paper 2 revised revised draft

12/3/12

Austin

1234 Capitola Road

Capitola, CA, 95010

Dear Darling Boyfriend Austin:       

As we have previously discussed, the world sucks for ladies. They make less money than men for the same jobs, they’re appreciated for being pretty rather than for being smart, their access to abortion and birth control are repeatedly threatened, they get less promotions and raises than men, they get stupid parts in movies where their presence only serves to further the plotline of the male protagonist, blah blah blah feminism. But beyond these tangible points of contention, there are broader social ills which befall us. I am speaking, of course, of the cultural mores which sanction and even encourage violence against women. Rape culture is a pervasive and damaging element of American culture that often goes unnoticed. We have all read statistics which should be alarming, like “The rate of sexual assault in the United States is the highest of any industrialized nation in the world” (Kilbourne 588) and “One in five (U.S. women) has been the victim of rape or attempted rape”(Kilbourne 588), but we fail to be alarmed. We are able to ignore these statistics because this outrageous level of violence against women is expected and entrenched in our culture.

Rape culture doesn’t mean all women are getting raped all of the time by all of the men; it means women are living under a constant and expected threat of some level of sexual violence. This violence presents itself as cat-calling, street harassment, groping, flashing, unwanted sexual comments and jokes, unwanted sexual advances, sexual assault and rape. This threat can come from virtually anyone, including friends, neighbors, teachers, police officers, and family members.  

Rape culture is evident in how we tell women to modify their behavior to avoid rape, placing the responsibility on women. My mom lovingly and neurotically advised me hundreds of thousands of times on how to avoid rape. We also receive advice about acceptable behaviors from our peers and our community. Advice such as don’t look like a slut (If another woman looks like a slut women feel the need to call her one so they can psychologically distance themselves from her and imagine that they are part of a safe ‘good girl’ category), don’t walk alone at night, keep an eye on your drink, don’t get too drunk, use the buddy system, don’t flirt too much (Or too little, it might aggravate him; an article published by the National Organization for Women suggests that "Because women are frequently perceived as inferior to men, a presumed insult from, rejection by or upstaging from a woman can damage a fragile ego. In that case, a boy or man looking to reassert his authority may well look to threats or acts of violence as his next course of action."). The truth is that none of the measures that we take to protect ourselves from rape are effective. Women can get raped at bars or parties, but they also get raped at home. In fact four in ten rapes/sexual assaults take place at the victims home, and two in ten take place at the home of a friend, neighbor or relative (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN)). Women get raped when they’re drunk, but they also get raped when they’re sober. Women can get raped when they look cute or when they are wearing sweat pants. Having a code of conduct to avoid rape makes women feel like they have control over their safety, but it also makes it easy to blame the victim of rape if she doesn’t follow ‘the rules’, and absolves the rapist of responsibility.

Rape culture is also evident in our jocular treatment of the subject, a prime example being all those ‘hilarious’ YouTube comments that are like “I totally raped the replay button” and “RE: raping the replay button; More like gang banged cause I got in on it too LOLOLOL”.  Minimizing a violent attack that affects so many women is not only distasteful, it’s deeply troubling. One in five American women have been victims of rape or attempted rape and most women are constantly modifying their behavior to avoid rape. Rape jokes are a callous and unnecessary reminder of the threat of violence that we live under, and to women who have experienced rape they can trigger unwanted recollections. Perhaps to the person making the jokes they are funny because the threat is so removed from the comedian’s reality. Daniel Tosh, popular straight white male comedian, has a storied history of making unabashedly insensitive and tactless jokes. In one well publicized incident, a female audience member objected to his assertion that rape jokes are funny, to which Tosh retorted (as told by the audience member) “Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by like, 5 guys right now?” (HuffingtonPost.com) Tosh has a different version of the story and has since offered an apology, but the tale is far from unbelievable. Many people will invoke their first amendment rights when being held accountable for making hateful statements. I would argue that although Tosh and kids on the internet have the right to act like jerks, they don’t have the right to go un-criticized or silence dissent with threats of violence, flippant or otherwise.

We are constantly exposed to advertising which reduces women to body parts and dehumanizes them. Jean Kilbourne discusses at length how advertising is harmful to women in her essay “Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt”. In the essay Kilbourne asserts that “Turning a human being into a thing, an object, is almost always the first step towards justifying violence against that person” (Kilbourne 585) and argues that the step of objectification is already taken with women, and violence is only the logical result (Kilbourne 585). Advertising presents unattainable ideals, presents people as objects, and uses sex and violence to sell us products. This is especially dangerous for the women because they are already at a power disadvantage in society. The threat of violence is palpable for the objectified woman in a way that it is not for the objectified man because of the existing inequality.

The ‘ideal’ of masculinity in U.S. society is for men to be aggressive, unemotional and independent. Although most men aren’t actively trying to fulfill this hyper-manly ideal, it still informs our notions of what is acceptable behavior for men. Many young men associate this ‘manly’ gender role with categorical rejection of homosexuality and anything feminine. As author Michael Kimmel put it in his essay “’Bros Before Hos’: The Guy Code”, “Homophobia – the fear that people might misperceive you as gay – is the animating fear of American guy’s masculinity.” (Kimmel 613) One problematic feature of this ’guy code’ is the conflation of weakness, femininity and homosexuality. Among teenagers and the interminably immature ‘gay’ means bad, ‘pussy’ means weak, and ‘bitch’ means subordinate. This language shows us how the hierarchy is arranged in the world of the masculine ideal, with homosexual individuals and women being seen as inferior to heterosexual men. The encouragement of ‘manly’ violence and an indifferent ‘boys will be boys’ attitude opens up the door to anti-gay bullying and harassment of women.

Rape culture is a persistent but often ignored element of American society. The first step to correcting this malevolent aspect of our culture is to recognize and challenge it. Women are held accountable for protecting themselves against rape, but this only leads to blaming victims and takes the responsibility off of the person committing the violence. Jokes which minimize the experiences of women are part of an atmosphere of rape culture in which women are constantly threatened. Objectifying anyone -- particularly women, who are already at a power disadvantage -- is dehumanizing and leads to violence, and maintaining an ideal of masculinity which considers callousness and violence ‘manly’ only adds fuel to the fire. Imagine with me, darling, a more ideal world: Instead of women being held responsible for not getting raped, rapists are held responsible for not raping. Victims of sexual violence aren’t belittled, blamed or shamed and don’t have their experiences minimized. Advertisers are called out for using women’s body parts to sell their products and are made conscious of the affect that this has on people’s psyches. A more positive masculine ideal that doesn’t focus on aggression is encouraged. Of course, in a perfect world sexual violence would be a non-issue. But these goals are within reach for modern America.

