I decided to evaluate the essay “When Words do More Than Hurt,” giving it a grade of 96%. The author organized their observations of an interesting hashtag with no grammatical errors. They also developed their community with a thick description and painting a vivid picture of the culture. I took off points because I think the author could have inserted their point of view a bit more throughout the piece. However, the writer did add other comments and news to mold the culture into a well-rounded picture. Overall, this essay did a good job of informing readers of the behaviors of the community they studied.

For this assignment, I have decided to do “Who are the Flat Earthers?”. To begin with, the opening of the essay was good. Like the storytelling caught my attention. The essay itself was sort of lacking information. For example, he/she could have talked about the online community a little more. Also, did not talk about what was happening in the community as much. The author could have added some quotes from the members of the community. The conclusion is a little weak. Other than that the organization and grammar were fine.

While I do like the premise of the essay, and how it introduces a new aspect of a woman’s thoughts on her society and how she should behave in it, I found this essay lacked some credibility. I didn’t really pay attention to minor things such as spelling or grammar, but when a piece of data was introduced, and it wasn’t followed by a source I felt bored reading the essay. I didn’t know if the writer was making the data up, or if they got their data from a heavily biased and unreliable news source so I knew to take their words with a grain of salt. Besides that, I thoroughly enjoyed the title and the contents of the essay, and overall I would give it a B+/A-.

I read “Who Are The Flat Earthers?” by Richi Barua for this assignment. The writer did give us a basic understanding of the Flat earther community and what they believed in. however, I thought that the author could’ve done more with it. A lot fo his evidence and points were not too compelling especially for a topic like this. I thought that the essay was fairly organized and that the development was adequate since the evidence wasn’t super concrete. I think that the writer should have delved into the topic more since it is pretty controversial and there are many videos on it. Maybe instead of only using a video that showed flat earthers and scientists he could’ve used a parody video as well and observed the behavior between flat earthers and the rest of the people online. Even Though the writer did include some of the language and behaviors some of the flat earthers use, I felt like there wasn’t much interaction between the writer and the community itself. The writer did have good grammar and the introduction was compelling. I give this essay an above-average grade but there are definitely places for improvements. 

“Who Are The Flat Earthers” by Richi Barua

I’d give this essay a 75% because it was well structured and contained a brief analysis of the Flat Earthers community. The author’s opinions, reactions, and assumptions were, for the most part, well incorporated. Very little grammatical error. The essay contains a few quotes from the people within the community. The topic was interesting which is why I think there could have been more information. The reason why I did not give it a higher grade is because there was not enough details and background information regarding the community such as demographics and behavior. The conclusion could have been a little bit stronger but overall it was adequate in my opinion.

For this assignment, I read “Who are the Flat Earthers?” by Richi Barua. The writer did a good job explaining the Flat Earth society and their beliefs. The writer provided historical background about the community and described their relationship with people who believe the Earth is round. I gave the writer an adequate grade for content, development, and organization. I think the author deserves adequate for these standards because the intro and conclusion could have been stronger, and the quotes could have been more descriptive for the Flat Earth side. However, I gave an above average grade for style, creativity, and grammar. The writer chose an interesting topic and was able to support it with strong sentences with good grammar. To conclude, I believe the author did a good job writing about the Flat Earth community.

 Reading “Who are the flat Earthers?”, I decided to give the essay a 91.75 grade.  With organization, style, creativity, grammar & mechanics, receiving exemplary grades, I felt that content and development was lacking. Regarding content I felt that the social-scientific interpretation was not enough. Even though the writer included info on the haters in the community there was no direct quote towards the theory other than mockery of the logo. In development I felt that the piece was missing the communities norms. I would have liked to know more about what actions the flat earth community was taking in society instead of only what was seen on the discussion board. Overall I did feel the piece was creativity and the title was what attracted me the most to learning about the Flat Earthers.

Excerpt from “Our Incel Problem” by Zack Beauchamp gave insight into the Incel online community. Incel– a shortened term for the involuntary celibacy is a name given to those going through “romantic troubles”. Beauchamp notes that incels are awkward in real life surrounding topics of romance and sex. The author notes that the group started as a community that shared struggles and gave advice but developed into a dangerous subculture. For instance, the author described the old online community to be a “social justice warrior community”– and shares that 20 years later the group shares dangerous ideas and is potentially a reflection of the political environment.

As the online community of Incels change, Beauchamp mentions that there are a particular age group and a picture of what an incel looks like. Insiders have a shared sexist ideology of the “black pill”– a fundamental rejection of a woman’s sexual emancipation. Members of the community are hostile to outsiders who look to observe the community — and has changed from a group that includes all genders to one that mainly consists of men. The author notes that the sexist ideology stems from a larger problem in society. In broader western society there is a dark set of societal values and expectations of women that reflect the discussions happening within the incel online community. Beauchamp says that the black pill ideology poses a threat and can lead to violence if taken to a logical extreme. The author also notes that even if it isn’t murder, the ideology can create various acts of violence such as harassment and violent assault. The current online community of Incels as a reflection of society’s darkest values with the combination of modern technological advancements is reshaping politics– and is a conversation that the author describes to be, “not prepared to be confronted”.

The specific patterns or trends that the author notes about the members of incel or “involuntary celibacy” are the reasons for joining the group, how the members share an age range, and the language in their ‘culture’. The group turned into an online community because its members had the same trend in facing rejection in their lives from women. Incel pertains to millennial males that range from the ages of 16-30. The article explains the pattern of difficulties with communicating to the opposite sex, and a member’s fear of rejection. In the group, they vent about their battles with bullying and low self-esteem. These introverted and awkward men found comfort in this support group with people facing the same isolation and loneliness. These patterns inform the insider experience of this community by exposing the language and pathos that the members use. Abe, for example, calls women “emotional tampons” to express his frustration from being dumped. They also have a pattern of acting unfriendly and defensive towards outsiders: “1,267 Braincels users found that about 90 percent of forum participants were under the age of 30. The users are almost all men — women are banned on sight.” A member named Miguel “was drawn to the community because he felt they were the only people who understood his experience,” this shows that despite being a virtual medium, the member’s mutual loneliness and misery indeed craves some type of validation from another member. Overall, the author analyzes how the community began as an innocent way for men to vent about their misfortune in love into an absolute misogynist and hateful group.

Throughout the reading there are different things that tend to come up often, sort of like the main idea of the article. Two of the trends that the author mentioned were the ages and the gender in the group. Before the change in  reasoning for this group, there were woman and men who talked and gave advice about dating. It was more of a safe space for questions to be asked and advice to be given. According to the article, after the change in the groups motives, the age range was from 16-30 and the gender of the group consists of mainly men. Woman were no longer allowed in the group because now they were the target. Another major trend that runs throughout the group is the fact that the men are not able to keep a girlfriend or get a date in the first place. They blame women for not being able to be socially and sexually acceptable in society. The members of the community are men who are down and out. They decide to take their anger out on woman because they feel less than or felt less than in the past and can’t handle it. It’s honestly a big pity party in my book but with more aggression and stupidity. In the end, the author shows how the group was one thing in the beginning and led to a whole other community solely off of toxic masculinity. Communities grow and expand in many different ways but this ones foundation was completely changed and thrown off course.