Pamela Santos

De Piero
Writing 2
4 November 2015
Difference of Disciplines for the Law of the Land
On June 26th, 2015, the Supreme Court made a decision that released a vast sea of

Commented [1]: Wow, what poetic language, Santos.

:)

rainbows all over the 50 states. Gay marriage was finally legal. It is obvious that the LGBT
community views homosexuality under a different lens than those who are not members or allies.
These different perspectives that society sets for homosexuality are quite similar to the
perspectives of varying platforms, which can be scholarly articles from different disciplines or
freshly published pages of a magazine. Whatever it may be, the success of a writers responses
depend on the moves--significant actions they take to build their style--that they insert in their

Commented [2]: I don't think that this connection is as

super-tight as it could be -- I had to read it a few times
to understand what you meant.

work. A writers final approach to a topic depends on their rhetorical situation, in oth er words,
within a context or genre, that nudges [them] to choose the right diction or even jargon and to
strike the right tone (Boyd). Although they approach certain similar moves, the sociological,
religious, and media approaches towards homosexuality ultimately contrast with each other,
targeting different audiences and desiring different responses based on their rhetorical situation.

Commented [3]: Awesome way to use the course

readings in your Intro. That's rare. One q, though: the
writer almost always *inherits* the rhetorical situation;
writers don't have rhetorical situations or use them...
it's, basically, the surrounding context (which you said,
but it didn't come across quite that clearly).
Commented [4]: ?

When viewing these three platforms, it is simple to declare them under the same genre
(an article), but by looking at the varying conventions, it leads to discovering core details that

Commented [5]: Your thesis is *almost* right where I

want it to be, Santos. Can you get a bit more specific?
How do they contrast? Based on what
factors/conventions/moves?

differentiate them from one another. Each article appears similar aesthetically since there appears
to be a title and author of the article. Additionally, the three break off their article into sections in
order for the reader to have room to breathe. All three works can easily be labeled as an article;
however, the differences can be seen when looking into the articles deeper.

Commented [6]: The three what? Authors/writers?

(You haven't really mentioned them yet, so this sounds
somewhat unclear.)

Under the discipline of sociology, writers Maia Sheppard and J.B. Mayo Jr. inserted
conventions in their article The Social Construction of Gender and Sexuality: Learning from

Commented [7]: What/which conventions?

Two Spirit Traditions in order to fit into the argumentative paper genre. For example, the
purpose of the essay was to encourage teachers to make use of existing, standard social studies
curriculum to uncover and to make visible the normative assumptions that underlie American
cultural beliefs about gender and sexuality (Sheppard). Having their purpose written down is
already a convention building up to the argumentative paper. Additionally, like most papers
under the same genre, Sheppard and Mayo create their own arguments that are followed by their
true argument. Their concluding paragraph claims as these teachers can attest, teaching social
issues, addressing difficult, emotional topics with high school students is not easy work. Yet, we
believe that such challenges should not stop us (Sheppard). The contradictions they insert in
this paper highlight its argumentative style the most.
In regards with the discipline of religious studies, the scholarly article The Role of

Commented [8]: I'm not sure what you're trying to do

with this paragraph. Are you basically saying that they
have an argument? Anything else?

Religion and Stress in Sexual Identity and Mental Health Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual
Youth written by Matthew J. L. Page and Kristin M. Lindah is classified as a research paper.
They have inserted the typical conventions that are used for that genre. Although this article and
the aforementioned article do share similar conventions--like having multiple sources and

Commented [9]: I don't think it's enough to say "there

are conventions in this piece" without actually stating
what they are and explaining *why* they're there -- how
they contribute to the piece's rhetorical whole

citations--one thing remains different: their method of research. In Pages and Lindahs paper, it
is addressed that they used a large amount of participants to determine their results while in
Sheppards and Mayos, they used a few anecdotes from teachers. By comparing these two
factors, it is evident that both papers do not fall under the same genre.
Aside from the scholarly articles, the Rolling Stones can be classified as a news website.
The header on the top left followed by links of different topics reflect those of C.N.N. or Fox.

