device used to draw on ignorance of the reader about the subject matter. Sosa goes on to allude to things such as “The Matrix”, in order to better bring his claim down to the eyes of the reader. By contrasting the abstract experimental scenario, to something as simple and popular as “The Matrix”, Sosa is able to first, draw on the reader’s ignorance--establishing ethos--to later bring his argument to a more emotional level that contains things more familiar and personnel to the reader. By placing both of these allusions right at the beginning of the article, Sosa is able to depend heavily on early pathos and ethos in his claim, allowing him to get more transition into the logos required to prove his point.

Sosa begins his next paragraph with a strong, somewhat ambiguous question: “What is happiness?”. After establishing a strong ethos already at this point, Sosa uses newly introduced questions to get the reader thinking. By specially designing his questions to lean towards his opinion, Sosa allows the reader to draw similar conclusions based upon questions the reader can answer in his mind (rather than Sosa just explaining his hypothesis). The creative process incorporated by the reader in thinking up his own question-guided conclusion helps boost Sosa’s ethos and the argument’s pathos even more. The use of rhetorical questions allows the reader to feel as if he, himself thought up the conclusion, making the issue much more personnel to the reader when Sosa seems to agree. Likewise, Sosa goes on to use rhetorical questions as a way to put pressure on the reader to make up his mind. By planting three deep questions in a row, the reader feels pressure to have some sort of opinion formed. Sosa, after placing new pressure on the reader, immediately provides a common answer to the questions: one that parallels his claim. By first flustering the reader into pondering his own opinion then giving a common answer, Sosa plays on the minds of readers who are, at the time, undecided on the issue. By providing a logical answer right after stirring up a need for a decision, most readers tend to follow the “common” opinion: the one stated by Sosa. In turn, Sosa uses rhetorical questions to spark emotion in the reader, forcing him to make a conclusion about the issue; drawing on his previously established ethos, Sosa uses the rhetorical question to further increase the pathos of the issue.

As the article continues, Sosa begins to introduce analogies, furthering the logos of the argument by playing on the previously sharp increase in pathos and ethos. The reader, already feeling as if they are being taught by a superior, is again hit by a device that simplifies the claim, to better suit the readers inexperience in the subject. Sosa plays on the logic of his analogies, such as in a fire saving your neighbor or your pencil, but not both, to highlight the seemingly simplistic logic of his claim. Sosa goes on to relate the difference between pleasure and happiness by comparing it to the life of a drug addict. By using an analogy with such negative connotations, Sosa is able to play on the emotional and logical aspect of proving his point. Readers find it easier to see reasons to not act like a drug dealer than reasons to believe Sosa’s claim, yet by bringing the same logic into analogous terms, readers feel much more inclined to sympathize with the writer. However, this strategy of analogy would not have worked had Sosa not been able to effectively establish ethos prior to introducing the analogies. Sosa relies on his image to the reader in order to persuade the reader that his claim is, in essence, just as logical as any one of his analogies. Use of the analogy greatly furthers the arguments logos, along with a slight increase of pathos.

Furthermore, Sosa uses a sympathetic tone to better improve the audiences’ pathos towards the issue. Sosa draws on both the abstract nature of his argument, as well as the connection most human beings have with desiring happiness, to portray his argument in a very relatable way. Since most readers have little actual qualifications concerning the true science behind happiness, Sosa allows himself to sacrifice some ethos--by using a less formal, yet more relatable tone--in order to achieve a large increase in pathos. By continually guiding the reader to form his own opinion, not generalizing opinions and using a conversational style of language, Sosa is able to present his opinion in a way that makes an impact emotionally, without forcing ideas on people. This tone choice allows the article, as a whole, to feel as if it were a simple day-to-day conversation between people of equal stature and knowledge. This allows the reader to not feel intimidated by the speaker, but rather feel sympathetic to the authors ideas; the reader and the author feel as if they are going through the same struggle, in order to find happiness. The use of such sympathetic diction allows the reader more freedom in determining an opinion on the issue, increasing the pathos of the argument even more-so.

Overall, Sosa constructed the claim and argument very well. Sosa chose to focus his tactics primarily on gaining pathos. Perhaps the biggest reason Sosa chose to do this is the complexity of the claim made. Since happiness is an irrational feeling, it seems logical to play most heavily on readers’ emotions. Sosa also noticed the importance of establishing a good ethos. This came up as important as what little logos was established. Had Sosa maintained no ethos, the few logical reasons for his claim could easily have gone unnoticed, or disregarded. Logos lacked immensely in the argument, yet didn’t seem to change the effectiveness of the claim. Sosa’s style makes it evident that he believes the presence of such an irrational claim makes it difficult, and rather unnecessary to provide immense logical support. While not completely rounded, Sosa’s claim, through use of numerous rhetorical devices, continues to prove effective in establishing a good opinionated argument.