Major difference with Hypothesis. Enabling annotation only in a specialized content repository drastically limits the utility of annotation.

I think about this a lot now that my business is annotation.

I concur. Diigo could have been a leader in the social annotation space, way ahead of Hypothesis. But now I think H is gaining more momentum than Diigo, because it adheres to open standards.

MyStickies is another annotation service

Great quote for OpenStax.

I would like to know how they imported the book. I am pretty sure they took the HTML from cnx.org, but the numbering is being done differently than our online version.

Are these also in the copies/adaptations spreadsheet?

I can't tell if this is an actual copy or not, because it is "locked". In the menu "OpenStax Textbook" they link directly to the openstax.org listing of the book.

I think this "copy" is just a hardcover book. Maybe we should count them separately in some way.

Why is my highlight completely messed up?

I think one of the ideas I'm struggling with here. Is web annotation just about research, or to advance conversation on the web? I sense this is part of decentralization too (thus, an ecosystem), but where does it fit?

Though the degree of variation around this figure means it's not very useful on its own as a benchmark.

early development of the World-Wide Web at CERN. The Internet was already well established by then.

Digital #annotation is currently demonstrating a model for discussion much like Michael describes, where "discussion" (as annotation) is a separate, generic service and different manifestations of that service can be harnessed for and surfaced in various platforms for different uses. See Hypothesis' work, especially with a Canvas LTI integration.

这是CNN之前的思路，需要手工地把特征标注出来。话说Annotations不也是手工标注吗？

For DUN participants: Use this text to practise using annotation with Hypotesis. Put your annotations in the group DUN-annotate https://hypothes.is/groups/ee1jLEXz/dun-annotate

human solutions FTW!

Here's another concern:

Let's say this bot-powered annotation "agora" starts to operate as Mike has laid it out. The annotations from that credibility activity alone may start to become noisy—and much noisier if 1,000 other bots start annotating for other purposes.

One solution would be a dedicated "credibility" layer, where only the annotations from "registered" or "approved" credibility annotators appear. That way a user could activate just this credibility layer to focus on credibility signals.

But if there's going to be a "credibility" layer, who is going to gatekeep participation? One might imagine a trusted, "neutral" organization that would publish criteria for participation in this credibility layer and enable annotators that meet such criteria.

And just as there could be multiple annotators—bots or human—with different points of view posting to such a layer, there could also be multiple credibility layers, each administered by a different organization with different points of view, sources, and/or approaches. A sort of agora of credibility agoras. Users could then pay attention to the credibility layers they find most useful.

But, users could pay attention to just the credibility layer they find most agrees with their established point of view. Would this just move the same issues we see with the credibility of information to the credibility layer itself? Would #fakecred become an industry like #fakenews?

I'm generally in agreement about the problem area and solutions Mike proposes here. One thing we probably certainly know is that the "automated, centralized, closed approaches" that we have already seen attempting to address issues of this scope are unlikely to solve all the issues we are already seeing around credibility.

Could we use "agora" or some other term rather than "marketplace" to suggest that not all activities in the space will be mercantile?

I refer to this sentence in my annotation above, as it seems at odds with Mike's earlier statement that this is a tools debate, not a legal one.

Not trying to nitpick, but I'm a bit confused between this statement and the one below where Mike says "We're vulnerable to state-sponsored attacks, he says, because we are too narrowly technological in our solutions."

So far in this debate I've been thinking that we are too quick to jump to technical solutions (as Mike's latter point would suggest) when I don't think the issues online are categorically different than they are offline. While certainly tools can help shape social relations and culture, we also have social/cultural mechanisms to deal with situations generated via online tools.

Abuse is not limited to online activity and remedies for abuse are not purely technological. If a person abuses another offline, we have (imperfect) mechanisms to address that abuse. Are we considering those offline mechanisms in our confrontation with online abuse?

I wonder if she would close comments on her site if all were constructive? From my read, it wasn't that she didn't want to engage in conversation.

That's me!

