Analysis Of The Longest War

As reported by the White House, women, on average, earn 77 cents for every dollar earned by a man. Writer and activist, Rebecca Solnit addresses such issues of gender inequality, as well as violence against women, in her 2014 essay, “The Longest War.” Solnit’s purpose is to shed a light onto the inequitable and detrimental treatment of women and to emphasize the need for change. She utilizes a compelling, matter-of-fact tone to optimize the effect her words will have on her readers, both male and female. “The Longest War” by Rebecca Solnit employs the rhetorical strategies of substance and delivery to highlight gender issues worldwide, evoke the audience’s rational and emotional sides, and inspire people to act toward equality.

Solnit opens

Taking advantage of this, she utilizes a compelling delivery and a strong style in her essay. Her first technique is the tone she employs throughout the essay. Her statements are matter-of-fact and leave no room for questioning. This can be observed even in the title of the essay, “The Longest War.” By portraying it as such, Solnit shows her audience that women have been fighting a battle, and the war that she refers to is not without its casualties and losses. Additionally, Solnit partitions her essay into sections entitled with provoking statements or questions to grab the reader’s attention. “Who Has the Right to Kill You?” (525) and “The Party for the Protection of the Rights of Rapists” (528) are just two of these inciting headings. The next tactic Solnit utilizes in her delivery is in drawing comparisons with other famous examples of oppression and human rights violations. One such example is the Civil Rights Movement and the fight for African Americans to gain equal footing with white Americans. This movement differs from the fight for women’s rights, however, in that women’s rights is “almost never treated as a civil rights or human rights issue” (523). The final method Solnit employs in her delivery is in making concessions to men throughout her essay. While Solnit informs her audience of shocking statistics against men, she acknowledges that this “doesn’t mean all

To reach this goal and attain her purpose, Solnit appeals to both the logical and emotional sides of the audience. Through facts and statistics, she demonstrates that gender inequality is an undeniable truth, and that despite limited coverage of all but the “exceptional crimes” (524), the impact of this inequality has exorbitant ramifications. This information calls upon the readers’ logical sides – giving them facts and numbers that are hard to contest. For the majority of the essay, however, Solnit depends upon appealing to her readers’ emotional sides with the goal of inciting change. The author petitions the audience’s emotional side through her tone and delivery, portraying the gravity of the situation women face. Solnit further draws upon emotions by making connections to the struggles of the Civil Rights Movement. Finally, Solnit fulfills this purpose by expanding her audience to include both men and women, forming a larger group capable of reversing the situation. Appealing to both logic and emotion, Solnit advances her purpose of enacting