There were no parameters set for this debate in terms of...
Feminism
As per the rules of the debate as set by my opponent, this will be my final argument. Since my opponent has failed to formulate a response, I see little need to elaborate much on my previous post. I will merely offer a brief summary of my arguments and this debate as a whole. My opponent claims that feminism is an incorrect argument. While I don't consider feminism an argument, I accepted the debate under these terms so I will argue as such. My opponent has offered nothing but an unsupported opinion regarding what he believes is feminism; a term of which he seems to lack a full understanding. There were no parameters set for this debate in terms of a place in which we were arguing, yet my opponent seems to have focused his argument purely on feminism in the United States. In fact, he basically concedes the debate by stating "in 1st world countries such as the USA, there should be no such thing as a feminist. The same can not be said for 3rd world countries, where women rights have not been established and women often have to be near a man to go anywhere in the city." Had we focused this debate on USA or first world countries alone, that statement would not be considered a concession, but the fact that we did not specify those terms shows that my opponent agrees that feminism is at least necessary in some places. Now let's ignore the fact that Con conceded the debate already and pretend we were just addressing first world countries. Con offers no sources to show that equality now fully exists, nor does he provide and decent explanation as to why feminism should disappear once success has been found. The fact of the matter is, inequality between the sexes still exists, as I showed in my previous round, and even once equality is reached here, feminism will still be important to help maintain that equality and to help spread the ideology throughout the countries where help is needed. Finally, if my arguments and sources are not enough to convince the reader, the fact that Con has only provided one poorly written paragraph backed by no sources, merely opinions, followed by a forfeited round, should be enough to win me this debate. I would like to thank the readers for taking the time to read this debate.