This is a first test. Can we use hypothes.is as part of the Moodle?

video overview of textthresher by Nicholas Adams

data annotation from Susie Lu at Netflix

Really useful session well worth your time! All the longed for teacher, student, researcher, creator & user annotation desires for the web, at long last on the way to fulfilment!

video with Gardner Campbell along with Jeremy Dean and Jon Udel from Hypothes.is

image annotation tool for Omeka

The ideas of "capturing" and "packaging" knowledge suggests a mindset based on monetizing rather than empowering knowledge makers. The new metaphor of zebra not unicorn startup business models suggests "profitable businesses that solve real, meaningful problems and in the process repair existing social systems" might serve us all better than Genius' "pivot" to media.

An annotation about annotation.

An annotation about annotation about annotation.

Just like how Moses designed the bridges to be too short for buses to fit under, similar tactics have been used to deterr homeless people and other unwanted people, such as skateboarders. Some of these tactics include no loitering signs, metal spikes in the ground where homeless poeple usually would lay down, and studs placed on ledges to prevent skaters from grinding their skateboards against the ledge.

In the supplmentaly reading, it stated how over 130,000 signed a petition to have the metal spikes in the ground removed, which prevented homeless people from sleeping in those areas. The article continued on to say that despite this large number of people petitioning against the attempts to deterr homeless people, not many people have realized that everyday objects that we use, such as benches, have been strategically designed to prevent anyone from sleeping on them, homeless people more specifically.

Sadly enough, descrimination can be seen all over, not only in words or actions, but also in less obvious ways, such as architecture. The layout and placement of specific neighborhoods or cities, or how certain buildings, bridges, and roads are constructed is an example of how architecture can be used as a method of discrimination.

And if you use annotation, it can be annotated in-line already!

Felt way more appropriate to comment here than in the comments at the body of the page :).

It was humbling to interact act with such dedicated researchers and practitioners and to watch these documents take shape.

Thanks, everyone!

Another big thank you! As I've mentioned on Twitter, your course's "re/turn" to a previous Marginal Syllabus conversation (from October) is what Joe, Jeremy, and I hoped would happen over time - that educators would find conversations and texts that resonate with their interests and courses, and then join the text-based conversation via ongoing annotation. This turns the text-as-conversation into an open educational resource (OER), and - like you - we hope other educators and courses revisit these conversations to support their own learning.

I've had students say similar things about using Hypothesis to read together. I'd like to explore the relationship between open/collaborative web annotation and community-building... many questions to consider...

Awesome. Is it possible to connect with some of these posts and perspectives?

This is important, and in my teaching I've been careful to include web annotation in both private (group) and public modes so that learners find comfort with different approaches and can come to appreciate some of the scaffolding that you describe.

You're very welcome, and we're appreciative of your willingness to merge formal course activities with the more open-ended and interest-driven approach to educator learning via Marginal Syllabus.

A publicly visible and annotated syllabus is a great practice, and something I'll incorporate into courses - great idea!

This is quickly going to become a bit meta... :)

Like Douglas, she plays this game on the preexisting turf of the white man. I suppose it is easier to infiltrate an organization than to create a new one. Certainly a new church would be separate; but equal?-probably not.

Again, already on this!

test annotation

FORCING us to keep track of our annotations is OPPRESSIVE and SILENCES our organic voice and STIFLES creative thinking.

Hypothesis activity pages could solve this...

Really cool.

This is a powerful differentiator from Comments.

This is so important to understand.

This is an interesting moment as we think the rhetorical tradition as a series of annotations, and as we recognize our own historical embeddedness.

This sounds like the concept of the motivated sequence (take public speaking, folks) where the speaker inspires the audience to take action, and I think this concept is brilliantly illustrated in Mark Antony's speech from William Shakespeare's Julius Caesar. This brief clip from the Mankiewicz film demonstrates how Mark Antony provokes a unique passion from his audience that directly leads to action - the chaos that consumes Rome in the second half of the play/film. There a plenty of examples of this motivated sequence from pop culture, but Shakespeare/Mankiewicz/Brando illustrate it brilliantly.

Now we know who made annotation #1,000,000!

Annotating the body.

The level of access--I guess that's scale--seem quite different.

How different would our definition(s) of rhetoric be if we viewed it through the lens of another ancient civilization? I think what this article (and many of the articles which we have read) is saying that in order to gain a broader and deeper understanding of rhetoric, we must view it from the perspective of multiple cultural interpretations.

