The Final Feminist Frontie

Rhetorical Strategies in Grose’s “Cleaning: The Final Feminist Frontie”

A common saying that a woman’s work is never enough is a saying that many Americans grew up knowing of, which is valid to some extent. A female author by the name of Jessica Grose wrote and published in the new republic in 2013; “cleaning: the final feminist frontier” where continues to argue that as well all men in their life start taking the household chores like cooking and taking care of the children, the act of cleaning will always fall and be the responsibility of women. Grose begins to create her trustworthiness with her facts and numerous sources while making cites, statistics ant persuading facts, and also employing emotional petition to readers, thus demonstrating her success in delivering the argument.

At first, in the article, Grose introduces the stage by explaining the unique situation of house cleaning together with her fiancée. This is after they are shut on Hurricane Sunday. She shows the unorganized distribution of marital duties in her marriage. She gets an opportunity to compare the larger feminist issue of who is always doing the union’s cleaning chore. Grose discusses and tells some of the reasons why men do not get involved in cleaning. One of the reasons is that social media will always advertise men and children on cleaning. Secondly, cleanliness pleasure and praise go to women but not men. She suggests the solution to be equal distribution of duties where one should be given the assignment on where they are well skilled. Also, doing cleaning appears to be fun, especially while using gadgets.

Through the article, Grose applies vast sources to strengthen her standing and petition to ethos and building of the argument. Her references are: “sociologists Judith Treas and Tsui-o Tai,” “a 2008 study from the University of New Hampshire,” and “P&G North America Fabric Care Brand Manager, Matthew Krehbiel” (qt. in Grose). Through the use of the sources, she improves her effectiveness by showing that she has used expert opinion, facts, and statistics to back up her claims. She continues to use her very own examples and personal experience in delivering her opinion. In addition to her ethos, she appeals to logos with any evidence of and logical explanation of the ideas. She continues to use her marriage and house to say they both work with her husband in the house chores. She says that they both help one another in feeding the baby, but her husband will never claim of cleaning their bathroom and also claims to do the dishes cleaning in nine out of ten times and he may hardly know how both drier works in the apartment she claims to have lived for more than eight months. This shows the idea that Grose is fond of doing more chores than her husband in their house.

As Grose expounds, her statistics show that an average of fifty-five percent of American women and mothers employed on a full-time basis are capable and always found of doing all household duties. In contrast, an average of eighteen fathers tries and do some household chores. She also says that most working mothers and children manage to go for the second shift a day compared to their male partners. Other statistics from Sweden shows that women do more chores than men with an average of forty-five minutes. She says that the above statistics are among the small scenarios supporting her argument and indicate a problem where most men fail to do a portion of their duty in their houses. The above information and appeal create logos and convince the reader that the problem is worth succession and discussion.

Grouse efficiently makes petition to pathos in the initial and central sections by the introduction of words that are full of emotions creating emotional images. She claims that she was eight months pregnantwhile her husband claimed that it hard to fight with a pregnant woman. In this image, she shows the challenges and the vulnerable occurrences that are experienced by many pregnant women. She also leads the emotions felt by pregnant women whenever they are introduced to an argument. Her main goal is getting the ayttention of the reader as wel, as ther sympathy. She introduces phrases like; argued, sucks, be judged, and with all these, her main aim is to induce the undesirable feelings about cleaning and make the reader fall in sympathy with all women who are victims of doing all household chores alone. Words like more gendered as used by Grose, express all kind of unfairness that are existing when it comes to the cleaning chore while acting and appealing to pathos and readers feeling of injustice filled with anger. However, at the end of this article, the article lacks misses the same level of efficiency while appealing to ethos. For instance, Grose notes that when men are found doing the home chores, they are always referred to be “enacting” where she refers to this as gender heroism. The use of the term “barf” is termed to be shuddering the person who reads both in unprofessional way and immaturity way. From the research, her choice of words is likely not to make the reader take he to be a serious author. This kills and destroys the credibility given to her argument.

Besides, the article’s last statement shows Grose referring to her husband a way that dilutes her argument. In conclusion, she uses a frequent and commonly used strategy. She decides to resume her husband’s discussion in a comic convention, where she discusses the solution by saying that there is a huge and untapped market for the toilets washing iPod. She says that she bet that her husband would buy one, this is returning to her own marriage, and the husband appears to be a plea to the ethos and individual trustworthiness. While this works well in the introduction, the conclusion lacks both strength and importance merited by the theme specified previously by the article.

Although Grose initiates her essay with effectiveness of persuading her readers on the matter regarding the unfair distribution of household chores, that is generally the cleaning, she dilutes and loses her point at the end while almost delivering home her argument. The audience can fully see that the issue is in existence her marriage as well as the entire world.  However, her act of comic and humor make the reader not to take her problem and argument seriously at the end. Otherwise, Grove would have brought home her argument that the woman’s duty would be done; by the man.