Clearasil makes a connection??? No

            Clearasil's got a commercial, and it was like the anti-connection, if that makes any sense. The slogan, aimed at teens, was literally "We know your acne, we just don't know you". I mean, at least they're being honest. But this commercial is worth a glance over for teens-- it's quite something.

            Where to begin? There's a large amount of material to dive into, so I'm going to start with the basic concept, and move on from there.

            This entire commercial is an attempt to establish ethos. Clearasil mentions several times that they know acne, and they only want teens to know that their product works fast. The early images of their board of directors and technicians in the lab try to show that they are credible. They are scientists, after all, or so they say.

            The female voice used throughout the commercial is very soft and passive. She attempts to reach teens without scaring them off. She tries to say "hardcore", but messes up several times. She is quietly appreciative of teen culture, and never raises her voice or accuses teens for their sometimes self-destructive and acne-causing behaviors. She asks the teens for help, validating their need to be heard by someone. The use of this voice is an attempt to get teens to feel comfortable and safe with Clearasil.

            A lot of the light is very natural, even indoors. The colors are also not aggressively bright. The background music is very calming. There is no hard-hitting rap or funky jazz or hip hop. Again, these methods attempt to establish a feeling of comfort.

            The use of aspects of teen culture, like food and activities, are meant to try and reach teens where they are. Clearasil claims they don't know teens, and that makes it seem like they are taking shots in the dark to less observant viewers. But all the aspects they chose are definitely fixtures of the teen life. Pizza, soda, snacks, skateboarding, dancing, edgy clothes, and hanging out with friends are all things that teens tend to enjoy.

            As a sort of last note, I found the board of directors very interesting. Out of 7 actors, 4 were female. Females are used a lot in similar media settings, as they are said to make people feel calmer and more safe. The three males are very nonthreatening. The standing man looks really silly, the old man looks like someone's grandpa, and the last man, the one with his hands folded, is passive-looking and not standing up. Because acne makes teens so uncomfortable, Clearasil shows them a safe way to get rid of it.

            While I'll admit I was tempted to buy some Clearasil, I'll hold off. The implicit suggestion that they know my plight as a teenager is tempting, but I think I'll play it by ear.

Please, feel free to discuss any aspects you think I may not have discussed enough! Thanks.

ɱ€Ɍ¢ħªŋŧ$ 0§ ©00ƪ: Stupid or Sexual?

            The media has its difficulties. Many difficulties. For one, they seem to be over representing some, and under representing others, otherwise known as misrepresenting everyone.

             Teens, a beast that some brave advertisers decided to tackle, have remained in the cross-hairs of the media for quite some time now. Why? It is abundantly clear by now that the media's in it for the money. But let's look at the how, and what follows.

            In the documentary film, Merchants of Cool, Frontline attempts to understand advertising towards teens. Doug Rushkoff, the exceptional narrator, identified two commonly used television characters (on MTV specifically, but you can find them in other places): the Mook and the Midriff. The Mook is an idiot who runs around doing obnoxious, inane things, and leaves anyone in his path with a throbbing headache. He's supposed to appeal to teenage boys. We'll get into how in a moment. But wait, the Midriff! Well, she's a teenage sex object who apparently has no brain, only a pair of breasts and a vagina. She's supposed to appeal to teenage girls.

            Why? Why does the Mook even exist? He's like an overgrown 4th grader. Is the media trying to propagate the idea that all teenage boys are morons? Not necessarily. This character gets its appeal because of a simple fact of biology: boys begin the maturation process much later and progress slower than girls do. That's why we get the height swap in children from 6th grade to about 8th grade. The Mook is a way of suspending a male in time: he looks like a man, sounds like a man, but acts like a little boy. Even while he begins to grow and change on the outside, he remains childish and silly. In a way, this does appeal to teen boys, because the Mook is a representation of their situation, not necessarily their personality.

            Hoo boy, the Midriff is a pile of whacko. Why has the media created such a sick image of teenage girls as sex toys? As mentioned previously, females mature faster-- they enter puberty earlier than boys do. Breasts can start developing as early as the third grade… and many teenage females are, in the biological sense, already provided with physical means to have sex. Often, they are not truly mentally or emotionally developed and ready for such things. But that doesn't mean they don't think they're ready or desire sex. Just today, a female classmate of mine walked into the class materials storage area where some other students were meandering around after class, and announced, "I need some (insert foul word for male genitalia)". …What? She is quite childish in most ways, but she has already began to have sex. That's why the Midriff exists. Girls are physically prepared for sex, so that's what the icon targets. It also notifies them of the male views of their sexuality and what their worth is. In this way, they are encouraged to be like the picture-- hypersexual and body-perfect, even though these things are less than necessary.

