Bianca Benaim

Ms. Joshi

AAP English Lecture #6

23 July 2017

Rhetorical Analysis

The color pink would not seem so warm and comfortable if you had breast cancer. Leisha

Davison-Yasol writes an article portraying her aversion to how society advertises breast cancer.

She points out the many flaws in their commercialization that seemingly degrade breast cancer as

an actual disease. She directs her article mainly to the people who support the commercialization

of breast cancer however do not fully grasp the drastic and life-altering effects. In the article,

Please Put That Pink Can of Soup Down and Put Your Bra Back On, Leisha Davison-Yasol

uses pathos, ethos, and logos, to draw in her audience and effectively explain her distaste

towards the commercialism of breast cancer.

Leisha Davison-Yasol uses pathos in order to emotionally draw in her audience,

ultimately convincing her readers that the commercialism of breast cancer diminishes the

seriousness of the disease. The article reads:

Are you kidding me? How on earth could a day where girls and women are

encouraged to post and share photos of their braless breasts and to walk around

with their nipples poking through their shirts be supportive for women who are

living with or who have died from breast cancer, or who have managed to

complete the arduous treatments and disfiguring surgeries required to put them

into remission? (Davison-Yasol par.2)

The use of quotation marks and Davison-Yasols tone behind words like, supportive

(Davison-Yasol par.2) and complete (Davison-Yasol par.2) highlight the ridiculousness in

which she believes the advertisement of breast cancer to be. Davison-Yasol believes that the

support of breast cancer should not be shown in certain ways, such as photos of their braless

breasts (Davison-Yasol par.2), which she believes to be non-productive. Through her emotional

appeal it becomes clear that she does not want this disease to be made into a mockery. She

persuades her audience to agree with her by not only using sarcasm but by also asking rhetorical

questions leaving a sense of doubt in her readers minds. The quote starts with, Are you kidding

me? (Davison-Yasol par.2) showing her intense frustration; leading with strong emotion proves

that there are certain ways to do things and that the support of breast cancer should not become

some sort of trend (Davison-Yasol par.2).

Davison-Yasols frustration is continually shown as she describes the specifics of certain

surgeries and their intensity. The article reads: Because of how invasive the surgery was and of

how much nerve damage, etc. resulted, it was not only extremely painful then, but continues to

be a source of pain and phantom sensations that affect my entire upper torso even today

(Davison-Yasol par.5 ). She continually uses strong words such as invasive, (Davison-Yasol

par.5) or extremely, (Davison-Yasol par.5) in order to pull the readers closer to the situation,

trying to make them feel as if they are experiencing the disease for themselves. She uses pathos

in such a powerful way that it makes her argument extremely strong and effective. By explaining

to the readers the intense pain that women who have undergone surgery experience, she allows

the reader to become that much more disgusted by any part of breast cancer becoming
commercialized, (Davison-Yasol par.5) or ultimately becoming just some sort of fun

advertisement. Her detailed description puts the intensity of this disease into perspective.

Leisha Davison-Yasols use of pathos displays a personal connection further providing

her the credibility to prove her argument. She uses ethos through specific examples and her own

life experiences to prove that there should be some sort of sensitivity to this disease and the

commercialization of it. She discusses her personal experience and how draining it is: Like so

many women and men who have faced this disease, I have lost my breasts to cancer.

Though I had a terrific surgeon, it was a physically and emotionally disfiguring surgery

(Davison-Yasol par.4). The fact that Davison-Yasol is using her personal experience in order to

frame her opinion proves that there is substance to her argument. She instills in the reader's mind

that it was a physically and emotionally disfiguring surgery, (Davison-Yasol par.4) intending

to extend her previously stated argument that cancer itself is not something made for

advertisements but it is in fact a life altering and in some cases life ending disease.

Ethos is such an influential rhetoric tool as it truly becomes the base of any argument.

Davison-Yasol continues her argument,

The cancer had gone so deep and was so extensive on my left side that it was at

first inoperable. Even after months of chemo, my surgeon took as much tissue and

skin as possible and went deep into my axilla (underarm area). The cancer had

metastasized to my lymph nodes and had invaded them to such a degree that they

broke open to allow the cancer cells to go beyond the walls of the nodes. Because

of how invasive the surgery was and of how much nerve damage, etc. resulted, it

was not only extremely painful then, but continues to be a source of pain and
 phantom sensations that affect my entire upper torso even today. (Davison-Yasol

par.5).

Again the seriousness of this disease is brought to the surface in the reader's mind. She in many

ways becomes somewhat repetitive truly highlighting how intense cancer is for patients and their

loved ones who have experienced it. She extends the pain she felt before and after surgery when

she says, it was not only extremely painful then, but continues to be a source of pain

(Davison-Yasol par.5). This quote explains the passion behind her argument, as a survivor

herself the argument is solidified into more than just the past and is brought to her present. She

makes it very clear that once someone survives (Davison-Yasol par.5) cancer, it does not mean

they are past it, but that sadly they still have to live with the emotional damage every single day;

this very important point makes every cancer survivor's story that much more important. Leisha

Davison-Yasol beautifully uses ethos in order to make her argument that much more clear, by

explaining the personal pain she, herself, has gone through.

Leisha Davison-Yasols credibility shown through ethos allows her to create logical

statements. She uses logos by pulling in very relevant facts which adds more than just emotion to

her argument, adding actual logic that beautifully complements and completes her argument.

Davison-Yasol discusses some positive endorsements but how they are rare and far between the

other companies that just advertise in the support of breast cancer for a profit. She writes, You

just have to do a bit of homework or read the labels on those pink items to see where your money

is actually going. (There are pink products out there that do help to fund research, etc. they

seem to be in the minority, but they do exist (Davison-Yasol par.13). She reassures her readers

that they do exist (Davison-Yasol par.13) meaning companies that are advertising just to gain
awareness for the cause. Using a fact like this highlights how her argument is supported by real

evidence and that there is a difference between companies and their reasoning behind their pink

labels (Davison-Yasol par.13).

Leisha Davison-Yasols article Please Put That Pink Can of Soup Down and Put Your

Bra Back On, speaks to the uneducated public in an attempt to advocate for the many patients

who struggle through breast cancer. She uses a hostile and sarcastic tone as an effective tool that

firmly proves her point. Her expert use of pathos, ethos, and logos provides her the perfect

connection with her readers in order to convey her strong disfavor of the commercialization of

breast cancer.

Works Cited

Davison-Yasol, Leisha. Please Put That Pink Can of Soup Down and Put Your Bra Back On.

Huffington Post: Oath Inc., 14 Oct. 2015,

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leisha-davisonyasol/october-pinkwashing_b_4102424.ht

ml. Accessed 23 July 2017.