Alludes to the "Q" question, possibly. To know if something has been fully "rhetoricized," we must understand how it falls into the context of rhetoric. Meaning we must understand how it influences and is influenced by rhetoric.

An interesting point—how can the learning and acquisition of knowledge of the outside world be contextualized in a way to benefit self-development? How can what we learn about others allow us to understand ourselves more deeply and establish a relationship with ourselves?

I thought this was a good piece to start the semester with. Not to oversimplify this chapter, but in a way, it was kind of like an annotative process. It's taking a large scope of writings and responding to/interacting with/comparing them. The annotations is sort of a smaller, beginning stage in interacting with texts in order to sort of trace what rhetoric is.

How to share specific annotation rather than a whole page

How to Annotate Jupyter notebook stored online

I added and annotation to this entity as an example of a note

Indeed!

I keep coming back to this question: does web annotation open up copyrighted texts?

Let's set aside whether it's ultimately legal for me to annotate a document and share that annotated document--or "republish" a portion of targeted content from a copyrighted source through an annotation service.

Web annotation does allow me to "open" copyrighted content to critique, commentary, and a certain kind of remixing. Quoting and critiquing/commentating is the oldest remix tool in the humanities scholar playbook.

To me this is the heart of it, especially in so far as this use case overlaps with the educational/classroom one.

Die LIBREAS-Redaktion lädt übrigens sehr dazu ein, die Inhalte der Zeitschrift aktiv zu annotieren. Weiteres folgt (vermutlich) in der kommenden Ausgabe #30. Thema ist dann: Post-Digital-Humanities.

Sometimes I'm not sure whether to do a page note or an annotation. Both?

"Penciling"? What's a pencil!?

Bullock team. Tyrrell Photograph Collection, Powerhouse Museum

Rigby's Romance evolved from the fifth chapter of the 1898 typescript version of Such is Life. In that text, the date of Tom Collins' arrival in Echuca is 9 January 1884. Although missing from TS, the date of the record is confirmed by internal evidence, such as Tom Collins’ two arrivals at Deniliquin in the closing pages; ‘2.45, p.m., on a cold winter day, nearly five months after the date of the events just recorded – or, to be precise, on the 3rd of June’ (TS 521); or ‘three o’clock on a Saturday afternoon, six or eight weeks after the date of the events just recorded’ (RR 249).

Situated in the Victorian Shire of Moira, Yarrawonga is 133 km upriver from Echuca.

With his insatiable appetite and his owner's vigilant protection and affection, Tom Collins' kangaroo dog, Pup, is a significant presence in both Rigby's Romance and Such is Life. Bred from greyhound and deerhound stock, kangaroo dogs were used primarily as a hunting dog and adapted well to Australian conditions. Kangaroo dog owned by Mr Dunn of Castlereagh Street, Sydney, 1853 / painted by Thomas Tyrwhitt Balcombe (State Library of New South Wales)

Echuca is located in the Victorian Shire of Campapse on the southern bank of the Murray River.

From "The Mother" by George Crabbe (1754-1832). First published as Tale VIII in Tales in Verse (1812).

Boom!

And new tools.

Its not only important for our curiosity but for the future of mankind too. It inspires people to be scientists, astronauts,and engineers that will even further help the space program. Nasa also does a lot of environmentally friendly projects even though they burn a lot of rocket fuel. They also study a lot of how to help the earth out from energy usage to climate change. Nasa also improves our daily lives with many objects they have created such as baby formulas, cell phone cameras, shoe insoles, and memory foam. Not only does he space program help on earth and beyond it, it also helps us put ourselves and the universe in perspective.

This is an interesting quote because it shows how personality and traits of a person actually affects the potential of their effort into college courses. A student's personality plays an important role in how they do in college or academics because whether they are enthusiastic or depressed will show in their study habits as well as test scores. When it comes to academics, many people will think it may come natural rather than utilizing the cognitive skills, which is believed to be a skill that applies. However, cognition is an important asset - there is more that contributes into this criteria of education. Although, what draws the line to being fully considered as a thriver student or a diver student. Can someone(a student)be considered both?

Originally a British daily newspaper, the Guardian has expanded its reach to worldwide news reporting on a variety of issues.

