Login

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

March 29, 2024, 01:41:43 am

Author Topic: 2019 AA Club - Week 3  (Read 2174 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

MissSmiley

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 349
  • Respect: +84
2019 AA Club - Week 3
« on: January 21, 2019, 11:20:37 am »
+4
Hi everyone!
Hope you're doing well!

Let's target our focus this week to find two main arguments and then start analysing how they're developed. For this reason, I haven't included a visual, so that you can focus on firstly tracking these arguments and then writing your analysis.

** Note: Parts from the main piece have been put together, to avoid coarse language as much as possible. This isn't the whole opinion piece. **

Quote
Background: A 20-year-old man was charged by Melbourne police over the death of 21-year-old Aiia Maasarwe, whose body was found near a tram stop in Melbourne's north on Wednesday. This has once again led to discussions about violence against women.

TITLE : Men of Australia, it’s time to pick your side
DATE : 17th January 2019  - Sydney Morning Herald
WEBSITE: https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/men-of-australia-it-s-time-to-pick-your-side-20190117-p50rz7.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The body of the woman found in bushes at Bundoora, in Melbourne's north, has been identified, and the worst seems confirmed: another young woman’s life has been ended by a man who chose to inflict sexual and physical violence on her.
In Baqa al-Gharbiyye, the city mourns.

How many women have to die before people decide to take seriously the very real, ever present, issue of men’s violence against them? Dog whistling politicians love to fling mud at migrant communities, stoking propaganda against them and nurturing the racism and violence that all too many white people consider to be a good day out, but they refuse to properly address the reality of misogyny and its widespread harm. Women of colour like Aiia are targeted by this violence at significantly higher rates, yet we have legislators and right-wing pundits embracing the tenets of white supremacy under the guise of "preserving our values".

Exactly what values are we protecting in Australia, especially when benign conversations about sexism and men being better too often result in yet more misogyny being produced as some kind of retaliation?
You men want to stop being lumped in with all the "bad apples"? Consider yourselves lucky that this is all you have to deal with. Women just want to get home safely, and to not become another statistic in the much more prevalent danger posed to us by the men we live with, sleep with and sit across the table from once we get there.

Think about that the next time you decide to whine that "it’s a really scary time to be a man".

Aiia was reportedly speaking on the phone when she was attacked. Whether this was her intention or not, this is one of the many tactics women learn to minimise risk to us on the street.

Walk with your keys between your fingers. Smoke a cigarette. When in doubt, call a friend.

Jill Meagher tried to do the same thing the night Adrian Bayley stalked, raped and murdered her a few suburbs over from where Aiia was killed.

Use your common sense. It might not be fair, but the world isn’t safe for you.

And so we do. But the moment we talk about it we’re accused of paranoia, hysteria and, the worst of all the crimes a woman can commit: man-hating. We’re expected to monitor and modify our behaviour to "prevent" harm, but we are never allowed to discuss the reality of that in case it makes men feel somehow implicated.
Guess what, men? You are all implicated.

You want to know the common thread linking every man who decides to rape and murder a woman just making her way home at night? They’ve laughed at sexist jokes. They’ve agreed that "women ain't shit". They’ve liked a comment online that says "feminism is cancer."

Every time these men see other men minimising sexism and misogyny in their environments is another moment that makes them believe that men think alike; that women are sluts and whores who deserve to be taught a lesson.

Haha, get back in the kitchen, bitch! Can I speak to the man in charge?

You f---ing ugly dog, I'm gonna bash your face in.

Men, you need to ask yourselves which side of that line you want to be on. Do you want to be one of the bricks in the wall that adds to the foundation of sexism and misogyny? That helps create the structure to which the worst of men can ascend to the most frightening of levels? Or do you want to be part of the team that's tearing it down?

It's your choice. Pick your side.

