Post your essay. Get expert feedback. For free.We're trying to help students improve their writing the hard way. Do you know students who want critical essay reviews from a professor of English Literature? Click like to share. Click here to sign up and post your own essay. We offer no paid services. All reviews are completely free.
Analysis Of Articles 3 - With A Free Essay Review
The Televised Sports Manhood Formula
This article analyzes televised shows that young U.S. boys watch most; sports. In these programs, young boys are taught that the components of being a man include being aggressive, unemotional, and sacrificing. If you do not possess these qualities, then you are not a man (however maybe the products in the commercials can help!).
By saying “boys will be boys” in reference to fights, they are letting the young boys who are watching these programs believe that aggression is okay way to handle emotions and it’s to be expected of them. Aggression is a valued norm of being a real man. Any sense of ‘non-masculinity’ is devalued, for example if a player is not being aggressive enough, the narrators question him, “is he feeble?”
Another value of masculinity is endurance. If a player gets injured, the narrators give him positive regard for staying in the game and overlooking the possibility of sustaining more severe injuries. They treat the game like it’s some kind of religious ceremony; if the player is injured, he is giving his body to the team as a sacrifice. This term is considered “manning up” and therefore is valued as another asset of masculinity.
The commercials in these sports games are marketed to “fix” any problems the boys have. However these problems are implanted in their heads in the first place by the marketers and are not actual things that need fixing. They know that the boys will view these products as things they need in order to view the “norms” of being a man. There are few commercials that target women to view themselves as beautiful the way they are, yet none for young boys.
This article is an important observation of the way sports programming teach young boys to think of themselves as inferior to what media portrays what a man should be. The programs themselves promote violence and aggression as a picture of what a real man should be. If you are insensitive, aggressive, and buy the products that are advertised between the programming, then it is possible to be a real man. Otherwise, you are inadequate.
The Sunk-Cost Effect (Fallacy)
The main argument is we should pull out of Iraq war, because he believes that no more good can come from us staying there and he proves his point with the sunk cost effect. His point is that feeding hopeless investments do not make it all of a sudden worthwhile; it just processed to put you further in debt. Once you have put commitment into something you cannot take it back: however you have the option to pull out when it is no longer worth it. The cost in the past is already sunk, and investing in it further does not mean automatic success.
I agree with him in a sense that we shouldn’t stay there just so the lives that have been lost are not in vain. We have already experienced a sunk-cost effect similar to the Iraqi war; the Vietnam War. We were indebted to the dead to continue the war as to have them not die in vain. However, we ended up losing anyways, so we just added to the number of lives lost with the intention of justifying the lives already lost.
Once I drove down to my friend’s house in MA to see a concert. When I arrived, I discovered our means to get there was questionable and it would be a difficult task to be a band that neither of us was too excited about. We talked about going anyways because we had already bought the tickets, but in the end we decided not to go. There have been times similar to this where we are deciding whether or not to go to a concert on the basis of “Well we already bought the tickets, so we might as well go.” However when we end up going, we also end up spending more money that we could have saved by not going.
The Good Doctor
There are two views on why Dr. Paul is helping the people of Haiti. Either he is genuinely a caring person, or he is helping to merely boost his own ego. Before picking an answer, let’s analyze Dr. Paul’s personality.
“According to his younger sisters… [he was] intense in anger and affection…” This quote encompasses Dr. Paul as a passionate person. One might say even as a young boy, he was destined to put his heart and soul into whatever he decided to do with his life.
“I can sleep here, everyone here has a doctor,” says Farmer after they arrive in Cuba. He is so passionate about helping people in need that he cannot even sleep when there are people that he could be helping. He can’t live with the feeling of people needing him.
When the author mentions that he believes the Cuban warmth Farmer receives upon arrival is due to his connections to Harvard, attacks on American foreign policy in Latin America, and his admiration of Cuban medicine, Farmer is genuinely offended. “I think it’s because I serve the poor,” Farmer affirms. Dr. Paul only has regard for himself not for his scholarly accomplishments, but because of the sacrifices he has made for Haitian people.
In conclusion, it is clear to me why Dr. Paul does what he does. Because it’s the right thing to do, and he knows this. Who cares if it is to fulfill his ego or if it’s because he is a good person; think of all the possibilities that could come true if everyone fulfilled their egos in ways that Dr. Paul does.
What’s Your Love Story?
The love story that I got the highest score on was number three: the travel story. I learned my love story through relationships, and what I want most out of them. Number three was very appealing and hopefully my boyfriend of three years has the same story that I do.