Jessica Valenti is a feminist author and blogger, and is the founder of feministing.com. A short biography of Valenti can be viewed at: http://jessicavalenti.com/about

McEwan expertly phrases this important point! This excerpt could be used to support my claim that culturally, white males are privileged and coddled which can lead to violent outbursts.

By offering further evidence of misogynistic crime, the reader begins to understand how pressing this issue is. This plays to both the ethos and logos of Valenti. Ethos, because the author includes a link to the source, and logos because a list of examples can be seen as data, as evidence of wrongdoing.

Valenti is aware of the way in which crimes of this nature (and their perpetrators) are typically addressed in the media, and she makes a point to not allow the excuses. Too many times, excuses are made for men who commit heinous crimes like this. The perpetrator is referred to as the "lone wolf" who got in over his head, or was in some other way irresponsible for his own actions. By addressing this issue head on, Valenti gains trust from the reader and grows her ethos.

Valenti addresses her claim head-on here. Misogyny is toxic ideology that contributes to white male privilege. When that privilege is disrupted, and self-image is threatened, disaster can ensue.

Valenti, Jessica. "Elliot Rodger's California Shooting Spree: Further Proof That Misogyny Kills." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 24 May 2014. Web. 13 Oct. 2016.

In all fairness, Fortgang is considerably younger than any other author whose work I annotated. However, his work is published to be read and evaluated by whomever sees it, and he is still responsible for any stance he chooses to take on an issue.

TIME is a well-trusted source across the United States and around the world. However, reading this article makes me wonder how loosely regulated the publishing process is. This article comes off largely as a complaint regarding human interaction, and less of a professional essay on privilege in America.

This excerpt is a piece of Fortgang's claim. On a broader scale, this article's purpose is to address those who attempt to remind Fortgang of his privilege and explain why those people are out of line.

Objectively, this article is full of evidence to support the author's claim, but all of this so-called evidence is personal information. Personal information is impossible to corroborate which leaves the reader to simply trust the author to report honestly. However, in some respects, personal anecdotes can contribute to an author's ethos and pathos. Some audiences may find the content relatable, and agree with Fortgang that privilege is something to embrace and not to be ashamed of. If a reader agrees with Fortgang's assertions, their common frustration will build trust and emotional connection.

Personally, I do not believe that I am sacrificing anything in trying to better our environment, and that makes this comparison fall short. Separately, one thing to make clear in teaching people about privilege is that no one is at fault, and having privilege is not inherently bad. This article is somewhat difficult to argue because Fortgang's understanding or description of privilege is surface level. "Property and a set of values" are arbitrary to the discussion of pervasive, institutional racism.

This article serves as a perfect example of what the "other side" believes about white privilege and institutional racism.

Fortgang has a narrow view of privilege. An audience that disagreed with the author would assert that privilege is not just freedom from oppression, it is entwined in every aspect of society. Privilege is bigger than a family name or "legacy" as Fortgang states. It is layered, and its effects seep into every level of culture, economics, law enforcement, and further.

Again, a little too over-embellished, this sentence forces readers to piece things together. On another note, this sounds interestingly similar to the hypotheses of Lowery and Unzueta. When faced with evidence of white privilege and the myth of meritocracy, whites will feel their personal hardships have been downplayed and will be threatened by the thought that their accomplishments may have been handed to them because of their race.

Beginning the article with this statement will either hook or alienate the audience, depending on their opinions regarding these current issues of political correctness. Either way, from a writing standpoint, the casual yet dramatized tone makes for a strange introduction.

Upon googling Fortgang's name, the first several results are articles responding and criticizing Fortgang for this very article.

This title certainly does not beat around the bush.

Fortgang, Tal. "Why I'll Never Apologize for My White Male Privilege." Time. Time, 2 May 2014. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.

Unzueta, Miguel M., and Brian S. Lowery. "Defining Racism Safely: The Role of Self-image Maintenance on White Americans’ Conceptions of Racism." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 44.6 (2008): 1491-497. Elsevier. Web. 10 Oct. 2016.

This is a powerful point that illustrates why many individuals, when faced with evidence of white privilege, want to deny the facts: they feel threatened by the downplay of their own contributions to success (e.g. merit).