Yours truly,

Jacqueline

Works Cited

Kilbourne, Jean. ""Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt": Advertising and Violence."Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. Ed. Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2001. 575-99. Print.

Gandy, Kim, Lisa Bennett, and Gina Mittal. "School Shooters Target Girls, Point to Larger Problem of Violence Against Women." School Shooters Target Girls, Point to Larger Problem of Violence Against Women. National Organization for Women, 10 Oct. 2006. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. <http://www2.now.org/issues/violence/101006school_shootings.html?printable>.

This article published by the National Organization for women (NOW) details recent acts of violence (the Amish school shooting where a milk truck driver shot ten girls, another school attack where a man took several high school girls hostage and sexually assaulted them before killing himself and one hostage) where the targeting of women in particular is overlooked by the media. the article discusses the aggressive ideal of masculinity and violence against women. a possibly useful quote from this article is "Because women are frequently perceived as inferior to men, a presumed insult from, rejection by or upstaging from a woman can damage a fragile ego. In that case, a boy or man looking to reassert his authority may well look to threats or acts of violence as his next course of action."

"The Offenders." RAINN (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network). RAINN, 2009. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. <http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders>.

McGlynn, Katla. "Daniel Tosh Apologizes For Rape Joke Aimed At Female Audience Member At Laugh Factory." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 10 July 2012. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/10/daniel-tosh-rape-joke-laugh-factory_n_1662882.html>.

Kimmel, Michael. ""Bros Before Hos": The Guy Code." Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. Ed. Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2001. 608-17. Print.

Paper 2 revised draft

12/3/12

Austin

1234 Capitola Road

Capitola, CA, 95010

Dear Austin:  

As we have previously discussed, the world sucks for ladies. They make less money than men for the same jobs, they’re appreciated for being pretty rather than for being smart, their access to abortion and birth control are repeatedly threatened, they get less promotions and raises than men, they get stupid parts in movies where their presence only serves to further the plotline of the male protagonist, blah blah blah feminism. But beyond these tangible points of contention, there are broader social ills which befall us. I am speaking, of course, of the cultural mores which sanction and even encourage violence against women. Rape culture is a pervasive and damaging but often ignored element of American culture. We have all read statistics which should be alarming, like “The rate of sexual assault in the United States is the highest of any industrialized nation in the world” (Kilbourne, Par 25) and “One in five (U.S. women) has been the victim of rape or attempted rape”(Kilbourne, Par 25), but we fail to be alarmed. We are able to ignore these statistics because this outrageous level of violence against women is expected and entrenched in our culture.

Rape culture doesn’t mean all women are getting raped all of the time by all of the men; it means women are living under a constant and expected threat of some level of sexual violence. This includes cat-calling, street harassment, groping, flashing, unwanted sexual comments and jokes, unwanted sexual advances, sexual assault and rape. This threat can come from friends, neighbors, teachers, police officers, or family members, virtually anyone.  

Rape culture is evident in how we tell women to modify their behavior to avoid rape, placing the responsibility on women. My mom lovingly and neurotically advised me hundreds of thousands of times on how to avoid rape. We also receive advice about acceptable behaviors from our peers and our community. Advice such as don’t look like a slut (If another woman looks like a slut women feel the need to call her one so they can psychologically distance themselves from her and imagine that they are part of a safe ‘good girl’ category), don’t walk alone at night, keep an eye on your drink, don’t get too drunk, use the buddy system, don’t flirt too much (Or too little, it might aggravate him; an article published by the National Organization for Women suggests that "Because women are frequently perceived as inferior to men, a presumed insult from, rejection by or upstaging from a woman can damage a fragile ego. In that case, a boy or man looking to reassert his authority may well look to threats or acts of violence as his next course of action."). The truth is that none of the measures that we take to protect ourselves from rape are effective. Women can get raped at bars or parties, but they also get raped at home. In fact four in ten rapes/sexual assaults take place at the victims home, and two in ten take place at the home of a friend, neighbor or relative (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN)). Women get raped when they’re drunk, but they also get raped when they’re sober. Women can get raped when they look cute or when they are wearing sweat pants. Having a code of conduct to avoid rape makes women feel like they have control over their safety, but it also makes it easy to blame the victim of rape if she doesn’t follow ‘the rules’, and absolves the rapist of responsibility.

Rape culture is also evident in our jocular treatment of the subject, a prime example being all those ‘hilarious’ YouTube comments that are like “I totally raped the replay button” and “RE: raping the replay button; More like gang banged cause I got in on it too LOLOLOL”.  Minimizing a violent attack that affects so many women is not only distasteful, it’s deeply troubling. One in five American women have been victims of rape or attempted rape and most women are constantly modifying their behavior to avoid rape. Rape jokes are a callous and unnecessary reminder of the threat of violence that we live under, and to women who have experienced rape they can trigger unwanted recollections. Perhaps to the person making the jokes they are funny because the threat is so removed from the comedian’s reality. Daniel Tosh, popular straight white male comedian, has a storied history of making unabashedly insensitive and tactless jokes. In one well publicized incident, a female audience member objected to his assertion that rape jokes are funny, to which Tosh retorted (as told by the audience member) “Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by like, 5 guys right now?” (HuffingtonPost.com) Tosh has a different version of the story and has since offered an apology, but the tale is far from unbelievable. Many people will invoke their first amendment rights when being held accountable for making hateful statements. I would argue that although Tosh and kids on the internet have the right to act like jerks, they don’t have the right to go un-criticized or silence dissent with threats of violence, flippant or otherwise.

We are constantly exposed to advertising which reduces women to body parts and dehumanizes them. Jean Kilbourne discusses at length how advertising is harmful to women in her essay “Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt”. In the essay Kilbourne asserts that “Turning a human being into a thing, an object, is almost always the first step towards justifying violence against that person” (Kilbourne, P 585) and argues that the step of objectification is already taken with women, and violence is only the logical result (Kilbourne, p 585). Advertising presents unattainable ideals, presents people as objects, and uses sex and violence to sell us products. This is especially dangerous for the women because they are already at a power disadvantage in society. The threat of violence is palpable for the objectified woman in a way that it is not for the objectified man because of the existing inequality.

