Connections
Both the LGBTQ community and the Ally community share goals of increasing understanding and acceptance of LGBTQ people in social and political spheres. Although one community is advocating for themselves, and the other is not, they use pathos in similar fashions.
Each community recognizes the power pathos has in persuading people to support their cause. Both the allies and the LGBTQ people discussed how pathos was an effective way to make people care, especially in the case of someone who may be indifferent to the topic. When making a case for the rights and acceptance of the LGBTQ community, convincing people that this is something they should care about is half the battle. For this reason, introducing pathos into an argument allows people to empathize with the community. It is more difficult to remain indifferent when emotions are brought into an argument. Pathos makes people care, and people who care are more likely to enact change.
Each community recognizes the power pathos has in persuading people to support their cause. Both the allies and the LGBTQ people discussed how pathos was an effective way to make people care, especially in the case of someone who may be indifferent to the topic. When making a case for the rights and acceptance of the LGBTQ community, convincing people that this is something they should care about is half the battle. For this reason, introducing pathos into an argument allows people to empathize with the community. It is more difficult to remain indifferent when emotions are brought into an argument. Pathos makes people care, and people who care are more likely to enact change.
Storytelling and humanizing the issues the LGBTQ community faces were stressed by both the allies and the LGBTQ people we interviewed. Often, it is easier for people to dislike or deny rights to an ambiguous group of “Others.” By personalizing the issues and applying them to a specific person, they become more real, relatable, and harder to ignore. Examples of this method of pathos emerge in both of our interviews. Members of the LGBTQ community discussed using powerful narratives, both about themselves and others, while the allies encouraged people to think about how their opinions might change if someone close to them identified as LGBTQ. Our interviewees in the podcast, too, discussed humanization as one of the most powerful and effective ways of garnering interest and support. The cultural artifact we chose, the Pixar “It gets better” video also uses specific examples of storytelling. We see the faces and hear the voices of these people, and that makes their stories and the things they have overcome all the more impactful. Overall, making the issue “smaller” and more personal seems to be the most common and universally accepted use of pathos in discussions surrounding the LGBTQ community.
As discussed on our page about pathos, this method is particularly effective when used on people who are indifferent to the topic. Each of the cultures we interviewed brought up pathos as an impactful way to appeal to people in the middle. It is different from arguing with people who are hostile to the issue because, as Denzel says, you don’t have to “break down a barrier in order to educate.” However, making people care is a uniquely difficult task. For people who think that the topic “doesn’t affect them,” humanization can force them think about the issue in a different way. By asking them to imagine if someone they loved was gay, it makes them think about the issue applying directly to them, and opens the door for empathy.
While they recognized the power pathos has in an argument, both communities stressed the importance of using not just pathos, but also logic and extrinsic facts such as data to educate people about issues. They did not discount pathos, but suggested that it is more powerful when there are more than solely emotional appeals in an argument. Multiple interviewees stressed that although pathos is an important way to connect people and make them care, they find arguments are more effective when they go beyond just emotion and add considerations that make people think as well as feel.
As discussed on our page about pathos, this method is particularly effective when used on people who are indifferent to the topic. Each of the cultures we interviewed brought up pathos as an impactful way to appeal to people in the middle. It is different from arguing with people who are hostile to the issue because, as Denzel says, you don’t have to “break down a barrier in order to educate.” However, making people care is a uniquely difficult task. For people who think that the topic “doesn’t affect them,” humanization can force them think about the issue in a different way. By asking them to imagine if someone they loved was gay, it makes them think about the issue applying directly to them, and opens the door for empathy.
While they recognized the power pathos has in an argument, both communities stressed the importance of using not just pathos, but also logic and extrinsic facts such as data to educate people about issues. They did not discount pathos, but suggested that it is more powerful when there are more than solely emotional appeals in an argument. Multiple interviewees stressed that although pathos is an important way to connect people and make them care, they find arguments are more effective when they go beyond just emotion and add considerations that make people think as well as feel.