A Rhetorical Analysis Of Guys Vs. Men By Dave Barry

Have you ever wondered why all men act the same? In the reading “Bros Before Hos: The Guy Code”, Michael Kimmel critics what it means to be a man and the “Guy Code” they are expected to follow. According to Kimmel, masculinity is a problematic social construct that invokes behaviors that men tend to follow unconsciously. The unconscious behaviors that men tend to follow is know as the “Guy Code” that is passed down to them when they were young. Kimmel informs the audience, mainly women about the negative effects inflicted upon men due to following the “Guy Code”. Kimmel uses pathos and logos very effectively to paint an image of why men act the way they do and how it hurts them.

In the article “Bros before Hos: The Guy Code”, by Michael Kimmel he writes about many different standards and ideals that young men must live up to, to be accepted in today’s society. The article talks about genders, at different ages sixteen to twenty six and how it is directed towards anyone that wants to know more about genders and how it can relate to masculinity and men. It was also based off of a book that he had written in the late two- thousands. According to (Kimmel) young men must live and abide, by a set of rules known as the spectacular “Guy Code”. The “Guy Code” was created to help understand why young men feel and act the way they do, and how masculinity may be perceived in their cultures. The code has been instilled into many young men around the world by their peers, family, and media at the age of four, or maybe even when a child has developed somewhat of a understanding. Being taught how to be masculine at a very young age is important to teach your child, it helps them discover who they are as a person, and who they are supposed to be perceived as, and how to find their inner virility as a young male. Kimmel also uses exemplification to help explain how the “Guy Code” is a collection of attitudes, values, and many traits that are together to help compose what it really means to be a man. The code lets us know how men are not suppose to cry, and how they are not suppose to be or act like sissies. But how men must be very

Dave Barry is a Pulitzer Prize-winning humorist whose syndicated column appears in more than 500 newspapers. Barry’s published works, totaling more than 25, include ‘Stay Fit and Healthy until You’re Dead’ (1985), ‘Dave Barry Hits Below the Beltway’ (2001), and ‘Dave Barry’s Complete Guide to Guys: A Fairly Short Book’ (1995). The preface to Barry’s book ‘Dave Barry’s Complete Guide to Guys: A Fairly Short Book’, ‘Guys vs. Men’, is his perspective on the difference between “Guys” and “Men.” While both words no doubt bring to mind an image of a human male, they are very different in there description of that male. First, guys like to buy “neat” things that they don’t really need. Also, guys like a really pointless challenge. Last, but not

Stereotypes are found throughout society today. Many of these stereotypes are propagated by the prejudice and false assumptions prevalent in the American advertising industry. In her article About Men, Gretel Ehrlich exposes a variety of these fallacies--in particular, those associated with the representation of the cowboy--and questions the burden of gender roles that are imposed upon men. In an effort to differentiate between reality and these fanciful stereotypes, Ehrlich employs strong syntax, powerful imagery, and logical arguments--as well as shocking revelations about the true nature of the cowboy.

Dave Berry defines guys by three distinguishing “guy characteristics”; these three characteristics are guys like neat stuff, guys like a really pointless challenge, and guys do not have a rigid and well-defined moral code. This is a short entertaining essay about what Dave believes make men, guys. Berry uses humor to poke fun at both men and women, and the stupid things we all do. Dave says guys like stuff that are “mechanical and unnecessarily complex”. This basically states that guys might only need a hammer to do the job, but will buy the nail gun with laser sites instead. Then Dave goes on that guys always want to one up the other guy, even if it is detrimental to someone’s health. Even when someone gets hurt, the winner will always

Susan B. Anthony once said, "It was we, the people; not we, the white male citizens; nor yet we, the male citizens; but we, the whole people, who formed the Union." Women's rights pioneer and Suffragette Elizabeth Cady Stanton uses a critical tone to call attention to the oppression of women in her speech, "The Destructive Male." She points out that men's ideas are the only ones that are cared about and listened to. In Stanton's opinion, men are revered for their tough nature and inclination to war, while women are expected to be more delicate and not form their own opinions. Through the use of logos, correction of erroneous views, and criticism Stanton conveys to her audience that women are equal to men, and therefore deserve a place in politics. Unfortunately, she died of heart failure before she got a

After depositing her gear into one of the cage’s lockers, she ascended into the rafters with Vic who was seen grinning from ear to ear. He invited himself to watch Owen Grady demonstrate the contributive abilities of his velociraptors. Omorose remembered working with one pack but only briefly. Vic had them put down for ripping the stomach from one of his subordinates. Truthfully, she was hurt by it; she and Barry developed a bond with them. Although Barry trained them, she worked diligently to see that they were protected and grew fostered an almost matronly bond with them.

A short essay “ Guys vs. “Men” written by Dave Barry, presents Dave’s perception on the difference between “Guys” and “Men”. Dave presents his essay in a comical way that generalizes the “men” vs. “guys” and also gender biased generalization. Dave argues that men hold too much of responsibilities and many expectations in which guys do not and they live happier life. One of the methods he uses to support his argument is a comparison. Other method he uses is the description of how he views “men” vs. “guys” and gives his perspective. And the last method he uses to further his argument is the use of hyperbole, exaggeration through out the essay.

