This article has many great ideas and suggestions. In the end it points out that the problem is not the lack of women elected into office but that if there were more women to choose from we would have much better results for women in office. If there were more women to choose from then eventually women would start to equally represent the U.S. in office. It is also pointed out that this could possibly eliminate problems that women come across in the media and with people in general. Another good point made was that women do not always vote for women when it comes to elections. She struggled to win over young, progressive female voters because she seemed too compromised, too conservative in many respects compared to Barack Obama. This fact about Hillary Clinton is very interesting and is surprising to many people. “One of the strangest things about this moment, for which Clinton would pay dearly, was that when her victory was presumptive many American feminists did not cheer her on, but shrugged their shoulders, curled their lips in distaste, or simply kept their distance.” This quote shows that women were not behind Clinton really at all and she was not supported. I believe that this article makes a lot of great points and is effective due to the reliable information given but it could as things to make it be more appealing to the public. The targeted audience of this article could be women who are voting and putting people into office.

In this article Michel Martin talks about how different women are treated in politics. “Nope, they’re doing what a lot of men can’t seem to help doing with women — a lot of throat clearing, offering compliments about her appearance and then acting like she isn’t even there”, this is a comment Michel made about Sarah Palin. Michel tells about a personal experience when dealing with a male in the house. She was seen as a women who would not understand a thing that was going on with bills and amendments. She then talks about how she is not the only female treated this way. Sarah Palin has taken many hits about being a mom or her appearance. Joe Biden jokes that one difference between the two of them is not his three decades of experience at the center of the country’s most complex issues, but that she’s better looking than he is. This is a huge example of how much respect males in office really have for women in politics. This article is very effective due to the heavily opinionated comments and all the great points made but, there are some things that could be different. There are not very many direct quotes of examples of candidates making demeaning comments about girl candidates. Also the article is kind of hard to follow and could be made easier to understand for people who are not into politics. This articles targeted audience would most likely consist of women trying to get into politics or women that are trying to take a stand in general.

“Are we ready for a woman president?”. This question is analyzed in the article while using the example of Hillary Clinton. The purpose of this article is to show the negativity put towards Hillary just because she is a female. First off it talks about how many times Hillary is talked about negatively due to her clothes and body shape. “What you gonna do with all that junk? All that junk inside your trunk?” Without the accompanying drawing, one could have assumed that Anderson was referring personal baggage, but the cartoon made clear that he was also making a sly dig at her shape. This quote in the article is just one of the many ways that people make negative comments about women in politics. Why is it that women are criticized continually for there clothes, hairstyles, and body shape when none of this is mentioned for a male candidate? Another great point brought up in the article is the double-standard women have when running for office. If women act powerful and strong they are talked about as being to manly and not embracing there feminine side. If women act to traditionally feminine then they are considered to soft or weak by the public to be in office. I love how this article points out different instances where women candidates like Nancy Pelosi are critiqued for there style, hair and appearance but rarely is what they stand for or what they said brought up. This to me is very effective because it really is an eye-opener on how journalism works.

This study is very surprising and informational. The study in this article shows that plump males have been proved to be more positive than skinny males. It also shows that plump women have been proved to be less positive than skinny females. I believe that this article has many purposes. One main purpose is how different men and women really are. It shows that image does matter to gender. It has been proved that body image really does matter to a person and to the people. Women that are bigger are not as appealing to the people than a women who is fit and skinny. It is interesting that this is the complete opposite for men. Skinny men are not as appealing to the public then men that are chubby and are bigger. It is believed that when men are “portly or bigger or fatter, they may be associated with a … grandfatherly image or a priestly image,” said Alvaro Deprat. Overall women in general were viewed as 10% less favorable then obese males. This articles targeted audience could have been anyone in the general public. People need to be aware of unconscious reasons that they could vote for a person over another. People also need to realize what an effect body image has to do with various things one example being politics. I found this article very effective. There was pictures to make the article more effective and give an example of men who have ran for office and have been more plump. There was also a very reliable study done that showed how much effect body image has on the public. Facts and statistics also make this article very effective.

In this article it is recognized that women in politics is decreasing. The number of women in congress declined for the first time in 30 years after the 2010 elections. Women occupy 16.4% of congressional posts. This remains a concern for many. Ms. Gillibrand argues that an infusion of women into the political system would go a long way toward changing the tone in Congress, a male-dominated world of fiercely clashing egos. She believes that with more women in congress all the arguing and pride of men could be decreased. She says throughout the article various times that an increase of women in congress would improve our government significantly due to the ability to really think things through and compromising. The main purpose of this article is for women to make a point as to why women should have a bigger part in the U.S. government. Anita Woolley, a professor of organisational behaviour at Carnegie Mellon, and Thomas Malone, a professor of management at MIT found that, “There’s little correlation between a group’s collective intelligence and the IQs of its individual members. But if a group includes more women, its collective intelligence rises”. Another purpose of this article is to explain that women are just as capable as men when it comes to politics, and some even believe that they can in some instances be more capable.It is voiced that with a less combative approach women could be more successful. This articles targeted audience consists of the public who are electing people into office. It could give people a different view on women in office and maybe want them to try adding females in congress.