The ‘ideal’ of masculinity in U.S. society is for men to be aggressive, unemotional and independent. Although most men aren’t actively trying to fulfill this hyper-manly ideal, it still informs our notions of what is acceptable behavior for men. Many young men associate this ‘manly’ gender role with categorical rejection of homosexuality and anything feminine. As author Michael Kimmel put it in his essay “’Bros Before Hos’: The Guy Code”, “Homophobia – the fear that people might misperceive you as gay – is the animating fear of American guy’s masculinity.” (Kimmel, p. 613) One problematic feature of this ’guy code’ is the conflation of weakness, femininity and homosexuality. Among teenagers and the interminably immature ‘gay’ means bad, ‘pussy’ means weak, and ‘bitch’ means subordinate. This language shows us how the hierarchy is arranged in the world of the masculine ideal, with homosexual individuals and women being seen as inferior to heterosexual men. The encouragement of ‘manly’ violence and an indifferent ‘boys will be boys’ attitude opens up the door to anti-gay bullying and harassment of women.

Rape culture is a pervasive element of our society which often goes unnoticed. The first step to correcting this malevolent aspect of our culture is to recognize and challenge it. Women are held accountable for protecting themselves against rape, but this only leads to blaming victims and takes the responsibility off of the person committing the violence. Jokes which minimize the experiences of women are part of an atmosphere of rape culture where women are constantly threatened with the violence. Objectifying anyone -- particularly women, who are already at a power disadvantage -- is dehumanizing and leads to violence, and maintaining an ideal of masculinity which considers callousness and violence ‘manly’ only adds to that violence.  Instead of holding ladies responsible for not getting raped, we should hold rapists responsible for not raping. We should create a dialogue in schools and in the media about what rape is and what consent is. We should not belittle, blame or shame victims of sexual violence or minimize their experiences. We should call out advertisers for using women’s body parts to sell their products and be conscious of the affect that this has on our psyches. We should encourage a more positive masculine ideal that doesn’t focus on aggression and not hold ourselves to such strict standards of gender performance.

Yours truly,

Jacqueline

Works Cited

Kilbourne, Jean. ""Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt": Advertising and Violence."Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. Ed. Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2001. 575-99. Print.

Gandy, Kim, Lisa Bennett, and Gina Mittal. "School Shooters Target Girls, Point to Larger Problem of Violence Against Women." School Shooters Target Girls, Point to Larger Problem of Violence Against Women. National Organization for Women, 10 Oct. 2006. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. <http://www2.now.org/issues/violence/101006school_shootings.html?printable>.

"The Offenders." RAINN (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network). RAINN, 2009. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. <http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders>.

McGlynn, Katla. "Daniel Tosh Apologizes For Rape Joke Aimed At Female Audience Member At Laugh Factory." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 10 July 2012. Web. 03 Dec. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/10/daniel-tosh-rape-joke-laugh-factory_n_1662882.html>.

Kimmel, Michael. ""Bros Before Hos": The Guy Code." Rereading America: Cultural Contexts for Critical Thinking and Writing. Ed. Gary Colombo, Robert Cullen, and Bonnie Lisle. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2001. 608-17. Print.

Paper 2 Rough Draft

Dear Austin,     

As we have previously discussed, the world sucks for ladies. They make less money than men for the same jobs, they’re appreciated for being pretty rather than for being smart, their access to abortion and birth control are repeatedly threatened, they get less promotions and raises than men, they get stupid parts in movies where their presence only serves to further the plotline of the male protagonist, blah blah blah feminism. But beyond these tangible points of contention, there are broader social ills which befall us. I am speaking, of course, of the cultural mores which sanction and even encourage violence against women. We have all read statistics which should be alarming, like “The rate of sexual assault in the United States is the highest of any industrialized nation in the world” (Kilbourne, Par 25) and “One in five (U.S. women) has been the victim of rape or attempted rape”(Kilbourne, Par 25), but we fail to be alarmed. We are able to ignore these statistics because this outrageous level of violence against women is expected and entrenched in our culture.

Rape culture doesn’t mean all women are getting raped all of the time by all of the men; it means women are living under a constant and expected threat of some level of sexual violence. This includes cat-calling, street harassment, groping, flashing, unwanted sexual comments and jokes, unwanted sexual advances, sexual assault and rape. This threat can come from friends, neighbors, teachers, police officers, or family members, virtually anyone.  

Rape culture is evident in how we tell women to modify their behavior to avoid rape, placing the responsibility on women. My mom neurotically reminded me hundreds of thousands of times about the tips ‘n tricks of not getting raped. We also receive advice about acceptable behaviors from our peers and our community. Advice such as don’t look like a slut! (And if another girl looks like a slut, you better call her one so you can psychologically distance yourself from her and remain safe in your rape-free-good-girl-bubble (good girls don’t get raped, dur)) Don’t walk alone at night! Keep an eye on your drink! Don’t get too drunk! Use the buddy system! Don’t flirt too much! (Or too little, it might aggravate him; an article published by the National Organization for Women suggests that "Because women are frequently perceived as inferior to men, a presumed insult from, rejection by or upstaging from a woman can damage a fragile ego. In that case, a boy or man looking to reassert his authority may well look to threats or acts of violence as his next course of action.") The truth is that none of the measures that we are told time and time again will protect us from rape are effective. Women can get raped at bars or parties, but they also get raped at home. In fact four in ten rapes/sexual assaults take place at the victims home, and two in ten take place at the home of a friend, neighbor or relative (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN) http://www.rainn.org/get-information/statistics/sexual-assault-offenders). Women get raped when they’re drunk, but they also get raped when they’re sober. Women can get raped when they look cute or when they are wearing sweat pants. Having a code of conduct to avoid rape makes women feel like they have control over their safety, but it also makes it easy to blame the victim of rape if she doesn’t follow ‘the rules’ and absolves the rapist of responsibility.