Commented [10]: What kinds of participants? What

was the study about? What questions did they ask?
What data did they gather? How do the ways in which
these researchers went about studying this topic differ
from the other authors/researchers, and what does it
suggest in terms of the importance they're placing on
their methods?
Commented [11]: I think you just mean "Rolling Stone"
here.
Commented [12]: They've got a few different genres
within the website besides news articles.
Commented [13]: Such as? Help me *see* what you
want me to notice.

Additionally, this article includes photographs and sidebar links leading to different articles,
which is not available for the scholarly articles. Automatically, this photojournalistic effect is an
affordance that strengthens this platform. The Rolling Stones article, along with the other two
disciplinary articles, all have distinguishable features that lead them to their own genre, but that
does not at all insinuate that they are not able to discuss the same topic.
The discipline of sociology, discipline of religious studies, and the Rolling Stones article
have all discussed homosexuality with different perspectives and goals which can be determined
by examining their rhetoric--which allows [them] to write (and speak) appropriately for a given
situation (Boyd). Before writing their respective articles, all three platforms must understand the
response they are trying to receive from the specific audience that they want to persuade.
Under the circumstance of persuasion, Sheppard and Mayo conjured an article containing
moves of varying importance as they worked to prove the importance of increasing gender and

Commented [14]: I feel like you've padded this with a

lot of fluff, Santos...

sexuality awareness in education. Like many articles, the writers broke paragraphs apart in
sections, with titles that separated them. This common move is often used for allowing their
audience room to breathe while reading on such a heavily informative topic. Along with this
move came the block quotes of each teacher reflection, that was printed in a slightly smaller font
to signify the hierarchy of scale in typography. Additionally, one move included highlighting
key terms displaying the importance of understanding those concepts, like heteronormativity
and heterosexism. However, from small moves of introducing each source by titling whomever
stated the claim to slightly bigger moves of varying sentence structure to avoid an overload of
text, the biggest move that sociology researchers took into this article was their use of teacher
reflections and their personal anecdotes. The researchers wrote that a teacher, Maia, felt
silenced by [her] own uncertainty of what to say...to make sense of their sexuality in light of

Commented [15]: Is this a font/appearance issue or a

diction issue, and which seems more important? (Did
the other pieces discuss "heternormativity"? Why/not
do you think? What kind of impact is that likely to have
on a reader?)

what they were learning in the classroom displays the writers appeal to pathos as they attempt
to persuade their intended audience: the educational system. The simplicity of this article and
their discovery of data increased the strength of response among their readers because some

Commented [16]: I'm glad that you're pinpointing

these moves, Santos, but I'm wondering what the main
focus of this paragraph is... what *kind(s)* of moves?
Moves within a specifc piece? It seems like you're
jumping around a bit randomly.

evidence is best obtained through direct interviews (Lunsford). The rhetoric within this platform
aid these writers into creating the perfect, persuasive article regarding sexual orientation in a
sociological light.
Following the discipline of sociology is the discipline of religious studies. It is already

Commented [17]: "Following"? What do you mean

here?

obvious that the two disciplines will have varying approaches to homosexuality and sexual
orientation, but it is important to understand how their approaches are both expressed and
conveyed. From the get-go, the religious study discipline automatically had a more experimentbased research paper, rather than interview-based. Although many of their moves are quite
similar to the sociological paper--with sections and block quotes--they also include their
methodology, what they are trying to determine, and the number of participants and carefully
examined the results and analysis. This paper contains an even more formal tone through their
diction with words like demographic, religious construct, and more research paper jargon.
These researches contained far less excess explanation of terms in their paper than the
researchers of the sociology discipline because they expect their audience to already understand
them. The importance of considering the authors purpose for the piece of writing, and the
intended audience is very high (Bunn) because without knowing this, analysts do not have reason
to understand why the writers are writing the way that they do.
Finally, after viewing the formally-toned scholarly articles, the Rolling Stones article
about 4 LGBT Issues to Focus on Now that We Have Marriage Equality written by
Annamarya Scaccia is placed on the opposite side of the spectrum when speaking about

