My last weebly reflection post has arrived, I'm sure I'll continue to post because weebly posts have become such a habit now. This progression is so interesting, and somewhat of a challenge. I find it challenging because my the "sides" of what we believe to be right for gender is all opinionated. For instance, my topic for my essay is based off of the article "Defending Camelot: Chivalry is not dead" and who is anyone to say is chivalry is dead or not? Men will say that woman no longer want it, so there is no chivalrous acts. Women will say it's offensive and that it breaks everything women have built and proved to man. However, there are men that faithfully believe chivalry comes with being a gentleman and a good partner. In the world there is also women who expect that of a man because they believe it's an obligated manner men should withhold. With my topic being so broad as to how much chivalry is accepted or how it isn't dead, just no longer wanted; a lot of my resources have come from well known blogs on the internet. My thesis remains incomplete due to the fact that I do not know where it is dead or just no longer wanted. 
Weekly writing has helped me reflect on my writing because I end up finding something out about the way I write each time. Also, the comments are greatly appreciated because it allows me to try new methods of writing as well. I think overall it has been helpful because it's continued to be a learning process and learning from one another has broadened my horizons on how I see things and how I interpret them.  




This progression is going to be very intriguing! The discussions we have had so far based on gender have been very interesting. I see gender to be how a person presents themselves not whether they are a female or male. In class this week, I don't believe that statement was challenged. The men that spoke in class this week were open minded and honest. I believe that there is no unmarked woman. Each woman has something to them that sets them apart from the others based off their appearance and how they carry themselves. My "marks" could be how I dress, I'm very casual and comfortable. Make up, I don't wear anything but mascara and chapstick, which is seen to be lazy by others. As well as me wearing my hair natural every day, it can be seen as lazy that I don't put in extra time for myself. A woman will always be marked, we have the subconscious obligation to prove something.  I believe that the only reason men are "unmarked" and have the option of being "unmarked" is because men have never had to prove anything but being the provider, and as long as they were doing so, that is the image they had to maintain. I went to a birthday party where both genders were present, and noticed that the boys were all dressed alike and the girls were dressed alike as well, (it was very cold so everyone was bundled up). Who stood out to me was a boy with a blonde patch of hair and was the only one not wearing a jacket. He was just louder than everyone else, making it obvious to look at him. A girl that stood out to me was one that sat alone. She was invited to partake in activities but said no. She purposely excluded herself which struck me to be odd considering she even attended the birthday party. The difference is that usually it'd be the other way around, or what we expect from the genders. The only difference was that the roles were switched. The women in the room seemed loud and wanted to be heard and the men (there was few) had no choice but to join in with the women to converse. I think it is controllable, but it can be difficult.  We have grown up to look at people and it's developed to assuming what kind of person they are. I think it's unfair based on how far you take it, how rude one gets based on their thoughts. I can think something, not say anything about it, and just swallow my thoughts and continue with my day. Can everyone else, and if not, why? 
I was never really interested in politics until we began Progression 2. This was the first time I had ever watched a debate and found it necessary to continue watching the debates. Watching the very first debate, I felt that it was their foundation of the debates, and would build from their first foundational debate. However, the debates following were a lot of repetition which I believe affected their logos. Repeating what the candidates said over and over again, damaged their logos because they just felt they needed to convince the voters their idea. In my opinion, being convinced and believing are two completely different things. The overall ethos of the debates was the candidates themselves. President Obama is a very credible man whether you like him or not, he is THE man. As for Romney, he may not be President, but he has a title. In the debates Romney speaks of how he led his state and how well he did it, trying to build his ethos, and President Obama mentions how he was fired. With that said, President Obama affected Romney's credibility immensely. I believe the debates were mostly based upon on Ethos and Logos because that is what voters need to see. In the town hall debate, having everyday people ask questions and speak on behalf of themselves, that is where the pathos was illustrated. The candidates can the see that there are no jobs for the people, but when ONE person stands up to speak on how they need a job, or help for their education, the viewers sympathize. The viewers see someone represent their situation and can receive an answer as if it were specifically meant for them. That is pathos because it has to do with one's struggle, and bringing someones struggle and making it known to the world just how hard it is, the viewers can relate and hope for that person. 
I just voted, so may the best candidate win! 
I can't believe we have such a short time left for our first semester of college. With these last four weeks, my goal is to get an A on an essay. With the A, I know I will have fully answered the prompt and did well on that essay. Through peer editing and the progressions I have seen improvement in each assignment. I saw improvement after my revision of my progression 1 essay. So, I do know it is very possible for me to get an A. Even though there has been slight improvement in my writing, that would still be what needs the most improvement as well. In my writing I answer the prompt very literally and don't go deep into my writing which causes the reader to not be too involved in the essay. I've always been afraid to go too deep in my writing in fear that I would stray too far from my point. Now that I've gone to the LRC, I've learned just how much I need to do to grab the reader and have them stick to my essay. There is no perfect essay, but I definitely hope to get as close as I can to it!