Rape culture is also evident in our jocular treatment of the subject. Like all those hilarious YouTube comments that are like “I totally raped the replay button” and “RE: raping the replay button; More like gang banged cause I got in on it too LOLOLOL”.  HAHA. Minimizing a violent attack that affects so many women is not only distasteful, it’s deeply troubling. One in five American women have been victims of rape or attempted rape and most women are constantly modifying their behavior to avoid rape. Rape jokes are a callous and unnecessary reminder of the threat of violence that we live under, and to women who have experienced rape they can trigger unwanted recollections. Perhaps to the person making the jokes they are funny because they are so removed from the comedian’s reality. Daniel Tosh, popular straight white male comedian, has a storied history of making unabashedly insensitive and tactless jokes. In one well publicized incident, a female audience member objected to his assertion that rape jokes are funny, to which Tosh retorted (as told by the audience member) “Wouldn’t it be funny if that girl got raped by like, 5 guys right now?” (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/10/daniel-tosh-rape-joke-laugh-factory_n_1662882.html) Tosh has a different version of the story and has since offered an apology, but the tale is far from unbelievable. Many people will invoke their first amendment rights when being held accountable for making hateful statements. I would argue that although Tosh has the right to act like a jerk, he doesn’t have the right to go un-criticized and silence dissent with threats of violence, flippant or otherwise.

We are constantly exposed to advertising which reduces women to body parts and dehumanizes them. Jean Kilbourne discusses at length how advertising is harmful to women in her essay “Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt”. In the essay Kilbourne asserts that “Turning a human being into a thing, an object, is almost always the first step towards justifying violence against that person” (Kilbourne, P 585) and argues that the step of objectification is already taken with women, and violence is only the logical result (Kilbourne, p 585). Advertising presents unattainable ideals, presents people as objects, and uses sex and violence to sell us products. This is especially dangerous for the women because they are already at a power disadvantage in society. The threat of violence is palpable for the objectified woman in a way that it is not for the objectified man because of the existing inequality.

The ‘ideal’ of masculinity in U.S. society is for men to be aggressive, unemotional and independent. Although most men aren’t actively trying to fulfill this hyper-manly ideal, it still informs our notions of what is acceptable behavior for men. Many young men associate this ‘manly’ gender role with categorical rejection of homosexuality and anything feminine. As author Michael Kimmel put it in his essay “Guy Code”, “Homophobia – the fear that people might misperceive you as gay – is the animating fear of American guy’s masculinity.” (Kimmel, p. 613) One problematic feature of this ’guy code’ is the conflation of weakness, femininity and homosexuality. Among teenagers and the interminably immature ‘gay’ means bad, ‘pussy’ means weak, and ‘bitch’ means subordinate. This language shows us how the hierarchy is arranged in the world of the masculine ideal, with homosexual individuals and women being seen as inferior to heterosexual men. The encouragement of ‘manly’ violence and an indifferent ‘boys will be boys’ attitude opens the doors to anti-gay bullying and harassment of women.

Rape culture is a pervasive element of our society which often goes unnoticed. The first step to correcting this malevolent aspect of our culture is to recognize and challenge it. Instead of holding ladies responsible for not getting raped, we should hold rapists responsible for not raping. We should create a dialogue in schools and in the media about what rape is and what consent is. We should not belittle, blame or shame victims of sexual violence or minimize their experiences. We should call out advertisers for using women’s body parts to sell their products and be conscious of the affect that this has on our psyches. We should encourage a more positive masculine ideal that doesn’t focus on aggression and not hold ourselves to such strict standards of gender performance. 

Annotated Bibliography #2

Grufferman, Barbara Hannah. "Does Facebook Condone A "Culture Of Rape"?" The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 15 Aug. 2011. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barbara-hannah-grufferman/does-facebook-condone-a-c_b_926309.html>.

This op-ed article published by the Huffington Post deals with the issue of one particular facebook group which centers on a rape joke and the reactions of facebook users and facebook. It also mentions the “slut walk’, an event which I may include in my essay. I think this article will be useful because it offers statistics about rape as well as a useful anecdote about rape culture in social media.
Armah, Esther. "Scar Stories: On White Dudes and Rape Culture." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 06 Nov. 2012. Web. 19 Nov. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/esther-armah/scar-stories-on-white-dud_1_b_2024639.html>.

Another op-ed from the Huffington Post, this article details most of the very wrong statements that Republican politicians have made lately. One useful quotation that the author makes is from South Dakota Republican Bill Napoli: “A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life.” This article will mostly be useful because it contains several quotes to this effect.

Black, Michele C., Kathleen C. Basile, Matthew J. Breiding, Sharon G. Smith, Mikel L. Walters, Melissa T. Merrick, Jieru Chen, and Mark R. Stevens. Www.cdc.gov. Rep. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers For Disease Control and Prevention, Nov. 2011. Web. 24 Nov. 2012. <http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf>.
This report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention offers many useful and relevant statistics on the victims and perpetrators of rape in the United States. It offers a variety of statistics and break downs by race, ethnicity, sex and form of assault. this will lend a lot of logos to my argument because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is a trusted government source.

Gandy, Kim, Lisa Bennett, and Gina Mittal. "School Shooters Target Girls, Point to Larger Problem of Violence Against Women." School Shooters Target Girls, Point to Larger Problem of Violence Against Women. National Organization for Women, 10 Oct. 2006. Web. 24 Nov. 2012. <http://now.org/issues/violence/101006school_shootings.html?printable>.
This article published by the National Organization for women (NOW) details recent acts of violence (the Amish school shooting where a milk truck driver shot ten girls, another school attack where a man took several high school girls hostage and sexually assaulted them before killing himself and one hostage) where the targeting of women in particular is overlooked by the media. the article discusses the aggressive ideal of masculinity and violence against women. a possibly useful quote from this article is "Because women are frequently perceived as inferior to men, a presumed insult from, rejection by or upstaging from a woman can damage a fragile ego. In that case, a boy or man looking to reassert his authority may well look to threats or acts of violence as his next course of action."

Paper 2 proposal

Rhetorical Analysis

Title: “Rape Culture”

Author: Jacqueline Cooper
Date: 11/11/12

Topic: How the objectification of women in advertising and popular culture leads to dehumanization and how the encouragement of men to be aggressive and reject anything perceived as feminine or ‘gay’ contributes to a culture where physical and sexual violence against women and members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer/questioning (LGBTQ) community are the norm.

Analysis of argument

Exigence: “From Fly Girls to Bitches and Hos” by Joan Morgan discusses sexism in rap music, “Two Ways A Woman Can Get Hurt” by Jean Kilbourne discusses the objectification of women’s bodies in advertising at length, and Michael Kimmel’s “Bros Before Hos” discusses the cultural stereotype/ideal of the physically aggressive, emotionally indifferent, and hostilely homophobic man. These all tie together when discussing a culture where aggression against women and members of the LGBTQ community are accepted and expected.