If the understanding of human cognition can be scientific, then the categorization of love can be categorized. You cannot get more subjective and individualized than each human’s thoughts and behaviors. There is a word for that: psychology. As most people’s behaviors can be categorized, love is one of them. Dr. Sternberg found a method to do that via “love stories”.
Will Your Marriage Last?
The main part of this article is to reveal that most marriages can be figured out whether they will last or fail within the first two years of marriage. This is further proof that love is scientific and can be categorized, in this instance it is in lasting marriage or divorce.
It was interesting how only consistent relationships were the ones that lasted. Does that imply that all fairy tales come to a negative end? Are the picturesque relationships that Disney and other movies and fairy tales portray a complete fallacy? This article suggests that they are; “The major difference between the unhappily married couples and their happy counterparts is simply that they have a lower level of satisfaction across the board.”
The main point of the story is analyzing what makes or breaks a second marriage. It analyzes how people do not learn from the mistakes from their first marriages and often repeat them, which is why the divorce rate of remarried couples are about 10% higher than people saying “I do” for the first time.
I’ve always thought it was interesting that “testing the waters” of marriage and living together first actually increases the likelihood that the marriage will not last. I would assume that people living together would be able to collect a sense of whether or not marriage is the right thing for them and proceed from there. I cannot imagine what would cause that other than boredom of from one of the partners. However, shouldn’t they realize that before they get married?
The High Mark
This article is relevant to the topic of environmental protection because it revolves around the question: should snowmobiling be banned while bears are not hibernating? By banning the snowmobiling from April to mid December, the noises that drive the bears away would be prevented and therefore the bears would not be disturbed. An argument could also be made that the emissions from the snowmobiles could be damaging to the environment and the animals in it. That is why Jim Barrett is fighting against the rest of his townsfolk, the U.S. Forest Service, the Fish and Wildlife Services, and the Department of the Interior. Jim Barrett is an active participant of the environmental protection committees, including the Sierra Club and the Park County Environmental Council who he is the executive director of. He is genuinely upset by the snowmobilers disrupting the environment of Yellowstone Park.
If I was there, I would side with the Cooke City locals. Snowmobiling is a way of life there, and they have the freedom to do it whenever they want. Cooke City depends on the people that come in yearly to use its barren mountainsides for snowmobiling. Without the snowmobiling tourism coming into the town, it would lose a lot of (if not all) of its tourism appeal. The townsfolk of Cooke City lives revolve around the aspect of snowmobiling and without it, they would lose their pastime.
The purpose of this site is to help students who are writing essays. The text you have submitted is obviously not an essay, and is in any case very difficult to assess since it is unclear what you are trying to achieve and because there is very little contextual information included that would allow me to assess how close you come to achieving what you are trying to achieve. I say this in order to apologise for a review that must be largely unhelpful, but the latter problem, the lack of context, is probably one that you should address.
If you are discussing the content of an article, for instance, you need to make clear, throughout your discussion, which claims are yours and which the author's. You need to begin, in other words, by identifying the author. You can clarify that a claim is the author's claim simply by saying something like "X [the author's name] argues that ..." You can also help to avoid confusion by avoiding unnecessary irony. You conclude your first bit of commentary by saying: "If you are insensitive, aggressive, and buy the products that are advertised between the programming, then it is possible to be a real man. Otherwise, you are inadequate." This statement is unlikely to be misunderstood, which is to say that most readers will understand that you are speaking ironically here and you don't actually believe the claim that is being made. In general, however, it is better to communicate your claims unambiguously.
Your discussion of the second article is better in that it is a bit clearer which claims are the author's and which are yours, although you still don't identify the author by name, as you should. You are also more obviously assessing the article, pointing out what aspects of the argument of the article that you find compelling, although it would be better to also identify any aspects that you find less than compelling. I think you ought to do this for each article; i.e., don't just summarize the argument of the article, but also critically assess that argument. I'm not sure, however, that your tangential remarks about going to concerts serves any useful purpose here. I understand that you want to clarify further the relevance of the concept of "sunk cost" but I take it that your real task here is to discuss the article, and in this discussion you've told us very little about the article. For instance, you don't explain just how the author of the article uses the "sunk cost effect," as you call it, to prove his argument.
I'm afraid I cannot say anything meaningful or helpful about the rest of the content you submitted. If you end up putting your discussion of these articles into an essay of some kind, I would be happy to review it.