The Effects of Rhetoric and Stereotypes Assignment

The Effects of Rhetoric and Stereotypes Assignment Words: 1215

Stereotyping is the formation of belief or beliefs about a person or groups of people that does not recognize individual differences. Stereotyping may be positive or negative in character, as it is also used as a means of persuading others to reason. Stereotypes have been known for its overall outcomes on society, as the rhetoric surrounding them normally have negative functions, and when used positively. “Understanding the nature of prejudice, scapegoating, stereotypes, and discrimination is the first step in combating these practices. All of us have prejudices about members of groups different from ourselves.

We should, however, recognize that we are not acting fairly if we treat people differently because of these stereotypes and prejudices. Each one of us deserves to be considered a unique human being” (Grobman, 1990). When viewing the five groups of stereotypes for example, politicians, senior citizens, feminists and tattooed persons, this paper is designed to explain what we are learning about different stereotypes. First, let us look at the stereotype of politicians, which falls under the “personal attack” ad hominem fallacy the uncertainty connected with the character of one who makes a claim and the qualities of the claim.

Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!

order now

Many Politicians are viewed as narcissistic, insincere, and deceitful swindlers. During election time, politicians are seen attacking their opponents, which the personal attack ad hominem fallacy is their attacking their opponent with negative remarks to win over the public. One opponent is discredited when the other stage personal attacks on them and the stereotype cause viewers to fall subject to believing in them. The majority of the time, politicians are deceitful and are not honest to the public as to why they choose to run for office, as we often hear them using negative rhetoric against one another during their campaigns.

One outstanding attribute of a politician is the double standard, which also is a part of the Ad Hominem Fallacy. It is also an Inconsistency hominem, it is an argument that we are taught not to make; just because one may do wrong, it is ok for you to do it. One thinks it humorous how this double standard comes into play when one political party lose their power becoming the minority and accuse the majority of doing the same deceitful campaign they practice previously. They use arguments such as wasteful spending or pork barrel spending or politics, which are great examples of rhetorical devices used to give descriptions of objectionable ehavior on part of the opponent. However, pork barrel and wasteful spending can be biased as a claim depending on the speaker and his agenda. The logic of the double standard that was applied to them is now made to appear less important, and seem politically correct by changing the terminology to a fallacy of composition so that the wasteful spending they accused their opponent of was justified because they had good intentions for the public; therefore, it was not wasteful spending. One could also view this as an act of nationalism, appealing to the welfare of the country with the theory that by doing so their actions will be accepted.

The next stereotype is the Feminists, which are often viewed as the man hating, tree hugging, braless lesbians. Negative images of stereotypes normally ease its way into society from an innocent standpoint; however, this is only in the beginning. These same images pivot how the public views an overall group. A politician negative rhetoric against his opponent becomes clear as the tactic worked, which caused other politicians to use the same tactics, lumping them all in the same gene pool.

This also applies to the misconceptions of feminist, which started out as a movement of women’s liberation, and now holds feminists imprisoned to that mental disposition. In my opinion, this is almost parallel to the Civil Rights Movement along with Affirmative Action, as feminism share similar paths. Feminists struggled for equal rights but eventually separated into sects whose attention when beyond equal rights. One remembers feminists as women who did not accept themselves as second to man, but demanded the same rights as men. However, the same as other group’s radicals get in it and adulterate the virtues of the original purpose.

In fact, these same radicals create a red herring driving the focus away from the intent of feminism fortifying stereotypes. Of course, we know that the media plays a major role focusing on their actions provoking public interest and excitement at the expense of accuracy. The one issue I have when it comes to feminism is the stereotype “All people who say they are feminist share the same beliefs”. When one says that they are a feminist, they are attempting to put into words a certain image, or trying to express their feelings about a belief.

The thing we seem to forget is that feminist A is not trying to convey the same message as feminist B, no one feminists think the same as the other. One small group of feminists representing a whole can sometimes reflects a bad image for the whole group, which the media can easily manipulate causing the public to view the whole group the same. Normally tattooed persons stand out from the norm, as they are prone to ridicule, sarcasm, and stereotyping. In some cultures, tattooing is a ceremonial event; it is not look up as impulsive or a disgrace.

However, here in America, people see it as distasteful and some even a disgrace due to biblical or religious beliefs. People who where tattoos are stereotyped into different sects such as, bikers, gangs, fraternities, criminals, even branches of the armed forces. One is immediately stereotyped as weird, evil or a bad person when seen with marking on their bodies. Although these groups do normally have tattoos, some actually are criminals or bad people. However, there are some that have never been criminal or have done no harm to anyone also have tattoos, but society will still say that they are criminals in some way.

This stereotype falls under false premises, but in a convincing argument or claim. On the contrary, this same stereotype of people with tattoos has become a high commodity and the negative dispositions have begun to diminish. More people have started tattooing their bodies in places that is not visible to the public eye. One would find it amusing attempting to stereotype seniors, as they do play a major part as to being positive role models in our lives. The one stereotype I would dare to use is “You cannot teach old dogs new tricks”.

This is not true as most “old dog” can teach this new generation a lot new tricks they have little knowledge. One may think today’s technology is too difficult or advance for senior citizens, when in actuality many seniors are beginning to learn today’s technology in order to stay on top of things. Many of our seniors have used technology as part of their work dating back to the mid to late 1900’s. Some of them have actually worked though technology that I have never had the opportunity to use, and their longevity in their present jobs proves they are able adjust relatively well.

How to cite this assignment

Choose cite format:
The Effects of Rhetoric and Stereotypes Assignment. (2020, Jun 06). Retrieved June 25, 2022, from