• CON

    One analogy I heard was "that's like saying someone who...

    Feminism is currently helping us reach gender equality in 1st world countries

    You are aware in this debate you are supposed to be arguing in favor of feminism right? Anyways did you even read my argument? Well I have about 7.8 thousand characters left so I may as well expand on my arguments. A lot of the ways feminists defend their movement when someone brings up the issues men face is by saying either 1. That feminism helps men's issues by destroying stereotypes. 2. That men's issues are completely separate from female issues. One analogy I heard was "that's like saying someone who cured breast cancer hates the effort to cure lung cancer". Well the reason why both of these defenses are simply wrong is because feminism doesn't just help solve men's issues or do nothing about them. Instead it makes the problem worse and the movement as a whole tries to stop anything from being done about male issues. For example, consider this article/video: http://www.avoiceformen.com... In this video there is a woman who talks about her efforts to bring awareness to men's issues is shut down and censored by Feminists. Clearly Feminism, as a whole, is not helping us solve men's issues. As I stated before it is making the problem worse. Now a lot of people (probably feminists) will refute this and say "Well not all feminists are like that"or "They aren't true feminists". The thing is I am asking the question of whether the movement as a whole is helping society, not if all feminists are bad. Also the thing about saying they are not true feminists is that people like them represent the face of feminism. They are usually the ones who control the policy in place, they control the movements and they control what the movement actually changes. A perfect example of how feminist policy has hurt society and driven us further from equality can be found here: http://www.avoiceformen.com... . This article by Karen Straughan talks about how once domestic violence (Let's us DV for short) started getting public attention there were two main approaches to solve the problem. One of them saw it as gender neutral and likely had external problems causing it such as mental illness, stress and alcohol/drug problems. Importantly this approach saw both males and females as victims and perpetrators. To put it simply this approach had no gender bias. This was lead by a woman named Erin Pizzey. She founded the first battered women's shelter. What she found while running her shelter was 60% of the women were as violent or even more violent than the men they were fleeing. And then there's the second approach, the feminist one. This model says that men are always the violent ones and are beating their partners to oppress them and to make their partners fear them. This model is based on what is called "patriarchy theory". This model became entrenched and seen as the most common and correct model by law enforcement, social workers and judges. This model is adopted by many of the 1st world, western countries including the US, Canada and the UK. In other words this model is the status quo. Despite being seen as the model that fits almost every case of domestic violence, in reality, it makes up the smallest minority of cases. The feminist model overtook the more benevolent model ran by Erin Pizzey, despite Pizzey's model being far more accurate and helpful. The feminist model has resulted in male victims of DV being seen as a joke and offered little to no help. Feminism did not help the issue. Feminism made the problem worse. Feminism is not helping 1st world countries reach gender equality, hence the resolution. As Karen Straughan put it, "If society was feminists, and blacks were men, they would scream ever louder that blacks are the primary offenders and that other races almost never commit such crimes, that the crime itself stems from "toxic, hegemonic blackness", they would ignore the evidence, suppress the evidence, intimidate or shun researchers who produce the evidence, engage in threats of violence against researchers who publish the evidence, and continue their attempts to entrench their view of blackness being integral to said crime into legislation and policy." To put what she said in other words: The way feminists view men and women in DV is dangerously similar to how racist whites view blacks in crime in a way that justifies systematic oppression. The women Erin Pizzey I recently talked about was terrorized by Feminists for questioning their model and saying it was wrong. She was protested and threatened by Feminists. She had to have a police escort where ever she went because of Feminists. She was instructed to have her mail re-directed to the bomb unit to ensure her house would not be blown to smithereens. The result of this terror peaked when her family dog was shot. As a result she fled the country. All of that just for saying women can be just as violent as men and that Feminists are wrong. Just for saying men can be victims too she was terrorized to the point of her fleeing the country. Countless Feminists view men as monsters and women as the princesses that need to be rescued from their violent captors. They reject the evidence and suppress those who speak out against them. As a result of Feminist policy men have been denied the rights as people, just because they are men and Feminist policy treats men like monsters. DV policy isn't even the only case. In Feminist rape policy all men are treated like possible rapists even though the reality is only a tiny percent of the population commits almost all rapes. So allow me to conclude, Feminism is not helping us reach gender equality in 1st world countries because feminism itself does not treat the genders equally. Feminism treats women as the superior, harmless gender while Feminism treats men as sub-human monsters. Does that sound equal to you?