Bickeboeller’s AP English Lang/Comp

The general argument made by Mencken in his  work “Feminine mond” is that women are intelligent but they will always be jealous of men.  What I learned about female mind is men work so hard all the time and the women folk envy them of their job and everything. More specifically, Mencken argues that women think that men are better then them, and this wish that they were as intelligent as men. Women envy their men.  He writes, “She may envy her husband, true enough, certain of his more soothing prerogatives and sentimentalities.  She may envy him his masculine liberty of movement and occupation, his impenetrable complacency, his peasant-like delight in petty vices, his capacity for hiding the harsh face of reality behind the cloak of romanticism, his general innocence and childishness.  But she never envies him his puerile ego; she never envies him his shoddy and preposterous soul.”  In this passage, Singer is suggesting that woman envy men.   He also says, “Women, in truth, are not only intelligent; they have almost a monopoly of certain of the subtler and more utile forms of intelligence.  The thing itself, indeed,  might be reasonably described as a special feminine character; there is in it, in more than one of its manifestations, a femaleness as palpable as the femaleness of cruelty, masochism or rouge.  Men are strong. Men are brave in physical combat.  Men have sentiment.  Men are romantic, and love what they conceive to be virtue and beauty.  Men incline to faith, hope and charity. “  This seems to say that woman are smart, but men are so much more than woman so therefore women still see themselves at the weaker sex.

In this article Tannin talks about the point that advertisers aim for men to buy clothes in a differents way. Men generally just take what given to them whereas women pay attention to detail. Advertisements aimed at men have to be more simple so that they feel comfortable. She says, “Each of the women at the coference had to make decisions about hair, clothing, makeu, and accessories, and each decision carried meaning. Every style available to us was marked. The men in our group made decisions, but the range from which they chose was incomparably narrower. Men can choose styles that are marked, but they don’t have to, and in this group none did. Unlike the women, they had the option of being unmarked.” Here she is saying that men can be unmarked but chose not to be because they seem to not care.

Good politicians use good rhetoric. Rhetoric strategies make a good speech. When using rhetoric in a speech you can make a plan boring policy seems like a new exciting strategy. Obama is really good with speeches because he uses good rhetoric. He uses ethos and pathos to get people riled up, and excited about his activities. Sometimes this is bad, because if someone who uses good rhetoric can get into office and then totally turn around and do bad things.

Obama uses really good Rhetoric, whereas Hilary trys to make herself one of the people by using rhetoric.  Mccain is  just straight forward.

My first reaction to Why i want a Wife was shock.  This woman was writing about why men want wives and it was basically to make their lives easier and have sex slaves.  She says “I want a wife who will take care of my physical needs. I want a wife who will keep my house clean. A wife who will pick up after my children, a wife who will pick up after me. I want a wife who will keep my clothes clean, ironed, mended, replaced when need be…”

In our country gender roles are not exactly equal.  Woman still see to be the ones doing laundry and cooking meals, although men do help with that.  Even with these, woman still go to college and many have equal jobs to that of men.  Woman are still slightly discriminated in our society because of this.  Also things like strip clubs which make the authors point, “I want a wife who is sensitive to my sexual needs, a wife who makes love passionately and eagerly when I feel like it, a wife who makes sure that I am satisfied. And, of course, I want a wife who will not demand sexual attention when I am not in the mood for it.”  I dont think a piece could be written about a  man.

AP student: Hello

Hippie: Hey man, have you been watching me long.

CEO: That kid is a creep. He likes watching you sleep.

Hippie: I was just on this trip, man - and there were like these colors, and floating shapes. And I saw this forest of peace signs and I saw this fox and it was like running through the peace signs toward me man, and it cried out to me: “Don’t put these freaky drops in my eyes, man, I like can’t see now!”

CEO: What trip were you on? Your brain’s obviously gone!

AP student: What does it mean, the fox?

Hippie: What do you think it means, man?

CEO: You sound Ms. Hastig, we should throw you in the brig!

AP student: Does it mean that animals don’t like suffering? I don’t like to suffer.

Hippie: Yeah, man, you right on - you dig?

CEO: No I don’t dig, you self-righteous pig!

AP Student: Why are you angry?

CEO: Animal liberation? It’s an abomination! Animals are dumb, so what’s wrong with killing one?

Hippie: I don’t man, that fox was screaming in pain.

AP Student: Yeah, haven’t you ever stepped on a cat’s tail and heard it yelp? How is that not suffering?

CEO: Okay okay but they’re stupid anyway.

Hippie: All right, man…Your neighbors’ have a little daughter, right?

CEO: Yes they do, but what is that to you?

AP Student (catching on): Your neighbors’ daughter isn’t as smart as you, right?

CEO: Well, I suppose not, she’s just a little tot!

Hippie: Well, man would you kill and eat her?

CEO: Ew, ew EW! She’s a human, too!

Hippie: Well, killing her would cause her to suffer, man.

AP Student: Animals don’t have your intellect, but they can suffer, too.

CEO: All right, I’ll buy that.

1. The first sentence in the essay is, “The happy life is to an extraordinary extent the same as the good life.”  This sentence is comparing the happy life to the good life and saying they are basically the same thing.  Happy life is made because of a good life.  To have a happy life, one must have a good life, or a least see the good in the situation that the person is in, but a person with a good life can either be happy or sad.

2.  Russell means that when a person goes between the world and their self they are in self denial because they think that their self and other people in the world have nothing in common with each other.  However when they start taking an interest in something or someone, they come out of their self-denial because they want to get more involved in the world and the  life of this person or thing.  By taking an interest they start looking at other things in the world besides themselves and that person starts to realize that they do have something in common with the world.

3.   Russel’s simile with the the billiard ball is “Through such interests a man comes to feel himself part of the stream of life, not a hard separate entity like a billiard ball, which can have no relation with other such entities except that of collision.”  His simile seems to build on his point with people that are in antithesis with the world and in self-denial.  His simile is not very effective because he is just saying that a billiard ball is alone in the world and seems like it doesn’t matter until it is shot in a whole were it then gives off points the the player that shot it in.  This is the same this that he said early that people are in self-denial until they become interested in something outside of themselves.  Russel would not necessarily be better off without the simile because it give clarity to his original point.

4. A citizen of the universe is someone who sees that everyone in the world is connected.

5)  This essay is similar to Singers essay because he is talking about happiness for everyone and Singer wants happiness for animals.

The general argument made by Siner in his  work “Animal Liberation” is that there should be a animal liberation movement and the woman’s right movement was not the last liberation.  What I learned about animal liberation is that animals do suffer, therefore humans have to right for an animal liberation movement. More specifically, Singer argues that humans think that liberation movement are made to make humans equal, and most would say that animals are not equal  in every aspect but they still suffer so therefor they deserve a liberation. He writes, “Animal Liberations will require greater a;truism on the part of mankind than any other liberation movement, since animals are incapable of demanding it for themselves, or of protesting against their exploitation by votes, demonstrations, or bombs. “  In this passage, Singer is suggesting that animals do not demonstrate how they suffer injustice, but they still do, therefore human beings should fight for animal liberation.

In my view, Singer is right to some extent because people need to see that mistreating animals is not right so therefore they should fight for what is right.   More specifically, I believe that it is sad that humans could be incapable of fighting for something that is right.