The Yes Men and the Punk Culture

The Yes Men and the Punk Rock culture both had very different ways of protesting through their appearance. The Yes Men had more of a silly approach to their appearance to poke fun at the WTO. The punk rock culture went with a more grunge, don’t care what I look like style to protest authority and societal norms. Both of these “styles” do relate to the groups’ values of what they are actually standing for. The punks are saying, I don’t have to look a certain way to be a good person, or a good member of society, and their style also says I cannot be ordered around. Whereas, the Yes Men’s appearance was a ridiculous suit to point out the flaws of the WTO. Andy and Mike create a relatable ethos. For example, their comedic way of showing their values makes them easier to listen to or to establish the same beliefs. The Punk culture conveys a totally different kind of ethos. They give off an untouchable attitude. Almost like, if you don’t believe what I believe then you cannot associate with me. But, yes I would categorize the punk clothing at the very beginning of the culture as a protest. As punk became more mainstream, the protest aspect of it died along with the real image.

PETA and the Guerrilla Girls

PETA and the Guerrilla girls, in my opinion reach everyone through bumper stickers, the internet, and billboards. All kinds of people see bumper stickers and billboards on a daily basis. Not everyone sees the internet. PETA is a bit more extreme than the Guerrilla girls. I can identify with some of PETA’s points such as abusing animals or causing them pain for no good reason, and I can also see not wearing fur. But not eating meat, is a bit extreme. To agree with the group, you basically believe that animals are equal to humans; that they should have equal rights. That is a little ridiculous. Now, the Guerilla girls are something quite different. The aspects of their campaign that stand out to me are the strength of their messages. It may be a humorous billboard, but it means so much more than that. The most effective part about it is how they reach everyone, everywhere. The internet reaches the world. They where the masks so people will focus more on than issues rather than who is presenting them, which makes sense. Feminism seems to be their main reason for this group. They are hard core feminists who want more credit to go to female artists. In a nut shell. I guess I agree.

Critical Mass

Critical Mass seems to be about social and political activism. Instead sitting in your car alone on the way home, why not interact with people and have fun? And then it can also be seen from an environmental standpoint, they aren’t using any oil or gas. But I think the main point is social interaction and fun, a new way to travel home from work. That seems to be their centralized purpose, they are not there to terrorize people in their cars or stop traffic. Their tactics do in fact match their purpose, it is just a bunch of people talking and enjoying their ride. As a bystander, I would support them, I think it is great what they were doing. I am not too sure if I would partake in it myself because of safety issues, but I think what they were trying to do was great. Some of their tactics were also quite funny, like the signs they wrote for people who honked at them “Honk if you love bicycles!” I thought that was really catching and funny to wave that sign at the people who are annoyed at them being in their way. It is a great thing in itself and a shame that it had to end.

Ethos

Ethos definitely plays an important role in the way you perceive someone’s speech or protest. They have to have a certain credibility or maybe a likeable persona. The ethos of the freedom marchers in the segment from the packet was very good because no matter what they never gave up. It just makes them more likeable, to be so perseverant; also they stood united for one cause they all believed in, which also gives a good ethos. Cindy Sheehan’s protest has a certain kind of ethos; she is trustworthy in her protest against the war, because her son died. It definitely persuades you to believe her more. I actually find her protest most persuasive because of the fact that she has a right to be against the war because her son died. Well, she has that right either way. Although, Malachi Ritscher’s protest was quite surprising, and disturbing. The ethos of his protest confuses me, I am not sure to say whether it is good or bad. But I know that belief was important enough for him to die for, so it must be important. The kind of ethos I find appealing is good knowledge and credibility of the issue, but also a trustworthiness or a good reason of importance to that issue. I support the anti-war groups for their message, and because I agree that there should be no more deaths because of the Iraq War. It is a tragedy that it is still going on. The ethos the anti-war groups provide is one of peace and non-violence. That’s why I support them.