Intended audience: People who are familiar with the topics of human objectification in advertising, gender stereotypes, and American culture.

Purpose: To explain how media which constantly sexualizes images of women and reduces women to body parts and a culture which prizes male aggression and homophobia leads to a society where violent attacks on women and members of the LGBTQ community are common (according to Kilbourne, “the rate of sexual assault in the united states is the highest of any industrialized nation in the world”(p 588).) and victims are often blamed for their attacks.

Claims:

Main evidence: “The rate of sexual assault in the united states is the highest of any industrialized nation in the world… one in five of us has been the victim of rape or attempted rape”((Kilbourne, Par 25).), case where a male baby sitter in Canada was acquitted of child molestation because the judge decided the 3 year old victim was “sexually aggressive” (Kilbourne, par 30)) “women have, in men’s minds, such a low place on the social ladder of this country that it’s useless to define yourself in terms of a woman. What men need is men’s approval.” (David Mamet as quoted by Michael Kimmel, p 611) “Homophobia – the fear that people might misperceive you as gay – is the animating fear of American guy’s masculinity.” (Kimmerl, p 613) “The single cardinal rule of manhood, the one from which all other characteristics… are derived is to offer constant proof that you are not gay” (Kimmel, p 613) “Sex has long been the bartering chip that women use to gain protection, material wealth, and the vicarious benefits of power. In the black community, where women are given less access to all of the above, “trickin’” becomes a means of leveling the playing field.” (Morgan, p 605) “Yeah, sistas are hurt when we hear brothers calling us botches and hos. But the real crime isn’t the name calling, it’s their failure to love us – to be our brothers in the way that we commit ourselves to being their sistas” (Morgan, p604)

RA #2

“From Fly girls to Bitches and hos” by Joan Morgan is an article about how sexism in rap music effects people who are immersed in hip hop culture and what the root causes of that sexism are. The author is a feminist who finds fault with the sexism present in rap music from one point of view, but from another point of view she sees a need to take a deeper look at the circumstances that lead to that sexism. The intended audience for this article are younger people who listen to rap music and are familiar with popular culture and people who are familiar with feminism and may also experience some divergence of feelings over rap music. The purpose of this article is to explain to the audience the presence of sexism in rap music and the reasons why it is present, to point out women’s complicity in their representation is rap music, and to point out aggressions within communities. The author claims that rap music is sexist because of the circumstances under which it is created, and that people within a community act aggressively towards one another because of outside pressures.

The author uses ethos by being a credible source herself: she is ‘a music writer and a fan of hip hop’ (p 601) as well as a feminist. She uses a lot of firsthand evidence and quotes from rap songs to make her case (she shares a story about a friend who was attacked by a pitbull, a family friend who was brutally murdered, quotes from Biggie  Smalls’ song ‘Everyday Struggle’ and Jeru the Damaja). The author also employs pathos by making appeals to those involved in the hip hop community, addressing readers by employing phrases such as “sista friends” (p 604) and using the pronoun ‘we’.  The author also uses logos extensively, offering real life examples and direct quotes from rap songs and connecting them back to how they affect the individuals and community that they are a representing (a good example of this is the analysis after describing the murder of a family friend “Clearly, we are having a very difficult time loving one another. Any feminism that fails to acknowledge that black folks in nineties America are living and trying to love in a war zone is useless to our struggle against sexism”). As a reader, I did not really connect with this piece because it didn’t feel like it was intended for an audience outside of those within a specific community. It was interesting and compelling to hear the author outline her struggle to reconcile her feminism with her love of rap music. I felt that she made a good case, she seemed credible and she used good evidence, although I feel that more statistics or quotes would have backed up her argument better. The tone made it feel like more of a personal essay or mass media article than an academic piece, and the 90’s hip hop slang made it seem dated.

RA #3

Rhetorical Analysis

Title: “Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt”: Advertising and Violence

Author: Jean Kilbourne
Date: 1999

Topic: How advertising dehumanizes people (especially women) and mimics sexual violence and pornography to sell products

Analysis of argument

Exigence: The use of pornographic images and violence in advertising

Intended audience: American consumers, especially young people for whom ads for perfumes, beer, and clothing are generally intended.

Purpose: to explain the prevalence of ads which represent people’s bodies (especially those of women) as objects, sexualize children and mimic pornography and violence, as well as to explain how this type of advertising changes the way people think about one another and effects our behavior.

Claims: the author claims that companies use violent and pornographic images and images which sexualize children in order to sell their products because it is shocking and sometimes appealing to consumers, but it is overall damaging to society and individuals in the end.

Main evidence: the author uses a multitude of advertising images to prove her point; she also uses logic, statistics regarding sexual assault (“the rate of sexual assault in the united states is the highest of any industrialized nation in the world… one in five of us has been the victim of rape or attempted rape”(Par 25).), specific court cases (a male baby sitter in Canada was acquitted of child molestation because the judge decided the 3 year old victim was “sexually aggressive” (par 30)), and noteworthy cultural occurrences (the trend of sexualizing adolescent girls in school uniforms (“Loli-con”) in Japan, the sensationalized JonBenet Ramsey murder case), and quotes and citations from reliable sources (Nan Stein, reasearcher at Wellesley college regarding abuse, an article from the journal ‘eating disorders’, an editorial from ‘advertising age’ regarding beer advertisements).

Rhetorical analysis

Writers strategy #1: ethos: the author cited statistics from the federal government, people connected to well known academic institutions, and publications related to her topic, but overwhelmingly used the advertising images themselves.

Writers strategy #2: pathos: the author tried to connect with the reader by soliciting sympathy for victims of rape and abuse which is commonplace in a society that is complicit in dehumanizing people to sell products.

Writers strategy #3: logos: the author used logos extensively through well researched facts and statistics and solid reasoning as well as by providing a multitude of examples.

Reader effect #1: as the reader I was convinced that the author was well educated on the subject and had done substantial research. The sources, statistics and evidence she chose to use were convincing and fit well into the article.

Reader effect #2: The author was successful in demonstrating the real world consequences of a society that dehumanizes people.

Reader effect #3: The author's argument was logical and convincing, she backed up her claims with good evidence and reasoning.

