I am taking the position that feminism is necessary for...
Feminism is Necessary
I am taking the position that feminism is necessary for women at this point in time. I will allow my opponent to go first.
Pro vs. con view
Pro vs. con view
Topic space view
PRO
-
PRO -
PRO Joke: What's the difference between a Feminist and a gun?...
Modern Feminism Actually Works
Now let's see here. On the topic of Feminism. Why go con against this? There is ALOT of proof to support the fact that Feminism works and is still alive..... Joke: What's the difference between a Feminist and a gun? ANSWER: A gun only has one trigger.
-
PRO However, we cannot confuse the essence of something with...
Is feminism needed in today's society
My opponent doesn't mention maintenance of equality in his last speech. Thus, my argument about having people still maintain the feminism ideology in order to maintain the equality of the status quo is extended. Cold conceded. Con gives a definition. prefer my definition because my opponent does not have a citation for where it comes from and they didn't mention it R2. Next, he completely ignores my comment about how the feminist movement is not necessarily a push, but maintaining equality which is entailed by the definition. Extend the arg. Saying feminism is about female supremacy contradicts the definition. Feminism in essence is equality of both sexes. My opponent then keeps on bringing up how feminists have misplayed the essence of feminism, I agree. However, we cannot confuse the essence of something with how people interpret it. For example, if someone were christian and decided to shoot up a clinic, we cannot say this is Christianity. Shooting up clinics is not doctrine
-
PRO Of course, this is not merely limited to pay. ... [1]...
Feminism! Hooray!
A quick prologue point - I take it as read that we both support the notion of equality. As you noted in the comments 'I understand that the idea of feminism is somewhat relevant to creating a better world' and 'being a good person and fighting purely for the equal treatment of the sexes is one thing'. ~ To begin I would like to posit two major themes to demonstrate why feminism remains necessary and why the positives of the broad feminist movement outweigh any perceived negatives. I will then go into greater depth citing examples to flesh out both of these arguments: 1. While gains have been made by, and on the behalf, of women this process is and remains incomplete. 2. Those gains that have been made require a feminist movement to prevent "reaction" ('resistance or opposition to a force, influence, or movement; especially : tendency toward a former and usually outmoded political or social order or policy'[1]) by those who would seek to undo socio-political and cultural developments which have led to the creation of a more equitable society. ------- 1. The gains made by feminism, as a movement, are historically well established. The suffrage movement of the 19th century after over half a century of campaigning succeeded in ensuring that women had the right to vote in every state in 1920. By the 1960s feminism had taken on wider social objectives beyond merely concern with the franchise. Some of the successes of the Second Wave of feminism include important support for the Civil Rights Movement, but most presciently, equal pay. These can be seen in land mark legislation including the Equal Pay Act of 1963 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Of course, these battles have yet to be fully won. In 2009, in the USA, women's pay remained only 77% of male pay. This is a vast improvement on the position in 1980 where it was only around 60%, by 1990 it stood at 71.6% and in 2000 73.7%. This highlights two important points worth observing.[2] First, that feminism was and remains a movement which is actively making society more equitable. Second, despite those gains, a 23% point difference in pay indicates that this process has yet to be fully achieved. This suggests that continued social pressure is necessary to ensure that society will be still more equitable in future. Of course, this is not merely limited to pay. Various employment sectors remain gendered 'spheres'[3]. Academia, for instance, despite being recognised as a generally 'liberal' and 'progressive' profession, remains deeply gendered in its hierarchy. To take academic medicine as an example, despite 47% of graduates and 46% of residents being female only 21% of full professors are women. Still more concerning, only 15% of department chairs are women.[4] Third Wave feminism, with its origins in the 1990s, now orientates feminism to also strive to resolve crucial cultural concerns which are also absolutely relevant in 2015. These include highlighting otherwise 'hidden' social problems such as (but by no means limited to): - Gender violence and domestic abuse, both of which disproportionately negatively affect women's lives. It is estimated that one in four women will experience domestic violence in their lives and that each year 2.3 million women will suffer at the hand of their partner. However, since feminist groups began to highlight this problem in the 1990s, and offered support to women who have suffered abuse, women have felt more able to come forward and report acts of domestic violence. This has had a two-fold effect, first, as a society we have become more aware of the problem and are thus able to tackle it. Second, because these women have been able to call on established support groups the associated costs and pressures on local, regional and national services has been offset. This has been estimated to have saved $14.8bn between the passing of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 and the year 2000. Thus, not only is a vocal feminist movement highlighting this problem, it is bringing respite to beleaguered victims of violence and also much needed relief to social support services which has significant economic benefit.