Rhetorical Analysis of Naomi Schaefer Riley`s

RhetoricalAnalysis of Naomi Schaefer Riley’s“Whypowerfulmennowhidebehind opendoors.&quot

RhetoricalAnalysis of Naomi Schaefer Riley’s“Whypowerfulmennowhidebehind opendoors.&quot

NaomiSchaefer Riley’s articleon NewYork Postis an informativereviewof howfeminismhas ledto menbecomingfearfulof sexualharassment assertionsin theworkplace, to a pointof not helpingthefemalestaffs.Consequently, womenare nownot ableto getassistance,mentorship, friendship,andevenpromotionfrom their malecolleagues.Shewrotethearticleon May 26, 2015 whenthedebateabout thetoxicnatureof feminismwasallover themedia.The article was filed under the sexism and workplace section of theNewYork Post.Riley has beenholdinga seniorpositionat theIndependent Women’s Forum. Moreover,sheis an authorwhoseworkfocuseson culture,education,philanthropy,andreligion.Shebeginsher argumentby givingevidential sentimentsfrom professorsandalsoprovidesus with anemotionalpictureof howlecturersare afraidof evenclosingtheir doorswhenaccompaniedby femalestudentsorstudent.Shecitescompelling personalfactsfrom reliablesourcesand use ethos, pathos, diction, and logosto convincethepublicthatnot onlyhas feminismledto unlawfulgenderfencesaround womenbutalsoitmay hinderwomen’sdevelopmentin their careers. Themainpurposeof thisarticleis to informthepublicespeciallyfeminists of theunderlying consequencesof feminismrulesandcodesin schoolsandworkplaces, as wellas in theAmerican society.Riley wrotethisarticlegivingher sideof thestorywith theaimof showingthatfeminismhas ledto discriminationratherthan equitability. Sheacknowledgesthatitis illegalto treatmenandwomendifferentlyas itmightbetermedas discrimination.However,sheseemsto supporttheactof menavoidingfemaleemployeesto preventharassment claims(Riley, 2015). Sheis outto convinceher audiencethatfeminismis killingwomeninsteadof improvingthem. Riley(2015) has stated that, “Thelegal environment has built those &quotfences&quotwelivein.Onceagain,feminists havemanagedto turnwomeninto helplessvictims”(p. 1). This statement reflects the boundaries sexism has createdbetween women and men, thus leading to women becoming victims ofunemployment and underdevelopment. Riley’s positionis backedby credibleexamplesfrom reliablesourcesthat giveweightto her argumentandat thesametimebroadenher persuasivenessandappealto ethos. Suchsourcesare suchas “National Journal Survey,” “a surveythat wasconductedon politicians’behaviorstoward femalestaffers”and “aprofessorat a prestigious liberalartscollege”(Riley, 2015, p.1).The National Journal reports on emerging and current politicaltrends. Therefore, theuseof informationfrom this journalrevitalizes thecredibilityof Riley by demonstratingthatshehas knowledgeabout feminismconsequencesnot onlyforprovidingthesefactsbutalsoby givingthe reader opinionsfrom expertsto reinforceher argument.Also,Riley illustrateshowsheis familiarwith theissueby givingpersonalexamplesfrom her counterpartswhoare male.Riley (2015) has stated that, “I haveheardsimilarexperiences with maleacademics” (p. 1), which means her arguments are first hand andpersuasive. Apartfrom theuseof appealsto ethos, Riley alsousesappealsto reason to supporther argument.Shedemonstratesfactsandgivesideasthatprogresseitherdeductively or inductively.In inductive reasoning, sheprovidesa factualillustrationof howthe school environment has become volatile to professors,due to fearof harassment claimsand so is the workplace.Thesefactsdemonstratethatthe specific case of volatile school environment represents thelarger population.Because male harassment is experienced in campus, the authorconcludes that it happens everywhere. Deductively, most of herarguments start with a general idea and then she applies to aspecific case. Forexample,she said “Feminists havemanagedto createan employmentatmospherewhere men walk around on pins and needles wondering when somethingthey say might be taken out of context or when a woman might decideto ruina man’scareerwith a falseaccusation”(Riley, 2015, p.1). She starts with a large claim, that feminism is aproblem in the employment sector and from this draws a more specificassumption that the whole situation is ruining men’s career. Heruseof strongappealsto logos isaccompaniedbythe practicaluseof appealsto pathosin almostall thesectionsof thearticle.First,thetitleof thearticlepaintsa picturethat denotesa sympatheticanddepressive imageof influentialmenhidingbehind opendoors.In theintroductionpart,Riley (2015) suggeststhat“theatmosphereon campusis sovolatiletorelationsbetween sexes,andyoungladiesmakeaccusationsagainst studentsandemployees”(p.1). Riley evokesan imageof challengesthat menare undergoingdue to feminismandhighemotionsmenfeelswhenaccusedof harassment. Also,theuseof thephrase“No kidding,” bringsto mindnegativefeelingsabout feminists’ codesandrulestoward men.Alsoare wordslike, “thisnonsense,”such a phrasedenotestheunfairness perpetratedto menby feminismviews.Therefore,theyare an appealto pathosthat is meantto evokefeelingsof angerandfrustrationof readers. Inadditiontothe useof logos, pathos,andethos to convinceher audience,Riley presentsher argumentsin a nonfiction genreof literaturethusgivingus a senseof realityabout thisissue.Also,shecreatesan informaldictionwhensheuseswordslike “boorish”to meanroughand“Men walkingaround needlesandpin”(Riley, 2015, p.1) to describemen’sfear.Thistypeof dictionnot onlybringstheaudienceinto theparticulareventRiley is describing,butalsoitfitsan audienceof variedintelligence. Indeed,Riley beginsandendsher articleby effectivelyconvincingher audienceof thefearmenhavedevelopedin their workplaces due to harassment claimsby their femalecolleagueorstudents.Through pathos, shedisplaysa pictureof the plight of an American man today due tofeminism.Using her own advice shows how informed she is about this particularsituation, thus it is easy to trust her claims. However,her argumentabout stoppingfeminists’ codesandrulesthat hindera closerelationshipbetween femalesandmalesneedsfurtherresearchandthinking.Rileymakesa goodandconvincingargumentthat getsher audience’sattention.Itis up to them to comeup with waysof stoppingthefeminists’ harassment codesthat haveledto menandwomenbecomingdistant,thereforeposinga threatto women’sdevelopment.Therefore, feminist’s philosophy should focus on equitability noton male emasculation.

ReferencesRiley,S. N. (2015, May 26). WhyPowerful Men nowhidebehind Open doors.TheNew York Post.Retrievedfrom http://nypost.com/2015/05/26/why-powerful-men-now-hide-behind-open-doors/