screwaround
New member
im watching the tyra banks about gays and im just now realizing that gay people and straight women often use appeals to emotion whereas straight males use logical argument more often.
why do you think straight males use logos while the rest use pathos?
not to demean appeal to argument; it can be even more effective than arguments from reason.
i mean appeals to emotion, not argument
i will give an example from tyra, but this isn't the extent of what i've seen. the show just sparked my memory.
the discussion, broadly, was whether gays should be allowed to marry. a gay man advocating gay rights ended up crying into his arm and wailing about how his father beat him because he was gay. this was probably effective; it evoked much sympathy.
I doubt this was deliberate. it was obviously a sensitive topic for him, and im sure anyone would be as emotional having experienced what he did. the issue i'm concerned with is that he based his argument on this. if i were going to argue in favor of gay rights, i would begin with a reasonable, thought out argument. i wouldnt even think about appealing to the emotions of the audience. this is the heart of the difference i've noticed between argument strategies.
dude you aren't bisexual, i'm convinced bisexuals dont actually exist. you're confused.
and YOU, the next answerer. that's cute, sweety, but this is a grown-up topic.
first answerer, come back!
pansexual? are you serious?
why do you think straight males use logos while the rest use pathos?
not to demean appeal to argument; it can be even more effective than arguments from reason.
i mean appeals to emotion, not argument
i will give an example from tyra, but this isn't the extent of what i've seen. the show just sparked my memory.
the discussion, broadly, was whether gays should be allowed to marry. a gay man advocating gay rights ended up crying into his arm and wailing about how his father beat him because he was gay. this was probably effective; it evoked much sympathy.
I doubt this was deliberate. it was obviously a sensitive topic for him, and im sure anyone would be as emotional having experienced what he did. the issue i'm concerned with is that he based his argument on this. if i were going to argue in favor of gay rights, i would begin with a reasonable, thought out argument. i wouldnt even think about appealing to the emotions of the audience. this is the heart of the difference i've noticed between argument strategies.
dude you aren't bisexual, i'm convinced bisexuals dont actually exist. you're confused.
and YOU, the next answerer. that's cute, sweety, but this is a grown-up topic.
first answerer, come back!
pansexual? are you serious?