[5] - Challenges culturally malevolent and socially constructed patriarchal modes of thought which had previous been normative. Not only do these modes of thoughts harm and restrict women but they also harm and restrict men. The notion that it is the male role to be a breadwinner and a woman's to bear, rear and nurture children has no relevance in modern society. Multiple historical and contemporary examples exist to demonstrate this. For instance, in Britain during the Second World War, millions of women directly contributed their labour to the war effort, including over 600,000 employed in the armed forces. The notion that heavy, industrial and intellectual work was the preserve of men, and that women are best suited to domestic and sexualised roles, was conclusively and empirically disproved. Nevertheless, these kinds of socially constructed gender stereotypes continue to inform contemporary thinking and inform how we view the world from a very early age.[6] This, I contend harms both men and women. It holds many women back from making as full a contribution to modern society as they otherwise might, and it also places pressure on men to behave in ways that do not necessarily suit them. Why, for example, should it be deemed 'abnormal', beyond the statistical point, for a man to stay at home and raise children (or perhaps only have a part-time job) while the mother of his children is the primary household breadwinner? [For anybody reading, I realise that this is an unduly cis-gendered and hetronormative familiar relationship I describe] Contemporary feminism has brought, and continues to bring, these kinds of issue to wider social attention. 2. [And I'll keep this short and snappy] The gains made by feminism are by no means guaranteed, and without an active feminist 'voice' within society, they can be easily eroded. And there are concrete examples of this, ranging from the recent gamergate storm-in-a-teacup to reproductive rights. For instance, and not to get into a debate about abortion but this is important, Roe vs Wade has been under sustained attack. In 2006 South Dakota attempted to ban abortion in all cases except where the "mother's" life was in danger. I don't want to go into a lengthy screed on the reasons why I support the right for women to control their own bodies. If you're interested then I broadly agree with Judith Jarvis Thompson's 'Violinist analogy'. [7] Conclusion In very brief, I have cited some examples where feminism has clearly helped take progressive steps to make society more equitable. I have also shown that the work on this front is yet to be completed, and that a viable feminist movement needs to further work towards this goal and keep it centre stage in public discourse. Moreover, those gains that have been made are not, at least without defence from feminists, far from 'safe'. Thanks a lot. I look forward to your counter-thesis. [1] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [2] http://www.iwpr.org... [3] http://en.wikipedia.org... [4] https://www.aamc.org... [5] http://nnedv.org... [6] http://ashatenbroeke.nl... [7] http://spot.colorado.edu...
-
PRO Now, this society (the United States in particular) is...
Feminism is not an ideology of equality
Feminism has morphed into a misbegotten ideology whose only purpose is to rally people behind a bigoted cause: that women are the oppressed party in every scenario, and we should pander to them whenever they cry that their feelings are hurt or that they are the victim in court cases. It has also nuked the fridge on the idea of the patriarchy and 'rape culture'. Without a doubt, patriarchy would have been an appropriate description of society 200 years ago. Even 50 years ago you could make the case for a patriarchy existing. Now, this society (the United States in particular) is not a patriarchal one. Feminism had utility in the early 1900's, when women really were oppressed and rallying behind a figurehead and standing up for their rights was exactly what was required, and perhaps heavily Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia could do with a healthy dose of that kind of feminism, but certainly not the kind of 'Punch Men', politically correct, Tumblr-feminism that has taken hold of people in the United States.
-
PRO The ideology of humanism covers all human matters. ......
Humanism is a better ideology then Feminism
I wish you luck in this debate. I will begin by going over the definition of humanism and feminism. Humanism: An outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems. Feminism: The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men. The ideology of humanism covers all human matters. It protects men, women, animals, our planet, our technology, our sciences, the actions we humans do, and so much more. Feminism claims to be for equality, but if they were for equality, why is it that Feminists and the M.R.A. (Men's Rights Movement) are so opposed to each other? The M.R.A. fights for equality, and feminism CLAIMS to. So if they really fought for equality, why wouldn't they be allied? I'll just leave that initial argument there to start up a conversation.
-
PRO Con will outline his beliefs in the first round and from...
Feminism is useless in the west now.
I firmly believe feminism has outlived it's usefulness in society and no longer has any use in the western world. Con will outline his beliefs in the first round and from there the debate will progress through 2 more rounds with the second and third rounds revolving around our reasons and any factual evidence we may have. To clarify this arguement concerns feminism in its current 3rd wave form in the western world so third world countries have nothing to do with this debate and neither does the past waves of feminism giving women the right to vote and etc. I already accept that those were necessary and thus they have nothing to do with this debate.
