TOW #11 "First Comes Baby, Then Comes Push Present?" by Una LaMarche

         In, "First Comes Baby, Then Comes Push Present?" NY Times staff-writer Una LaMarche questions the nature of the flamboyant "push presents" that celebrities such as Kim Kardashian have popularized more and more in the past few years. LaMarche is known for her cleverly sharing her thoughts on subjects such as feminism, privilege, and critiquing the modern-day media in the form of her own books, writing for the NY Times, and also guest-writing for the Huffington Post. With this in mind, I really did not need to question her credibility and knowledge on this subject matter, and also took her previously shared views into account when looking for nuances to alter my interpretation of the piece. In this particular writing, it seems as though she is talking to all women who have, or plan to have, children. In addition to sharing her own passionate opinion, she uses statements from women and medical professionals alike to make a very firm argument that ridicules the sincerity of "push-presents" and what they imply about a woman. Her purpose in writing is not in any means to say that women do not deserve to be shown some kind of gratification after enduring carrying a baby for nine months and then delivering some- she more so takes issue with the given name. She wittily proclaims, "it is hard to deny that the unfortunate name makes women sound like human slot machines waiting to spit out a jackpot," (para. 5). She skillfully achieves her purpose by writing something that is strongly worded enough to show significance, but also neutral enough to not make her readers feel the need to "get defensive."
        To achieve her purpose on a somewhat controversial topic by using a multitude of rhetorical devices and strategies, including juxtaposition, allusion, and helps her argument seem more logical by addressing the counterargument. She juxtaposes celebrities like Kim Kardashian with common people, and their thinking around "push presents." She does show to show the disparity between what is normal, and what is normal for a celebrity who can spend a million dollars on a necklace without thinking about it twice. In her contrast of the average women a celebrity, she alludes to the major differences in those who are extremely wealthy, as well as the way that this impacts someone's view on feminism. This greatly helps her achieve her purpose by showing the relevance of the issue she describes, and makes sure her audience knows that she is not just choosing to argue over something as small as a name. In addition, she addresses the counterargument, to show that she is aware of, and respects the other sides opinion. In doing so, she creates a very powerful argument that definitely changed the way I thought about the subject.

I accessed this article on the NY Times website: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/03/fashion/kim-kardashian-push-present-politics.html?ref=fashion&_r=0

This cartoon was included with the article, and I thought it did an awesome job in setting up LaMarche's ideas: