Lesson video

Hello, I'm Miss Howard we are on our final lesson of this unit looking at rhetoric and injustice, and particularly gender specific injustice.

We're going to build on our understanding of that this lesson, just to finish off the unit.

So we taking ideas from Sojourner Truth who we looked at right at the start of the unit and Emmeline Pankhurst, and create our own speech using rhetoric, to be quite persuasive.

So for now, you need to close down any apps or conversations that you've got running in the background.

You'll need for equipment, a pen and something to write on.

Find yourself a quiet space where you know that you won't be disturbed and when you're ready, resume play of the video and we'll get started.

So to finish up this unit today, we're going to be taking inspiration, not only from our studies of Sojourner Truth earlier on in the unit, but focusing on the particular language that Pankhurst uses as well in order to highlight injustices, particularly gender specific injustices.

So we're going to revisit rhetoric and injustice, make sure that we have a secure understanding of what rhetorical language looks like, but also that word injustice, remind ourselves of what that means.

We're then going to consider what are gender related injustices.

So what injustices were, what was Pankhurst referring to particularly within her speech and campaigning as a whole.

And then we're going to think about why rhetoric is useful for speaking out against injustice before we finish up this unit about rhetoric and injustice.

Rhetoric is usually used within, kind of, persuasion or persuasive writing.

I think we're normally quite used to that, but how is it useful in this particular context, when we're talking about our injustices? We're going to return back to our triad, time and again, we need to think about how speakers are making selective use and judicious, so judicious, well selected use of these three aspects of the triad.

So how trustworthy and credible do they come across to us as well, listening to their speech? Where's their sense of logos? So they, do we get the impression that they're knowledgeable on the topic that they're talking about? And some of that will come from the reputation that they have, as well as, what's within the speech as a whole.

And where are they evoking pathos in us? Where are we left with this idea that we are emotionally moved as a result of listening to their speech? Where is it that we get the idea that we want to act or do something about the topic that they're speaking about? And that's the kind of emotional reaction from our side as the the audience.

Let's revisit this word, just to make sure that our understanding of it is secure.

Injustice, is if something is unfair, either morally or legally.

Remember we talked about this last time, it doesn't need to be both.

The Latin injustitia means not just or right.

So it really is whether something feels wrong, if we feel that something is wrong we have a feeling of a sense of injustice.

Now Emmeline Pankhurst and the Suffragettes felt very, very strongly about this injustice that women were suffering around the vote, the right to vote.

They felt that their enticement to have a decision over governance and law should be decided by them as well as men.

So there should be, or should have been, a sense of equity.

Women who supported this Suffragette and Suffragist movement, remember the two from last time, Suffragist was the original group that was set up that their, their protests were quite peaceful.

In contrast, the Suffragettes, you have a far more active and violent in their, in their approach and were far closer to illegal acts of protest.

So women who supported both movements were made aware of the fact that women were expected to be able to carry out domestic roles in homes.

So they were more than capable of carrying out roles in the home.

Things like house keeping, budgeting for, for food shopping, grocery shopping, that was completely acceptable.

However, in the public sphere, so public rights, things like the right to vote, the right to own property, the right to have your own bank account, the women just weren't able to access that sort of, that sort of right in a public, in a public sphere.

And so they relied upon the one weapon that they did have, which is rhetoric.

They relied on the words they had in order to share this, these feelings of injustice that they were experiencing.

Okay, pause the video here, have a go at this true or false.

Best of luck.

Fantastic.

If you got one and three are false, number two is true.

The Suffragettes raised awareness of injustices suffered by women.

So Emmeline Pankhurst and the Suffragettes, we know that she was a renowned member of the Suffragist, and she got really frustrated and decided to take a far more active approach with their motto of deeds not words.

And I think that very much speaks for itself in the fact that they were not satisfied by just conducting this use of rhetoric within their campaigning.

Also to them, that had to be coupled with these quite violent, aggressive acts that raised awareness of them in the press.