            We see the representation, but how does each stereotype make money for the media men? The Midriff plays off of teen female insecurities, presenting an "ideal" woman, in the sense as created by men. The Mook reinforces typical teen male behavior: It is ok to act like a little kid, boys will be boys. This creates confidence in their impunity and actions. If you create insecure females, they will buy your products to make themselves feel confident. If you create confident males, they will buy your products to feel validated and reassure themselves.

            This grand plan of the media masterminds is little more than a ploy to make cash money and enforce gender roles. But it affects the teens who drink it in negatively. Marian Wright Edelman once said, "You can't be what you can't see." She is definitely correct. If no role model is present in the media for the youth, how can one expect them to understand or know how to act? They begin to believe that these flat icons are their idols, or that they at least represent them mildly, even though they can amount to much more than a babbling numbskull or a brainless pair of breasts. Stupid or sexual? I guess the media will help us figure that out.

Jolyn Clothing: What's the appeal?

Jolyn. A name well known by female swimmers throughout the U.S. They make swimsuits and all sorts of bits and bobs to go with them. But what is their appeal? Who are they trying to get through to? Due to a personal interest, I decided to write this post.

            One of the most prevalent parts of the Jolyn appeal is versatility. After going on their website, one is subject to all sorts of scenarios where a Jolyn swimsuit can be used. The ocean, in the workout pool, surfing, water polo, you name it. Anywhere you can find a swimmer, you can find a Jolyn to go along with them.

            Another important factor to consider about the approach Jolyn uses is athleticism. The company has a target: athletic and fit females from about 16 to 30. None of the models or featured females are near overweight. Some of them may have large breasts or significant curves, but they don't have the extras typically viewed as unhealthy. This really reveals Jolyn's target demographic.

            Jolyn also appeals to competitive athletes. Featuring an Olympic gold medalist in water polo is quite obviously a nod to girls who swim like it's their occupation. It also endorses the product.

            What swimsuit dealer would be successful without appealing to human vanity? Don't worry, Jolyn also knows how to pour sex appeal on their products. Many of the models are very attractive and have excellent figures. Naturally, the buyer will want to feel just as attractive. Sex appeal sells. It is not uncommon to want to be good-looking.

            Jolyn isn't only sexy, it's fun too! Holy moley, the girls in these lookbooks look like they're having a great time. It really adds to the appeal by showing us that these girls are having fun in their Jolyns, so if we get a Jolyn, we'll have fun too. While this is obviously illogical, it can still hit some of the most cynical swimsuit buyers right where it hurts.

            Last, but certainly not least, it's time to discuss Jolyn's blog. One thing that sets Jolyn apart from other companies is their connection to their customers. Often, high concept ads (as I discussed in an earlier post) attempt to form that connection by claiming to fulfill our emotional needs. Instead of that, Jolyn tells us stories of female swimmers, gives us recipes, and talks to us about fitness. What? Talk about underhanded ways of getting people to like you. I'm not saying it's inherently evil or bad, or that it's cruel, but that is some seriously under the table stuff. I mean, it ropes you in. One moment you're looking at swimsuits and the next you're reading some woman's life story. We were going to Los Angeles, but we ended up in Seattle, people, and we also managed to pick up emotional baggage on the way.

            Looking at it like this, it is very clear that Jolyn appeals to the 16-30 healthy female who loves water, participates in some kind of aquatic sport, and has a nice body. Jolyn doesn't attack in the usual way-- it uses its blog and special lookbooks to do it. While all the ads don't necessarily always work, they are definitely appreciated, and what sets Jolyn apart from other companies.

(all lookbook images credited to Jolyn; same goes for logo.)

Youtube Review: IISuperwomanII Discusses Commercials

            Superwoman is huge. Lilly Singh, known to her fans as IISuperwomanII, came out with a new video today (which I am proud to say I caught just after it came out). Here I was, moseying through Youtube, looking for music. But since Youtube can connect itself to my brain, the first thing that showed up on my Recommended was "Types of Commercials". Immediately, I thought, This is going to be fun. I was not disappointed.

