args

Feminism Isn't Actually for Women's Rights.

Thank you for that! Also, oops. Terribly sorry. I suppose I misunderstood. I guess the last round also must have passed over my head...? Anyways, I will now take this time for rebuttals to your arguments - I guess this kind of messes with the structure of the debate, but we'll go with it. (1) Feminism is necessary because men are not victims as often as women. (1a) There are many fields and layers of society in America where both men and women equally suffer, or where one suffers more than the other. In legal institutions, men tend to be more victimized than women of injustices stemming from their anatomical sex. For instance, in custody dispute cases, men tend to be viewed as womanizers and as the aggressor; whereas women tend to be viewed as fragile, weak, and as dependent on the legal system. Therefore, in accordance with social norms as well as gender appropriation, women tend to be aided more by the system with biases because they are viewed as unable to protect themselves without some means of affirmative action. However, this is changing, and therefore demonstrates that men do not necessarily require any assistance in this particular field or an expansion of their "rights". An article by Villainous Company perfectly describes it with numerous studies across a few states in America; the results were chilling and bore a stark contrast with public perception on the issue. For instance, in their first study (Massachusetts), 2100 cases were analyzed where fathers wanted to dispute in court for custody of their children. 29 percent of fathers got primary custody, where only 7 percent of women got primary custody. That is a large gap. Women clearly need assistance in legal institutions, contrary to popular belief. Therefore, I ask that you dispel the notion that women do not need feminism. (1b) Several sources across the internet have reported that men are raped more often than women - when accounting for all prison assaults. However, accounting for street harassment and sexual violence faced by women, statistics have shown that women are raped 5.6 times more often that are men. During wartime, rape also disproportionately affects women, whereas men are considerably less victimized by rape. This is all explained by the Women Under Siege Project's article. The rape culture surrounding men also only tends to be sharp during times of war, but the average is sustained as 1 in every 71 men in the U.S, according to an article by Wikipedia. According to the same article, in 2013, 28 percent of heterosexual and 48 percent of bisexual women were raped - and that was between the ages of 11 and 17 alone. These figures are substantially higher. (2) Radical feminism does not represent the whole movement. (2a) It is undeniable that radical feminists - those who wish to institute a matriarchy into society - do exist. However, it is not true that these people represent the entire movement. The distinction to draw comes down to two categories of feminism; one is 'radical feminism' and the other is 'liberal feminism'. Radical feminism seeks to install a matriarchy - a society where women are dominant and men are subordinate. The reason for this demand is two things; 1) the general distaste for men because of objectification and 2) the current society where men are institutionally superior to women. While this theory is wrong, it has some sentiment shared with liberal feminism, which is expressed in a much less extremist fashion. Liberal feminism seeks to implement legal policy which diminishes biases and stigmas faced by men or women stemming from their anatomical sexes. The following quote from 'Radical vs. Liberal Feminism' perfectly reflects this general concept, "Liberal feminism is rooted in the belief that women as well as men are rights bearing, autonomous human beings". Once more, liberal feminism demands that all genders are treated equally within a given society, whereas radical feminism demands the institutionalized supremacy of women over men. (2b) It is true that feminism is losing its popularity, where only 20 percent of women openly support the movement. But there are many factors to take into account; for one, there is a severe radicalization occurring over the internet. People often perceive feminism's ambitions because of radicals on Tumblr and other social media outlets, and therefore conclude the movement is the same. This scrutinizes even just the name of the movement, and surely discourages people from joining it. But there is also the fact that feminism is an opposition to the status quo, and those who reap the benefits will often socially suppress opposition to their means. Those above - mainly within corporate America - will pay politicians to run campaign platforms that pertain to their interests - especially when their privileges are being questioned. This also pushes people away from the movement; propaganda and the fact that the movements are gagged by media and other important ways people communicate. (2c) Feminism is not just advocating for gender equality within the United States, but generally within the world. Just because there are feminists in America does not mean they only serve the interests of American women. Conditions faced by women within the Middle East only goes to show that there is a global need for feminism and its corresponding legislative implementations. Forced genital mutilation upon women across various countries, particularly within Africa, are the kinds of things that empower feminism. There is still a global struggle for women. Just as for instance, LGBT Rights Movements would also be vocal about the conditions LGBT community members face in other nations where they are under harsher conditions (i.e Middle East, Africa). You made the following talking points that I would like to individually refute. 1. Women have the right to genital integrity in America? Of course they do. Unlike with men, it is not necessarily feasible to demand that your daughter be circumcised, considering nothing of interest or particular significance would linger there to be cut. With men, that's a different case entirely. But this is also omitting the underlying concept behind circumcision; when a man has no foreskin, it reduces discomfort, enables them to clean themselves easier, and decreases risk of infection (i.e smegma). 2. Selective Service does not quite mean men are absolutely required to join the military if the government sees fit. The draft, a system wherein people are sent to war by force, no longer exists because it is not seen as constitutional. Forcing people to fight and die for America's [fraudulent] causes does not particularly seem reasonable nor within the basic human rights of our citizens. Therefore, there really is no right to complain about Selective Service, although I personally would say that neither men nor women should have to register in it. Sources Cited: (1a) http://www.villainouscompany.com... (1b) https://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.womenundersiegeproject.org... (2a) https://apakistaninotebook.wordpress.com...