Somewhere in Australia right now, there’s a woman reading this news who’s just like Aiia Maasarwe, like Eurydice Dixon, Tracey Connolly, Jill Meagher, Lynette Daley, Vicki Cleary, Anita Cobby and all the other countless women who came before her. We don’t know her name yet. But we will.

Pick. Your. Side.

By Clementine Ford
Clementine Ford is a best-selling author and feminist commentator. Her book, 'Boys Will Be Boys', is out now.

2017 : Further Maths [38]
2018 : English [45] ;English Language [43] ; Food Studies [47] ;French [33] ;Legal Studies [39]
VCE ATAR : 98.10
2019 - 2023 : Bachelor of Laws (Honours) and Bachelor of Arts at Monash University

I'm selling a huge electronic copy of  VCE English essays and resources document (with essays that have teacher feedback and marks) for $10. Feel free to PM me for details!

peachxmh

  • Forum Regular
  • **
  • Posts: 84
  • ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Respect: 0
Re: 2019 AA Club - Week 3
« Reply #1 on: January 22, 2019, 10:33:13 pm »
0
Clementine Ford, in a scathing opinion piece "Men of Australia, it's time to pick your side" (The Sydney Morning Herald, 17/01/19) addresses the recent killing of Aiia Maasarwe, contending that the increasingly frequent issue of sexual and physical violence against women in Australia needs to stop. Ford aims her article primarily at the Australian public, in particular males, as well as politicians who refuse to help resolve the issue.

She asserts that violence against women in Australia is a prevalent and ongoing problem. By describing Maasarwe's death as "another" loss of a young woman's life, the writer establishes this issue as longstanding in an attempt to alarm readers through drawing attention to the issue's commonplace nature in our society. Having established that this violence occurs in Australia at particularly high rates, Ford then goes on to state that women of colour are much more likely than other women to be targets of this violence, highlighting their increased vulnerability and hence, eliciting sympathy from readers. She continues to build on this sympathy through her suggestions that women have had to alter their own lifestyles to try to prevent such violence from befalling them. Her description of common preventative tactics is an attempt to make female readers more aware of the habits they have been accustomed to following and to demonstrate that they are not alone in their experiences, fostering a spirit of unity amongst them. In this way, Ford not only suggests something needs to be done to combat the issue as it is affecting the lives of numerous women, but also creates a call to arms for women to support each other and continue to fight against their shared injustice. Ford's specific mention of Jill Meagher as a victim is another attempt to bolster her argument by using Meagher, another high-profile case, to remind readers that similar events have occurred in the past. It is also an effort to carry forward the anger generated by that case towards Maasarwe's and the issue of violence against women in general. Ford therefore not only establishes the issue of misogynistic violence as frequently occurring but also shows that despite similar incidents occurring in the past, nothing has really been done to resolve the issue as it is still taking place, and at high rates.

The writer then argues that people should address the root causes of this misogynistic violence, instead of blaming it on other circumstances. As Ford is a feminist commentator, it is likely that she has a vested interest in misogyny. She claims that politicians are contributing to the violence faced by women of colour. By labelling these politicians as "dog whistling", Ford suggests that they are aware of their actions as well as the resulting consequences, and vilifies them through the phrase's connotations of being sneaky. Furthermore, she criticizes men for being too focused on themselves and for "whin[ing]" whilst women are experiencing danger daily. Thus, she likes men to little children and portrays them in a negative light by implying that they are unable to act with maturity. She also makes a clear separation between men and women by referring to men as "you" and women as "we". In this way, she suggests that men and women are fundamentally different in their struggles, playing into her assertion that women's struggles to avoid violence are more poignant than men's struggles of avoiding criticism. She continues her attack on men by claiming that all men are responsible for the violence, in a generalisation. Her inclusion of coarse language in her condemnation emphasizes and exemplifies the vehement nature of the violence women are facing. Through her metaphorical description of men as "bricks in the wall... of sexism and misogyny", she points out that even bystanders are playing a part, causing that proportion of her readers to feel guilty. Hence, she implies that standing up to displays of misogynistic behaviour is a plausible solution. Ford argues that to put a stop to the issue of violence against women, the behaviour and warning signs that lead to such acts should be dealt with, by other men.

