Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
The issue revolving around gender equality and the study of rhetoric used in speeches are both widely discussed, involving many debates and theories as to how rhetoric is used especially when addressing an audience. Aristotle details this ‘art of persuasion’ and is heavily credited with developing the foundation of the system that was written on persuasion – He is seen still as ‘one of the greatest thinkers in politics, psychology and ethics’. For my investigation, secondary sources of research from various websites will be used in order to heighten the analysis of the chosen speeches – looking also at the wider implications in order to aid the judgment as to what makes a speech successful or unsuccessful.
My analysis will specifically look into the rhetoric and language used by women in discussing gender equality. In order to explore this, I have devised three research questions:
- What specific rhetorical devices are used throughout each speech?
- What can we say about the devices and language used?
- Do the different speeches use rhetoric in a similar or different way?
Aim
‘Investigate the rhetoric used by women in discussing gender equality
In my investigation, I aim to explore how rhetoric is used in speeches in order to highlight the speaker’s argument and beliefs, and the impact of using rhetoric, especially on the audience. I will also look into how gender and power may influence the language they use in order to investigate the similarities within the speeches – using theories in order to develop my investigation and to see whether the speeches adhere to them.
Methodology
For my investigation, I have analyzed two different speeches – the first speech by Emma Watson and the second by Hillary Clinton. I chose to explore these speeches as each has a prime topic of gender equality and can evidently be seen to use rhetorical devices in similar and contrasting ways. To begin with, the first speech by Emma Watson was made on September 20, 2014, at the launch of the HeForShe campaign. This speech was transcribed by the United Nations Women’s website, and so can be seen as a reliable source of data. The second speech was ‘Women’s Rights are Humans Rights’ by Hillary Clinton, delivered on the 5th of September, 1995 in Beijing, China. This speech was transcribed by The Atlantic – an American magazine – under the politics section, the article targeting an audience interested in politics. Clinton’s speech is significant as it was made in 1995 whilst Watson’s speech was made in 2014, meaning I could analyze any clear differences in the speeches made as a result of time and progress – language adapting and evolving over the time period. As well as this, Clinton’s speech is referenced in Watson’s speech, demonstrating how these women influence one another and share common beliefs. Fundamentally, these speeches will provide me with strong data to deconstruct in order to analyze the rhetoric used by women in discussing gender equality.
Analysis
Lexis and use of words
When looking at the thesis of Watson’s speech, she conveys the important message that stereotypical gender roles preserve gender inequality and in turn prevent equality from being achieved. In order to get this message across to the audience, she uses the modes of persuasion pathos, logos, and ethos – developing a relationship with the audience. Pathos is used in the speech in order to engage the audience at an emotional level, using this early in her speech when stating ‘I need your help’ – appealing to the sense of decency in her audience. Logos is evident when she expresses her concern that the word ‘feminism’ has become a negative word associated with male hatred, contrasting the common understanding of the word with the political and ideological definition. As well as this, Ethos is also seen when drawing on her own personal experiences, placing herself in a position of trust. Furthermore, allusions are also used in Watson’s speech – referring to the speech by Hillary Clinton about women’s rights. This is effective as Watson is, and so referring to the American politician develops her connection with the American audience.
On the other hand, the speech by Hillary Clinton has the key message that women around the world deserve to be given equal rights, and a voice, and to be acknowledged for their contribution to society: demonstrating this message, similar to speech one, through the use of pathos, logos and ethos. Pathos is used when she appeals to feelings so that the audience responds to her argument on an emotional level, using a range of negative emotions women experience such as powerlessness and fear. This can be seen as to link to Robin Lakoff’s Deficit model (1975), which explains how women’s language is weaker than men’s: Clinton reflects these feelings of weakness through her speech – further demonstrating the impact of those who share a similar perspective to Lakoff. Logos is seen when Clinton refers to statistics – for example when she presents women to be discriminated against statistics about their situation. As well as this, Ethos is used when Clinton positions herself as trustworthy, discussing how ‘Over the past 25 years, I’ve worked persistently on issues relating to women and children and families.’ Also similar to the first speech, allusions are seen frequently in the speech in order to further the rhetorical appeal of the speech, referencing the 75th anniversary of women’s suffrage and the signing of the Declaration of Independence.
Grammar and Syntax
In Watson’s speech, repetition is seen frequently in the speech in order to emphasize her ideas and message to the audience. Anaphora is used when she discusses how ‘When at 14 I started being sexualized by certain elements of the press.’ Here, Watson clearly addresses stereotypes by using anecdotes in order to reflect on how she has experienced them. Furthermore, rhetorical questions are also seen frequently in the speech in order to directly address the audience and to have them think of an answer their themselves – Watson asks ‘Why has the word become such an uncomfortable one?’.