-
PRO A study found that "one out of every 3.8 television...
Modern Feminism
Definitions- Feminism: "advocating social, political, legal, and economic rights for women equal to those of men." Rape Culture: "a complex set of beliefs that encourage male sexual aggression and supports violence against women. A rape culture condones physical and emotional terrorism against women as the norm." These definitions will be sufficient for both sides of the debate. I will not accept other definitions. Good luck. Feminism may not always be relevant. It may not always have a place in society. There may come a day when feminism is a thing of the past. But that day is not today. That day is not tomorrow, or next week, or six months from now. Now, feminism is a necessary idea of empowerment, of strength and sisterhood. It is relevant in every country around the world including the so advanced and so equal United States. You see, feminism is not simply an idea that protects women who are treated as slaves by their husbands. Feminism is a belief that all people are created equal and deserve to be treated as such. I will agree that women in the United States are far better off than women in many Middle Eastern countries. But if for a single moment you believe women are treated equally, you, sir, are the problem. The actual concept of feminism itself is often warped into the idea of female supremacy and "man-hating." Feminists are not seeking female domination. In America, we are only seeking equal rights. A 2015 study found, "The United States is no different, as women earn $0.77 to every $1 men earn for the same amount of work. Currently, women hold 99 of 535 seats (18.5 percent) in the 113th U.S. Congress; 20 of 100 seats (20 percent) in the Senate and 79 of 435 seats (18.2 percent) in the House of Representatives. The United States has never had a woman president. Also, women in the U.S. military account for only 14.5 percent of active-duty force." Women still lack equal representation in the halls of government in America. I would not call that equal. You state above that "there are people in other countries, such as Afghanistan, or china, where women legitimately are objectified and they are oppressed, here in the United States they have many rights,". I agree there are women in other countries who are oppressed. Women in the United States (generally) do not face the same types of hardships as women in other countries. But different does not mean less than. In the United States, the beauty ideal for women is so disproportionate and unhealthy that we actually have "Anna Rexia" Halloween costumes. A study found that "one out of every 3.8 television commercials sent some sort of 'attractiveness message' to the people who were watching. These messages are directed to the American consumer more often than not to sell a product but at the same time they are telling the consumer what is essential to be beautiful in American society." There are constantly billboards and advertisements showing off the ideal image of "beauty." Women are always bombarded with images of this. Women are picked apart constantly and told we aren't good enough. Twelve year old girls are checked out by 50 year old men. Men will unabashedly stare at a woman's breasts in normal conversation. Girls are sent home from school for wearing yoga pants because "it's distracting to the boys." Do not tell me women are not objectified when I have battled anorexia because I was 115 pounds and was told I was too fat. Do not tell me women are not objectified when my ten year old sister has been cat called. Do not tell me women in America are not objectified when every single day I see billboards, pictures, and advertisements on how to "perfect" myself for a man. Do not tell me this does not exist. You argue that "In the current day they act as if we are still in that day and age, when women get raped it's because someone who has serious mental issues was allowed that opportunity, some are under the influence of illicit drugs and or they're potentially more uncontrollable counterpart, alcohol. Not many men rape or even have thoughts of rape, nor any desire to do so. A simply hello or a casual comment that is meant in a flirtatious or even a courteous way does not signify or blow a whistle (that's ironic) signalling rape." A study conducted by the Washington Coalition of Sexual Assault Programs found, "Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes." Another study conducted by the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network found that "1 in 3 sexual assaults, the perpetrator was intoxicated — 30% with alcohol, 4% with drugs." Most rapists are not, in fact, intoxicated or under the influence. Two-thirds of all rapes in the United States are conducted by completely sober men. A casual greeting or a whistle on the street may seem trivial to you, but to women, it is a warning sign. Generally, men who are interested in getting to know a woman to actually get to know her are not whistling at her on the street. They are not shouting crude comments to her as she passes. These actions are frightening, not flattering. I do not find it flattering when a random man on the street tells me he wants to "f*ck me." Feminism is the fight for decency and respect towards women. It is the fight against mindsets like yours that protect rapists and turn a blind eye. It is the fight to spread awareness for the oppression we feel, even if it is different from that of women in the Middle East. It is the fight to be treated with respect. Your last argument states,"'Rape culture' is not a real thing". Rape culture is the acceptance and perpetuation of violence and sexualization towards women. It includes (but