Therefore, Ford claims that changing men's behaviour is an instrumental part of reducing the high rates of violence against women. She completes her piece by listing women who have been victims of such violence, which again emphasizes its long history. By asserting that it will happen again, she criticizes the public's habit of only attempting to solve the issue in the immediate aftermath of another similar crime, and still, ultimately, allowing it to happen again. Her use of the short, sharp sentences "Pick. Your. Side" grabs the attention of readers and conveys her anger as well as her determination to solve the issue once and for all.
2019: VCE
2020: Med @ Monash

ngu0038

  • Fresh Poster
  • *
  • Posts: 3
  • Respect: 0
Re: 2019 AA Club - Week 3
« Reply #2 on: January 23, 2019, 04:56:01 pm »
0
A violent death against a woman near a tram stop in Melbourne’s north has further raised concern for the issue violence against women. Clementine Ford, a feminist commentator, in an aggressive tone argues in her opinion piece that women should not be targets or inferior to males, which has seen to be the cause of violent acts against women. Ford aims to strike awareness of this issue into Australian readers, especially males, about what it means to preserve “our values.”

Ford argues that violence against females is an issue that has not yet taken its opportunity in being prevented. By attempting to show derision in Australian politicians that they are incapable in addressing the “reality of misogyny and its widespread harm,” Australian readers are to feel that the general public has failed in accomplishing a standard of values to prevent violence against women. This is due to the connotations of the word “misogyny,” representing prejudice against women which also further outlines the sexual and physical violence on females in modern society. Furthermore, this is also complimented by the words “widespread harm,” amounting to the long-lasting damage inflicted on the image of women in the community. Additionally, Ford aggressively stresses the straining difference between men who are considered “lucky” in what they must deal with, against women who struggle live in society and struggle to get home safely. The idea that women don’t want to become “another statistic” reinforces the Australian public, particularly males, that these violence acts on women are a common occurrence in the Australian society. As a result, readers are to feel that corrective action needs to be approached by the general public against the destructive nature of this issue, to ensure that women are protected by a safe environment around them and by males.

Switching to a calmer tone, Ford contends that males need to take the initiative in identifying what they need to bring into the community. Only questioning whether they want to add to the “foundation of sexism and misogyny” or tear down the wall inspires the right motif into readers that would help deem preventing female violence in the Australian community for the modern and future generations. Stating that building the wall only ascends to the most “frightening of levels” further emphasises the large nature of the issue into Australian males, making them only feel guilt and burdensome if they were to continue inflicting cruel acts against their opposite genders. Moreover, Ford’s use of direct language evokes a sense of responsibility in readers for the side of the issue they take, that if they were to add to the foundation of sexism and misogyny they would highlight the guilt of their choice. This is mainly evident from the words “you” and “your,” which is help showing to the reader that it is “your choice” in the side they take regarding violence against women.

clarke54321

  • Part of the furniture
  • *****
  • Posts: 1041
  • Respect: +365
Re: 2019 AA Club - Week 3
« Reply #3 on: January 24, 2019, 02:20:15 pm »
+2
A violent death against a woman near a tram stop in Melbourne’s north has further raised raised furtherconcern aboutfor the issue violence against women. Clementine Ford, a feminist commentator, in an aggressive tone argues in her opinion piece that women should not be targets or inferior to males I'd say this is an implication of her contention, but I'm not sure it is at the centre of it. You're a bit closer with the next sentence. Ford wants her male audience to cultivate values, which will destabilise the foundation of misogynistic culture in Australia., which has seen to be the cause of violent acts against women. Ford aims to strike awareness of this issue into Australian readers, especially males, about what it means to preserve “our values.” Great. If you can tweak your contention, the structure of this introduction will be great :)

