In Deserae Peck’s argumentative essay about female circumcision, she uses various rhetorical strategies in order to inform and to persuade her readers to stand against the act. Though she lacks a clear thesis in her introduction, she does take the time to define what exactly female circumcision entails as well as stating “there are three forms of FGC.” Her introduction can serve as a rough start to a road map, but it definitely does not suffice for not having a concrete thesis. In terms of how I would improve her first paragraph, I would definitely incorporate a thesis and define the boundaries for what the paper covers.
Peck follows up with an interview conducted by an expert in anthropology concerning a victim of female circumcision. This serves to provide a first-person account of the event being discussed and uses pathos to persuade the reader to feel strongly against the event. Her last sentence serves as a topic sentence and as well as a wrap-up, “...female circumcision is an inhumane …show more content…
Peck then uses cause and effect to define the complications that can result from female circumcision, providing support for her belief that it does not benefit the patients. While her facts provide some form of logos, it is not clear where she got her information from.
It is evident Peck is completely against the act of female circumcision and wishes for her readers to feel the same. Though her paper provides a clear definition of what exactly FGC entails and the effects of it, she could have included more analysis in the early parts of her essay. Her thesis should also be at the beginning of the essay rather than the end, but she at least provides a solution for preventing female circumcision in her