While reading this, I kept considering the authors' names and could not understand why, until I remembered that these writers also contributed to the second article I annotated, "Deny, Distance, or Dismantle"! This helps me as a reader to trust that these experts truly know what they are talking about.

Lowery and Unzueta explain the differences between the individual and institutional conceptions of racism, giving examples for each. This keeps the audience on the same page as the writers, and encourages ethos.

This short paragraph states all sides of the claim in understandable concise sentences, part by part. First, white Americans may deny racism as an institutional issue because it makes the individual more aware of the privilege he or she possesses due to the color of their skin. The authors found that is it is much less threatening to white individuals when they consider race an individual issue, a case-to-case offense, because then they are not faced with their privilege.

Author Brian S. Lowery is currently a professor of Organizational Behavior at Stanford Graduate School of Business in California. He earned his doctorate at the institution for which his co-author currently teaches, UCLA. Lowery's work also focuses on inequality experienced by individuals. In fact, his findings indicate that "individuals distinguish between inequalities framed as advantage as opposed to disadvantage," and that this correlates to "how individuals perceive inequality and the steps they take, if any, to reduce it," (Stanford Graduate School of Business).

Both authors have focused their academic passion on the issue of diversity, social inequality, and perception of racial inequality. In sharing their findings on white's perception of racial in equality, the authors can shed light on the psychology behind the issue, hopefully having a positive impact on future race relations.

Biography and information on Lowery: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/faculty/brian-lowery

Author Miguel M. Unzueta is an associate professor of Management and Organizations at the UCLA Anderson School of Management. Unzueta's work focuses on the interworkings of social hierarchy and how that affects the way in which we view social in equality as a society. A short biography is available at the School of Management's website: http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/faculty/management-and-organizations/faculty/unzueta

This is the MLA citation: Flentje, Annesa, Nicholas C. Heck, and Bryan N. Cochran. "Experiences of Ex-Ex-Gay Individuals in Sexual Reorientation Therapy: Reasons for Seeking Treatment, Perceived Helpfulness and Harmfulness of Treatment, and Post-Treatment Identification." Journal of Homosexuality 61.9 (2014): 1242-268. Web.

This article is found in an academic journal, which means that it is reliable.

The psychologists behind this study and article respond to the idea that conversion therapy is useful to the lgbt+ community because through their experiment they disprove this 'logic' of the other side's arguments. They want to prove that conversion therapy causes more issues for people then if these people were able to just express their lgbt+ identities. People with extreme religious backgrounds may disagree with this article because they want to believe that even though they are putting their children in harms way through this therapy, that the end result of their children being able to live an eternal life in heaven is more important.

Through the study that these authors conducted on lgbt+ people who had underwent conversion therapy at some point of their lives, the data and quotes from these people who have experienced the harshness of the therapy, they establish pathos. Pathos is shown because these people went through traumatic events and still identify as lgbt+. This study shows that the harm that they went through to become heterosexual was not worth it in the end.

This study is interesting to me because it shows that conversion therapy may never actually work on anyone. It makes me question if there is anyone who would say that it helped them realize that they are heterosexual instead of homosexual? If there are people out there who believe conversion therapy was a good thing for their identity, are they in denial because of the pain that conversion therapy brings or did it truly change their identity? This is something I would like to investigate more with in the future.

Flent Je, Heck, and Cochran decide to use arguments of the other side's perspective in order to show that the controversy of conversion therapy has multiple arguments and sides that show the complexity of the topic at hand. This evidence is reliable because they also cite their sources and invite the other side into the conversation. It may not be a recent discovery, since Zucker's argument appeared in 2003; however, it is an excellent idea on the authors' of this article to include to show the history of the controvery of conversion therapy being used on lgbt+ individuals. Since, they include arguments of the other side, it helps establish even more ethos because they are willing to acknowledge the people who have not agreed with their views on this therapy in the past. This shows that the authors are not bias and have done research on all angles of the controversy.

This is the claim that the authors are making through their observations of the certain lgbt+ individuals that they decided to write about. They state that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and should not be treated as one, especially not with conversion therapy, since it causes the individual more pain.

