English 205 Extended Definition Example

College level
ENGLISH 205
Example of an EXTENDED DEFINITION

I know many of you are struggling to understand what an extended definition is because it is necessary for your research paper.

To my best knowledge, this extended definition is to give your audience a background understanding of whatever topic you choose. I chose to write about a current event such as the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood "party" in Egypt and how that was working out in Egypt.

Therefore, I gave a brief summery of what was then the current situation so that in the actual research paper, the reader would know where I was coming from. If you are going to talk about smething complicated that needs to be known beforehand in order to understand your research paper, add it into your "extended definition"

However, in all available opportunities you may have, PLEASE see your professor to know espicifically what he/she may want from you. This is ONLY and example. Different Professors =Different Worlds/Different Brains & ways of thinking.

My topic was "Muslim Brotherhood: The Cause to Rising Civil Unrest in Egypt."

S.S.

English 205

15, April 2013

Extended Definition Paragraph for Research Paper

                           Muslim Brotherhood: The Cause to Rising Civil Unrest in Egypt.
  

The Muslim Brotherhood “Party” which cannot be officially called that due to not

fulfilling requirements to be recognized as thus, is now at the center of this current civil

unrest in Egypt. The members of this party also have double membership to an

organization founded in Egypt also known as The Muslim Brotherhood, that although

given to charitable works, is also involved in dark and devious goals.  Al-Banna, the

founder of The Muslim Brotherhood, said “It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be

dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet.”

              There is no disguising what they are now planning and imposing on Egypt. Because of its’

influential power over its’ members, one of whom is  current President of Egypt Mohamed Morsi,

The Muslim Brotherhood ‘Party’ is, therefore, in a sense governing Egypt through the use of its’

puppet. Now, this ‘leading party’ is trying to establish laws in their favor despite the Egyptian

citizen’s protests while neglecting them and the country. This reflects where the Muslim

Brotherhood’s true intentions lie. Egyptians wanted a democracy, but according to The Free

Dictionary’s Encyclopedia The Muslim Brotherhood is against westernization which has a lot to do

with the modernization that Egyptians want. What The Muslim Brotherhood ‘Party’ is giving them

instead through President Morsi is actually leading towards an Islamic Republic like many of its’

other Arab neighbors, which Egyptians fear.

A Rhetorical Analysis

A Rhetorical Analysis: The Merging of Home and Work

by S.S 

Submitted to SDCCD

(September 6, 2012)

Are business conferences from one’s own kitchen becoming a new set of normalcy? “This merger can have positive influences on family togetherness and interdependence” Montgomery 1018), but whether you are working from your desk at home or in an office, can the world still consider you as a professional? We will find out more on this subject through the essay of Kitchen Conferences & Garage Cubicles: The Merger of Home and Work in the 24-7  Global Economy. The author is Alesia Montgomery, an African American ethnographer and  someone who enjoys observing not only the differences, but as well as the likenesses that can be  found in the diversity of ethnic and religious groups. My attempt is to write a rhetorical analysis  about her work and to lead the audience to discover the main point of Montgomery’s article which has a lot to do with merging home and work, to give you a better understanding of whether or not making this change is really worth it; why the author believes it, how she proves it, what she uses to support her beliefs and who she is trying to reach out to from within her audience.

           Here is another thing to think about; can men, women, home and work be  mixed together? Throughout her whole essay Montgomery uses an open example of a young couple, Marjaneh and Steve whose occupation either requires 24-7 or partial time working from home. Through these two people the author shows us how it may be an option for some, and although it may not be perfect, it is certainly possible! An example the she includes for her readers is when “Steve helped Marjaneh with her work reports. […] so that she could come to bed or watch TV.” (Montgomery 1015) Steve did later admit that what inspired him to help was  his wife’s mumblings about being without a job soon, but in the end we also see that afterwards, “he enjoyed her praise, and they often would go out to a restaurant to celebrate” (Montgomery 1015). One is fortunate to see both sides here and still, at the end of the day this experience can still be closed with a positive note.  

         One might think still, is this conventional, for families to work together? My response as well as Montgomery’s is—Yes, and from home too! This idea is not a novelty. Anyone who is well informed with history and culture will remember a time when working from home was something rather common. In fact, owning a business from one’s own house was not so difficult. Montgomery supports this idea by referring to a book that shows us how couples and their families as a whole made this work even then. “The baker’s wife iced cakes a few steps from her husband, the butcher and his son chopped meat on the same counter, and for the family grocers who lived in their shop, work and home merged.” (Pycior, Slack, and Abir-Am 1996) this not only offered husbands help to get more work done and faster, but it also gave the wives the feeling of self worth in that she too was needed and just as capable to help bring home the extra cash that was sometimes badly needed. Throughout all history we can see that the end is very much like the beginning, history continues to repeats itself like in that proverb that says, “there is no new thing under the sun.” (Ecclesiastes 389)