Your response

Defend, qualify, refute: I agree with the author that the use of advertising images which depict violence against women, images which reduce women to body parts and dehumanize them, and images which sexualize children are damaging to society and to the individual’s psyche.

Kimmel RR

Michael Kimmel is the author of “‘Bros Before Hos’: The Guy Code”, an analysis of the strict set of rules that young men follow to appear appropriately masculine. The article details the rules, their purpose and their origins.

According to Kimmel, these rules are learned from a very young age. They begin when young boys start to reject their mothers and identify with their fathers, or ‘become men’. This is when boys learn the basics of ‘boy code’: don’t cry, don’t be a wimp, etcetera. These values are reinforced by fathers who fear their sons being rejected from male peers for being ‘sissies’. As boys get older the Guy Code is further enforced by coaches who push young athletes to not show pain and male teachers who extol the “…explorers or scientists [who] were so courageous and braving the elements and all that” (611) as one young man explained.

The Guy Code is most strongly enforced by male peers, who’s approval is key to and the goal of ‘being a man’. In fact the purpose of the Guy Code is not to impress women but to impress other men. Kimmel quotes playwright David Mamet as saying “Women have, in men’s minds, such a low place on the social ladder of this country that it’s useless to define yourself in terms of a woman. What men need is men’s approval” (611). All of the ostentatious posturing of young men is not to gain the adoration of women, although the adoration of women may add to their perceived manliness. What young men really want is the admiration of other men.

The rules on Kimmel’s Guy Code top ten list are all very familiar. Don’t cry, don’t show emotion (except anger, which is encouraged), be stoic, don’t rely on others for help, be brave and tough, be big and strong, quantify your masculinity with material possessions, and (possibly most importantly) never seem gay. These rules fit the white American stereotype of manliness that I am familiar with. Although it seems to be the ideal, I have not seen Guy Code fully lived up to by any actual man (although a few of my family members have made enthusiastic attempts). Not only are these rules very restrictive, but they are very difficult to maintain. Kimmel states that “the Guy Code fits as comfortably as a straight-jacket"  (615). Masculinity (much like femininity) is a social construction that we learn from how we see others treated around us and how we are encouraged to act. There is nothing natural or healthy about men being expected to never show emotion, never need help, measure their worth in physical strength and material possessions, and categorically reject things that they might otherwise identify with or enjoy because they are ‘un-masculine’. These standards of masculinity are damaging to men as well as to women and our culture as a whole. I feel it would be in everyone’s best interest to abort the whole masculine/feminine dichotomy and treat everyone like individuals without any social expectations based on their genitalia.

Prop 30 final polish

Cooper, Jacqueline

English 2

T/Th, 12:40

California’s budget is in crisis and Jerry Brown thinks he has the solution. The state debt (recent estimates by The New York Times say $28 billion) often makes headlines but California voters (who seem to categorically oppose tax hikes) have rejected the last 8 proposed tax increases. Meanwhile schools have suffered continuous cuts to funding, leading to increased tuition costs and reduced course offerings for community colleges and larger class sizes and less staff for k-12 schools among other hardships. Jerry Brown proposes a solution in the form of Proposition 30, which will prevent further cuts to education by instating a 4 year .25% sales tax increase and a 7 year income tax increase for California’s wealthiest earners. The passage of Prop 30 will make a world of difference for California’s schools.

If Prop 30 does not pass, a pre-approved package of ‘trigger cuts’ will go into effect on January first 2013, automatically cutting another 5.4 billion dollars from grade schools and community colleges. If Prop 30 does pass it is estimated that it will earn $6 billion a year for 4 years. This money will be set aside for education and public safety (including education in prisons and supervision of parolees) and will free up some of the state’s general fund that was being used for education.

            The passage of Prop 30 would help ease the financial burden for California’s schools. If the proposition does not pass community colleges like Cabrillo will lose an additional 7.3% in funding, which will mean losing space for 780 full time students at Cabrillo. That means less young people and community members will be able to further their education and more people will be locked out of opportunities for career advancement. More cuts will affect the educational opportunities of almost a thousand people in our area alone, and similar repercussions will be felt all over the state. With previous budget cuts we have already seen restrictions placed on community college students regarding course attempts, fewer classes being offered, less tutoring and support staff, reduced hours and tuition increases. This illustrates that less funding means more obstacles to student success. If we continue to cut funds from education, we are setting up our students and children for failure and California will continue to fall further behind in education.

            California is one of the most expensive states to live, and most voters are opposed to paying more in taxes when they are already struggling financially. However, the tax burden of Proposition 30 will be minimal for the majority of voters. The sales tax will increase by only ¼ of a percent, or one penny for every $4.00. The income tax increase will only affect the wealthiest 3% of California residents (individuals earning over $250,000 or families making over $500,000), raising their income tax by 1-3% for seven years. It is in everyone’s best interest to make education accessible, and California’s wealthiest tax payers have the means to do just that.

As a long time community college student and daughter of a long time public school employee I have experienced and witnessed the increased budget cuts and the hardship it creates for students and administrators. These past two semesters I have been unable to register for courses that are required for me to transfer due to over enrollment, and I have had no choice but to prolong my stay at community college for an additional year. I have also spent time volunteering at the public elementary school where my mom was office manager and seen how teachers are overwhelmed by increasing class sizes and decreasing funds as well as how my mom had to struggle to complete an ever increasing workload with less help and less hours. Our public schools cannot get by with less than they already receive, and voters need to recognize that.

            Many students like me who live away from home and pay for school out of pocket will find it difficult to continue their education if California continues to cut school funding to make room in the budget. Many students may find it impossible to pay for school with more tuition increases. More students will struggle to complete their required classes due to limitations on attempts and classes being cut, increasing the time spent in community college and the time it takes to transfer or graduate. Without more funding for education, California will see a decrease in college graduates and by extension a decrease in the standard of living. Those who can’t afford college will have to forgo an education or leave the state to obtain an affordable education, creating a ‘brain drain’ for California. Even those who don’t attend school or don’t have children who attend school will suffer if Californian voters don’t decide to make education a priority, because California’s economy will suffer.

            There is another proposition to fund education on the ballot alongside Proposition 30. Proposition 38 proposes to fund education by raising income tax on a sliding scale for all Californians earning over $7,316 for 12 years. Some of the funding earned would go to education and early childhood development and some would go to paying off state debt. Unfortunately both measures cannot pass since they both involve raising income tax, and the proposition with the most ‘yes’ votes will take precedence if both propositions pass. Proposition 30 is the better choice because it doesn't raise income tax on lower income Californians and the money will be allocated specifically for education and public safety.

