args

The rise of feminism has negatively impacted relationships

Oh man, have I been barking up the wrong tree. It seems my opponents premise was referring to society as a whole, and so free will has no real place in this debate, boy is my face red!!!!! Ya, because society is made up of a mass of preprogrammed mandroids who have no control over social attitudes. And since we have no control over social attitudes, then we must not have control over how social attitudes affect our individual relationships (assuming we have individual relationships, because my opponent has proven that all of our relationships are a public matter and we have no control over it on an individual basis). I should have read his premise more thoroughly, then I would have noticed the word "society" was clearly present. Sorry for the misunderstanding!!! Just in case you didn't realize, this entire paragraph is sarcasm! All of a sudden, this debate is meaningless on an individual basis and only refers to society as a whole!?! If I may quote my opponent here "my opinion has been formed over an eight year relationship with marriage and two children and I think its hard for anyone to have a legitimate opinion on these matters without such an experience; not that this experience gives you the right opinion, I am not suggesting I am right because of my experience. My relationship experience has taught me however, to get back on track, that women are better suited to childcare and housekeeping. My partner takes far more pride in appearance than I do, and this is common across the board, she loves furnishings, decoration and patterns, to make the house look attractive: she will dress the kids smartly and always dislikes how I dress them: she will sit for ages and clean their ears, pick spots, etc and has the patience to play for prolonged periods and be comforting." ***************Ummm, this all sounds like some very personal information and my opponent admits that it is his personal experience that has formed his opinion. My opponent began his argument from the basis of his relationship, but out of nowhere claims that this debate has nothing to do with individual relationships and it only pertains to society as a whole. I remain categorically unconvinced. You need to try harder to convince me that social attitudes affect my relationship more so than I am able to!! I fail to see what point my opponent is trying to make when he talks about "the influence of technological, social and interlectual factors. He claims that these factors take place outside of the individuals control. Of course they do! Beside our bodily functions, ALL factors take place outside of our control. As individuals, we choose to react to these factors. Our choice is still the defining factor here!! What technological factors is my opponent talking about anyway? Is he trying to claim that we are being controlled by our phones and tablets and laptops? It is our CHOICE to engage in technology, it is our choice to let certain information influence us on our additudes. I don't know of any technology that physically drills ideas and attitudes into our head without our consent, and if this technology does exist, I would recommend not using it. Just a suggestion though, it's your choice in the end! I question my opponents idea on the "natural order of things" concept, and I question how "relationship satisfaction" has anything to do with egalitarian attitudes. Is my opponent suggesting that what society thinks about our relationship is the dominant factor for "relationship satisfaction"? If consenting adults enter into a relationship, then the feelings they have or do not have for each other is the dominant factor. If these adults are affected by egalitarian additudes, then it's their choice to let these things affect their relationship. My opponents acceptance of a "natural order" seems to be a more disruptive additude than egalitarian or feminist additudes. When people use phrases like "natural order", what they're really doing is denying that social attitudes change or progress at all, and they label any shifts in additudes as deviance. They deny progress is a real thing, all it is to them is deviation, but denying progress is like denying that the wind blows. Whether you accept it or not, it's still going to happen. Like my opponent pointed out, we've changed from a farm based society to an industrial society, that's progress! I get the sense that my opponent thinks that womens new found sense of self is unprecedented and goes against the natural order of society. If that were true, we would not have the word matriarch. There have been societies where women were held in high regard and some claim they were dominant. Even in European and African cultures women could be queen, they were not specifically barred from that, and in light of this, it makes me wonder what my opponent means by the "natural order of things". I challenge my opponent to clarify his view of the "natural order" of society.