                  The author states that “Far from weakening family bonds, these mergers of home and work foster family cohesion.” (Montgomery 1010) We can see this throughout the previous examples and information that she has provided for her audience. The book “Women, Work & Family” supports the idea that the aspect of women working, whether or not it was taking place within the home, allowed for women to “balance her productive and domestic activities.” (Tilly and Scott 51) Montgomery has also used her study with Marjaneh and Steve to show us that “unlike relations in the old middle class of shopkeepers, these mergers are not necessarily male-dominated.” (Montgomery 1010) I can attest to this for myself. Before my school days I can remember my mother was able to make a side income from my father’s by doing custom sewing from bridal dresses to some rich lady’s cat! She received clients in our living room and sewed all day from her bedroom. My brother and I were always able to accompany her when her business forced her to sometimes leave the house for private fittings, the purchasing of fabrics and such other things as these. Though many of her hours throughout the day were spent sewing, I never once felt neglected. While she sewed I’d be sitting on her bed, trying out that knitting technique she had taught me and all the while talking or singing together. Even though she no longer does this, through that experience I gained my own knowledge from what I learned from my mother and her work through those years. Like Alesia Montgomery said, “The collaborations of Marjaneh and her family increased togetherness and interdependence” (Montgomery 1010). The same has happened with my family and I can say for myself that it is possible to work 24-7 within the home without causing a disruption.

            The author has done a satisfactory job in bringing her ideas around in a very convincing way to her readers; first, as a narrative because of her open example of Steve and Marjaneh. Secondly, from reading her conclusion it is easy to see how descriptive she was from the beginning to show how there life was before and what their lives have resulted in due to those changes. She did include some compare and contrast within the organization of her work but not much, mostly near the end.

Like when she says, "I do not mean to suggect that merging home and work has no downsides"  (Montgomery 1018). In that she was truthful, but she was by far leaning vastly on the positive side of this idea with sufficient proofs and examples to make one believe in it. Enough has been mentioned throughout this rhetorical analysis essay to hint towards whom Montgomery wishes to reach out to within the audience. All examples have been pointing towards husbands and wives, their children, in one word—the families. More often than naught she points out the positive views to show that it is very possible to have a type of dynamic working family and to promote this ideology to those who have never considered it or ever deemed it possible. We know now as a fact that families can successfully work together in the home.                                    

           
            The importance of this essay by Alesia Montgomery is to open the eyes of her readers to see an alternative way of living; one that allows for family involvement when it comes to merging home and work. To those who don’t like new changes, she digs back into history to lead us to a better understanding of her idea. Just as communications have come a long way, from letters to e-mails and transportation, from coaches to cars, this is no different. It is not a foreign concept at all. Just an old idea that has been able to pull through time and modernize along with other updates that have been made throughout history. She is showing us the possibility of a better living; that working together at home can bring unity within the family. This is something worth considering in these times. Don’t you think?

Work Cited

Lamentations. The Holy Bible. Grand Rapids: Zondervan House, 1962. 381. Print.

Montgomery, Alesia. "Kitchen Conferences and Garage Cubicles: The Merger of Home and Work in the 24-7 Global Economy (excerpt)." 2000. Everything's an Argument with readings. 5th ed. Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martins, 2010. 1008-1022. Print.

Pycior, Helena M., Nancy G. Slack, and Pnina  G. Abir-Am, eds 1996. Creative couples in the sciences. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. Print

Scott, Joan W. and Tilly, Louise A. "Urban Women." Women, Work, and Family. 2nd ed. New York: Methuen, 1987. 47-51. Print.    

Cultural Stereotypes

This is an example of an essay, how to use sources and in text citations, works cited page etc. This is an essay assignment for English 101 levels. Today, I would have totally crossed out some of the introduction. It's too long for a college assignment, and it took me forever to get to the thesis.
I apologize about the appearance of the works cited page, it doesn't paste the same way as it is viewed in Word.

