Compare and contrast the rhetoric in "The Fraud" from "What's Wrong with 'Equal Rights' for Women?" by Phyllis Schlafly and "For the Equal Rights Amendment" by Shirley Chisholm.

Using the box provided below, write one to two paragraphs analyzing how the use of diction, rhetorical devices, rhetorical appeals, and figurative language is similar and different in these speeches. Consider which is more persuasive, which did a better job reaching an intended audience, and whether both speeches would still be persuasive today.



Answer :

Final answer:

Comparing and contrasting the rhetoric in Phyllis Schlafly and Shirley Chisholm's speeches regarding equal rights for women, this response discusses their use of rhetorical devices, appeals, and effectiveness in persuading audiences.


Explanation:

Comparing and Contrasting Rhetoric in Two Speeches: When analyzing Phyllis Schlafly's "The Fraud of 'Equal Rights' for Women" and Shirley Chisholm's "For the Equal Rights Amendment," it is evident that both speeches use rhetorical devices such as diction, appeals to emotions, and figurative language to convey their messages. However, Schlafly's speech relies more on emotional appeals and utilizes diction that emphasizes traditional roles and societal fears. On the other hand, Chisholm's speech employs a more logical appeal and figurative language to argue for gender equality.

Persuasiveness and Audience Reach: In terms of persuasion, Chisholm's speech may be seen as more persuasive due to its logical reasoning and inclusive language, which could resonate with a wider audience. However, Schlafly's speech might have been more effective in reaching her intended audience at that time, tapping into existing societal norms and fears. Both speeches could still be persuasive today, but Chisholm's approach may have a broader appeal in contemporary society.


Learn more about Comparing and Contrasting Rhetoric in Speeches here:

https://brainly.com/question/28924998