Christopher Meaby's Smacking Children In The Age
Following the incident of a child being smacked in his local supermarket, Christopher Meaby writes an opinion piece "Smacking Children is Child Abuse" in The Age, February 2016, which tries to paint the act of smacking children as violence and child abuse. In the piece he uses imperative language such as "simply no place", to position the reader to feel the same way and it shouldn't happen ever in this society. He argues passionately that it is a disgrace to use violence against anyone in a modern and civil society, let alone children. The author appeals to the general public and specifically targeted parents to view smacking children as child abuse.
The writer's contention with its message of 'smacking children is child abuse' is highlighted …show more content…
These are not words a civil society associates with parenthood.', the author speaks of the civil society that we live in and how preposterous it is that smacking children is considered to be a part of parenthood. It is also an example of connotative language that suggests there are people who deliberately avoid the true meaning of 'smacking' and try to make it sound better than it actually is. This encourages the reader to feel outraged that there is child abuse in a civil society by using inclusive language to make the reader feel like a part of this issue and a need for them do take action against child abuse. This is confirmed by a reference to 'correction' in the last line of the piece, which seeks to engender support by ridiculing that smacking can make children better.
The attacking phrase 'poor citizens and woeful parents' make the parents that use violence against children that read this sentence feel guilty of their actions and make other members of the public see them as cruel and cold-hearted. The overall effect here is making smacking children look like something that only a bad parent that doesn't know how to treat their children do, and the author's argument about smacking children is child abuse and should not be a part of a civil society is therefore
The writer's contention with its message of 'smacking children is child abuse' is highlighted …show more content…
These are not words a civil society associates with parenthood.', the author speaks of the civil society that we live in and how preposterous it is that smacking children is considered to be a part of parenthood. It is also an example of connotative language that suggests there are people who deliberately avoid the true meaning of 'smacking' and try to make it sound better than it actually is. This encourages the reader to feel outraged that there is child abuse in a civil society by using inclusive language to make the reader feel like a part of this issue and a need for them do take action against child abuse. This is confirmed by a reference to 'correction' in the last line of the piece, which seeks to engender support by ridiculing that smacking can make children better.
The attacking phrase 'poor citizens and woeful parents' make the parents that use violence against children that read this sentence feel guilty of their actions and make other members of the public see them as cruel and cold-hearted. The overall effect here is making smacking children look like something that only a bad parent that doesn't know how to treat their children do, and the author's argument about smacking children is child abuse and should not be a part of a civil society is therefore