Marissa Makar

Mrs. Thomas
UWRT 1101
18 October 2014
At first I had no idea what I was going to write about for this assignment. Then I thought of a
subject that is often talked about and just kind of went from there. Im still a little bit confused
about ethos, pathos, and logos and Im really hoping I pointed them out correctly in my articles.
My academic article was crazy long so I tried to give my best summary of it without trying to
sound boring. I may or may not have succeeded at that.
The Views about Gay Marriage Presented in Four Different Genres
The debate on whether or not gay marriage should be legal throughout the United States happens
to be a huge controversial topic in todays world. Gay marriage is a partnership between two
people of the same sex. As of October 17th, 2014 gay marriage has been legalized in 31 states in
the United States, Massachusetts being the first in 2004. Among those 31 states, North Carolina
is one of them; making gay marriage legal since October 10th, 2014. Gay marriage is presented in
four different genres: a bumper sticker, citizens protesting, a popular website, and an academic
article.
Bumper Sticker

This bumper sticker is presented in a rainbow of colors because that is what the original gay
pride flag looks like. Each color stands for something; pink stands for sexuality, red stands for
life, orange stands for healing, yellow stands for sunlight, green stands for healing, turquoise
stands for magic/art, blue stands for serenity/harmony, and last but not least violet stands for
spirit. On the bumper sticker it reads Its Called HUMAN RIGHTS NOT Heterosexual Rights.
This bumper sticker is explaining that we all are humans and should be treated equally no matter
what our race is, what our gender is, what our culture is, who were attracted to, etc. There are so
many different types of bumper stickers that are for and against gay marriage its a way to
express their emotions and let others see their opinions about it without others being able to say
anything about it and that gives a person satisfaction.
Protesting

The point of protesting is to not change things, but to raise awareness. Protesting is a safe way to
prove to others that they care about a certain situation. In this picture one of the ladies protesting
are holding up a sign that reads Gay people getting married?! (Next theyll be allowed to vote
and pay taxes) Suggesting that people in this country do not treat gay people equally. She wants
to make others aware that gay people should have the same rights as heterosexual people do.
Pathos is presented a lot while protesting; its a way for people to express their emotions by
trying to convince people at the same time. In this case, these two ladies are trying to convince to
the surrounding people that they feel as if it is not fair how gays get treated and how they support
the freedom to marry.
Website http://swampland.time.com/2013/03/28/how-gay-marriage-won/
As I was furthering my research about the political debate between gay marriages I found an
interesting website article called How Gay Marriage Already Won it seemed to be written by
David Von Drehle. I did a little bit more research and discovered that Drehle happens to be a
writer and a journalist. He has written 3 books and many journalistic articles in his 32 year
career. He earned his B.A in 1983 from the University of Denver where he was also a Boettcher
Scholar and editor of the Denver Clarion, the student newspaper. In 1985, Drehle graduated from
Oxford University with a Masters in Literature as a Marshall Scholar. The website article is
presented with two covers from the TIME magazine, one with two guys kissing and another with
two girls kissing while saying across the magazine cover on the top Gay Marriage Already
Won. The site itself is aimed towards any audience who is interested in the political debate
between gay marriages.

Von Drehle first starts off his article by referring back to Adam and Eve and how some people
are still against gay marriages due to the fact that God didnt make Adam and Steve. An
example of logos he adds in his article would be about the story when an Air Force veteran
named Jack Baker and his boyfriend Michael McConnell, filed an application to get married,
which was quickly denied because homosexuality was still considered a mental illness according
to the American Psychiatric Association. Von Drehle added a ton real life stories in his article
which made it very easily for the audience to trust what he was saying. He refers back to a lot of
cases dealing with gay marriage such as the Hollingsworth v. Perry case and the U.S v. Windsor
case.
Academic Article: (Re) Defining Marriage: Changes and Challenges
Scott Monsma, Northwestern College
For an academic piece I decided to choose this one because the cover really caught my eye and
seemed unique. Monsma separates his academic article into five different subjects. The first
subject would be abstract. He starts out with a summary of his academic piece; he explains that
his paper examines the different ways of defining marriage in order to understand that current
debate about legal same-sex marriage. His audience would be aiming towards anyone who is
also interested in the debate between legalizing same-sex marriages. He starts off using pathos
by reminiscing about his parents 50th wedding anniversary and how it was a time where he had
thought about how the meaning and definition of marriage had changed since his parents first
decided to get married. He mentions the confrontation that occurred in 1969 between police and
a gay man raid on the Stonewall Inn in New York City that led to several days of rioting and the

emergence of the lesbian and gay rights movement. In this case he uses logos to present to the
audience just how serious legalizing gay marriage started becoming in 1969.
His second subject he discusses is cross-cultural and historical definitions. He brings up the idea
that people who are against same-sex marriage are the ones that believe in the traditional
marriage between a man and woman. He uses a scholar, Stephanie Coontz as an example of
logos. He explains to the audience that she documents that there is no one definition of marriage
that fits all cultures historically and cross-culturally. He brings up the idea that in some cultures
such as Tibet, India, it is possible for a woman to marry several men including her own brothers.
He mentions in some societies it is even possible for a woman to marry someone who is dead, a
ghost. He uses all these examples of logos to prove his idea that marriages can have a
completely different definition depending on the culture.
The third subject that Monsma presents would be function definitions. He uses a sense of logos
by quoting Robert Jackson, a sociology professor. Over the past two centuries, womens long,
conspicuous struggle for better treatment has masked a surprising condition. Mens social
dominance was doomed from the beginning. Gender inequality could not adapt successfully to
modern economic and political institutions. No one planned this. Indeed, for a long time, the
impending extinction of gender inequality was hidden from all. (1998: 1, emphasis added). He
explains that Jackson mainly focused more on gender. Monsma focuses more on how the
stereotype used to be back in the 50s when the men were supposed to take on the role of the
primary breadwinner.
The fourth subject that Monsma explains would be legal definition. In this paragraph Monsma
states that legal marriage typically means that a partner who survives the death of the spouse is

entitled to inherit property and have sole custody of the children in the event there was no signed
will assigning these rights elsewhere. When a marital partner is incapacitated due to health
issues, a spouse has right to be present and has the legal power of attorney to make medical
decisions for the other partner. A marital partner can obtain social security benefits in the event
of the spouses death. Monsma is a big fan at stating facts to help get his point across and for
the audience to better understand his point of views.
The fifth topic that Monsma brings up happens to be normative definitions. He mentions that
normative definitions are important cultural understandings that have a huge effect on religious
groups. And these normative definitons do seem to change after time. He says, For example,
some conservative evangelicals continue to maintain the belief that the man should be the head
of the household. Just like hes been using throughout his whole academic article, he uses logos
to help support his opinion.
All in all, Monsmas academic article is about how our world is constantly changing. What was
50 years ago is not the same today. Cross-cultural and historical evidence proves that there is no
support that there is just one definition of a marriage.
Last but Not Least
After discovering all the different types of genres that the debate between same-sex marriages is
presented in, I can see all the different types of audiences each piece reaches out to. Seeing how
others express their feelings about the debate between same-sex marriages has really encouraged
me to be more observant of my surroundings and to better recognize this debate outside of my
computer.