In the article “What I’ve Learned from Men. ” The author Barbara Ehrenreich defines and roots her essay on things women can learn from men. She upholds that men influence women to become tough because of all the conflicts and arguments between the genders that make women recognize they are too ladylike when they are in a battle with men. She also explains that women should learn to get tough and take credit when they have accomplished or succeeded in a certain task and not just blame it on luck.
Unfortunately, the article “What I’ve Learned from Men” is fruitless because the author hasn’t displayed any credible sources that support what she is claiming and also exhibits an amount of logical fallacies. First of all, there are several logical fallacies found in the article, which shows us why Barbara’s article is ineffectual. “I, a full-grown feminist…had behaved like a ninny-or, as I now understand it, like a lady. ” This sentence is an example of Ad Hominem. The reason is that she refers to herself as a ninny, a foolish person, or in other words as a lady.
Thus, she is attacking herself and all the other ladies who experience a similar event rather than the argument. Identically, the sentence “we spend a great deal of time acting like a wimp. ” is another example of Ad Hominem. Another example is the entire fifth paragraph, “Think, for example…fascination for us. ” This is clearly an example of Hasty Generalization where the author has referred the actors Mel Gibson, John Travolta and Marlon Brando as people who don’t talk and care about others feelings so, therefore, this has to be the same situation with us.
But, there is no relation between them and us. Moreover, a good example of slippery slope is also present in the article. “If you’re not sure what to do with your face in the meantime, study Clint Eastwood’s expressions—both of them. ” The reason is that the solution (study Clint Eastwood’s expressions) has nothing to do with the problem (what to do with your face). The first step does not lead to the second step and there is no connection between the two steps.
Finally, there is an example of a Post-Hoc fallacy in the article. “If you take the credit you deserve…fully intend to do so again. ” There is a connection between two ideas in the sentence. That is, if you take the credit for accomplishing something then this will result to being confident and succeeding again and again. Following this further, we will shift to the other claim of why the article is ineffective, which is the lack of supportive and credible sources.
The author is not credible since all the information she supplied in her article is from her own experience and not from a well-known book or study. Hence, people will face difficulties in trusting whatever the author is saying in the article and especially males, since the independent variable in the article is men. “Sociologists have observed that in male-female social interactions it’s the woman who throws out leading questions and verbal encouragements. ” This sentence has no proof, evidence or reference.
So the author cannot just state this point without backing it up with proof. Logically, you can find men who are similar to this statement and women who are as well. Finally, this shows that the author is not demonstrating information and details with evidence and proof. Thus, this is another reason why the author’s article is ineffective. In conclusion, the article is fruitless since the author hasn’t supplied it with credible and supportive sources and references; as well as the presence of several amounts of logical fallacies and also of different types.
This affected her argument badly and her reasoning just showed that she is trying to strengthen her opinion rather than strengthening her argument. Likewise, if the author has a very good experience in such topics but fails to have a good logical reasoning, the article’s reputation will be disrupted critically. Finally, the article should contain all these points so that it can be strong; and so that she can promote in what she believes in.