Aime Santilln

Genre Analysis
LGBTQ Discrimination in the workplace
Same-sex marriage was declared legal in the United States in June 26, 2015. This
was a big milestone in the LGBT rights movement. However, the LGBT community still
faces other social hardships. They still have a long way to go. This issue is addressed by a
blog post called Whats Going on with LGBT Discrimination in the Workplace, written in
a blog called On Labor, which talks about how Americans wrongfully believe that is
illegal to fire someone based on their gender identity and sexual orientation across the
nation. It is also supported by graph published by Washington State University titled
LGBT; Sexual Stigma and Gender Identity, which portrays the states that have protection
against discrimination in the workplace and the states that have not yet passed a law
protecting LGBT rights in the workplace. These two genres will be further discussed
throughout the remainder of the analysis.
Audience and Purpose
The first genre, Lauren Godles Whats Going on with LGBT Discrimination in
the Workplace is a post on a blog site called On Labor posted on April 6, 2016. The
purpose of this post is to inform readers about how most American citizens wrongfully
believe that it is illegal, across the nation, to discriminate LGBT members in the
workplace. The second genre, Mark Colins LGBT; Sexual Stigma and Gender Identity
contains a two-picture graph, which depicts the states in which protection to LGBT
members has been passed as a law, and the states in which it has not.

The intended audience for the first gender is LGBT members and American
citizens interested in LGBT rights. And, it seems that the purpose is to inform its
audience about the facts on protections towards LGBT members in the workplace, since
it starts by talking about a Huffington Post poll published in 2013, which found that
69% of Americans (incorrectly) believed that firing an employee for being gay was
already illegal (Godles, 2016). Three years later, according to Godles blog post, most
states still have not passed protection to LGBT members.
The second genre seems to have the same intended audience, since it states
similar facts. It informs, by visually showing the states in which protections towards the
LGBT community has been passed.
In both genres, the purpose is tied to the audience since it informs LGBT
members as well as American citizens interested in LGBT rights, which, according to the
first genre, are mostly misinformed about the actual legal protections to the LGBT
community. It helps its audience realize the misconceptions and misinformation given to
the nation and the members of the LGBT community who has not personally experienced
injustices in the workplace. The first genre does this by giving the example of the
Huffignton Post poll published in 2013, which shows how 69% of Americans
(incorrectly) believed that firing and employee for being gay was illegal (Godles, 2016).
Later, the article emphasizes that, in a post-Obergefell legal regime, those Americans
would likely find it even more incredible that the federal government and most states still
have not passed anti-discrimination laws, nor has the Supreme Court ruled such
discrimination to be illegal (Godles, 2016). The second genre does the same by
providing its text that states, 29 states have failed to pass laws that protect gay and

transgender workers (Collins, 2015). With this, they are trying to encourage general
awareness.
Furthermore, both genres explain the same information in different formats. One
explains it through text and examples, and the other explains it through maps and colors.
Rhetorical Issues
Both genres portray most rhetorical appeals.
Ethos
The first genre establishes its credibility by first stating the fact that most
Americans wrongfully believe that it is illegal, across the nation, to discriminate LGBT
members in the workplace. Next, it summarizes existing protections for LGBT workers,
and later, it states the inadequacy of those protections. By providing the already
successful protections on LGBT rights, it creates a sense of unbiased and it makes the
article more credible.
As far as the second genre, it provides the source and the explanation of the
graph.
Pathos
Both genres can provide different kinds of emotions by providing the fact that
LGBT members are not legally protected in the workplace. The second genre might
create more sudden emotions since it becomes more visual to see the states that have not
yet provided protection to LGBT members.
Furthermore, in the second genre, the states in the different pictures are colored in
blue and red blue for the states that have provided protection to LGBT members in the
workplace, and red for the states that have not. This gives the impression of Republican

(red) versus Democratic (blue). It suggests that Democrats have been able to provide
protection to LGBT members in the workplace, and Republicans have failed.
Logos
The first genre provides evidence to support its claim by providing statistics, and
links to articles and documents that talk about the statement they provide. Moreover, the
second article provides evidence and support to its claim through the article that
surrounds the image, which also explains what the image is about and how it is credible.
Conclusion and Synthesis
Both genres seem to be successful in achieving its purpose. The first genre was
thorough in providing examples and evidence, not only of lack of protection on LGBT
rights, but also in the providing examples of protection that already exists and has been
successful. The second genre is successful since it makes it very visual the gap that still
needs to be covered to be able to protect LGBT rights in the workplace.
Thus, both genres are great in supporting the fact that there are persisting issues,
such as discrimination in the workplace, in the LGBT community, even though marriage
equality has already been established.

References
Collins, Mark. "LGBT; Sexual Stigma and Gender Identity." Washington State
University. N.p., 21 Oct. 2015. Web. 5 Oct. 2016.
Godles, Lauren. "What's Going on with LGBT Discrimination in the Workplace?"
Onlabor. N.p., 6 Apr. 2016. Web. 5 Oct. 2016.