
It’s safe to assume common sense knowing that in order to be considered a legitimate writer, or even a successful communicator, everything needs to make sense.  The challenging aspect of this is determining what exactly that means and how to get there.  One of the first things taught in any rhetoric class are these three Greek words that have the power to make or break your argument: logos, ethos, and pathos.  In Roxane Gay’s article, Daniel Tosh and Rape Jokes: Still Not Funny, she effectively combines all three of these pivotal appeals while creating an undeniably convincing argument against making jokes out of sexual violence.  In this paper, I will explore the message that she is trying to get across and to whom she is trying to reach, and will follow by picking apart each of the three previously mentioned appeals.

The title of the article makes the central theme of the argument conspicuous: rape jokes are still not funny—prompting the reader to consider that perhaps they never will be funny.  After considering her varying styles of evidence, her general age implied and personal experience established, and the topic applying to both genders in every generation, I’ve concluded that this piece is targeted for the entire general public.  Roxane begins her article with an all-capturing comparison and story about her childhood experience with the Challenger explosion that surely captures the audience’s attention and sets a deep tone.  As the piece progresses, Gay uses diverse examples as evidence to support her claim that poking fun at topics such as sexual violence is never appropriate.  She reminds readers that, “We are free to speak as we choose without fear of prosecution or persecution, but we are not free to speak as we choose without consequence.” (Gay 88).  This quote encompasses the underlying message of her article of simply being aware of what you speak and how it can affect other human beings.

The author avoids using specific statistics for logos in this article most likely to not overwhelm the reader with numbers involving cases in sexual violence.  Providing such statistics could potentially steer away from the connection Gay is trying to make.  Instead, she uses logos through personal and societal testimonies directly involving the “accused”, Daniel Tosh.  As previously mentioned, she begins the article with her account of the Challenger explosion and how a comment made by a fellow classmate was deemed way too far (Gay 87).  Gay follows this by admitting that inappropriate humor is sometimes the funniest and quotes New York magazine as reinforcement, “The transformative power of the ugly truth was, for O’Neal, a form of grace.” (Gay 87).  She immediately concludes that Tosh’s style of humor does not fall under this category of grace.  Gay continues to advocate voices of offense through real-life interactions with Tosh including a scene at the Laugh Factory and the subsequential affairs on Twitter, giving the reader legitimate information to consider her argument (Gay 88-89).  

Gay’s extrinsic ethos is established immediately with her story in the classroom.  This informs the reader that she has life experience with tragedy and is therefore qualified to be able to appropriately recognize it.  Her extrinsic ethos is also enhanced through the obvious research she had done prior to writing the article with New York magazine and the stories behind events at the Laugh Factory and Twitter.  Her intrinsic ethos appears to be confident and bold since she starts off with a personal story and continues the article with a slightly sarcastic tone.  Above the article it states her qualifications as well, so if a reader was unsure the information is readily available.

The strongest of the appeals in this article is pathos.  To start off, Gay utilizes a tragic attention grabber that is most likely to succeed in setting a suitable tone for the rest of the article.  She continues by providing real voices ranging from writers to citizens to Tosh himself, this benefits her argument greatly just by making it relatable.  Gay certainly uses a sarcastic tone to respond to Tosh when fitting, allowing the audience to understand what she’s thinking without her having to fully explain herself.  There are two instances of pathos in this piece that cause the reader to pause and really think; which is one of the main purposes of a persuasive piece.  The first of these is found after she provides her first example of Tosh’s humor, “There’s no better follow-up for a rape joke than a gang rape joke.  Because if rape is funny, gang rape is funnier…” (Gay 88).  She doesn’t follow this with any further explanation, and it’s obvious why—frankly, it doesn’t need it.  The second is found on the next page where she provides a Latin phrase that reads, “Qui tacet consentire”, meaning “silence gives consent” (Gay 89).  These three words are applicable most obviously in standing up against the act of sexual violence, but Gay intends it for speaking out against joking about rape as well.  She concludes the article by passive-aggressively challenging readers to be bold enough to say “enough” about these issues (Gay 89).

The rhetorical appeals logos, ethos, and pathos are crucial in constructing a well-founded argument.  In Daniel Tosh and Rape Jokes: Still Not Funny, Roxane Gay provides a great example of how to merge these three organically and logically while also presenting her argument in a way that all readers can appreciate.