            Lilly, in all her usual charisma, presents several different types of common commercials. While Lilly may not have experienced high-level critical thinking training, she noted many of the things I myself have learned. It was fun to see how many concepts she referred to that I recognized. Without any more formalities, let's dive right into some connections!

            When Lilly talks about the Medical commercials, she mentions that they start out really dark and overly sad, and then turn into something great and amazing after the introduction of the product. The makers of the commercial clearly divert the subject and attempt to associate their product with something good and appealing. "Knee pain" isn't fun, and can denote a serious health problem. Y'all think some Aleve (yet another commercial I saw today) is gonna substitute for knee surgery? I mean, it may make you feel safe, but it won't solve all your problems.

            The following commercial type that Lilly reviewed was Perfumes. The way she described them, they definitely sounded like something a Modern Art or Film student would attempt to create. The most important thing she talked about was that they were confusing and there was a lot going on in them. That obvious confusing factor is meant to make us remember these commercials so we remember the product.

            Infomercials came afterwards, and I was very amused by Lilly's emphatic descriptions of her reactions to these. She says at one time, "These people in these commercials be convincing me that they have solutions to problems I don't even have," (04:19). I found that extremely interesting. Sometimes these specific products don't claim to fulfill a need that we have, they just create one that isn't applicable to us and make it our issue. Sometimes they bribe us, sometimes they attempt to make it high-concept and sell us "a lifestyle". We transfer the attributes of the person or setting in the infomercial and attach it to the products. They have friends? I want friends. This product will get me friends.

            The Celebrity commercials section is so relevant to everyday life as a consumer. The companies try to find whoever's new and hip and cool with the kids, and then they put 'em smack dab in the center of an ad or commercial. Tampax, I know you want the love and adoration of adolescents. But will Demi Lovato really sell more tampons? That's a mystery in and of itself. I guess people just have soft spots for celebrities. I mean, if Lilly endorsed something, I'd seriously consider buying it. Even pet food, and I don't own a pet. At least, I don't own a pet until Lilly or Game Grumps start making commercials for them.

            The fifth type of commercial is really phenomenal. I mean, it's a commercial made by Lilly herself. I was totally emotionally unprepared for that the first time I watched this video, it took me by complete surprise. I was actually thinking about buying the lipstick myself, and I don't really do makeup. The rest of the video sort of segway-ed into an ad. I mean, I was really hoping she'd end it with some sort of deep media message connection, but lipstick is cool too.

            When it all comes down to it, this was a very thought-provoking video. Lilly's own commercial really targeted a desire for power and control, and a desire to be different. She's pretty dang famous, so that message will be spread among a lot of people. After all, that's what media does.

            I think that Youtube has become a huge media center because of people like Lilly. She forms a solid connection with her fans and spreads ideas among us. Several of my schoolmates love her content as well, and that's why it becomes so well known so fast. Now, just by watching a Buzzfeed video about different foods or laughing at the Game Grumps playing a tabletop game, I can experience a similar message to millions of other people. That's some news.

Fangirl by Rainbow Rowell

            Good books can be hard to find. Reading time can also be hard to find, especially being in the HISP program and just having an all-around busy life. When I first picked up this book in the teen section of the library last Saturday, I thought, Well, my mom read it and said it was good, and there's fandom stuff? I guess I'll get it. But I wasn't expecting very much from it. I read a few pages Saturday night, a chapter on Sunday, and by Monday I was fully hooked. On Tuesday I read about a hundred and fifty pages. Anyone who has spent a sizeable amount of time in my presence over the last two days has probably witnessed my devotion. I became so invested in it that I was reading it during passing period, making it through up to ten pages as I devoured Rowell's masterwork.

            But what I'm really trying to get at is: I finished the book. And now, I am incredibly sad. And also happy? But mostly kind of lament-y. I really wish there was a sequel. But, I still have a chance to read the main characters ultra long, super cool fanfiction (written by the indomitable Rainbow Rowell, of course)!

            This post is a lot more of a book review than a gripping, grimy, hard-hitting criticism of the media. I am not saying that books are not media. They most certainly are. Nobody ever stops talking about when Gutenberg invented the printing press. That was a really important moment in human history (or European history, at least), because it made books and information widely available to people. Books are definitely means of mass communication. I could throw out examples all day: Harry Potter, the Laura Ingalls Wilder novels, Golden Books, Maximum Ride, all the Nancy Drew and Hardy Brothers books, The Great Gatsby, The Old Man and the Sea, Great Expectations, The Lord of the Rings, etc, etc. Gee willikers, there's a huge network of people who have read these books.