Ford argues that violence against females is an issue that has not yet taken its opportunity in being prevented phrasing is a bit awkward here. Try: ...that has not been adequately addressed.. By attempting to show derision in Australian politiciansagain, just look out for phrasing clarity. Try: By declaring that Australian politicians are incapable of recognising the "reality of misogyny and its widespread harm," Ford.... that they are incapable in addressing the “reality of misogyny and its widespread harm,” Australian readers are encouraged (keep the language consistent with the idea of 'intention' - we can never know exactly how a reader will feel)to feel that the general public has failed in accomplishing a standard of values to prevent violence against women. This is due to the connotations of the word “misogyny,” representing prejudice against women which also further outlines the sexual and physical violence that females are subject to in modern societyon females in modern societylovely analysis here. Furthermore, this is also complimented by the words “widespread harm,” amounting to the long-lasting damage inflicted on the image of women in the community excellent. Additionally,there is absolutely nothing wrong with the connecting words, 'furthermore' and 'additionally.' However, you can strengthen your analysis by making sentence progression more seamless. For example, you could say: Ford seeks to consolidate anger within readers by aggressively stressing that.... Ford aggressively stresses the straining difference between men who are considered “lucky” in what they must deal with, against women who struggle live in society and struggle to get home safely. The idea that women don’t want to become “another statistic” reinforces the Australian publicyou can't really 'reinforce' an audience: it would make more sense to say: "another statistic" that alerts her audience, particularly males, that...., particularly males, that these violence acts on women are a common occurrence in the Australian society. As a result, readers are likely- remember my previous comment regarding objectivityto feel that corrective action needs to be approached by the general public against the destructive nature of this issue, to ensure that women are protected by a safe environment around them and by males. This was a solid paragraph!

Switching to a calmer tone, Ford contendstry and keep this verb choice to the introduction, where you are articulating the contention. To pinpoint argument, I'd keep to the following verbs: avers, argues, declares, asserts, maintains, intimates that males need to take the initiative in identifying what they need to bring into the community. Only questioning whether they want to add to the “foundation of sexism and misogyny” or tear down the wall try and quote the wall metaphor, so that examiners are clear that this isn't your own languageinspires the right motif into readers that would help deemthis analysis is a bit confusing- I'd like to see you unpack your ideas more preventing female violence in the Australian community for the modern and future generations. Stating that building the wall only ascends to the most “frightening of levels” further emphasiseshow does it do that? What kind of image is being conjured? the large nature of the issue into Australian males, making them only feel guilt and burdensome if they were to continue inflicting cruel acts against their opposite genders. Moreover, Ford’s use of direct language, as evidenced in the phrases X and X, evokes a sense of responsibility in readers for the side of the issue they take, that if they were to add to the foundation of sexism and misogyny they would highlight the guilt of their choice. This is mainly evident from the words “you” and “your,” which is help showing to the reader that it is “your choice” in the side they take regarding violence against women great choices of evidence, but flip the order in which you introduce these. That is, as soon as you mention the technique of direct language (ie. last sentence), you should follow it up with evidence immediately..


Great job, ngu0038! This was a very well-written piece of work. Your choice of evidence, and overall structure were components that particularly stood out for me. To improve, I'd encourage you to simplify your expression (speak it aloud, and see whether it would be comprehensible in spoken conversation). If you can do this, examiners will be better able to appreciate your analysis. Well done :)
BA (Linguistics) I University of Melbourne
Tips and Tricks for VCE English [50]

Essay Marking Services in 2021 for VCE English + Essays for Sale

Anonymous

  • Guest
Re: 2019 AA Club - Week 3
« Reply #4 on: January 24, 2019, 08:56:50 pm »
0
Hey, not a language analysis but just a question:

How do you quote something that is already in quotation marks in the article? For example in this one, if I wanted to say:
Men who agree "women ain't shit".... The "woman ain't shit" is already quoted in the article, but do I ignore that?

