Woldai 1

Delaila Woldai
Professor Deadrick
ENGL 102
3 March 2016
Lorelei Bennetts Argumentation
It is very important to know the purpose of Lorelei Bennetts argument. The purpose of
this article/argument is to inform readers what Hollywood can bring to you about gender issues
and what is actually going on. Bennetts intended audience of this article is other conservatives,
women and celebrities. This article is especially important to upcoming celebrities, those who are
new to the Hollywood industry because they should know the issues that are awaiting them. In
the article Hollywood's War on Gender by Lorelei Bennett, which was posted on April 13th of
2015, Bennett argues that Hollywood tries to neuter Americans and pretend there is no difference
between boys and girls or men and women. This argument is important because it is true;
Hollywood encourages and supports LGBT. For example, Bruce Jenner now known as Caitlyn
Jenner recently came out, and is classified as a Transgender now. Hollywood does not have a
problem with this. Even though Caitlyn is biologically a man, just because he went through some
procedures to have his male part removed, Hollywood treats him and sees him as a female which
is just disturbing because he was not a female from birth. Upcoming celebrities should be
prepared to see and adjust to the nonsense that Hollywood will bring to them. Bennett thinks this
war on women began when feminist, decided women should be equal to men. She says, What
the early feminists really wanted was to be men and this continues into modern times. The way
Bennett puts up her argument is in an angry way, not very scholarly. Lorelei Bennetts

Woldai 2

argumentation in Hollywoods War on Gender is not effective because her evidence is not
convincing, her strategies are not effective, and she uses many logical errors.
Lorelei Bennett is from Florida and she is married and has two children. Bennett is a
credible women; she has a Bachelor's degree in Political Science and has met many political
candidates. She is also a writer and published author. Bennett basically tries to inform the public
that all this controversy on the war on gender is going on because women once wanted to be
men or take on men's roles. She has a purpose of offending the intended audience.
Bennett claims that Hollywood tries to neuter Americans and pretend there is no
difference between boys and girls or men and women. Lorelei Bennett's argument is not
convincing. The logos is not effective and contains logical fallacies. In the article, Actor Ashton
Kutcher complains that Costco does not have a changing table in the men's restroom. He thinks
that the lack of changing tables in public restrooms is sexist and discriminates against men.
Bennett's response to this was, Like it or not, women are still the only sex to conceive and carry
a baby. Bennett's response is not completely right because one does not have to be a women to
change diapers. Nowhere in the book does it say only a woman should change diapers and take
care of her child. It may seem that women are the ones to care for their child most of the time
but that is not true. What about single fathers? What about fathers who have lost their wives? Or
even what about regular fathers who enjoy and have to take care of their child? Another example
of a logical error is when Bennett says, rather than keeping their firefighting physical exam
status quo, municipalities had to water down the test so that woman could pass it. Basically
Bennett is saying that woman firefighters are only able to become firefighters because the test
got watered down (easier). This is an example of Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc. Bennett
concludes that since the test was made a little easier to pass than what it was before, this is

Woldai 3

increasing the number of female firefighters that would not have been able to pass the original
test before the test was watered down. She also says, I dont care if the firefighter who might
need to pull me out of a burning building is a man or a woman but I do want them to be
physically able to do so. In the same paragraph, she said, We all know there is a big difference
in the dynamics of the male and female body. So basically she would rather prefer a man to pull
her out rather than a woman, she's just not admitting to that. The logos that Bennett uses is not
effective.
Bennett's strategies such as comparing to prove her claim that Hollywood tries to neuter
Americans and pretend there is no difference between boys and girls or men and women, is not
effective. Bennett compares sexism to animal cruelty, namely the production of veal. She says, I
have another idea for Mr. Kutcher. If he wants to go after Costco for something morally
shameful I say he petition that Costco refuse to sell veal. Although I have already talked about
logical fallacies, there are just too many of them to ignore and they reoccur many times. This is a
great example of red herring because veal has nothing to do with this topic. Bennett is going off
topic because there is no real evidence to support her reasons. Bennett also tries to compare the
mens and womens restroom. She says, It is not prejudiced to have a distinction between the
men and women's bathroom; in fact it is appropropriate and normal... Reason being is that men
and women are different and this too, is normal. We already know that men and women are
different and that is just nature. This is a great example of circular argument because Bennett just
restates the argument rather than actually proving it. Bennett also uses hasty generalization; she
says, He ought to find himself a gender neutral-type bathroom and just say he feels like a
woman and problem solved. She is talking about Ashton Kutcher here. This is a conclusion

Woldai 4

based on insufficient evidence before having the relevant facts, she is just trying to attack Ashton
Kutcher (Ad Hominem). Bennetts strategies are not effective and contain many logical errors.
Bennet does not know how to strongly support her reasoning. She says, Liberals love to
quote science. Well, science, DNA, hormones, the birds and the bees all agree that there is a
difference between a man and a woman and no amount of rainbows and unicorns and wishes can
change that. Yes, this is 100 % true but this does not support her reasoning or argument at all.
Everyone knows the physical and other differences of a man and a woman but bringing up
science doesn't necessarily prove her point.
In addition to many of the logical fallacies, Bennett takes a tone that is not scholarly and
immediately shows her bias. When Bennett talks about the people who she feels are opposing
her, the ones who claim to be the peaceful political party the make love not war people she
says, If this were true they would get a life and live it rather than constantly starting social and
cultural wars. If an individual is trying to win an argument and trying to convince their
audience that what they are saying is correct and should even be considered, criticizing the
opponent is not the right way to do so and only makes one look weak. Bennett says, it is not
inequitable for an establishment to solely place condom machines in their male bathrooms and
tampons exclusively in the womens room. It is not bigoted to offer mens cologne in the mens
room and perfume in the womens room. Men are not the only ones who use condoms, woman
do as well. After that she says, It is not prejudiced to have a distinction between the men and the
womens bathrooms; in fact it is appropriate and normal. Yes, I said it, normal. Reason being is
that men and women are different and this too, is normal. The fact that Bennett uses italics and
bold font for the word normal and says, Yes, I said it is irritating and makes it obvious that
she is trying to make the opponent mad, which is not very scholarly. Instead she should just

Woldai 5

focus on her argument before trying to come for the opponent. Bennett also insults the opponents
by talking about them as those poor misguided bleeding hearts.
Lorelei Bennetts argument in Hollywoods War on Gender is weak. It could possibly
be improved if more realistic examples were used and her evidence were not so biased. Bennett
says herself she is a conservative and, We are right, but yet she does not have convincing
evidence to win her argument or audience over. Right now this article is not convincing at all. I
do agree with Bennett that Hollywood tries to neuter Americans and pretend there is no
difference between a man and a woman, but I do not find her argumentation strategies effective
at all.

Woldai 6

Works Cited
Bennett, Lorelei. Hollywoods War on Gender. Politichicks. n.p. 13 April 2015. Web. 20
February 2016.