            Anyhow, back to Fangirl. I am very impressed by this book, as it was inspiring and enthralling for a person like me, who took a hiatus of sorts from reading outside of class. I will offer Rowell's brief summary for those of you yet to read it:

"Cath is a Simon Snow fan.

Okay, the whole world is a Simon Snow fan...

But for Cath, being a fan is her life—and she’s really good at it. She and her twin sister, Wren, ensconced themselves in the Simon Snow series when they were just kids; it’s what got them through their mother leaving.

Reading. Rereading. Hanging out in Simon Snow forums, writing Simon Snow fan fiction, dressing up like the characters for every movie premiere.

Cath’s sister has mostly grown away from fandom, but Cath can’t let go. She doesn’t want to.

Now that they’re going to college, Wren has told Cath she doesn’t want to be roommates. Cath is on her own, completely outside of her comfort zone. She’s got a surly roommate with a charming, always-around boyfriend, a fiction-writing professor who thinks fan fiction is the end of the civilized world, a handsome classmate who only wants to talk about words... And she can’t stop worrying about her dad, who’s loving and fragile and has never really been alone.

For Cath, the question is: Can she do this?

Can she make it without Wren holding her hand? Is she ready to start living her own life? Writing her own stories?

And does she even want to move on if it means leaving Simon Snow behind?"

            Gosh, even the summary sounds fantastic. I would read it again. But now it's time to really look at some of the messages that Fangirl promulgates. A lot of the book is about being afraid to step out of one's comfort zone. I think that we can all relate to this: it is hard to try new things when you know you can get hurt. Not even hurt sometimes, but disappointed, or just not knowing what will happen to you. Cath, our main character, even mentions once that she's afraid of everything:

            I feel you. Even if there wasn't so much in this world to fear, I would still probably be scared of all of it. Or a sizeable amount, at least. There's also a lot of crazy and 'I-don't-know-how-to-talk-to-people' inside of me.

            In another quote from the novel, Cath asks if it is ok to quit when something is hurting you:

            While I don’t agree, I can still see why this may be an attractive option. Giving up, while it may not always be easy, is still way easier than sticking it through and making it. But I think the notable message from this is that Cath doesn't give up, thereby telling us, as readers, that we shouldn't give up either. When the going gets tough, the tough get going.

            I'm going to analyze some of my favorite quotes from this book, which coincidently have catchy graphics made for them by internet people. Thank you, Internet (most likely Tumblr)!

            I love this quote because sometimes that is exactly what writing feels like. Sometimes, writing can be stressed, forced, like trying to use a pencil on a cheese grater. Other times, it's just like this, like sprinting down a hill, where your brain goes too fast for your fingers or pen. That's what this post became for me. The urge was burning inside me and I just had to write it. Starting is always tough, just like it was for Cath, but now it's coming out so easily.

            This quote really gets into that desire for stability and comfort that many youths write off as corny. "Happily ever after" is good. Like Cath's twin sister, Wren said, "The ultimate act of heroism shouldn't be death." (387) Literally, how is that romantic at all? Ah yes, I love you so much that when the time comes I'll just die! For you! Amazing. I think it's more courageous, just like Wren, to really stick out that love and work through life without someone dying. Because when you kill off someone's love (literally), you figuratively accomplish the same task. That person won't mourn you forever if they are a normally emotionally-functioning human being. They'll move on, and the martyr will become nothing but a memory.

            This is my favorite quote in the book, but it doesn't appear in my favorite context. One of the characters is explaining the downside of fanfiction, which I adore almost completely. But it is a very true quote. Even now, as I write this, I am creating a tangible representation of all the unconscious thoughts in my head. I am connecting that which is impalpable, and defining it. How is that anything but profound?

            When it really comes down to it, I love this book, so, so much. I love it so much that I just can't even.

            Seriously. I really hope there's fanfiction of this book because I'm gonna need it real bad in about a day or two after my brain fully understands that there is no more original content to read. One of the things I really enjoy is that in the Acknowledgements in the back of the book, Rowell does a shout-out to all the fanfic-writers (and readers!) and appreciates us. That was really pleasing, as I read and write fic fairly often.

            Media can come in all shapes and sizes, even a quirky little novel about a freshman in college who loves to write (awesome) gay fanfiction. If you have any time to enjoy these messages about love and live, Fangirl is only 438 pages.