Just something I've always wondered but never asked  :D


MissSmiley

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 349
  • Respect: +84
Re: 2019 AA Club - Week 3
« Reply #5 on: January 28, 2019, 10:51:23 pm »
+2
Hey, not a language analysis but just a question:

How do you quote something that is already in quotation marks in the article? For example in this one, if I wanted to say:
Men who agree "women ain't shit".... The "woman ain't shit" is already quoted in the article, but do I ignore that?

Just something I've always wondered but never asked  :D
Hey!
Great question!
If it was me I'd just say something like: By writing the typical man's response that "women ain't shit" in direct quotation marks, the author castigates (severely disapproves) misogyny...or whatever the argument or the effect is that you want to add to complete this sentence.

So I guess you could play around with your sentence structures:
- By writing....in quotation marks....
- The author references....in quotation marks
- In an attempt to .... the readership of.... the author employs quotation marks when writing....


Hope this helps!  :)

2017 : Further Maths [38]
2018 : English [45] ;English Language [43] ; Food Studies [47] ;French [33] ;Legal Studies [39]
VCE ATAR : 98.10
2019 - 2023 : Bachelor of Laws (Honours) and Bachelor of Arts at Monash University

I'm selling a huge electronic copy of  VCE English essays and resources document (with essays that have teacher feedback and marks) for $10. Feel free to PM me for details!

Jigsaw

  • Forum Obsessive
  • ***
  • Posts: 208
  • Respect: +97
Re: 2019 AA Club - Week 3
« Reply #6 on: January 29, 2019, 08:56:52 pm »
+3
Clementine Ford, in a scathing her opinion piece titled "Men of Australia, it's time to pick your side" (The Sydney Morning Herald, 17/01/19) addresses the recent killing of Aiia Maasarwe, contending (there's nothing wrong with this, but accentuates works well here, too!) scathingly accentuates that the increasingly frequent issue of sexual and physical violence against women in Australia needs to stop. Close! Ford is positing that sexist and misogynistic acts directed towards women primarily by men, which in extreme cases culminates in senseless murder, must be eradicated. Ford aims directsher article primarily at the Australian public, in particular males, as well as politicians who refuse to help resolve the issue in the hope that...

 Nice intro! The only thing that is really missing here is purpose. Why is Ford writing this article? What does she hope to achieve from it?

She Ford initiates her piece via (inserting a tone word here would be nice)asserting that violence against women in Australia is a prevalent and ongoing problem. By describing Maasarwe's death as "another" loss of a young woman's life, the writer Ford (establishes this issue as longstanding) allows her readership to envision this issue as longstanding and superfluous, due to connotations of longevity elicited by this adjective in an attempt to alarm readers through drawing attention to the issue's commonplace nature in our society. :)Good!Having established that this violence occurs in Australia at particularly high rates, Ford then goes on (good awareness of argument progression)to state that women of
colour are much more likely than other women to be targets of this violence, highlighting their increased vulnerability (quote an example from the text here and hence, elicitsing sympathy from readers due to (explain language from quotation. She continues ( :) ) to build on this  sympathy through her suggestions that women have had to alter their own lifestyles to try to prevent such violence from befalling them. Her description utilisation of common preventative tactics; "quote examples here" is an attempt to make female readers more aware of the habits they have been accustomed to following and to demonstrate that they are not alone in their experiences, fostering a spirit of unity amongst them. Also to create a sense of outrage amongst the readership due to the fact that women are forced to be reactive to acts that go against human decency. In this way, Ford not only suggests something needs to be done to combat the issue as it is affecting the lives of numerous women, but also creates a call to arms for women to support each other and continue to fight against their shared injustice Notj just a call to arms for women, but to all to fight against this injustice, women AND MEN.. Ford's specific mention of Jill Meagher as a victim is another attempt (avoid this wording. Your task is to comment on how language is being utilised, not whether or not you believe it is successful. to bolster her argument by using Meagher, another high-profile case, to remind readers that similar events have occurred in the past.  Good, but can you take this further? It's not just to remind readers of the fact that this has occurred in the past. It's also to reignite a feeling of anger felt during this period years ago, and to hence emotively concur that more must be done in order to avoid tragedy as countless deaths are still occurring. It is also an effort to carry forward the anger generated by that case towards Maasarwe's and the issue of violence against women in general. Yes, good, on the right track here. Ford therefore not only establishes the issue of misogynistic violence as frequently occurring a frequent occurrence but also shows (try and avoid this word) emphasisesthat despite similar incidents occurring in the past, nothing has really been done to resolve the issue as it is still taking place, and at high rates.

