On December 1st there was a article on CNN titled “Women enable men like Matt Lauer and Charlie Rose.” I was disappointed before I even read the article. I believe it is a dangerous narrative. The article implies that some of the accusers enable these men and that some of these women have benefited from the harasser’s success, by getting promotions, recognition, and raises.
It’s wrong to imply even in the slightest way that harassed women are enablers. Most of those Women are in a male dominated system and there is a deeply embedded sexism structure here in the US. It’s already hard enough for women to even try to report abuse, because of the chances of prosecution being low.
Coming out to accuse someone in power is not anything easy. It takes a lot of courage and needs to be handled correctly. Yes, some of these women did not come out and accuse their harassers until years later, and the only question there is what is wrong with our system that doesn’t allow for a women to report the harassment right away. I was even more surprised with this article because it was written by a women.
With all these sexual harassment cases coming out, as a women that is disgusted by all these stories, we need to never accuse the victims in any way and realize it is not the womens fault.
The Knife Media posted an article titled “The follow-up on Matt Lauer’s dismissal: Objection, irrelevant. The author Jens Erik Gould argued that the media’s follow up coverage on Lauer is wrong because it brings up information not related to his current allegations. He is complaining that Matt Lauer reputation is being damaged. He says his past behavior has nothing to do with the current allegations and that it is being used to spin the public. My opinion is that when you admit to inappropriate sexual behavior your past interactions are up for judgment. For anybody that has been living under a rock for the last few weeks, Matt Lauer has been accused of inappropriate sexual behavior with colleagues. There have been multiple women come forward with one accusing him of sexual assault. He was fired from NBC and shortly after he offered an apology to the ladies he hurt. Although he said some of the allegations were false, he admitted that were enough truth in stories to make feel embarrassed and ashamed. He also acknowledged that he caused some pain by his words and actions. This sounds to me like an admission of guilt of some sort, although he did not say which allegations were true or false. Matt Lauer has been on televisions in homes across America for 20 years. After hearing him admit to some level of guilt for inappropriate sexual behavior, I think it is natural for people question past behavior that was overlooked. To many across the country, he is not the man most thought he was. I think there is now context to go along with some of his previous behavior. Everything from the ill advised sexual harassment jokes to taking his pants off on set, I believe it is the viewing public’s right to look back and wonder about the actions of Matt Lauer.
Zoe Sugg. Hands down my favorite youtuber and has been since I started watching youtube years ago. Not only does she make youtube videos, but she also has her own makeup line and writes a lifestyle blog where she posts recipes, gives fashion advice and talks about things that are relevant in her life. As any youtuber, to have achieved everything that they have, they’ve had to do it all on their own at the beginning and work their way up the ladder. And even when they’re at the top they have to work extra hard to stay up there.
Don’t worry, this post isn’t just going to be about how much I love Zoe and absolutely everything she does (even though I could write a million blog posts about that, and probably will for future blogs)
For the third exercise (contributing to critical discourse: the analytical post) I am going to try to “criticize” her blog page. I chose to write about her’s because I wanted to give myself the challenge to find one single flaw lol.
If you go to Zoe’s blog, you’ll see that there is definitely a lot going on which I think is the one thing that I’m not completely excited about. Even though it is pretty organized, I find it a little hard to pick something to read. She used to have a different layout years ago where you wouldn’t have to click through different tabs to read her posts which made it a little easier to navigate. I think she leaves out a lot of opportunities for people to easily find her newest blog because if you go to the main page you’re not entirely sure which of her posts are the most recent.
I think she should also be a little more open about her struggles to getting where she is now, because we see the more glamorous side of her life and where she is now but she’s never really talked about how much hard work she had to do.
Zoe doesn’t write about anything controversial, but one of her blog posts talks about her dealing with her anxiety. If you know Zoe and have watched her from the start, you know that she has dealt with anxiety her whole life and since her fame started, it has gotten worse. A lot of people who love to criticize, have given her grief about her talking about her anxiety because they don’t think she should “complain” about it. When she talked about it in videos, it not only angered me that people were saying these things but you could tell how much it hurt her which is why she hadn’t talked about it for a long time. I think it’s incredibly brave to talk about mental illness, especially when you have such a big audience. If you wanted to read about her anxiety and how she’s dealt with it, pop on over to this blog post.
So there, I tried my best to criticize a blog. Maybe my mistake was choosing someone i admire because there is definitely going to be bias, but hey I’m not perfect!
The author of “What if climate change isn’t real” starts off by suggesting that only 95% of scientists believe in climate change … only 95%. Apparently, if at least 5% of experts disagree with something we should seriously question the validity of the other 95%.
Maybe the author is a one-percenter …
The subheader to the title of this piece is, “What should we do if science turns out to be wrong?” My first thought is, “nothing.” Who cares? I mean seriously, what is the worst case scenario of climate change not being a really, really big deal?
We live on a cleaner planet with less trash floating around in the ocean?
We have more options for fuel, which will increase supply and lower prices?
Yeah, sounds rough.
As it goes on, the blog does begin to redeem itself as it weighs the pros and cons of taking action to fight climate change. In the end, the author decides takes a “why not” attitude saying that we may as well go ahead and do something since the risks of climate change outweigh the risks of lack of climate change.
Overall, this whole blog is not well thought out and doesn’t really make any compelling arguments. It reads like something that was a required writing for school. The points are stretched and the logic is sketchy.