Commented [18]: OK, this is good stuff right here -- I

suggest maybe articulating this early on. If I
understand early on the *essence* of these pieces and
how they differ, I'm probably going to be able to follow
along more purposefully throughout the rest of your
paper.

homosexuality. While sociology leaned more towards persuading the approval of sexual
orientation, religious studies viewed more at facts based on experimentation. However, this

article is to convince the United States to move forward and push away homophobia even after

Commented [19]: Excellent. This is your strongest

sentence/thought so far -- you're *cutting right to it* and
explaining how/why these pieces are fundamentally
different.

gay marriage has been declared law of the land, which in a way becomes similar to the

More of this, please!

article contains opinions that display the support of the LGBT community. The purpose of this

sociological approach, but still varies because of the platforms lack of constraints when
speaking about it. Their move of adding a subheadline already grabs the readers attention
because it explains that even though same-sex marriage is a huge victory...LGBT Americans
still face high rates of violence, discrimination, and poverty (Scaccia). Along with this move,
the article had affordances of adding hyperlinks to phrases that one might not fully understand
the concepts of, which makes the entire article more concise through less wording. Another
affordance could be their addition of the hashtag, #LoveWins. Using this hashtag grabs the
readers attentions since it captures the attitude of todays media. These affordances that Scaccia
has was not offered to the first two scholarly articles because their purpose was to be informative
and formal.
By viewing the various moves of all three articles, while also comparing their similarities
with one another, aids in understanding how different disciplines and platforms are allowed to
speak of the same topic in various ways. While the topic may be the same, their rhetorical
situation is most likely not, and the important aspect of delving deeper into these articles is to
remind each reader that although there may be one topic, there are varying perspectives that all
need to be noticed--which makes writing one of the most open-minded forms of expression.

Works Cited
Boyd, Janet. Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking). Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, Vol. 2.
Ed. Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky. South Carolina: Parlor Press, 2011. Print.
Bunn. Mike. How to Read Like a Writer. Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing, Vol. 2.
Ed. Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky. South Carolina: Parlor Press, 2011. Print.
Lunsford, Andrea. Style in Arguments Everythings An Argument. Ed. Andrea A. Lunsford,
John J. Ruszkiewicz, and Keith Walters. Boston: Bedford Books, 2010. Print.
Page, Matthew J.L., Kristin M. Lindahl, and Neena M. Malik. The Role of Religion and Stress
in Sexual Identity and Mental Health Among Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Youth.
Journal of Research On Adolescence (Wiley-Blackwell) 23.4 (2013): 665-677. Academic
Search Complete. Web. 29 Oct. 2015.
Scaccia, Annamarya. 4 LGBT Issues to Focus on Now That We Have Marriage Equality.
Rolling Stone. Rolling Stone, 29 June 2015. Web. 29 Oct. 2015
Sheppard, Maia, and J.B. Mayo. The Social Construction of Gender and Sexuality: Learning
From Two Spirit Traditions. Social Studies 104.6 (2013): 259-270. Academic Search
Complete. Web. 30 Oct. 2015

Writing 2 Feedback Matrix for WP1

Table of Textual Features

Did Not Meet

Met Expectations

Expectations

Expectations
X/X-

Thesis Statement
X

Use of Textual Evidence

from Genres

Use of Course Readings

Analysis

Organization/Structure

Attention to

Genre/Conventions and
Rhetorical Factors
X

Sentence-level Clarity,
Mechanics, Flow
Santos,
Other Comments

Exceeded

I think that this paper has a lot of potential. Towards the end
there, it seemed like you started heating up -- you were getting
more specific and more direct. You were highlighting the
fundamental differences between these pieces, and thats exactly
what you want to do. To take this to the next level, here are some
ideas:
-Include a lot more analysis of the kinds of data/evidence these
different sources are using and what kinds of RQs theyre asking
-Think about what kind of structure/organization would be best
suited for your argument (and know what, exactly, your argument
is -- sometimes putting it in plainer language will help)
-Consider working in moves earlier on and adding in more of
them -- I thought that your section on moves was interesting
-Scrap the fluff. Use the allotted page/space limit to squeeze out
as much hard-hitting evidence and super-smart points as you can.

Z
7/10