Those opposed to Proposition 30 argue that it is unfair to tax the wealthy at a higher rate. It is unlikely that the 1-3% tax increase on those earning more than $250,000 a year will create a life altering burden for the wealthy. The benefits of keeping education available outweigh the costs of a meager tax increase on the rich.

            California voters should support Proposition 30 because it is the best course of action to take to protect California’s education system. Without a properly funded education system California’s citizens will be unprepared for higher education and the workforce. Fewer people will be able to earn college degrees and secure well-paying jobs. If Proposition 30 passes the tax increase will be slight for most Californian’s and those who can afford it will pay their fair share. And Proposition 30 is supported by the people most affected by it, including California Teachers association, Academic Senate and California Faculty Association.

Works Cited

Walsh, Mary W. "California Debt Higher Than Earlier Estimates, a Task Force Reports." New York Times. The New York Times Company, 20 Sept. 2012. Web. 14 Oct. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/us/california-debt-higher-than-earlier-estimates.html?_r=0>

Kelly, Erika. "Prop. 30: Taxes for Schools and Public Safety." The California Report. KQED Public Radio, 3 Oct. 2012. Web. 14 Oct. 2012. <http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201210030850/a>.

"California Proposition 38, State Income Tax Increase to Support Education (2012)."Ballotpedia. Lucy Burns Institute, n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2012. <http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_38%2C_State_Income_Tax_Increase_to_Support_Education_%282012%29>.

Barns, Brooks, and Ian Lovett. "Californians Face Rival Ballot Initiatives That Would Raise Taxes and Aid

 Schools." New York Times. The New York Times Company, 10 Sept. 2012. Web. 23 Sept. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/us/californians-face-competing-tax-increase-propositions.html?_r=0>.

York, Anthony. "Gov. Jerry Brown Formally Kicks off Prop. 30 Tax Hike Campaign." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 16 Aug. 2012. Web. 23 Sept. 2012. <http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/16/local/la-me-brown-taxes-20120816>.

Final draft: Prop 30

Cooper, Jacqueline

English 2

T/Th, 12:40

California’s budget is in crisis and Jerry Brown thinks he has the solution. The state debt (recent estimates by The New York Times say $28 billion) often makes headlines but California voters (who seem to categorically oppose tax hikes) have rejected the last 8 proposed tax increases. Meanwhile schools have suffered continuous cuts to funding, leading to increased tuition costs and reduced course offerings for community colleges and larger class sizes and less staff for k-12 schools among other hardships Jerry Brown proposes a solution in the form of Proposition 30, which will prevent further cuts to education by a instating 4 year .25% sales tax increase and a 7 year income tax increase for California’s wealthiest earners. The passage of Prop 30 will make a world of difference for California’s schools.

If Prop 30 does not pass, a pre-approved package of ‘trigger cuts’ will go into effect on January first 2013, automatically cutting another 5.4 billion dollars from grade schools and community colleges. If Prop 30 does pass it is estimated that it will earn $6 billion a year for 4 years. This money will be set aside for education and public safety (including education in prisons and supervision of parolees) and will free up some of the state’s general fund that was being used for education.

            The passage of Prop 30 would help ease the financial burden for California’s schools. If the proposition does not pass community colleges like Cabrillo will lose an additional 7.3% in funding, which will mean losing space for 780 full time students at Cabrillo. That means less young people and community members will be able to further their education and more people will be locked out of opportunities for career advancement. More cuts will affect the educational opportunities of almost a thousand people in our area alone, and similar repercussions will be felt all over the state. With previous budget cuts we have already seen restrictions placed on community college students regarding course attempts, fewer classes being offered, less tutoring and support staff, reduced hours and tuition increases. This illustrates that less funding means more obstacles to student success. If we continue to cut funds from education, we are setting up our students and children for failure and California will continue to fall further behind in education.

            California is one of the most expensive states to live, and most voters are opposed to paying more in taxes when they are already struggling financially. However, the tax burden of Proposition 30 will be minimal for the majority of voters. The sales tax will increase by only ¼ of a percent, or one penny for every $4.00. The income tax increase will only affect the wealthiest 3% of California residents (individuals earning over $250,000 or families making over $500,000), raising their income tax by 1-3% for seven years. It is in everyone’s best interest to make education accessible, and California’s wealthiest tax payers have the means to do just that.

As a long time community college student and daughter of a long time public school employee I have experienced and witnessed the increased budget cuts and the hardship it creates for students and administrators. These past two semesters I have been unable to register for courses that are required for me to transfer due to over enrollment, and I have had no choice but to prolong my stay at community college for an additional year. I have also spent time volunteering at the public elementary school where my mom was office manager and seen how teachers are overwhelmed by increasing class sizes and decreasing funds as well as how my mom had to struggle to complete an ever increasing workload with less help and less hours. Our public schools cannot get by with less than they already receive, and voters need to recognize that.

            Many students like me who live away from home and pay for school out of pocket will find it difficult to continue their education if California continues to cut school funding to make room in the budget. Many students may find it impossible to pay for school with more tuition increases. More students will struggle to complete their required classes due to limitations on attempts and classes being cut, increasing the time spent in community college and the time it takes to transfer or graduate. Without more funding for education, California will see a decrease in college graduates and by extension a decrease in the standard of living. Those who can’t afford college will have to forgo an education or leave the state to obtain an affordable education, creating a ‘brain drain’ for California. Even those who don’t attend school or don’t have children who attend school will suffer if Californian voters don’t decide to make education a priority, because California’s economy will suffer.

            There is another proposition to fund education on the ballot alongside Proposition 30. Proposition 38 proposes to fund education by raising income tax on a sliding scale for all Californians earning over $7,316 for 12 years. Some of the funding earned would go to education and early childhood development and some would go to paying off state debt. Unfortunately both measures cannot pass since they both involve raising income tax, and the proposition with the most ‘yes’ voted will take precedence if both propositions pass. Proposition 30 is the better choice because it doesn't raise income tax on lower income Californians and the money will be allocated specifically for education and public safety.

Those opposed to Proposition 30 argue that it is unfair to tax the wealthy at a higher rate. It is unlikely that the 1-3% tax increase on those earning more than $250,000 a year will create a life altering burden for the wealthy. The benefits of keeping education available outweigh the costs of a meager tax increase on the rich.