However, that was coupled with quite strong rhetoric, as we saw from Pankhurst's speech last time.

And maybe it's worth us thinking about, well, what can we learn from that use of rhetoric in order to, to then translate to our own work? And that's what we're going to be looking at today.

So what I've done, I've broken down Pankhurst's speech to segments.

We're going to look each stage in turn and really think about how she threads different aspects of the, the triad that we keep returning to.

So where is it that we see evidence of ethos, logos and pathos throughout each stage of the speech? Now, this is very much reliant on, and I know that I've mentioned this a few times before, but it's very much relying on the idea that these, these three aspects are used selectively, so that we're not trying to sound really trustworthy, build a strong sense of ethos, but then we're not paying attention to making sure that we leave, that we evoke pathos in our audience.

We're not trying to sound really knowledgeable and throw loads of facts or really reasonable argument, because then it sounds like if, if we've forgotten about ethos, then it might be the fact that we don't sound like we care.

And so it really is about seeing how Pankhurst uses these three aspects of the triad really selectively throughout, and they're almost woven through like a thread.

Okay? So as I read each segment of the speech, I want you to try and spot, where does she make herself sound trustworthy and credible, Like, she cares about what she's talking about? Where does she sound quite reasonable and logical, it's quite a reasonable, logical argument? She sounds quite knowledgeable? And where is it that we are being essentially made to feel or made to react in a particular way? Where does it, if we went, you know, stood in the, audience as Pankhurst delivered these lines, what emotions might we feel? And which is the particular part of, you know, which particular words or phrases encourage us to do so? Okay? So what I'm going to do, I'm going to read each segment for you, make notes around those three areas.

You can pause the video once I've finished reading, and then we're going to look at it in a little bit more detail together.

I am here as a soldier who has temporarily left the field of battle in order to explain, it seems strange it should have to be explained, what civil war is like when civil war is waged by women.

We women, in trying to make our case clear, always have to make as part of our argument, and urge upon men in our audience, the fact, a very simple fact, that women are human beings.

Let's have a look, in a bit more detail.

So we can learn a great deal around just the opening of Pankhurst's speech alone.

She appeals immediately to pathos, remember the majority of the, the crowd that she's talking to very much already believe in the campaign to stand and listen to her in the first place.

So she, she's quite lucky in that regard, but she uses that analogy, you remember where I was saying, that overarching metaphor of her as a soldier.

So her opening line, I am here as a soldier.

It shows that, that kind of, that firing up of I'm enlisting you, I want you to join in.

You've also got a hint of, you may have got that for ethos as well, because it shows us that she cares.

If she's talking about herself as a soldier, it's, that idea that she's so committed to this campaign, It means so much to her that she's labelled herself as a soldier.

So you may have heard, that's quite a clever, the best ways or the most effective uses of rhetoric or where they've managed to use, kind of, to appeal to both ethos and pathos or logos and pathos or logos and ethos.

If you've got a bit of a double whammy statement in any rhetoric, any argument using rhetoric, then they're the clever ones to, to make use of.

So she uses that idea, I am here as a soldier.

She also uses, to build, to create sense of ethos, this repeated use of collective nouns.

We women, when she's talking about women, she talks about we.

So it's only really, she uses some quite sporadic, so not very often use of I, however, that we is threaded particularly through this opening, we women urge upon men in our audience.

She talks about women as a group and that use of collective nouns helps her to do that.

You've also got this use of logos, she refers to the fact.

And it reduces her argument to very, very rational one that she says, women are human beings.

Now that reminded me echoes a little bit of, of Sojourner Truth, when she was saying about women being helped over carriages or, you know, assisted over mud puddles, that Pankhurst makes a very, very basic statement there, women are human beings.

So why are you not treating them like human beings, like men, as she said, like human beings.

So it's building on very simplistic facts to demonstrate the ridiculous situation, she feels, that women are in of not having equal access to the same rights.

So let's see how you get on here.

