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.

proposal

Title: Proposal

Topic: California Proposition 30

Analysis of argument:

Exigence: Proposed continued cuts to education funding have resulted in multiple propositions which attempt to create more funding for California public schools, including Prop 30.

Intended audience: Undecided/uneducated voters, opposed voters.

Purpose: To create an argument for Prop 30.

Rhetorical analysis:

Writer’s strategy #1: Logos:

- If prop 30 doesn’t pass, community colleges like Cabrillo lose an additional 7.3% of funding.

-Cabrillo would lose space for more 780 full time students

-due to previous funding cuts, there are already restrictions on attempts at courses

-Prop 30 is funded by a tax increase for the top 3% of earners and a ¼ cent sales tax increase.

Writer’s strategy #2: Ethos: 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.

Writer’s strategy #3: Pathos: I’ve struggled to pay for rising education costs without financial aid, paying much of my school fees with my earnings from minimum wage jobs and the rest with help from my grandpa. 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 enrollment, increasing the time spent in community college and the time it takes to transfer or graduate.

Reader effect #1:

-7.3% is a staggering amount for already struggling community colleges.

-Otherwise qualified community members and young people will lose the opportunity to further their education due to budget cuts

-The education system is already underfunded and creating obstacles for student success: this will only get worse with more cuts.

-The tax increase will minimally affect middle and lower class tax payers (the majority of voters). The sales tax increase is an almost unnoticeable change and the income tax increase only affects the rich.

Reader effect #2: Reader will see that I am involved in the school system and have experienced previous budget cuts.

Reader effect #3: Reader will empathize with students who have to prolong their education or forgo it completely due to decreased funding.