args

Feminism is beneficial to Western society.

Prologue Unfortunately, Pro has not been able to post her opening argument. However, I will not refrain from arguing this round. I am not against the advocacy of equality; if anything, refer to me as an egalitarian. However, the reasons why I am personally against feminism will appear in this argument. This will mainly consist of how the feminist campaign produce, and advocate false arguments to further their privileges. For this reason, it is detrimental to society. Arguments Wage Gap A very popular argument among feminists is the wage gap. This is however, not argued correctly. The argument normally assumes the following form: P1: There is a gap from the average, overall earnings between males and females P2: This is due to gender discrimination in the workplace C: The wage gap is caused by gender discrimination in the workplace This may appear valid, but it is impossible for feminists to deem premise two with decent veracity... To keep this argument short, I will post a popular article posted by a feminist, and I invite Pro to do the same. Nevertheless, all arguments that relate to the aforementioned syllogism, boil down to the same falsity; no empirical evidence to assert the cogency of premise two. This source was produced by Lisa M. Maatz, who is arguing the validity of this syllogism. As a defense of premise one she states: "For the last decade, median earnings for women working full time, year-round have been just 77% of men’s earnings" (1) Despite this being a bare assertion, I will help her out with premise one: " 2010 the median income of FTYR workers was $42,800 for men, compared to $34,700 for women. The female-to-male earnings ratio was 0.81" (2) So, premise one is now valid. Alright, now for the entire argument to be sound, premise two must be valid as well. As a defense of premise two, she states: well... Nothing. Well, she did mention one case that happened in 2003. However, this commits the anecdotal fallacy; just because one woman experienced unequal pay, does not verify that the entire wage gap is due to discrimination. Since premise two, lacks validity, the argument itself is not sound. I affirm that this is the case for all of the arguments that assume the syllogism. I invite my adversary to post as many sources she likes to corroborate premise two. All of the sources appear to commit an unwarranted assumption fallacy. That being said, I will now provide sufficient evidence to debunk the wage gap entirely: This source produced by CONSAD Research Corporation, deduces that the wage gap is in fact due to: "Agreater percentage of women than men tend towork part-time. Part-time work tends topay less than full-timework" "Agreater percentage of women than men tend toleave the labor force for child birth, childcare and elder care. Some of the wage gap isexplained by the percentage of womenwhowere not in the labor force during previousyears, the age of women, and the number ofchildren in the home. " "Women, especially working mothers, tend tovalue “family friendly” workplace policiesmore than men. Someof the wage gap is explained by industry and occupation, particularly,the percentage of women who workin the industry and occupation." (3) And this doesn't even mention all variables. That source is also corroborated by (4)(5)(6)(7) This pertains to the resolution, since it is unreasonable just to look at the definition and deduce that "equality is good, and since feminism wants equality, then feminism ought to be good". It's like looking at what the IRA sought for ( a united Ireland) and then deducing that the IRA must be good as well, despite them using violent forces to try and achieve what they wanted. For this reason, Pro cannot say that feminism cannot be detrimental to society just because of what feminism denotes; we ought to argue for, or against the feminist campaign. Rape Culture We all see the feminist campaign argue for rape. Another reason for feminism being detrimental to society is that, they seem to feed women false ammunition. They feed women the victim card, by extensively telling them how they are treated unfairly. Rape culture is one of these things. Yes, rape is bad. But, feminism seems to make it a thing, that women are the victims and men are the big bag wolfs. The real statistics are: "Along the CDC's report, the US census has recorded in 2011, in the United States, .052% of US women are forcibly raped annually". (8) This is far less then what feminism commonly asserts. In fact, from the same article, we can see men are the vast majority of homicide victims: "[Based on Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reports Supplementary Homicide Reports.]" It appears very apparent to me, that the severity of murder supersedes the severity of rape. And, if one were to factor in prison rapes, there is a clear indicator that men can be raped more than women. (9)(10) Feminists, nor the feminist campaign advocate for less "male homicides"; this is a double standered that seems to go unnoticed... Gender Roles Men and women all had their own stations... Women were generally the care takers, and men did the food-getting, the working etc. Feminism advocates that basic gender roles are sexist to females, because they assert women are just as capable of doing the jobs as males. Albeit, some women were able to do the tasks that men could, but naturally, sexual dimorphism dictates that men are the "stronger" gender. (11) If we were to apply this feminist logic to literally any other topic, we can deduce that male ducks are sexist, because they are more colourful than female ducks. Because men are genetically stronger than females, they were the more suitable gender to part take in the more muscle-demanding tasks. Gender roles isn't sexist; it is basic biology. In fact, the same logic can be reversed - gender roles are also against men, because they are not as suitable to take the caring tasks. The argument is moot and completely unecessary. All laws constitute that gender is not a factor when determining who gets the job, pay, privileges etc. (12)(13) Unnecessary Advocation of an Increased Amount of Rights and Privileges I postulate that women have more legal rights, and social privileges than their male counterparts (14). This source proposes 5 rights that women have, that men don't. Men are systematically circumcised in many countries without consent, whereas, women can keep their genital integrity. To vote, men must give their life to the draft if needed. A woman can have abortions, and a man cannot without her consent. Women are assumed caregivers for children, because they are women. Women can cry "rape" falsely, with infinitesimally small legal repercussions. Not to mention numerous privileges (15). My fiftheenth source cites around 60 major privileges that women have over their male counterparts. And after all this, feminism still claims that women need more rights than males. There is equality; feminism is unnecessary; women do not need any more rights, nor privileges. How I Fulfilled my Burden of Proof 1. The feminist campaign produces false statistics 2. The feminists feed women false ammunition 3. The feminist campaign make situations problematic for no apparent reason 4. Women have all necessary rights and privileges The first point is axiomatic in terms of detrimental effects on society. They produce false arguments about the wage gap, to affirm that women are treated unfairly. The second point is that they extensively tell women there is inequality when there isn't. They are told that they are constantly that they are the vast majority of victims of rape etc. whilst they ignore statistics about the detriments of males. The third point is apparent when you consider the gender roles argument. There isn't a prolem with gender roles, yet they twist it around to make it seem like there is a problem - it is simple biology - sexual dimorphism. The fourth and final point is that women have all the necessary rights as males - even more rights than males, yet still expect more. This is in turn, detrimental and unneccesary in society. If I, as Con, fulfill my burden of proof, I negate the resolution. Therefore, I win the argument. Closing Statements I would post more arguments, but I have ran out of characters. Hopefully Pro can appear for round three, and we can have a decent argument. Good luck to you Pro for the next round and the remainder of the argument, and thanks for instigating this topic. My spell checker is buggy, so if there are any spelling mistakes, I apologize. Citations (1) http://www.forbes.com... (2) http://www.bls.gov... (3) http://www.consad.com... (4) http://www.huffingtonpost.com... (5) http://www.forbes.com... (6) http://www.cbsnews.com... (7) http://billmoyers.com... (8) http://www.census.gov... (9) https://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com... (10) http://www.dailymail.co.uk... (11) http://en.wikipedia.org... (12) http://www.equalityhumanrights.com... (13) http://www.eeoc.gov... (14) http://thoughtcatalog.com... (15) https://mensresistance.wordpress.com...