Analysis Of ' Donna Laframboise ' And Stevie Cameron
950 Words4 Pages
Donna Laframboise and Stevie Cameron have written two very different articles on the topic of gender. Laframboise argues that today’s society treats boys worse than girls. Cameron argues that the poor treatment of women and the relatively high risk of physical danger has shown no improvement from when she was growing up to now. Both Laframboise and Cameron’s articles discuss gender, and the implications that it can have on a person’s life. Cameron displays the strength of her article by exclusively arguing her own point. Laframboise opts to utilize and disprove other’s statements about girls as her proof. Negating other arguments is only an effective tactic when an opposition exists. Arguing ‘who has it worse?’ does not help anyone, and in fact can be detrimental in cases like this. Both articles have their own strengths and weaknesses, but Laframboise hinders her article by prioritizing denying female struggle over substance.
There is a very stark difference in tone between these two articles. Cameron takes a concerned and somber tone, expressing sadness about the treatment of girls. Her style is also very narrative and involves a lot of her personal emotions. She expresses her disappointment in the lack of a change in society’s treatment of girls from when she grew up, to today; and tells the story of the school shooting in Montreal. There is a feeling of wary hope, throughout much of the article, while she describes her aspirations for education and employment