However since they refuse to apologize they are denying that their expression should have not offended anyone. The type of justification demonstrated in this article is denial of victim. Brad is aware of the statements he has made and although he understands they can backlash on him and the Conservative party he refuses to apologize. “He’s hurting the Conservative Party of Canada” (Smith 2017:1). He expresses his position that he had the right to say such statements about homosexuals and these comments were permissible because gays deserved the injury, since their sexual activities were not moral. This article relates to the thoughts of Scott and Lyman as they discuss in their articles under deny to injury that acts such as these are permissible since the victim deserves the injury, as they are involved in roles that are not viewed upon as acceptable in society. Homosexuals have still not been accepted thoroughly by everyone and the hatred can be evidently seen by Brad Trost, who is a member of the Conservative …show more content…
This assignment gave me the opportunity to explain what the term meant to me before what the dictionary presented and by that I was able to connect it to certain areas of my life. I was also able to learn the different terminology used by interactionists, which is accounts and the two types of accounts. This assignment also gave me the freedom to look for articles of my interest and apply them to the concepts. The hardest part of this assignment was finding the perfect article but once I did, it was fairly easy. I learned how to connect the accounts with the articles, which made me understand it better. Overall I enjoyed working on this assignment as I gained more knowledge of how to break down articles and how to analyze