Rossman 1

Sydney Rossman
Wilkinson
English 100
22 September 2016
My Amendment...Just Kidding
The term satire is defined by Dictionary.com as the use of irony, sarcasm, ridicule, or
the like, in exposing, denouncing, or deriding vice, folly, etc. Satire can be used in writing as a
way to amuse and persuade an audience in an unusual way. In order to be successful, however, it
must employ the use of certain techniques, such as being edgy, sarcastic, timely, relatable, and
many more. In 2004, George Saunders published a satirical article titled My Amendment in
The New Yorker. By using satirical techniques, his article is attempting to persuade its readers
that Same-Sex Marriage should be legalized. However, is it effective? Despite the fact that it
may be confusing to some, George Saunders' "My Amendment" is effective satire because of the
satirical techniques it uses to enhance his argument.
George Saunders wrote his satirical piece from the exaggerated viewpoint of a person
against Same-Sex Marriage. In the very beginning of the article, he states that he believes not
only should Same-Sex Marriage be banned, but Samish-Sex Marriage should be as well
(Saunders). To explain this situation he says, It goes without saying that He [God] did not want
men marrying men, or women marrying women, but also what He did not want, in my view, was
feminine men marrying masculine women. (Saunders) He goes on to tell the audience that he
developed a Manly Scale of Absolute Gender (Saunders) to measure if a marriage is a SamishSex Marriage. If, according to his scale, a married couple scored poorly, Saunders suggests

Rossman 2
either a divorce or for the couple to become more like their respective genders. Near the end, he
says that if we let Same or Samish-Sex Marriages be legal, we will have a nation ruled by the
anarchy of unconstrained desire. (Saunders) However, because this article is satire, he is
actually saying the opposite of what he means. By imitating a person who is against Same-Sex
Marriage, he is trying to convey that those who are against Same-Sex Marriage are irrational,
and their demands go too far. He is asking: When will it be enough for you? If we ban SameSex Marriage, shouldnt we ban Samish-Sex Marriage as well?
My Amendment is effective satire because of the humorous sarcasm that it employs.
The entire concept of this article is ridiculous, and many of the ideas Saunders presents are
humorous. For example, he uses self-deprecating humor to drive home his point when he
describes how he too used to be effeminate. He describes how he enjoyed looking at his long
hair in windows, contradicted himself often, and cried a lot. He humorously described what he
considered feminine traits while using himself as an example of how it is possible for someone to
change themselves. Furthermore, at the beginning of the article, he sarcastically says that, Like
any sane person, I am against Same-Sex Marriage, and in favor of a constitutional amendment to
ban it. Satire would be plain mockery if it wasnt for humor, and Saunders makes good use of
this element to enhance his article.
Saunders article was written about a timely and controversial topic, which is one of the
reasons why it is effective. One of the main elements that contribute to the success of satire is
whether or not it is a subject that is currently being debated. If the topic is controversial at the
time, the satire will be relatable and appealing to its audience. Saunders chose to write his article
about the controversy of Same-Sex Marriages. He published his article during a time in which
Same-Sex Marriages was a controversial topic. On one hand, the first legal Same-Sex Marriage

Rossman 3
in the United States was held in 2004, and on the other, President George W. Bush announced
that he supported a constitutional amendment to ban Same-Sex Marriages that same year
(ProCon). Therefore, the topic on which Saunders wrote about was very timely and
controversial when he wrote it. However, is it still timely today? Homosexual marriage rights is
still a topic upon which many people do not agree. At the moment, Saunders article is still a
timely piece. Nonetheless, because the U.S. Supreme Court declared Same-Sex Marriage legal
in 2015 (ProCon), the article is slowly losing its controversial element. It is possible that in a
few years, when the Same-Sex Marriage controversy is a thing of the past, this article will be
ineffective satire, simply because nobody will care anymore.
Another reason why My Amendment is effective satire is because it is edgy and almost
offensive. Saunders Manly Scale of Absolute Gender is a good example of his almost
offensive points. He is boldly saying that his scale can tell without a doubt whether or not a
marriage is a Samish-Sex one. The fact that he took a controversial topic and boiled it down to a
number may be offensive to some people. The thing about satire is that it has to be sharp,
sarcastic, and rude to some extent. It has to be offensive enough to catch the audiences
attention, but not too much that it completely offends the readers and turns them away from the
piece. Saunders has found a good balance by being sarcastic with his offensive remarks; which
makes them seem rude, but they are actually false.
Last, but certainly not least, My Amendment is effective satire because it is subversive
and has an implied call to action. The most important thing that satire does is it makes fun of the
established system, instead of the usual victims. Instead of mocking homosexuals, Saunders
ridicules those who are against them. Also, at the end of his article, when Saunders promotes a
call to action to ban Samish-Sex Marriage, he implies exactly the opposite. He says, I, for one,

Rossman 4
am not about to stand by and let that happen. (Saunders) By imitating an exaggerated antiSame-Sex Marriage person throughout the article, he is hinting that we need to stop this behavior
and legalize Same-Sex Marriage.
Although My Amendment has many strong satirical elements, it may lose its effect
because the satire is rather obscure. Saunders never actually tells us his side in his article,
making it seem like he is against Same-Sex Marriages. Satire is always sarcastic, as mentioned
before, but it has to be recognizable by the audience. If not, it can be too believable, which leads
to the argument being lost. Saunders says in an interview that after publishing his article, many
people did not recognize his work as satire (Identity Theory). He got multitudes of angry emails
asking why he would mock homosexuals and gender stereotypes in such a way. However,
Saunders was doing just the opposite. If you were to read My Amendment without knowing it
was satire, you most likely would not realize that. Although you can see the satirical elements in
this article once you know that it is satire, without knowing, the argument is lost.
Satire is a delicate form of writing, because it can easily go wrong if not done correctly.
Because Saunders used many techniques that define his article as satire, he effectively built an
argument out of a humorous article. Not only was satire an effective way for Saunders to argue
that America should legalize Same-Sex Marriage, it was also a unique and unusual way for him
to display his voice in his writing.

Rossman 5

Works Cited
"Gay Marriage Timeline - Gay Marriage - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web.
15 Sept. 2016.
"George Saunders - Author Interview - Identity Theory." Identity Theory. N.p., 2012. Web. 15
Sept. 2016.
Saunders, George. "MY AMENDMENT." The New Yorker. N.p., 2004. Web. 15 Sept. 2016.