Pankhurst uses various rhetoric tools to highlight injustice, including which rhetoric tools does she use in that opening? Have a go.

Did you get two here? Fantastic.

If you only got one, that's fine, but both do feature.

So we've got collective nouns in there.

We've also got emotive language.

Okay? Let's have a look at the next part.

Human life for us is sacred, but we say if any life is to be sacrificed.

It shall be ours.

We won't do it ourselves, but we will put the enemy in the position where they will have to choose between giving us freedom or giving us death.

Pause the video here and see if you can spot elements of ethos, logos, and pathos within this section.

Don't forget to press play when you're done.

Okay, so here, we've got our quite a clever use, and I'll explain to you which elements of the triad once we've had looked at the language itself, so we've got emotive language and collective nouns within this statement that really do evoke pathos within the audience.

I think you could quite easily argue that this is, this is whole statement, this section, is all about evoking pathos because of the language that she uses.

So she makes this reference to sacrifice, if any life is to be sacrificed it shall be ours.

And again, she's talking about like, she's using that collective noun to talk about women together.

She also builds upon her sense of logos by including that dialysis that either/or argument.

And again, if we're thinking about the way that she used the women are human beings, quite simplistic use of logos, she uses logos in quite a simplistic statement there.

She does a similar thing here as well.

We will put, that collective noun, we will put the enemy in the position where they will have to choose between giving us freedom or giving us death.

And it's that use of dialysis that, that either/or arguments.

So either give us freedom, the good thing, the thing that we want, or give us death, the awful thing, the thing that's happening where women are, you know, starving in prison, through hunger strikes and whatnot.

So she uses that dialysis that either/or statement to really build logos and her rational, her rational argument.

So, quick recap dialysis is which one, pause the video here.

Don't forget to press play when you're done.

How did you do? This one was a tricky one, deliberately tricky.

So don't worry if you only got one here because it's an either/or statement or like Pankhurst used, we have a look back, a between/or statement.

So she says you either had to choose between this and this.

She could have said either this or this, all right? So you can use either/or between/or.

Right, let's have a look at this final section of the speech, now I'm not breaking this one down for you, so I'm going to leave it with you.

And I'd like you to pause the video and see if you can spot ethos, logos and pathos.

And maybe, if you want an extra challenge, have a think about which one is the strongest, which one comes through the most? Which one do you think she spends the most time upon in this section? I'll read it out and then press play when you're done.

And I will talk you through it a little bit, but make sure you have a go first at spotting, those three elements of the triad.

I come to ask you to help to win this fight.

If we win it, this hardest of all fights, then, to be sure in the future, it is going to be made easier for women all over the world to win their fight when their time comes.

Pause video here.

Have a spot for ethos, logos and pathos.

Okay.

Hopefully you had a good go.

Let me kind of talk you through some elements that stood out to me.

There's plenty to talk about in this final section.

So first of all, she invites, the audience, says, I come to ask you.

So we've got that direct address in there.

Yeah? So to, to invite them to win this fight, she uses the word fight.

So that repetition of the word fight, have a look, it's used three times over, within this final section.

It really does evoke pathos because it makes the audience feel that by agreeing with her argument, they are committing to a cause they are going out and fighting a battle for women.

So you've also got that kind of, that win as well, that repetition of win we've got three times over.

It really leaves the audience with that powerful unforgettable message.

We've also got, again, ethos with, if we win it and she's talking about that collective noun, if we win at this hardest of fights in the future, it will become easier.

So actually she said, I care about this so much that if, if you helped me do this, if you help me to achieve this, we won't just be changing women's rights here, we'll be changing women's rights all over the world.

Okay, so if we're thinking about her, her building that, that credibility and trust, it demonstrates how much she cares about this overall.

Yeah? So what we're going to do is use these ideas, the different devices, the different approaches that Pankhurst included within her speech, to create our own use of rhetoric our own speech.

Okay? So we're going to have a look at the idea of this sense of gender and injustice.

