After reading this article it was unclear whether there was a clear argument that the author was trying to make. However, it is made clear that there was a belief of there being a connection between the boys who were straight who killed the boy who was gay. This is one argument on the case of Matthew Shepard, but not the only one. I think the main reason for the author to use this case as the basis of the paper i think was because it discussed what it means in society to be a man and what people define as the main important qualities that make a man a “manly” man. a main stereotype that is brought to discussion is the belief that in order to be a man one must be straight among other qualities. the author goes into how maybe it is not so much that Shepard is homosexual but more about the boys who killed him, who are straight and agree with the “rules” of what a man is.
I think that the writing in this essay is well done. She clearly makes a point, however, she does not come right out and say her point, she lets it evolve throughout the work. With the addition of quotes and historical information it boosts the ethos and also helps to make the argument stronger. The organization of the paper is coherent and fluent. The examples used were intriguing and continued to make me want to read on to see the overall point the author was trying to make.
