Along with the use of comedy as a means of critique, Fey also incorporates humor as a tool to downplay the serious aspect of her topic and as a way of keeping the attention of her audience. Fey incorporates humor throughout her entire narrative in order to critique the patriarchal society that she finds herself surrounded by. Fey’s use of humor is made up of sarcasm and does a good job at making her harder to refute. “The only person I can think of who has escaped the ‘crazy’ moniker is Betty White, which, obviously, is because people still want to have sex with her” (Fey p.3). Fey makes choses to talk about the way women are treated in the entertainment industry with a joke on Betty White, which targets both sexism and ageism, which Fey repeatedly addresses, but with a softer approach through the use of humor.
I was greeted with a smile and politely asked if I was dining alone or awaiting a party. The only difficulty I faced, was trying to understand the greeter’s accent. I found this greeting very interesting because I had my girlfriend on the way and seating arrangements could be made prior to her arrival. The host asked me if I would like to leave a name and they would direct her to my table when she arrived. That provided me with a peace of mind of looking up every time for her coming in the restaurant and having to navigate her to our table.
. All argument begins in agreement (at the very least people engaged in argument have agreed to use words rather than weapons). Consequently, a writer will make many claims that her opponents agree with. However, her central claim will be one that her opponents disagree with because, after all, this disagreement is what motivates the writer in the first place. After you’ve identified the writer’s central claim, ask yourself: “Do her opponents agree with this claim?” If you answer “yes,” then you’ve probably not identified the central claim; if you answer “no,” there’s a good chance you have identified the central claim.
The author, who is anonymous but is assumed to be a woman, uses her writing to convey a view that is not known to most readers to show the good side of something that would otherwise be noted bad. She is writing to provide an alternative view on this matter, and although the view is issued, the success is not fully there. The author’s use of logos convinces readers that there are some positive effects in shoplifting, although the use of pathos is not as effective, which negatively affects the author’s ethos, furthermore reducing the strength of the piece as a whole. Despite remaining anonymous throughout the piece, the author is presumably a woman, given the references to a female shoplifter that the reader can infer is her persona..The primary audience is young
After reading this article, I started to pay closer attention to this poor-putting issue and I noticed that everything he points out is entirely true! The thing that I liked the most about this article was his introduction/title. The title “Why Women Putt Worse than Men” is shocking because nobody has really posed the question before and I commend him for it. His article was probably frowned upon at first but if women would just read it, they could start to ask themselves, “Why am I not doing the same things that the guys are doing?”, and it would actually help their putting. His cover page shows a woman in a putting stance with a guy in a lab suit watching her every move and a bunch of gauges surrounding her which implies that they are going to back up that title with some case studies and statistical analyses.
I do not like how she criticizes everything about others and attacks people by putting them down all the time, but I was still curious to find out what this book was all about. Unfortunately, this book did not change my opinion of the author and the message she sends to her readers and viewers. I Hate Everything Starting With Me is crudely humorous. Her signature sarcasm starts on the first page. It is just one of those books that when you read it in public, you start laughing out loud, and people give you some weird looks
Rather than just being rude, she obviously has her opinions about certain things and sticks to them. For example, when asked about Bogey Lowenstein’s party Kat explains that people go to the party’s “in hopes of distracting themselves from the pathetic emptiness of their meaningless consumer driven lives”(10 Things). In this scene, she clearly describes how she feels and how that is the reason she does not go out to be with other people or parties. This gives us audience an insight to how Kat has real opinions and being hardheaded is why she is hated and so considered rude. Even though this is different than the play itself, I felt that this was a good adaption of the character for the film.
She did not really agree with anything besides that watching TV is okay. Just by the name of Stevens article makes her views regarding TV making us smarter very clear, because she refers to TV as “the Idiot Box”. What she wanted to get across is that TV is not a medium to make a person more intelligent. Stevens disagrees with Johnson’s opinion that thinking out the more complex plots of TV shows improves a person’s intellectual abilities. She believes those intertwined plots don’t just induce a person to watch more TV, they also slow the persons thinking process because shows like to overflow a person with quick-paced facts.
When the speaker reiterates that her motive is not what they think, the women respond in disbelief, thinking that she tells, "lies". The speaker, however, tries to explain to them her own reasons for the attractiveness others see in her. The numerous things she points to about herself such as "the reach of my arms" and "the fire in my eyes (paragraph2 line9)." all focus on the common thread that she is a "phenomenal woman." Being phenomenal is not by the clothes people wear or how loud they can be in a crowd.
In her essay, Tannen explains the impression that men don’t listen during a conversation is usually wrong. She states in her article, “but often when women tell men, “are you listening,” and the men protest, “I am,” they are right” (Tannen 425). This statement through my experiences I have found to be one hundred percent false. In the case presented by Tannen, the problem is that the women she’s talking about aren’t interpreting the true meaning behind the language being used. For example, when my girlfriend tries to talk to me during a payper view UFC fight, I completely blocked her out.