Alternatively, in Clinton’s speech, repetition is also used along with enumeration in order to provide structure to the speech whilst making it memorable. This can be seen by ‘Yet much of the work we do is not valued – not by economists, not by historians, not by popular culture, not by government leaders.’, presenting the techniques combined. Declarations are also used throughout the text when Clinton addresses the audience: this is seen when she says ‘Let me be clear’ and at the end of the text when she says ‘The time is now. We must move beyond rhetoric.’ The declarations, along with the collective pronoun ‘we’ can once again be seen to present Clinton engaging with the audience whilst placing herself as trustworthy and knowledgeable. This can be linked to Deborah Tannen’s difference theory (1990) which demonstrates how men and women use language for different purposes. Clinton presents herself using language to build a relationship with the audience, linking to the difference between information vs. feelings – ‘feelings’ being evident by Clinton using language to share common feelings and to build a relationship with the audience.
Pragmatics
Emma Watson’s speech was delivered at the launch of the UN Women HeForShe campaign – with her background as a declared feminist and her appointment as a Goodwill Ambassador making her a credible sender in the context of the speech. Her prestigious position can be seen to suggest Watson is considered trustworthy by many, evidently building ethos by this being established at the start of the speech. Watson uses metaphorical language to further this, using two main types of metaphors: those that describe ‘gender stereotypes’ and those that describe ‘feminism.’ Her inconsistent use of the ‘fight’ metaphor develops this – she is hesitant to use ‘feminism’ to describe gender equality due to its stigma and instead replaces it with phrases such as ‘he for she’.
Furthermore, Clinton’s speech was delivered at the United Nations Fourth World Conference. At the time of the speech, Clinton had been the First Lady for two years since her husband, Democrat Bill Clinton, became the US President – this being alluded to when she mentions traveling around the world and meeting women. Her use of Ethos throughout the speech positions her as knowledgeable on the topic, building a connection with the audience through this. Clinton can be seen to also use metaphorical language, creating imagery regarding the lives of women – this often being seen by the use of extensive enumerations: the contributions women make in every aspect of life: in the home, on the job, in the community, as mothers, wives, sisters, daughters, learners, workers, citizens, and leaders.’. This can be seen to appeal to women who feel overlooked and underappreciated, emphasizing the importance and value of women.
Discourse structure
Watson begins her ‘HeForShe Speech’ by announcing the launch of the campaign and asking for the audience’s help to end gender inequality: ‘I am reaching out to you because I need your help. We want to end gender inequality – and to do that we need everyone to be involved.’ She also begins by disassociating the word ‘feminism’ from ‘men-hating’, positioning herself in line with the audience by recognizing the stigma. She further advances on how her experiences led her to become a feminist – ‘I started questioning gender-based assumptions when at eight I was confused at being called ‘bossy,’, presenting her own experience of gender inequality. At the end of the speech, Watson closes by again referencing the ‘HeForShe’ movement, presenting a cyclical structure in order to reflect the cyclical nature of the problem if change doesn’t happen. The final simple sentence ‘Thank you.’ ends by addressing the audience, reinforcing how she is positioned with the audience throughout the speech.
On the other hand, Clinton’s speech opens by referring to the conference as a celebration: ‘It is also a coming together, much the way women come together every day in every country.’ Ethos is used early in her speech in order to establish credibility and builds on this throughout the speech, emphasizing her experience of fighting for change and positioning herself as knowledgeable. At the end of the speech, a declarative is used in order to highlight the message of the speech – ‘The time is now.’ This ends the speech in a formal and serious tone, as used throughout, emphasizing the serious nature of the topic. Anaphora is also used, Clinton highlighting how ‘We must move beyond rhetoric. We must move beyond recognition of problems to working together, to have the common efforts to build that common ground we hope to see.’ – the declarative ‘We must’ further how important it is for change to occur now.
Conclusion
To conclude, my investigation reflects there are evident similarities within the speeches made by women in discussing gender equality. Through analyzed data and support from theorists, it is clear that the women who made the speeches came from a similar nature and shared a similar perspective – this being reflected by the similar methods of rhetoric used. When looking at the research questions posed at the beginning of the investigation, have clearly supported my analysis and have led to my conclusion that speeches made by women in discussing gender equality, especially when sharing a common perspective, share similar rhetorical devices in order to achieve similar goals. When looking at the rhetorical devices used throughout each speech, they can be seen to have used many of the same techniques, such as repetition and the use of ethos, pathos, and logos. Although different techniques were also used in each speech, these were used to achieve a similar effect and so further the similarities within the speeches. Furthermore, when looking from a theoretical approach, it can be established that both Robin Lakoff’s theory and Deborah Tannen’s theory can be applied to both of the speeches. Lakoff’s theory can be applied due to her deficit model (1975) establishing how women are socialized into behaving like ladies – these suppressive emotions are reflected in both of the speeches in order to address stereotypes and emphasize the reality of society at the time. As well as this, Tannen’s theory can be applied due to her difference theory (1990) demonstrating how there are differences in men’s and women’s language but neither is better: the ‘women’s’ purposes of language being evident in both of the speeches. However, it can also be seen that both also use elements of the ‘men’s’ purposes, such as by adhering to both sides of the difference ‘orders vs proposals’, and so the validity of Tannen’s theory can be questioned. In order to further strengthen my investigation, more speeches on gender equality would be analyzed from a wider range of female politicians in order to gain more data – comparing the similarities and differences within all of the speeches, as well as the intended effect of the devices in order to reach a composed conclusion. As well as this, a wider range of theorists could be applied in order to further develop the purposes of the rhetoric used.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.