Cultural Stereotypes

            First of all, what is Cultural Stereotyping? It can be many things regarding people, categorizing them into groups to represent others as a whole; whether in race, age, gender or religion. Can such a thing as “positive” stereotyping be possible? In my own experience I think it is something that we as humans very easily do. As far as racially, or in cultural divisions, it is easy to do it to one’s own “kind” to liven up the mood and joke around in family reunions. It is especially painless when it is directed to others who are different from one, it may sometimes even be done unintentionally. Sometimes these comments have a  meaning that is hidden to us, but understood only by the receiver of our words that are naively used to praise or start a conversation with others. For me, as an American with Mexican roots I can say that I have thankfully lived relatively unscathed by such remarks; receiving only enough to open up my curiosity to this subject. When meeting new people, eventually the question of “so….what are you?” is thrown into the conversation. I find it rather entertaining to watch people try to pinpoint my ethnicity. When non-Mexicans fail to guess, they usually end up wide-eyed and unable to see the connection between me and my ethnicity. I don’t see why and I have yet to read their minds to fully understand what it is they aren’t telling me. When I do ask them, they are unable to give me an intelligent answer leaving me with only, “you just don’t look Mexican.” So, what does that mean? The only logical thing I can think of is perhaps they have a preconception of what Mexicans should look like. Categorizing them into perhaps dark skin and straight black hair as seen in history books, movies or murals. Even many of my own ethnicity do not seem to accept me as their own saying I look like an American or in the term they used—Gringa. I fail to understand this as I too have a stereotype built into me that at hearing this word I picture someone blond and blue-eyed—which I am not, and perhaps they reject my origins because I am less like them. The truth is that it goes around in a circle affecting everyone in the ring. At some time or other one has been or will be found guilty of stereotyping. This essay is to expand the awareness of this topic, showing its’ complexity.

            According to a student-written and published reading of “Stereotypes, Positive or Negative, Cloud the Truth” by Cathy Hwang an Asian graduate of Pomona College in California, it should never be done. (Hwang 750) It is what it is even if it may appear to be non-offensive. Testifying of her own account she says it has been done “in ways that would seem to be an innocent, even positive way.” (Hwang 749) When being used as such, people may not see how doing this can be harmful or cause hurt to others, but both negative and positive stereotypes are really negative and Hwang explains this by saying, “because they lump people into categories and assign some kind of trait to the whole group” (Hwang 750). She went on to explain that no matter how positive the remark, it may cause unwelcome pressure to those who don’t hit the mark to fit in even when it may not  for some unknown reason be possible to them (Hwang 750). There are however many people who feel just as strongly as Hwang on this subject and one other purpose for this essay is to show how their articles interact with hers.

For example in “Uncle Ben, Board Chairman” the author Stuart Elliott—an advertising reporter and blogger for the New York Times makes a question regarding stereotypes asking, “can an image that has become a marketing liability be salvaged and transformed into an asset?” (Elliott 636) He focuses on racially charged characters used for advertisements such as Uncle Ben or the well-known pancake mix also featured by an African American known as Aunt Jemima and many more in the food industry. What some people see as a problem in all this is that as Elliott says, “Before the civil rights movement took hold, marketers of food and household products often used racial and ethnic stereotypes in creating brand characters and mascots.” (Elliott 637)Now after so many years, these brands have been accepted and changing them might lose its’ appeal to the consumer. That’s why Mr. David L. Wenner, chief executive of B&G in Parsippany, New Jersey notes that if any change needs to made, “you would have to be very careful…and would want to do it with dignity.” (Elliott 639) If one is part of this guilty party in business, how is it possible to make things right without causing one’s production to fall? According to Mr. Luke Visconti, partner at Diversity Inc. Media in Newark, “There’s a lot of baggage associated with the image, ‘which the makeover’ is glossing over.” (Elliott 636) It is a very difficult task to embark, and Howard Buford, chief executive at Prime Access in New York (an agency specializing in multicultural campaigns) says “It’s potentially a very creative way to handle  the baggage of old racial stereotypes as advertising icons, it’s going to take a lot of work to get it right and make it ring true.” (Elliott 639)

Stuart Elliott is involved in the same topic as Cathy Hwang’s but it rather complicates things. Where Hwang simply says, “Don’t make stereotypes!” (Hwang 750) Elliott opens up the audience’s attention to situations that don’t make it easy to change their whole image. Showing us those big monopolies and firms who are guilty of using racial cultural stereotypes and how fixing this could cost them a lot. (Elliott 639) Yet, he does emphasize how these companies have the desire to make things right.

            There are two other articles that deal with stereotyping; one extends on Cathy Hwang’s view, the other complicates it, but both share similarities—school mascots. The first article to which I will be refereeing to here is “Common Themes and Questions about the Use of ‘Indian’ Logos.” By Barbara Munson, member of the Oneida Nation from Mosinee Wisconsin. She remarks that, “’Indian’ logos and nicknames create, support and maintains stereotypes of a race of people.” (Munson 624) Furthermore, the use of the Indian brave symbol depicts them as savages. This however does not mean that Native Americans are in any way embarrassed of their warriors, but they are rather saying, “We are proud and we don’t want them to be demeaned by being ‘honored’ in a sport’s activity on a playing field.” (Munson 627)  Some say that it is a way of honoring Indians but the native people don’t see it that way by using all that symbolism but rather are saying, “we experience it as no less than a mockery of our cultures.” (Munson 627) This extends and clarifies Hwang’s essay when she argues that, “Even positive stereotypes are likely to offend and upset the people around you.” (Hwang 750) Some wise words from Barbara Munson are “when someone says you are hurting them by your action, if you persist, then the harm becomes intentional.” (Munson 626-627) Where the Native American’s from Munson’s essay wanted to eradicate these public school mascots of Indian braves as the memory of a “systematic genocide” will always be found very painful to remember (Munson 627), the native students of Florida State wish to keep theirs.

