Revised Conclusion

In this blog post, I will be posting my old and new conclusions. For my conclusion, I attempted to use the "paint a picture" technique by looking at the topic in a broader sense. However, I find it necessary to tailor the conclusion to my essay by including specific details. I attempted to create more of a bridge between my conclusion and restating my thesis. I also addressed the reader explicitly.



Old Conclusion

Almeling adeptly discusses a rather brazen topic in an open manner that puts readers to ease while simultaneously decreasing their comfort level. She embraces technology that moves the world forward, yet, adopts an attitude that appears to be anti-sperm donation. Throughout her argument for stronger regulation of sperm industries, she characterizes herself as a defender for those who have suffered due to sperm donation. However, this same position results in the subtle crafting of an overall argument against the sperm industry. Therefore, through her inclusion of emotional vignettes, a contrast between personable tone and cool subject topics, and statistical analysis, Almeling presents a rhetorical argument against sperm donation within her work.

New Conclusion

Almeling is able to simultaneously put her readers at ease and push their comfort level while discussing a tabooed topic. However, Almeling focuses on the social dilemmas of sperm donation and does not place emphasis on the acute physiological ramifications of reproductive technology. In this way, it is important for the reader to understand that the author effectively makes use of rhetorical arguments that are based in sociology and not physiology, although the work masquerades as a scientific document. The author acts as a protector for those who have suffered from the consequences of sperm donation, which lends to ethos. Yet, the author presents all of her information with an air of ethical strain. While Almeling outwardly supports regulation of the sperm industry, a closer analysis of her writing clarifies the nature of her arguments against sperm donation. Therefore, through the inclusion of emotional vignettes, the contrast between personable tone and cool subject topics, and statistical analysis, Almeling presents a rhetorical argument against sperm donation within her work.