Flent Je, Heck, and Cochran are the authors of this article. They are all professors in Psychology, which establishes their ethos because they are all professionals in their field of study and will be able to analyze the harmful affects of conversion therapy successfully.

[](https://www.hongkongfp.com/2016/09/20/gay-pride-china-activists-fight-conversion-therapy/ This is a link to an article that is about a man who went through conversion therapy in China and how he is planning to fight for it becoming banned. This helps relate this article to what it is like in another country besides America.

Https://www.facebook.com/JournalistAmyWillis. "Gay Men Still Subjected to Electric Shocks to 'cure' Their Sexuality." Metro Gay Men Still Subjected to Electric Shock Therapy to Cure Theirsexuality. N.p., 08 Oct. 2015. Web. 12 Oct. 2016.

This is the MLA format for this source.

The documentary establishes pathos through talking to Chinese lgbt+ youth, as well as by showing disturbing clips of the conversion therapy process in China. The documentary does not include bias because it gives insight on what the doctors who perform conversion therapy in China believe and provides insight on what lgbt+ youth are subjected to.

The documentary amplifies that conversion therapy is something that Chinese parents are willing to make their lgbt+ youth go through in order to make sure that they will not shame their family. In China, it is less about the religious aspect of homosexuality and more about how lgbt+ youth affect the honor and status of the entire family. The documentary shows that the conversion therapy that happens in China is hurtful to the individuals that are forced into it by their family members to restore honor. The people who would disagree with this documentary, as to why conversion therapy is harmful, would be the families who feel that their lgbt+ youth should feel ashamed that they cannot bring future generations to their families. Personally, I think this documentary will be an excellent source to include in the future because it shows the perspective that China has on lgbt+ youth and also brings a new direction with how another country feels. Usually with the homosexuality argument and the conversion therapy debate, the opposing side is arguing due to their religion, but this debate is more about honor of a family.

The author of this article is Amy Willis; however, she is not the person who created the documentary. She is just reporting on the documentary that the source 'Unreported World' created.

The article appears on the internet to get the word out there that there is a documentary that will be airing live in order to show that conversion therapy takes place in more than just one country in the world.

The stakeholder in this video article are the lgbt+ individuals in China as well as the viewpoints of the doctors who are subjecting these people to conversion therapy. It is reliable because they interviewed both sets of people, since it was filmed it is known that this is exactly what they said about the topic.

This article would not let me use hypothesis.is in the actual article; however, I decided to write the entire source needs up here.

Erin Dean is the author of this article that appeared in the news. As a reporter, Dean is expected to research conversion therapy through out time. This source does not provide much insight on the conversion therapy or the lgbt+ youth that are subjected to it; however, it does provide an interesting viewpoint on how it affected the people who were on the other side of these tests.

Dean suggests that this 'cure' of conversion therapy on lgbt+ individuals through out the ages is unpleasant and harsh; however, it also explains that conversion therapy was not just harsh on the patients, but those involved with administering these treatments were also affected.

Dean explains that conversion therapy is harmful to more than just one group, which may be an unpopular opinion to people who believe this is solely an lgbt+ individual's issue because they may believe that by talking about the nurses and doctors involved in this practice that it takes away from the issue at hand.

The author of this article uses the facts of historic occurrences and suicides that happened to people who were involved in conversion therapy.

I would need to do more research on how the stakeholder of nurses and doctors involved are affected by doing following orders of hurting the lgbt+ individuals for their 'treatments'. The nurses are stakeholders because they have opinions on the horrifying therapy that they placed on another human being. [](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/28/gay-conversion-therapy-ruins-lives-lgbt-rights This article explains that conversion therapy hurts lgbt+ the most, however, it should affect the community as a whole.

Here is the MLA Citation: Dean, Erin. "Shock Therapies." Nursing Standard 30.23 (2016): 25. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.

This source is goes into more depth on the Islamic views on homosexuality, which provides a base on what their views on conversion therapy may be.

These are the authors of the article and are professors with PhD's. This shows that they are qualified and have knowledge in their field of study for homosexuality and conversion therapy.

This is a journal that this article is derived from in order to critique the journal that was created by Ahmed, as well as to explain the Islamic viewpoint on the situation of conversion therapy.

