Stuff dealing with issues

Outline:

Introduction-Slight background on arranged marriage and a hook into the cultural aspect of different marriages being performed in different places.  Hopefully I tied the theme of globalization in well enough.

Thesis-American citizens may feel negatively towards arranged marriage, nevertheless they shouldn’t judge so harshly and try to be more accepting of others’ cultures. [Maybe, I'm not for  sure on that]

Main Points-A true definition of arranged marriage: There are many stereotypes involved with arranged marriages and my main goal was just to set them straight.  I pretty much just explained how they were really gone about and gave people's defenses about them who had actually been through one or lived in a culture where they were traditional.
Aspect of tragicness: Many believe that it is cruel and harsh to the couple to be wed to force them into an arranged marriage.  However, as it is a tradition, they grow up knowing what they have to look for in the future.  Americans especially think that is a violation of freedom.
Marriage has grown:  Marriage involves more than just tradition or family ties nowadays.  Two different families are being brought together.  Sometimes the families don't always get along or other times the parents don't approve of the young man himself.  Arranged marriages can lessen or often times eliminate these problems.
Parents usually have the same goals:  Whether a follower of arranged or free-choice marriage, you want the best for your child.  In cases, it is assumed that the parents looking for a spouse for their child don't consider their child's fortune in their choice.  This is another myth.  The parent's always (or will try their hardest) look for someone that is best suited for their child.

Conclusion: TBA. Haven't gotten quite that far yet so we shall see...

So maybe this is one of those 4 part ones?

Direction...I think not?

So...basically I have no idea what I even want my fake topic to be.

The only ideas I've had is something on the death penalty or phone-hacking...maybe?

Something interesting for the night.  Saw a story about an iPhone surviving a fall from a plane. Yeah.

They're invincible.

Now for my thesis: umm.......ooo I just had an idea.  Maybe arranged marriage vs. courtship?

Let's go with that.

Thesis attempt 2:  With different cultures comes different styles of marriage.  In the world there seem to be two main ways to wed: Courtship and Arrangement.  While arranged marriages tend to be frowned upon, a marriage based upon love may not be so happily ever after.

...who knows...

Reflection on Analysis (RA)

Everyone's thinking it, I'm just saying it...analysis papers are boring!
Usually opinion based papers are a lot more exciting for me.  I thought this paper went well though.  Getting started was definitely a challenge.  I wasn't a huge fan of having to go through and find an article that I like or thought I could analyze well.  That was kind of a struggle.  Once I began though, things went smoothly.  I don't mind rhetorical anylsis papers too bad.  I studied rhetoric a bunch in my senior year English class so usually it's not too hard to spot the tools being used.
On this paper, I tried to channel my focus on the analyzing.  I felt like the whole time I was writing, that's what I was telling myself to pay attention to.  Apparantely it's harder than I thought!  When going in for conferences Chris said, "hey...you need more analysis."  That surprised me since I felt like I was focusing on that the whole time.  I realized the analysis part of the paper can sometimes be underestimated! 
Specifics. Specifics. Specifics.
That's really something we should all focus on the whole time.  In any paper.
The End 

The Word

My article is "Water Wars: Bottling Up the World's Supply of H2O" by Joshua Ortega.
Now that that's out of the way...here's what's up!

First off, I noticed Ortega uses various degrees of overstatement.  For example he says, "you may find yourself going to war over your water."  As well as, "taking away your water is the same thing as putting a gun to your head."  I think these statements are effective.  They may be exaggerated, but that only get the reader thinking about what the potential possibilities could be concerning water.  It adds to the drama of the article!
Next, there are moments of imagery involved in making this article convincing.  Ortega uses words such as "looming", "scarce", "crisis", "war", and "necessity".  With the word looming, you can just picture the water crisis hanging over your head and it makes you anxious to listen to Ortega's solution.  Just the same with "looming", the other words paint pictures in your mind of frightening images making you eager to listen to Joshua Ortega's argument.  
Just some other small things I observed were a few rhetorical questions such as: "The issue can be distilled into a simple, opening proposition: tap or bottled water?" and "How can bottled water be contaminated and still be sold in the U.S.?".  These questions get the audience thinking about which type of water they would choose and other possible answers to Ortega's questions.  This also sets up a perfect opportunity for Joshua to provide his own answers to these questions.
Well...that's all I'm seeing so far so yeah.

R.A. in progress:

“Water Wars: Bottling Up the World’s Supply of H2O” is an effective argument to convince U.S. citizens to choose tap water over bottled water due to the argument’s interesting data, the emotion of urgency, and the achievable solution offered.

(Tell me what you think guys, this was somewhat of an experiment)

Now for the body...not in order.

Author Joshua Ortega starts immediately into the necessity of water.  The opening paragraph to his novel (?) begins as such, “Clean, unpolluted, affordable water.  There is nothing more important in the world…”  Being the substance that it is, water draws attention from human beings naturally because it is crucial for their survival.  Ortega employs the use of vivid adjectives such as, “scarce”, “crisis”, “looming”, and “war” to create even more emotion in his reader.  Using emotions as a tool, the author can cause the audience an urgency to listen to his argument.  As a race that depends on water to live, if we are told that our water supply was to become inadequate, we just might do anything to fix that.  An automatic attention grabber. 

There you have it.  Feedback please :) 

Time to Reflect

So, as for the OpEd...I loved it!! I really enjoy opinion based papers.  For some reason I think I enjoy arguing my opinion (even though arguing sucks sometimes).  Another aspect I usually enjoy is being able to choose my own topic.  Sometimes that can be difficult to come up with a good one but for the most part I can put more into a paper that has a topic I feel strongly about.  Things that went well for this paper was definitely the revision process.  Although the writing center had a little bit of a negative attitude, they were helpful and I think the revising stage made my paper 97% better!

...Technical Difficulty...
           BLEH

Anyways back to the paper.  On the negative side, as much as I like expressing my opinion there are some problems putting them into a paper.  I always get a bunch of ideas in my head and then it is a lot harder to get them sounding right on the page.  So, that's always a struggle when it comes to opinion papers.  Making my opinions into something organized can be hard.  Another thing that is hard with this being the first paper and all is knowing what your professor likes and what makes him give you a good grade :)
So we'll see what C. B. Husberg thinks...

 

A.C.R.

Ok first off...Chris don't hate me. Please. Life is crazy...anywho.

Claims

In my paper I make the claim that the Helaman Halls visiting hours should be changed.  And not only the hours, but I also claim that the days shouldn't be just Sundays and Wednesdays.  Another one consists of the administration and that they should let us choose not only the days but the times as well. My final claim, and thesis, is if the men are allowed in the rooms somedays, they should be allowed in the room all days.

Reasons

Some of my reasoning includes that there is no difference from one day of the week to the next.  Also I stated that Heritage Halls can have guys in their dorms as much as they want. As well as working on finding the Wyview visiting rules and regulations.  Another reason consisted of believing in free agency which should qualify us to choose the days and times for that matter that the guys come "visit".

Assumptions

I think my first assumption is really that people living in Helaman Halls are bothered by these visiting times.  I make it sound like we are all on the same page about this policy.  I noticed another assumption is that people are supporters of free agency (not too hard to assume). Also, that my audience cares to be equal with Heritage and Wyview. Hmmm...what else? I seem to struggle with this one the most.  The last assumption that I can think of is assuming the intentions of the administration a little here and there.