And if you remember right at the start of the unit, I asked you to keep in mind that, this wasn't that long ago, but also there are several elements of gender and injustice, which are still very relevant today.

And I'm giving you an example here.

So, I've put, when might girls and boys be given different choices and is this fair or unjust? So have a think about different examples that you can think about that you might have even experienced as to where girls and boys have been given different choices.

That, now that might be something actually quite obvious, or it might be quite subtle.

It might be, for example, the different choices you have to sport, different access you have to sport in your local area is an example.

The example I have picked from here is, it was from the guardian newspaper and it was one, it was from three years ago that outlined gender pay gap starts early, the 20% disparity, disparity is difference, in pocket money.

A study showed that girls age five to sixteen, receive £2.

20 less a week than boys and are allowed less financial independence, report shows.

So not only do girls receive, even from the age of five, receive less pocket money every week, they also, have less freedom around how to spend that pocket money.

So all of these ideas that we thought were all the way back in history are still relevant now.

Disparity, when something is unbalanced or unequal.

It's the Latin from paritas, which means parity, which is equality.

So this is flipping it on our head.

Yep? So disparity, when something is unequal Parity, when something is equal.

Okay.

So thinking about all the different ways that you've seen, maybe, disparity between girls and boys, and if you can't think of absolutely anything that it might be the fact that you just use that example of the pocket money that I give you to begin with.

I'd like you to complete this task.

You have been asked to give a speech with the title, the same choices for girls and boys.

What I'd like you to do is use the inspiration that you've had from Sojourner Truth and Emmeline Pankhurst to plan out your speech with that title.

Think about where you build and incorporate different areas of the triad.

And I'll give you a little bit of a framework for this in a minute, and think about where you would use particular rhetorical language to highlight these injustices.

So you might want to think about the different examples that you include of the difference for girls and boys, but how you would use language to highlight those differences.

Now, you might want to use this particular plan for planning out your speech.

So it may be the fact that you want to focus on building a really strong sense of ethos within your opening of your speech, remember we saw, we saw Pankhurst use lots of collective nouns to talk her audience using we and our and us to win the trust of her audience.

And then in the development, you might provide logic and evidence to build and strengthen your argument here.

Now, remember you don't need actual statistics or facts here, you can make them up as long as they sound believable.

You could use my pocket money example that gave, that gave those kind of facts and figures, or you can create your own here.

And then in the closing part of your speech, think about how you can encourage this feeling of sadness or pity or perhaps frustration from your audience.

That means that it demands further action from them.

So think about what the final line of your speech might say that will encourage them to do something about this and not just listen to you.

Okay.

Now you've got your plan.

What I'd like you to do is have a go at writing your speech.

Okay? So the title, the same choices for girls and boys.

What I'd like you to do is, for an extra challenge, try to include those three words within your speech, disparity, injustice, and urge.

It may be the fact that you allocate a word to a particular section of your three section plan.

And then that way, you know that you've met your challenge.

Don't forget to pause the video here.

You can use that sentence starter to get you started if you're struggling and press play, when you're done.

Brilliant work on your speech, not only have you formulated a really sturdy plan, but you've also really thought about those three aspects of the triad.

If you'd like to, please ask your parent or carer to share your work on Instagram, Facebook, or Twitter, tagging @OakNational, and using the hashtag #LearnwithOak.

I'm really excited to see your different arguments for gender equality.

And that's the end of the rhetoric and injustice unit, fantastic work, and I hope you've really enjoyed our exploration of Sojourner Truth and her journey and Emmeline Pankhurst and her somewhat controversial suffragette movement, as strongly as you turn to have a look at both of those, both of those figures within history.

Cause it's a really interesting read.

I'd like to do two things for me today before you finish up, the first write down three things that you've learned that could be within this lesson, or it could be across the unit as a whole, completely up to you.

And the second is to complete your quiz, just to see how much you've learned.

Have a fantastic time and I'll see you again soon.