This is the MLA format citation

Junaid B. Jahangir and Hussein Abdul-latif establish credibility through the evidence that they use throughout their article. They explain that Kutty's reasons for supporting conversion therapy are not justifiable, and then provide statistics and research based evidence, as to why these reasons are not logical reasons for conversion therapy to be needed.

I think for the future of my research, that this source will be helpful because I will be able to include other countries views and reasons for using conversion therapy to strengthen my argument against it.

Since the author of this article is an American, he could be bias to the Islamic faith and viewpoints. However, this may be unlikely considering America has individuals who are religious as well with the same kind of approach to conversion therapy that doctors have over there.

The author of this article is arguing against the ideas of a different homosexual viewpoint through the perspective that Islam has. The author uses evidence from an Islamic source to point out the flaws of the idea that sexuality can be changed through a variety of ways that may be harmful to an individual. Also this compares and contrasts America's ideas of homosexuality versus another country. In the American culture many arguments against homosexuals is mostly based on religious affiliations, which seems to also be the same approach many of the Islamic faith have as well.

Junaid B. Jahangir and Hussein Abdul-latif are responding to the views of the Islamic faith and their views on homosexuality and the treatment that would be best for this 'mental illness'. The author's disagree with the point of views that are explained by conservative Muslims, who would also not share the viewpoints of the authors of this article. Since, the Islamic faith categorizes homosexuality under a mental illness, the way they handle it is harsh and meant to be solutions to an actual disease.

Not only would the Islamic faith disagree with the viewpoints presented in this article, but they would also be considered a stakeholder in the topic of conversion therapy. Since, conversion therapy is different for other cultures and does happen around the world, they do have different ways to go about the therapy. This is a reliable source for the Islamic faith viewpoint on homosexuals and conversion therapy because the article features many thoughts by a Muslim doctor.

The study the authors identified earlier in the paragraph is summed up excellently in this one statement. When faced with examples of the privileges of whiteness, those who identified strongly with their whiteness tended to feel threatened and insecure, consequently directing that negativity toward the outgroup.

Said in other terms, increased pride in whiteness equates to increased opposition to legislation that could negatively impact white privilege. This reminds me of the fact that most violent or murderous incidents in the news lately have been committed by white men who have considerable white pride and act out against people or groups threatening their privilege.

Peggy McIntosh's "White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack" is an important and eye opening read! I was assigned to read this in a Race and Membership in American History class in high school. Here's a link to it: http://nationalseedproject.org/white-privilege-unpacking-the-invisible-knapsack

The authors interestingly admit that they disagree with the invisibility thesis, yet still want to discuss what it means and how credible it is. Continuing to give the audience both sides of the argument further solidifies ethos.

Before this statement, the authors are addressing what those with opposing views think about the topic of whiteness and privilege. This plays toward their ethos because it clearly outlines for the reader both sides of the issue, helping the reader to feel informed and to trust the authors to deliver credible information.

Furthermore, the authors use the terminology and apply it to their theory that when faced with evidence of white privilege, a white person will react in one of three ways, each reaction relating to their "concern for racial inequality and commitment to measures that might reduce it."

Knowles, Lowery, Chow and Unzueta give the reader vocabulary, defining and explaining the terms they use to discuss their theories. This works to hold the audience at the same academic level as the writers, assuring there is nothing lost in translation, so to speak.

The authors directly address their claim in this statement. Beginning the article with the reference to Ebony magazine vaguely introduces the topic of discussion, then by the end of the second paragraph it is understood by the audience what the intention and argument of the article is.

Knowles, E. D., B. S. Lowery, R. M. Chow, and M. M. Unzueta. "Deny, Distance, or Dismantle? How White Americans Manage a Privileged Identity." Perspectives on Psychological Science 9.6 (2014): 594-609. PsycINFO [EBSCO]. Web. 11 Oct. 2016.

The main author seems to be Eric D. Knowles. Knowles is an associate professor of Psychology at New York University. You can find a list of his publications with his contact information here: https://psych.nyu.edu/knowles/

The journal this article is published in, Perspectives on Psychological Science, is a bimonthly publication that is peer-reviewed and contains a wide variety of content. View the description by the parent company SAGE Journals: http://pps.sagepub.com/