Cookie Boycott – Jon Otero

Since she believes the the Girl Scouts of the USA are not being honest with its members, this girl scout had posted a YouTube video to broadcast her concerns and to ask the public to boycott girl scout cookies. She began by asserting her affiliation and credibility as an eight year veteran of the girl scouts.

To introduce her argument, she immediately accused the GSUSA of lying to its members. However, this accusation was never backed up by any evidence. Rather than citing that the GSUSA lied to the public and its members, the young girl first cited the group stating that they would accept anyone who identifies themselves as a girl. This fact contradicts her accusation and makes it illogical.

Her next supporting evidence of Girl Scout deception dealt with questioning the honesty behind admitting transgender girl scouts into the group without letting anyone know. However, the quote she backed her argument with clearly displayed the GSUSA admitting that there are transgender members in the group. She wasn’t clear as to whether she wants the GSUSA to admit to the public the private details of certain members, or if she simply wishes they would have made a general announcement. She’s not being fair or logical, and the overall effect is ineffective.

The argument progressed into discussing how the Girl Scouts have spent money acquired through donations and cookie sales to research the cruciality of all-girl groups for girls. She pointed out despite that cruciality, the GSUSA deceives the public by ruining the al-girl experience in allowing boys to join. However, the GSUSA doesn’t admit boys. They will admit boys who identify themselves a girls. She highlighted a very problematic circumstance for overnight activities in which boys who turn 18 would essentially become men. This could in fact be a safety concern, but it has no relevance in an argument trying to convince an audience to boycott girl scout cookies because of GSUSA deception.

She began to wrap up her list of points by stating that the reason the GSUSA is lying is because they are “promoting the desires of a small  handful of people”. At no point in time did she ever back-up this claim. She proposed that the audience help solve the issue by boycotting cookies since there are other methods to contribute to girl scouts. This isn’t very logical at all, because the GSUSA still receives funds. She underscored with her final statement “the worst part is, they are not being honest with us”. To reiterate, she never successfully pointed out any lies that the GSUSA made to its members, parents, or to the public.

Overall, due to the poorly given evidence to her claims, her argument came across very poorly. She could have at least included some of the views of her contemporaries on the matter so that the effect would have been more grounded. Her call to action is not very likely to be answered the way she would like due to the ineffectiveness of her argument.

This entry was posted in X Archive 2012. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Cookie Boycott – Jon Otero

  1. davidbdale says:

    Jon, I regret I haven’t left myself enough time to do thorough notes for your work today in advance of our grade conference. That’s my failing and I’m not happy about it. I am still providing grades, but without analysis they may not mean much to you.

    I’d like very much to have a bit of your time at your convenience next week to provide more feedback and answer any other questions you may have. Just pick a time (or two, or three) from the Google Doc schedule: next week is wide open.

    I will also provide thorough notes here in the comments sections of your posts between now and next week. I’ll leave another brief set of note here now just to get started.

  2. davidbdale says:

    P1. Several grammar and syntax problems here that cost you credibility, Jon.
    P2. I’m not clear how Taylor’s quoting the Girl Scouts’ position contradicts her claim or is illogical, Jon.
    P3. If I wanted to answer the question you’ve posed here, Jon, I’d simply say the Scouts now admit they’ve admitted transgenders, but they didn’t do so until the situation came to light. In other words, they did so without publicly announcing a new policy. That’s Taylor’s objection.
    P4. Clearly Taylor does not agree to identify as girls transgenders who present themselves as girls. Are you claiming she has to agree with this definition to be logical? Your own example has the bizarre consequence of girls becoming men on a particular birthday.

    That’s all I have time for today. Maybe we can talk about this particular piece during today’s conference.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s