-From a Fan

Music in the Media: Vegas Lights

            Media isn't just big news. Media can encompass many things under the definition of widespread communication. One of those things is music. Any band or singer/songwriter with a following can spread messages. Whether they're on the tip of everyone's tongue, like One Direction or Beyoncé, have a sizeable following, like The 1975 or Sara Bareilles, or are relatively indie, like Bombay Bicycle Club, musicians have a voice, and they can speak to us through their music.

            Today, we'll be taking a look at a song by one of my personal favorites, Panic at the Disco, a small band that started in Las Vegas. The headman, Brendon Urie, has shown up on this blog before. However, that's no reason not to show him here again:

            Now that we have that sorted, I'd like to foray a little deeper into Panic's song, "Vegas Lights". As previously stated, Urie grew up in Vegas, so it can be assumed that his childhood had an effect on the composition of this song.

            The song begins with children singing a series of numbers, 1-10, increasing and then decreasing at a significantly faster speed. I find it interesting that this is how Urie chose to begin the song, as Vegas is seen as an adult's playground, and it can easily be forgotten that people actually live and raise their children there. The rapid counting down, from 5-1, is repeated throughout the song, suggesting decline.

Oh, if you only knew

What we've been up to

I guarantee you'd keep it secret

So give it to me now

We're lost in a dream now

Do it (5-4-3-2) one more time

            The next stanza is a representation of the sort of activities that happen in Vegas. It denotes things that are better left as secrets, and how people lose their inhibitions and forget reality.

In the Vegas lights

Where villains spend the weekend

The deep end

We're swimming with the sharks until we drown

            Afterwards, Vegas is described as a place "where villains spend the weekend". When Urie says this line, one can imagine that it refers to the compulsive gamblers, criminals, and other unsavory types associated with the idea of Vegas. "The deep end" is typically used as the point of no return. The "sharks" are probably loan sharks, who lend money to gamblers knowing that they will probably be unable to pay it back. The gamblers associate with these loan sharks until they are overwhelmed by their debts.

The Vegas lights

The lies and affectations

Sensation

We're winning 'til the curtain's coming down

            An affectation is defined as artificial behavior designed to impress. The "Vegas lights" are not like typical lights. They do not illuminate the truth behind the lying and showing off, or denote honesty and purity. Instead, these lights are part of the sensation, prolonging the illusion until the curtain comes down. After that, the show is over and people are their real selves again. It reminds me of the old truism: "People are only really themselves when no one is looking", or something to that effect.

Ain't it so, ain't it so perfect

Our cynical minds will make it totally worth it

So give it to me now

We're lost in a dream now

Do it (5-4-3-2) one more time

            Cynical has two definitions, and I think that the lesser known is, in this case, more logical and easier to use: concerned only with one's own interests and typically disregarding accepted or appropriate standards in order to achieve them. Vegas becomes perfect for self-interested people who are only concerned with self-gratification and greed. Again, there is a loss of inhibitions and disconnection with reality, and people begin their inevitable decline.

And we're all not here for nothing

And we're bored with looking good

We gotta be starting something

Would you change it if you could?

            This stanza, the last unique stanza of the song, is sort of the reasons given for the debauchery. The villains are bored with their appearances and being good on the outside, so they need to start something big to keep themselves occupied. "Would you change it if you could" is the question about Vegas itself, which is sort of seen as a capital of sin.

            When we really look at "Vegas Lights", it becomes more than just a catchy song sung by an attractive singer in a cool band. It really dives into the band's place of origin and how hard it can be for people to actually live in a place that is viewed as a land of impurity.

            Media isn't just about the cameras and big news. Sometimes it can come to us like this-- in a few stanzas and lyrics. Music isn't just expression and raw emotion. Music is a form of communication.

Let's Talk Love Marks: High Concept Ads

            Introducing love marks, otherwise known as irrational emotional connections that advertisers coax us to form with their product or company by using the brand experience or high concept ads. This post will focus more on high concept ads.

            But what is a "high concept ad"?

            High concept ads are ads that attempt to establish an emotional connection with the viewer or portray themselves as a means to fulfill an emotional need that we have. In The Persuaders, a documentary film by Frontline, there is a discussion of high concept ads and how they are used to convince us to consume a specific product.

            A fantastic example of the high concept ad is "Extra Gum: The Story of Sarah & Juan".