In Guyland, Michael Kimmel chronicles the journey of young males and the issues they face while trying to exert their masculinity and prove themselves to their peers. Based on interactions among North American males between the ages of 16 and 26, Kimmel has found that at an age where young men had previously prepped for a life of work and committed relationships, they are now living in “Guyland” where they spend their time drinking, playing video games, and having immature relations with women. Kimmel explains that these young men are “frighteningly dependent on peer culture” and “desperate to prove their masculinity in the eyes of other boys.” (30) These young men live in constant fear that they will not measure up to the ideals of

All across the world, since the dawn of time, men have taken a dominate role in society in their everyday lives. This role

In the article “War Against Boys?”, I noticed two common and reappearing rhetorical appeals, pathos and logos. The reason I chose both of these appeals is because of how Michael Kimmel thinks about how gender inequality affects boys and how this is affecting boys education in lower and higher institutions. Pathos played a huge part in this essay because of the emotional and mental impact on boys through discrimination from the school system. One example of pathos being shown is when feminism was mentioned pathologizing boyhood making boys think what is normal , another way pathos was being shown is when gender stereotyping was stated to be hurting both girls and boys (Michael 522-523). Like pathos, logos was also seen throughout the article as well. The first logos that was shown was when statistician Tom Mortensen stated that “ the graduation line 2068 will be all females”(Michael 522). Another example of logos was the statistics of gender imbalance throughout the higher educational system.

In Dave Barry’s article “We’ve Got the Dirt on Guy Brains” and the Deborah Tannen’s “Sex, Lies, and Conversation” , the authors discussed the difference between men and women in terms of specific issues. However, their opinions of what reasons have led to certain differences diverged. This essay aimed at providing a detailed examination of both articles by comparing some of the points. First of all, I will discuss the shared point of both articles regarding the differences of men and women. Then the I will move on taking about the major different opinions the two authors held. Once these have been done, a brief examination of the the evidence in both articles.

In addition to using words and phrases relating to nature, Barry utilizes diction that includes many different scientific terms that strengthen his point by showing him as directly connected to the scientific community. Throughout this passage, Barry uses words such as “theory”, “inquiry”, and “analyze” to increase his credibility on the subject with his audience. Had he not used scientific words such as these he would sound less official and his audience would be less inclined to listen and believe his point. In addition to scientific words, he uses different phrases that represent the scientific process. This includes mentioning crystals and how they “create form, structure, and direction”, as this phrase is scientific in nature and acts

Within his piece, Guys Vs. Men, Dave Barry articulates the different perspectives available on viewing males. Throughout his piece he utilizes a satirical tone to showcase this idea. The audience that Dave Barry is attempting to convey his message to is the general public. I believe this to be an appropriate assessment as the level of language employed by Dave Barry, throughout his piece, lacks complexity. His use of satire also helps to identify the audience. This is because the use of humour can be seen as a way to capture the attention of a reader quickly in hopes that the reader continues, and ultimately finishes the article. Using these as evidence I can conclude the audience being targeted is the general public. Dave Barry’s thesis, which can be located in paragraph one, stating “that there’s another way to look at males: not as aggressive macho dominators; not as sensitive, liberated, hugging drummers; but as guys.” Within his thesis, Dave Barry expresses how the stereotypes that define a male are not the only points of view of a male. He conveys that there are other perspectives available on how males can be viewed, and one of them is simply to view males as guys. In his body paragraphs, Dave Barry proceeds to explain the various characteristics that make up, and are exhibited by, guys. The Characteristics he mainly emphasises are how “Guys Like Neat Stuff”, how “Guys Like a Really Pointless Challenge”, and finally how “Guys Do Not Have a Ridged and Well-Defined

However, there are certain characteristics for men that are more ideal than others. Wade and Ferree describe this principle as hegemonic masculinity, which “refers to a type of man, idealized by men and women alike, who functions to justify and naturalize gender inequality”. They expand this concept and explain that “the hegemonic man is the “real man” in our collective imagination who theoretically embodies all the most positive traits on the masculine side of the gender binary” (2014:124). Other researchers examining hegemonic masculinity concluded that this concept supports a “social hierarchy where masculinity is hegemonic: where men dominate and women are subjugated” (Dill, Brown, and Collins 2008:1403). This dominance is particularly salient in gaming culture, where most, if not all, of the characteristics of games are geared to appeal to men. From the portrayal of men as strong heroes to the violence and aggression they are free to engage in within the game, these games are created with the hierarchy of men in mind. This hierarchy is “a rough ranking of men from most to least masculine, with the assumption that more masculine is better” (Wade and Ferree 2015:125). In order to perpetuate this hierarchy, men react negatively to anything that threatens their position. Researchers Michael Kasumovic and Jeffrey Kuznekoff explained this phenomenon of male reaction as evolutionary theory because by threatening the position a man holds in the hierarchy, one threatens his access to potential mates. They further expanded on this theory to “predict that a male’s behavior should be moderated by status and performance, such that only lower-status males that have the most to lose with a hierarchal reorganization by the introduction of a female competitor will be hostile towards female players” (2015:3). This theory explains why men tend to