            This now leads to “Bonding over a Mascot.” By Joe Lapointe who finds a twist in this case. Lapointe is an author of sports and sport’s related issues for the newspaper who investigated this circumstance at Florida State University. This selection shows a complex relationship that exists between Florida State athletics and the Seminole Tribe and how “stereotypes are part of that complexity.” (Lapointe 632) This school’s mascot has been allowed to continue due to the National College Athletic Association’s (NCAA) permission to retain an Indian-theme mascot because of an agreement with the Seminole Tribe of Florida. Why are they so different from other schools? Lapointe notes how, “not every university enjoys a harmonious relationship with Indians,” and explains that “a sense of cooperation seems to permeate the Florida State campus in Tallahassee, Florida.” (Lapointe 632) Toni Sanchez, a Seminole Florida State student recalls how each time she gets a glimpse of her tribal flag she feels so proud of it (Lapointe 632). How can one deny them of using their tribal flag when it is inoffensive to them and when they themselves ask for it? Even their school mascot is traditionally dressed, the clothes being designed by their own tribe. So who is allowed to stereotype? This rises an issue which complicates Hwang’s theory which is very explicit and gives no room for exceptions (Hwang 750). Is it okay to use stereotypical icons if it involves yourself, or your own culture? The president of Florida State, T.K. Wetherell “okayed” it as long as the tribe continued to support it. Something that also helped was that the Indians were not demeaned to careless caricatures, but rather were portrayed in a respectful way in which they could find pride in their own culture.

            A short informative video on “Overcoming Cultural Stereotypes”, featuring Howard J. Ross, Founder and Chief Learning Officer of Cook Ross In., talks about stereotyping in a nonsensical way. He explains how it may not be used to form negative criticism, but as a subject. Sometimes stereotyping is done not to harm, but rather to serve the customer better. Such as in the study of statistics we learn that there is observational studies done and just because we notice certain patterns or tendency’s in certain groups that help us make certain decisions; such as stocking up a store room better, who to offer special services to, avoid dangerous negative reactions through medication to patients, it doesn’t mean we can say it is true for a whole. When it is used for these reasons it could be thought of as a “positive stereotype” or also known as a generalization. Ross gives us a definition to this concept describing it for a medical team saying it is to, “give them the most current information that resources give us that is available and to help inform their decisions in terms of how they’re going to best serve their patients.” (Ross 07:28) His great effort is to not just help in hospitals better serve others, but as well as other business corporations. This also complicates Hwang’s belief when she says that, “stereotypes are stereotypes, whether they are positive or negative.” (Hwang 750).

            Hwang is very clear on her opinion of stereotyping. We get it; it is WRONG, but is she being reasonable? How can we NOT stereotype? Is that even possible? We’ve already reviewed articles that for the most part complicate her idea. We as humans are fallible, sadly that is the truth. We can all express our opinions, but there is no magical cure. Stereotyping is just another one of those bad characteristics that humans carry such as negative thoughts, vanity and pride and therefore must be kept under good regulation. And now that we’ve become aware of the dangers and hurt it may cause, we may now therefore have the opportunity to speak and express ourselves in a more conscious manner to others.

Sources

Elliot, Stuart. "Chapter 21/ Uncle Ben, Board Chairman." 2007. Everything's an Argument with Readings. By Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz, and Keith Walters. 5th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2010. 636-39. Print.

Hwang, Cathy. "Chapter 16/ Stereotypes, Positive or Negative, Cloud the Truth." An Argument Rhetoric and Reader. By Gary Goshgarian and Kathleen Krueger. 5th ed. New York: Pearson Longman, 2009. 748-51. Print. 

Lapointe, Joe. "Chapter 21/ Bonding Over a Mascot." 2006. Everything's an Argument with

Readings. By Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz, and Keith Walters. 5th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2010. 632-34. Print.

Munson, Barbara. "Chapter 21/ Common Themes and Questions about the Use of "Indian" Logos." 1998. Everything's an Argument with Readings. By Andrea A. Lunsford, John J. Ruszkiewicz, and Keith Walters. 5th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2010. 624-31. Print.

Overcoming Cultural Stereotypes. Perf. Howard J. Ross. YouTube. CookRossInc., 26 Jan. 2011.Web. 03 Oct. 2012.