In the article about John Boehner his crying is addressed. During speeches while campaigning for president John Boehner is known for his extremely emotional breakdowns. It is asked in the article can he manage Michelle Bachman, a woman that is aggressive. “I can get pretty emotional,” Mr. Boehner conceded in a recent interview. “I learned there are some things I really can’t talk about. Can’t go to schools while campaigning. All of those little sweet kids, I’m a mess.” This article has a main purpose of showing that crying is more openly done by men then it used to be. Many men have been successful on campaigns even if they do cry. Public crying, he said, can be calculated or self-permitted. “We do so for a number of reasons,” Mr. Lutz said. “For emphasis (this is so important I give myself permission to break the rules); for self-definition (I don’t care how I’m supposed to act; this is who I really am); to ward off criticism (he’s too upset for me to challenge him); to suggest intimacy (he feels so comfortable with me he will break the rules in front of me); and so on.”  This quote shows that crying can actually considered an advantage in campaigning. It shows a vulnerable and more relate able side of the contestants.  This article could be targeted at men to show that showing emotion is changing and instead of becoming a weakness is actually showing as a strength. This article is effective due to the many sources used. It has many real life example of situations where crying has been excepted.

“Eighty-nine is the number of nations that still surpass the U.S. in terms of women’s representation in government”. In this article it is mentioned various times that the U.S. is continuing to fall behind other countries with the progress of women in our government. A fact that supports that our country is falling behind is that the article mentions that for decades now within the U.S., female participation in political and business leadership has consistently stagnated around 18%. This is extremely concerning because it shows that no progress has been made at all due to many factors. In the article it states that one reason women in politics is so low is because women are too busy upholding both careers and the majority of household responsibilities. This is a controversy because women are trying to move past there role as just being a stay at home mom that takes care of the children. There are many purposes of this article. One main purpose I believe is to show that women are at a clear disadvantage in politics in the U.S.A. and some of the reasons are from past beliefs from people. Another purpose is to show that the U.S. is falling behind majorly and to keep up with other countries needs to find a new method to include both men and women in politics. I believe that the targeted audience is high school students to anyone of older age. People should know and understand U.S. politics and who is running there country and the reasons for it. This article was effective because it talks about something that people need to know more about.

Have you ever thought why does the NBA get paid so much more than the WNBA? It is the same sport, with the same concepts but with a different gender. Why is it that gender affects the revenue brought in so significantly that the difference is counted in millions. In the article Comets Flame Out by Joe Lemire it mentions a few facts and statistics about women’s national basketball that are unforgettable when it comes to money. The WNBA remains a tough business to bring in revenue. Only 10 of 14 teams saw an increase in revenue from 2007 to 2008, and only a few have turned a profit. Another surprising fact was that “to cash-flow the team” in ’09 Koch (the owner) needed to sell 3,000 season tickets and get $2 million in corporate sponsorships, but the Comets reached only about two thirds of each benchmark. Something that continually bothers me is why is it that the WNBA game barely have any attendance at all when almost every single NBA team has many fans every game. The same sport should have the same supporters and not loose them just because of gender. The fans are so important because if they dont buy tickets and support the WNBA teams then the difference between the profits is going to keep increasing. Another factor to why the NBA gets paid much more than the WNBA is all the airtime and advertising the NBA players and teams get. This article has a targeted audience of women’s basketball players or any athletes wanting to know about professional women’s sports. The article I read was effective for what it was going for but a little short and could have included much more information about the subject.

Britney Spears is one of the most influential people of our time, but if you think about it, how did she influence our culture? This reading really shows how much pop artists like Madonna and Britney and celebrities like Jane Fonda had a huge influence on body type and changed the popular skin and bones body type to an athletic and muscular looking body. Earlier I asked the question what kind of influence did Britney Spears have on our society? Well it is believed by Forbes (2002) that her influence is to blame for increases in body image disturbances among young girls all over. Many themes emerge from Britney’s videos when analyzed. Power and control, identity development and gender stereotypes and sexuality. Also all throughout many of Britney’s music video is promotion of the female body. Another aspect that is promoted in many of her videos is development from “schoolgirl” to “diva”. Many things are prominent in her videos including power. In the video “Oops I Did It Again” she shows her power by being dressed in a red space suit with a boy following around and in the beginning of the video coming from up above. This academic writing can be targeted at teenagers and young adults around the world. Britney Spears has influenced girls from ages 8-28 and this article could be interesting to many teenagers. Britney Spears being one of the most important singers in my youth I really enjoyed this article. The form it was wrote in was very organized and it showed its reliability by using many facts and even a case study. One thing I did not like was the length of it and at points it got kind of boring to me. Other than this critique I believe this reading was effective and is good information to have.

The reading “Nascar’s Boy Wonder”, is extremely surprising and has so many different purposes to offer. I think a main purpose is to show how our society has a tendency to not accept different and hate the unfamiliar. When Jeff Gordon joined the race world and became a NASCAR champion he was not looked at like other champions like him. He was ridiculed for his bright-colored car or his young looking face and body. Credentials were also something that was not accepted in NASCAR. NASCAR heros are usually always classified as rough and intimidating. The men are also characterized as extremely manly and do not have educations. All of this was completely opposite of Jeff Gordon. Jeff Gordon came into NASCAR with MANY astonishing credentials. Something that really created a division within NASCAR fans was the youthful profile. Jeff Gordon was either hugely excepted or roundly rejected. After a while Jeff Gordon got unearned speculations that he was gay. Even though there was no evidence to support these speculations there became fan groups against Gordon where rude t-shirts and websites were made to show hate for the racer. Even after Jeff Gordon married his wife and also a model he was not done being accused for being gay. A divorce set a new spark to the fire and gave people even more momentum to accuse Jeff. Some studies have shown that Gordon’s image is projected for advertisements and other photo shoots. I think that this reading is very true and has a very good point and message. Our society does jump to conclusions when we encounter something different than the normal. I really loved the message because of this message and all of the informative things in it. This reading was very effective due to all the different statistics, quotes, studies and stories told. This article should be read by everyone because of the message it sends out to America.