100 POINTS What does Ensler suggest by her descriptions and explanation of “the elusive nature of security”? What does she mean by the term hard matter identity?

What is the “new paradigm” she discusses? (A paradigm is a system, organization, or pattern of behavior, beliefs, or practices.) How are the examples of those people who are willing to compromise their security essential to creating a new way of thinking and a new form of security?

How do those who risk their security open up a dialogue and discussion and promote a sense of inclusion in unlikely places?

What, in Ensler’s opinion, are some of the consequences of the desire to feel secure?

Ensler is actively working to raise social consciousness because of what she sees as the desecration (destruction) “of the primary resource of the world.” What messages or themes are you left with from Ensler’s work and activism?

How do you think security influences your sense of self, identity, and understanding of the world around you? Does Ensler’s talk seem relevant to you? Why or why not?

Instructions: the following argument argues for advertising to children. read the argument and answer the question that follows: topic and question advertising: should companies be allowed to advertise to children? ineffective argument i think that advertising to children is necessary. how else will we know what we can buy? i think that children are not aware of the products that are available. most children don’t own cars and can’t drive to stores to look around. the only way we know what we can buy is by seeing advertisements on tv. my friend really likes advertisements, too. he said, "how will we know what to buy if we don’t see advertisements? " seriously, children are consumers, too. we know what we like and we ask our parents to buy these products for us. i know that i like certain cereals, but how would i know that if i did not see advertisements? i love those commercials! kids are people, too. why is the argument ineffective? in a paragraph of 7–10 complete sentences, explain why the following parts of the argument are ineffective, and how they can be improved: claim support conclusion clincher point of view transitions