            This commercial attacks one of the greatest emotional needs of mankind: the need for affiliation. Most people desire affection and love, and boy, Extra is really playing to that. I mean, c'mon, a montage of romantic scenes set to Haley Reinhart? The emotional connections will be forthcoming. Just in the comments, many people expressed the pull they felt towards this particular commercial, and their emotional reactions to it. Some people attributed the couple's relationship success to the gum, which is the exact line of thought that Extra wanted them to pursue. However, despite the charming atmosphere of the commercial, it is clear that this is a high concept ad attempting to create an emotional bond with the viewer. Extra did not fail.

            Another example of the high concept ad is "SK-II : For every moment shaped by your touch".

            Again, cue the emotional music and montage of cute scenes. Only this time, it's a mother and her daughter, and the product isn't explicitly shown until the end. This commercial still attempts to fulfill the human desire for affiliation (and nurture, in case that baby/small child at the beginning escaped you). I think SK-II also succeeded in their attempt to ensnare their consumers. Many commenters responded to the video stating how they had to find the video again after they saw it pop up on one of their videos. Admittedly, I too did that. It was hard to resist. But while I enjoyed the commercial enough to watch it again, I was not very interested in the product being marketed. However, I was filled with a strange urge to start touching people's faces. Regardless of my personal reaction, however, SK-II was indeed successful in bridging the emotional gap between company and viewer.

            High concept ads: do they really work? While I enjoy them immensely and have an emotional reaction from watching them, I think that they are less than effective on me. However, other consumers appear to believe in the power of the emotional bond. Regardless of whether these ads are truly what sells the product, they do emboss a sort of love mark on the viewer. I guess I'll just have to wait and see if I feel that indomitable craving for Extra mint gum. 

Fashion?? What

     For as long as I can remember, I've always been really confused by popular advertisements for clothes. They don't ever really seem to make sense to me. Is the model supposed to be a representation of me or someone I want to be? Or is it an objective clothing display? No one knows. Mysterious.

     If the model is intended to be me or an improved version of myself, then why are they so over the top and unrealistic? Perhaps they are images of an impossible to obtain style or status that I am expected to desire. I used to wear Calvin Klein, and I never looked like this:

     This post is going to be an examination of ads and the desires I am expected to have as a consumer. In other words, there's going to be a LOT of pictures. (I will probably also joke and make satirical comments about ads because they're so outlandish)

Where am I going? Where am I? What am I supposed to be doing in this image? So many questions, so little answers.

I'm not swimming. Why

No swim again, explain

WHY I NO SWIM

This is dastardly and outrageous

I'm apparently a member of a gay barbershop quartet attending a bachelor party? Why else would I be wearing those clothes and standing in a group of four similar-looking men?

The starving artist drama club group meets on Tuesdays. Only on Tuesdays. That guy closest to the viewer kind of looks like Robert Pattinson. I'm gonna be that guy. That's me, looking really moody and angry at my mom.

Don't I have stuff to do???

Ah yes, whenever I put on these clothes I too find myself suspended in time and space, lost in a world of dimensionless-ness.

We've got cool safari hats and fans because it's 2tropical5us in the wild rainforests of downtown Paris.

     This form of media, as I have hopefully revealed above, is sort of ridiculous. Ads, which are kind of supposed to be snapshots of daily life, have little meaning or realism. I definitely don't want to be the kind of person who wears swimwear and doesn't go swimming. I don't want to be the kind of person who doesn't swim at every possible opportunity, period. Anyways, while I may not understand fashion ads, they are still nice to look at. Sometimes.

Let's Talk Loaded Language: Abort Mission

Loaded language is one of those fun persuasive tools that plays on the emotions and values of the audience in order to skew opinions in favor or against an issue. If something is described as "pro-" then by definition it must be positive, correct? Not really. Our brains see or hear pro and go "Whoa, this guy's gotta be good," or "This is positive". What about "anti-"? This word really gets under our skins. Anti means against, and if somebody's against something, then that means they don’t like that thing, and if someone doesn't like something, something's gotta be wrong with it. Right? Nope.

            What this is leading up to is a discussion of the language used in two separate articles on the same subject: Should it be legal (or allowed) for women to have abortions in the US? One article declares itself pro-choice, the other pro-life.

            But what is abortion? Both sides define it and redefine it so many times that it can be hard to remember what it actually is.

            Abortion, n.: the deliberate termination of a human pregnancy, most often performed during the first 28 weeks of pregnancy.

