ASSIGNMENT 2 2025
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 1 JULY 2025
, Theory, Style and Poetics
Essay Response: Critical Analysis of Persuasive Techniques in “One Step
Forward Two Steps Backward... LGBTQI Rights in Africa”
The text titled “One Step Forward Two Steps Backward... LGBTQI Rights in Africa” by
Sonke Gender Justice focuses on the contrasting developments in African countries
regarding the recognition and criminalisation of LGBTQI rights. It targets a socially
conscious audience interested in human rights, particularly in African political contexts.
The main persuasive purpose of the text is to raise awareness about the
inconsistencies and injustices concerning LGBTQI rights in Africa and to encourage
support for equality and legal reform.
The text functions as a social persuasive article, aimed at influencing public opinion and
policy by highlighting contradictions, injustices, and the historical roots of anti-LGBTQI
sentiments. It draws the reader in by contrasting progressive legal developments in
Namibia with the regressive anti-LGBTQI laws in Uganda, using this contrast to
emphasise both the potential for change and the significant challenges still faced by
LGBTQI communities on the continent.
One of the main persuasive strategies used in the text is appeal to logic (logos). The
author presents factual and statistical information to substantiate claims. For instance,
the text mentions that in Namibia, "sexual relations between men are still considered a
criminal offence... however the law is seldom enforced." This highlights the paradox
between legal theory and practice. Additionally, citing the ILGA database that “same-
sex relationships are considered legal in 22 African countries” and “32 nations... have
outlawed same-sex relationships” appeals to the reader’s reason and provides credible
support for the author's argument. The use of verifiable data serves to make the
argument more convincing and difficult to dispute.
Another key persuasive appeal employed is appeal to emotion (pathos). This is
evident in the emotive language used to describe Uganda’s new law as “one of the
harshest anti-LGBTIQ laws to date” and the mention of “capital punishments” and “20-