Unequal Representation

What is the difference between men and women in office? When women fight for the same idea or ideal and with the same level of intensity as men, women are perceived as b*tches and men are seen as powerful. The strong females who are a part of the United States government are held at much higher standards than the opposite gender. Women are expected to be perfect and when we make a mistake or anger others by a statement, we are patronized.  

The environment that that government provides, does not welcome women with open arms. In fact, it is sometimes dangerous for us to enter the male majority scene. Sexual harassment happens behind closed doors as well as in the public! Women are condemned for not being perfect but yet the president can sexually harass women and not be held accountable. An example of this is during the Clinton and Trump presidential election.

During the last presidential election, Hilary Clinton was harassed by the public and as well as her opponent, Donald Trump. People called her names, judged her mannerisms, criticized her looks, and the way she spoke was “too scripted.” During debates, Trump acted like a predator towards her by circling her like a shark would its prey. This scenario is just one of the many that women are held to a much higher standard than men.

My argument here is that U.S. government needs to be more encouraging and supportive towards females running for positions in office. This will help balance out the genders within government. We as women need to be allowed to have voice and be able to gain same levels of respect and equal representation as men do. It takes one honest person in position of power to change the kind of negative image that women have gained. My hope for our future this that we who run in office will gain the same level of respect as men do. 

A Right's View on Gun Control

      This blogger J Hines posted “Here’s Why some People don’t understand about Gun Control” to defend the second amendment and supported his claim with poor evidence. First of all, this blogger failed to title his work in a coherent fashion, so naturally we already see where this argument is heading. J Hines has no credibility nor evidence, other than his opinion, to back up his argument. His intended audience is virtually anyone who will agree with his opinionative argument.

      This blogger is desperately trying to guard gun laws by adding in uncited statistics. “However the statistics have proven time and time again that the rate of violent crime will go up even if ordinary, law-abiding citizens are denied ownership of guns.” Unfortunately, there was no credible source noted to back up this statistic. He is hopelessly defending the idea that gun ownership does not lead to gun violence. Does this really have any logic behind it? The ratio between gun owners and gun owners that kill, is very low. Most people who own firearms do not pertain in killing others, but the process through which those individuals purchased the gun is where the problem lies. The Rights seem to call the Left crazies and vice versa, but who is really right? Both sides have valid arguments and I think that compromises can be made. Firearms should not be as accessible as they have been in the past. Although laws and regulations are being put into place, gun owners still exist and are scaring the majority. Overall, this bloggers argument is unclear and does not have respectable sources backing up his claim.