            California voters should support Proposition 30 because it is the best course of action to take to protect California’s education system. Without a properly funded education system California’s citizens will be unprepared for higher education and the workforce. Fewer people will be able to earn college degrees and secure well-paying jobs. If Proposition 30 passes the tax increase will be slight for most Californian’s and those who can afford it will pay their fair share. And Proposition 30 is supported by the people most affected by it, including California Teachers association, Academic Senate and California Faculty Association.

Works Cited

Walsh, Mary W. "California Debt Higher Than Earlier Estimates, a Task Force Reports." New York Times. The New York Times Company, 20 Sept. 2012. Web. 14 Oct. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/us/california-debt-higher-than-earlier-estimates.html?_r=0>

Kelly, Erika. "Prop. 30: Taxes for Schools and Public Safety." The California Report. KQED Public Radio, 3 Oct. 2012. Web. 14 Oct. 2012. <http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201210030850/a>.

"California Proposition 38, State Income Tax Increase to Support Education (2012)."Ballotpedia. Lucy Burns Institute, n.d. Web. 14 Oct. 2012. <http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_38%2C_State_Income_Tax_Increase_to_Support_Education_%282012%29>.

Barns, Brooks, and Ian Lovett. "Californians Face Rival Ballot Initiatives That Would Raise Taxes and Aid

 Schools." New York Times. The New York Times Company, 10 Sept. 2012. Web. 23 Sept. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/us/californians-face-competing-tax-increase-propositions.html?_r=0>.

York, Anthony. "Gov. Jerry Brown Formally Kicks off Prop. 30 Tax Hike Campaign." Los Angeles Times. Los Angeles Times, 16 Aug. 2012. Web. 23 Sept. 2012. <http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/16/local/la-me-brown-taxes-20120816>.

Ruff Draft

It’s clear to voters that something has to be done about California’s budget crisis. The state debt (recent estimates say $28 billion) often makes headlines (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/21/us/california-debt-higher-than-earlier-estimates.html?_r=0) but California voters, who seem to categorically oppose tax hikes, have rejected the last 8 proposed tax increases. Meanwhile schools have suffered continuous cuts to funding, leading to increased tuition costs and reduced course offerings for community colleges and larger class sizes and less staff for k-12 schools among other hardships.(http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/b/brooks_barnes/index.html) Jerry Brown proposes a solution in the form of proposition 30, which will prevent further cuts to education by a instating 4 year .25% sales tax increase and a 7 year income tax increase for California’s wealthiest earners.

If prop 30 does not pass, a pre-approved package of ‘trigger cuts’ will go into effect on January first 2013, automatically cutting another 5.4 billion dollars from grade schools and community colleges (http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201210030850/a). If prop 30 does pass it is estimated that it will earn $6 billion a year for 4 years. This money will be set aside for education and public safety (including education in prisons and supervision of parolees) and will free up some of the state’s general fund that was being used for education.

            The passage of prop 30 would help ease the financial burden for California’s schools. If the proposition does not pass community colleges like Cabrillo will lose an additional 7.3% in funding, which will mean losing space for 780 full time students at Cabrillo. That means less young people and community members will be able to further their education and more people will be locked out of opportunities for career advancement. More cuts will affect the educational opportunities of almost a thousand people in our area alone, and similar repercussions will be felt all over the state. With previous budget cuts we have already seen restrictions placed on community college students regarding course attempts, fewer classes being offered, less tutoring and support staff, reduced hours and tuition increases. This illustrates that less funding means more obstacles to student success. If we continue to cut funds from education, we are setting up our students and children for failure and California will continue to fall further behind in education.

            California is one of the most expensive states to live, and most voters are opposed to paying more in taxes when they are already struggling financially. However, the tax burden of proposition 30 will be minimal for the majority of voters. The sales tax will increase by only ¼ of a percent, or one penny for every $4.00. The income tax increase will only affect the wealthiest 3% of California residents (individuals earning over $250,000 or families making over $500,000), raising their income tax by 1-3% for seven years. It is in everyone’s best interest to make education accessible, and California’s wealthiest tax payers have the means to do just that.

As a long time community college student and daughter of a long time public school employee I have experienced and witnessed the increased budget cuts and the hardship it creates for students and administrators. These past two semesters I have been unable to register for courses that are required for me to transfer due to over enrollment, and I have had no choice but to prolong my stay at community college for an additional year. I have also spent time volunteering at the public elementary school where my mom was office manager and seen how teachers are overwhelmed by increasing class sizes and decreasing funds as well as how my mom had to struggle to complete an ever increasing workload with less help and less hours. Our public schools cannot get by with less than they already receive, and voters need to recognize that.

            Many students like me who live away from home and pay for school out of pocket will find it difficult to continue their education if California continues to cut school funding to make room in the budget. Many students like me may find it impossible to pay for school with more tuition increases. More students will struggle to complete their required classes due to limitations on attempts and classes being cut, increasing the time spent in community college and the time it takes to transfer or graduate. Without more funding for education, California will see a decrease in college graduates and by extension a decrease in the standard of living. Those who can’t afford college will have to forgo an education or leave the state to obtain an affordable education, creating a ‘brain drain’ for California. Even those who don’t attend school or don’t have children who attend school will suffer if Californian voters don’t decide to make education a priority, because California’s economy will suffer.

            There is another proposition to fund education on the ballot with proposition 30. Proposition 38 proposes to fund education by raising income tax on a sliding scale for all Californians earning over $7,316  for 12 years. Some of the funding earned would go to education and early childhood development and some would go to paying off state debt (http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/California_Proposition_38,_State_Income_Tax_Increase_to_Support_Education_(2012)) . Unfortunately both measures cannot pass since they both involve raising income tax, and the proposition with the most ‘yes’ votes will take precedence if both propositions pass. Proposition 30 is the better choice because it doesn’t raise income tax on poorer Californians and the money will be allocated specifically for education and public safety.

            California voters should support proposition 30 because it is the best course of action to take to protect California’s education system. Without a properly funded education system California’s citizens will be unprepared for higher education and the workforce. Fewer people will be able to earn college degrees and secure well-paying jobs. If proposition 30 passes the tax increase will be slight for most Californian’s and those who can afford it will pay their fair share. And Propostition 30 is supported by the people most affected by it, including California Teachers association, Academic Senate and California Faculty Association.