After reading the article, I would conclude that the issue was about how men feel they have to act macho and like jerks only for the sake of impressing one another. The author compares two author's opinions and views of how and why men act the way they do. One of the authors, Maurer, is, I guess you could say one of those guys. He talks about men's behavior like he is proud of the way they get drunk with their friends and plan out how they are going to hit on girls at bars. The other author, Kimmel, recognizes this behavior by guys, but implies that it is childish and stupid. The author of the article seems to side with Kimmel, thinking that guys are pigs and need to, at some point, grow up. The issue was not hard to pinpoint at all. I feel the author did a good job of stating both sides of the issue: that men are pigs and its acceptable behavior and, that men can be pigs but need to move past that phase at some point in their life.
The message in this article is very clear. It is that men are "all jerks and all they care about is football and women." It is also apparent what side the author is on. She just like every girl thinks this way. The authors both portray the same message but one is proud while the other admits that it is childish and they need to grow up. There is no doubt that the men who act like this are immature and do need to grow up. However, what both of the authors fail to do is admit that not every guy is the same. If the author really feels that way then it would only be fair that she classify every woman as only caring about shoes, credit cards, and rich husbands. Now this is not true but it is an example of the double standard in our society. If a man were to write an article like that, oh lord, CNN and feminist groups would be booking it to that guy to cash in on that story.
This article talks about the stereotypical negative views of men. It points out bad habits, childish behavior, and immature views on life, that some men may have, but not all men do have. The author takes two other pieces of literature to use to point out opposing sides. One side talks about 'guyland' and the over-the-top stereotypical dude slang that apparently guys use to be cool around their freinds (or bros). The other side explains why men may want to use their special lingo. The author seems to take the side that men need to grow up and act mature, but she still does a good job stating both sides.
To me, this article's main point is about how men are jerks and they only think about themselves to look cool compared to one another. The side the author is on is obvious. She compares two other authors opinions, who are of course men, and explain how and why they act the way they do. She says men act like a child, and they think being drunk is cool. One author talks about this so-called "guyland" and how it is shows the stereotypical guy. The other author talks about why men do what they do. She did a really good job with explaining both sides and their points.
The article does a great job at explaining why guys act the way they do. The author shows both sides to the argument very well. In the long run guys pretty much act like jerk because if they don't some other guy would question his masculinity.The author did a lot of research on her article and by using dialogue helped show how guys really think. I like how the author portrays the way she feels about guys, and her opinion is the same as most women.
The message of the article is how men are jerks. One author states on how he is proud of men’s behaviors while the other author feels that guys are immature and they need to grow up. The article does explain both sides well.
This article was very humorous and kept your attention to the end of every sentence. The author used comedy and wit to express her views on the image problem of manhood in America. The author touches on the views of two authors, Maurer and Kimme, and compares the two sides. One is promoting the vibe of male bonding and unity, Maurer, and the other is explaining the destruction that this bromosexual lifestyle is causing young males in America, Kimmel. After reading you can determine that the author is leaning toward the idea that this bromanship is childish and stupid. Although she does a good job of expressing both sides I would have liked her to mention that all guys are not this stereotypical robot.
The article presents the issue that men feel that they have to constantly put on a show in front of other men, always trying to prove their masculinity. They can never show their feelings, in fear that they will look feminine. Guy Land as the author describes is like a theme park stage of a man's life, that he never wants to leave. Football, blondes, beer pong, what else does a guy need? The author presents a stereotypical view on men. The author portrays all men as wanna-be frat boys until they reach about 30 years old and grow up.I think that the author sides with Kimmel on the issue. The article gives a humorous but very believable explanation on why guys act the way they do. And for the record, i loved this article. It was entertaining.
From the beginning of the article, i found that the author used interesting arguments as to guys and relating them to sex. The arguments are compared by two authors and their opinions. The first author, Maurer, is what some would say your typical "guy". He has his own analogies towards particular subjects, which sort of shows a biased towards a guy's superiority and somewhat puts women on the spot. The other author, Kimmel, seems to take a more serious approach on the subject, and tells about why these behaviors that men exhibit arent necessarily acceptable. I think that the author did a good job of stating both sides, and transitioned between the two authors opinions very well.
This articles explains basically how guys are jerks and self centered. the author of this article definitely takes a side and thats the side that says men are stupid and only cares about watching television, especially sports.The author also talks about holw men have a zero chance of having sex becausje of thier self centeredness. In the article it also talks about how men want to act macho just to impress women.
The article was unbelievably entertaining as it truthfully stated men's ways. It explains the opinion of two authors of men's behavioral books. One author rewrote the ten commandments with one being "keep holy the sabbath and watch football." The article is well written and flows wonderfully from one transitional gross man way to another.
This article shows why guys act the way they do. It shows the reasons for why guys have to act so masculine in front of one another. The author does a great job of comparing both sides of the issues. The author takes the side of how men only want to watch sports and do things that you would think of a man to do. This article was very entertaining and I enjoyed reading it.
after reading the article, the author portrays all men the same way. Kimmel saids that same thing about all men. The author uses different literary devices to portray men. It says that men don't believe to get rich by working hard or saving and sacrificing but by winning the lottery. It also saids that men don't pay any attention to the arts or literature but sex. The author uses two authors in the article. Kimmel who believes this about guys and Mauer who is one of those guys.
In this article the author talks about two viewpoints on why men act the way they do. One talks about them as jerks who need to grow up and act more mature. The other sympathizes with men and say that its just typical behavior. The author sides with the first article saying that men are immature pigs who just get drunk and be obnoxious.
The article was about how men are taught to be like in today’s society. It basically that men want nothing more than to get wasted with there friends and score at the end of the night. You can easily see that one side to the issue is that it is ok for guys to act this way and the other side is that they should grow up and look at the more important things in life. The author is clearly on the side that wants men to change their bad habits. You can especially tell what side he is one when he offers a solution to the issue.
The author of this article is comparing two different authors. She did a good job discribing the argument and you could definitely tell which side she was on. It was about the way people view men negatively and how they are macho acting and like to sit around and drink. Basically it was about how men are jerks.
When reading this article, i felt that the author wanted to portray an image of macho men, who grow up having to act like manly men. It shows two contrasting opinions. One who is proud to be a manly man and another who believes such actions are childish.
This article tells about your basic stereotypical man. That is that we are childish, immature, jerks, stupid...etc. Basicly men are pigs. But what the writers do not admit to is that all men are not this way. The author did a good job of saying that we are pigs as men, and that is what we do, but at one point we should grow up. But overall her opinion is a little bit bias.
Post a Comment