Samantha Stapleton Blog 4

This blog post is my response to Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s “Declaration of Sentiments and Resolutions.” Four women are specifically named in this text to be supporters of women’s rights (Stanton 206 and 208). While one woman, Mary Ann McClintock, is named along with a man, Thomas McClintock, others are not listed with the names of men. Since men were, at this time, considered to be the “master” (Stanton 205) of women, were the women who were specifically named punished or prosecuted by their husbands or relatives? Is this why other individuals at the Seneca Falls Convention were referred to as “and others” (Stanton 206)? Members of both genders opposed as well as supported women’s rights, so what if many individuals decided to remain anonymous out of fear? What could a woman do if her husband or male relative was abusive? If men were supposed to “master” (Stanton 205) women, were abused men ridiculed when abused by wives? What could they do to escape abusive relationships? Did Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s husband strike out at her for advocating women’s rights? Was spouse abuse even reported by the police in eighteen forty eight? I have found this on Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Anyone who is still unsure which text to write about may or may not find this useful in decision making. http://womenshistory.about.com/od/stantonelizabeth/a/stanton.htm

Samantha Stapleton blog on the "Genocide Project"

The “Genocide Project” on the pedestrian walkway ineffectively uses pathos, ethos, and logos. The project uses pathos by presenting images of aborted fetuses in an attempt to make the audience, the student body of the University of Tennessee, feel sad and angry because of the deaths of these unborn children. However, the student body of the University of Tennessee responded in anger because such graphic photos were displayed in public along the pedestrian walkway. Some students even made signs in protest with explicit comments aimed at the “Genocide Project”. The “Genocide Project” supporters were present in an attempt to establish the project’s ethos, or good character, by handing out informational pamphlets, but because the audience was already angered by the graphic nature of the images provided, the ethos also failed because students were unwilling to accept the pamphlets. The project tried to win over the audience with logos by displaying a picture of an abused boy next to a picture of an aborted fetus and asking the audience why there are no laws against abusing unborn children like there are laws against aborting born children, but again the failed pathos caused the logos to fail because the audience was angry and unwilling to consider the logical argument presented by the project. The project may have succeeded in swaying a few people to support their cause but angered many more. The angered individuals were unwilling to consider the project’s argument, so because pathos failed, logos and ethos failed as well. If you are interested in more information regarding the “Genocide Project”, you can click here.

http://abortionno.org/index.php/the_genocide_awareness_project_gap

Response to Machiavelli and Lao-tzu

I do not agree with the ideas of Machiavelli or Lao-Tzu completely but rather believe in a combination of the two. Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu both wrote about what a how leaders should interact with their followers. Leaders come in many forms from royalty to elected officials to even parents. Machiavelli writes that "a prince must consider it of little importance if  he incurs the name of miser" and that "men are a sorry lot". This would lead one to the conclusion that Machiavelli believes leaders should determine boundaries for their followers, man is incapable of caring for itself, and that its opinions are of little importance. These beliefs agree with an authoritarian style of parenting. Authoritarian parenting is shown to lead to anxious, withdrawn, and unhappy children according to proffessor Kinzling of the University of Delaware. Lau-Tzu writes "practice not-doing, and everything will fall into place". This would lead one to the conclusion that Lao-Tzu believes leaders should not set boundaries for their followers or get involved in the affairs of followers in any way. These beliefs agree with an uninvolved style of parenting. Uninvolved parenting is shown to lead to incompetent children with low self esteem according to Diana Baumrind and other researchers. Both Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu stress the importance of the happiness of followers, but parents who follow their ideals tend to have unhappy children. However, studies done by both Baumrind and Kinzling show that authoritative parenting produces happy, competent children. Authoritative parents set boundaries for their children but let the children take part in the decision making process. This is a combinations of the ideals of both Machiavelli and Lao-Tzu.