A good opening paragraph. It may be a little long to write an in actual examination setting, but for practice it's fine. Good job.

The writer Fordthen furtherargues that people should need toaddress the root causes of this misogynistic violence, instead of blaming it on other circumstances. As Ford is a feminist commentator, it is likely that she has a vested interest in misogyny. This is irrelevant. You are not analysing language here. You are simply making an assumption. Try and focus specifically on language and argument :)

She claims that politicians are contributing to the violence faced by women of colour. By labelling these politicians as "dog whistling", Ford suggests that they are aware of their actions as well as the resulting consequences, and vilifies them through the phrase's connotations of being sneaky and deceptive.. This positions Australians to feel...Furthermore, she criticises men for being too focused on themselves and for "whin[ing]" whilst women are experiencing danger daily. Expand on your analysis of "whining." Thus, she likes men to little children and portrays them in a negative light by implying that they are unable to act with maturity. Bring in connotation here. Ford also makes a clear separation between men and women by referring to men as "you" and women as "we". In this way, she suggests that men and women are fundamentally different in their struggles, playing into her assertion that women's struggles to avoid violence are more poignant than men's struggles of avoiding criticism. She continues her attack (ad hominem) on men by claiming that all men are responsible for the violence, in a generalisation. Her inclusion of coarse language in her condemnation emphasises and exemplifies the vehement nature of the violence women are facing. Through her metaphorical description of men as "bricks in the wall... of sexism and misogyny", Ford points out that even bystanders are playing a part, causing resulting in a that proportion of her readership to feel negligent. Hence, she implies that standing up to displays of misogynistic behaviour is a plausible solution andargues that to put a stop to the issue of violence against women, the behaviour and warning signs that lead to such acts should be dealt with, by other men.

Therefore, Ford claims that changing men's behaviour is an instrumental part of reducing the high rates of violence against women. She completes (concludes) her piece by listing women who have been victims of such violence, which again emphasizes its long history (work on expression here. Also try to link in effect on the readership; what emotions are felt?. By asserting that it will happen again, she criticizes the public's habit of only attempting to solve the issue in the immediate aftermath of another similar crime, and still, ultimately, allowing it to happen again. Her use of the short, sharp sentences "Pick. Your. Side" grabs the attention of readers and conveys her anger as well as her determination to solve the issue once and for all.

Overall, given that school hasn't even started yet, your argument analysis skills are already very impressive! You had a lot of extremely detailed analysis; well done. As for some constructive feedback, make sure your expression stays consistent throughout your piece. Make sure you are always coming back to how language and argument are being utilised to position the audience to do or feel something. Sometimes, you identified WHAT and WHY language was being used, but not HOW it was being used. This HOW part forms a massive chunk of your analysis, so if you can reference this more, your analysis will become a lot stronger. Keep practising! You are already at such an impressive level.
2017: | Business Management [47] |
2018: | Legal Studies [50] (Premier's) | English [48] | Accounting [41] | Japanese SL [38] | Maths Methods [32] |

ATAR: 99.40 2019 Onwards: Laws (Hons)/Arts @ Monash