            Thank you, Google. This definition is pretty cut and dry. Where's all that rhetoric typically used to defend or attack abortion? Don't worry, that's the subject of this post.

If this image cannot be read, it says "ABORTION: Never an easy choice, sometimes the right choice, and always a woman's choice".

            The pro-choice article, written by Thamiel Rosenkreuz, notes "FIVE PRO-CHOICE ARGUMENTS TO SHUT UP ANTI-CHOICE RIGHT-WINGERS". Wow, that's… That's pretty upfront. The rest of the article is executed in a similar tone. He vehemently attacks "anti-choice" supporters, referring to them as "homophobic" and claiming that "They just want to use pregnancy to punish women". What? That's like saying that teachers give their students low grades because they don't want them to go to college. Pro-life activists have a secret hidden agenda that wants to punish women? Of course, Rosenkreuz. That must be why there are so many women (with children) that support pregnancy and giving birth. And all pro-life supporters must be religious, or at least "there’s so much religious overlap that this works on most of them". Sorry to burst your bubble, dude, but while religious groups like the Catholic Church may value life so much as to oppose abortion, they don't compose the entirety of the pro-life group, and your argument won't work on them. Rosenkreuz also claims that the pro-life supporters are also "armed with misinformation". I find it interesting that he claims this, as a substantial amount of vocal women on this issue have either had abortions and regretted them, or considered them and been glad they did not go through with it. While I agree that a substantial amount of pro-life supporters are just spouting slogans without regard for the women they speak for, I don't agree with Rosenkreuz's choices of language. His entire article is one vast, negative ocean. There is no visible positive or even neutral concept of pro-life supporters, which gives me the idea that this article is a piece of propaganda against "right-wingers". Rosenkreuz's diction is attempting to portray pro-lifers as uninformed, cruel, religious freaks.

http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/religion/five-pro-choice-arguments-to-shut-up-anti-choice-right-wingers/

            The pro-life article, authored by Kristi Burton Brown, lists "10 reasons not to have an abortion". I was enjoying the peaceful vibe until I read "We do not erase a rape by killing a child". Uh… We're not attempting to erase that event. That's not the reason why those women get abortions. That line portrays all pregnancies as right or necessary to sustain. They aren't. That's a total 180 from what we're trying to accomplish, which is a normal life for those women. It is not their responsibility to keep something that is hurting them or a relic of something that did hurt them. If they do keep the baby and raise it as their own, more power to them. But expecting a victim of rape to give birth? That's insensitive and inhumane. It places more value on the baby's life, which is not yet final, than the woman's. This concept has been perpetuated throughout the article. The list also describes abortion as "discriminatory, inhuman, and cruel". This language is definitively slanted, to get a negative feeling. Pregnancy is described positively, however, referring to it as a "great gift" that parents are blessed with. Abortion becomes the choice that is demonized under any circumstances, without consideration of the need of women. Yes, Brown, I know that you don't feel like it is a right to kill your child. But your body is your own, and other women's bodies are their own. Brown's article, while less spitfire and brimstone than Rosenkreuz's, still negatively skews the opposite side. It attempts to criminalize and turn women away from abortion, assuming that they will feel a specific feeling that Brown prescribes and have a straightforward situation.

http://liveactionnews.org/10-reasons-not-to-have-an-abortion/

            Since both Rosenkreuz and Brown play to extremes (both of which are extremely negative), they don't really affect the population of opposite believers very much. In the comments, most of the people are strict supporters of that viewpoint presented in the article. They don't tend to leave their comfort zone, for fear of being unable to truly defend themselves from the opposite side. That's why they fail. A barrage negatives will not prove a point. Something has to be good, right, and pleasing for people to believe. Otherwise, it can be too much to swallow or denied immediately.

            Regardless of language, the issue is what it is. It is an ongoing discussion over two conflicting value systems. When it comes down to it, neither side is ethical. As was mentioned in the Pro-Life article, just because abortion is legal, permissible, and/or perceived as necessary for a woman, doesn't mean it's right. It still involves forcefully removing a child from the womb, which can cause it pain. That is undeniable. But requiring women to have children that they do not want or will not care for isn't right either. Women can die in childbirth, or give birth to a baby that will not survive. How is this okay? Neither extreme is right, and the only way to fix this is to sift past the language and really look the issue in the eye. Until then, outspoken members of both parties will do anything they can to shift the crowd in their favor.