is not limited to) jokes, music, advertising, video games, laws, and even words that support violence and the subordination of women. I'll give an example. Though many do not know the root of the word, "hysterical" has a very dark and bloody past. It can be traced back to the late 4th-early 5th centuries. The root "hyster/o" refers to the uterus (hysterectomy is surgical removal of the uterus). Often, the word hysterical was used to describe women who were upset, blaming her emotions or "hysteria" on her uterus and her hormones. Women who supported the Declaration of Sentiments in the 19th century were called "hysterical" and forced to undergo a hysterectomy to rectify it. The continuation of this word perpetuates rape culture by saying, "She's just crazy because she has a uterus." It encourages violence and harm against women who stand up for themselves. This is the same with video games that allow rape. This is the same with laws that do not give women the same rights as men. This is the same with courts that protect rapists. Questions like "Well, what was she wearing?" perpetuate rape culture. We make excuses for rapists and ourselves instead of facing the problem and fixing it. We blame the victim so we don't have to blame ourselves for being a part of the problem. This is rape culture. Feminism is the belief this is wrong. It is the belief that we can change how we view and treat women. Feminism is essential in our current society because women are still not yet equal. We still teach girls never to leave a drink alone with a guy because he might roofie you. We teach girls never to walk home alone in case you are attacked. We teach girls to hold your key between your fingers in case you need to protect yourself. We teach girls that our education is less important that our male counterparts. We teach girls to cover up so we don't get blamed for their own rape. We teach girls not to get raped, instead of teaching boys not to rape. Until women are treated equally on paper and in the minds of people, feminism will still be necessary in America. http://www.wcsap.org... https://rainn.org... http://www.cw.ua.edu...-
-
PRO I'm sorry, I expressed myself wrong. ... Since you are...
Feminism is morally good
I'm sorry, I expressed myself wrong. I didn't mean you deliberately took my debate out of context by relating morality to abortion. What I wanted to say is that feminism doesn't necessarily defend abortion. While it is true that many feminists support abortion as a form of female right, there are many feminist pro-life organizations. In fact, the first feminists were totally against abortion. I myself was prepared for a debate on the morality of feminism, not abortion. Since you are not debating against equal rights (the basis for feminism), but against abortion, I feel the debate as I proposed it is no longer possible. This is why I am deciding to drop the debate.
-
PRO Feminism is frowned upon in society because people...
Feminism Is Needed in America Today
Feminism is necessary in America today because women are still far more disadvantaged than men. 91% of rape victims are female, and 1 out of every 6 women has been a victim of attempted or completed rape. Furthermore, women are also underrepresented in media despite being roughly half the population, with only 29% of protagonists and 37% of major characters being female in 2016's top 100 films in the US box office. Feminism is frowned upon in society because people misinterpret what it means - many people think that it calls for better rights for women over men, when it simply calls for gender equality. Feminism is necessary because it can be empowering for women, and it needs to exist so that men will be called upon to face the consequences of their sexism.
CON
-
CON It seems to have been repurposed, and that is what has...
Western feminism has failed
Well the debate is Western feminism has failed not modern feminism has failed. My opponent claims "Women now have equal rights, but feminism is still here. It seems to have been repurposed, and that is what has failed about it" this is not the case there is still huge amounts of discrimination directed towards women, and even today in western culture women are not treated as equal for example women currently only hold 5.2 percent of Fortune 500 CEO roles (1), new figures released 2 days ago by the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that, on average, full-time working women"s earnings are 17.1% less per week than full-time working men"s earnings (a difference that equates to $262.50 per week) (2), In Australia, 13 Australian women have reportedly been killed as a result of domestic violence in the first seven weeks of 2015, that"s almost two women per week, as opposed to 0 men (3). As it is obvious there is still a huge need for feminism as already stated feminism is the advocacy of equal rights between the sexes and as we may not be there yet feminism has certainly got society on track to getting equality for all and again has certainly not failed but there is indeed still more work ahead. source: 1. https://www.google.com.au... 2.https://www.wgea.gov.au... 3.http://www.womensagenda.com.au...
-
CON I lost all respect for feminists, and feminism in...
Feminism is morally good
I lost all respect for feminists, and feminism in general, once they embraced abortion. I believe abortion to be morally wrong; therefore, feminism, a movement that supports abortion, is morally wrong. This is the point i'll be arguing. I am entirely for equal rights.
-
CON But before I begin, I will concede that there are some...
Feminism Is Hypocritical and Sexist Against Men
I accept. It seems my opponent outlined their case, so I will do mine as well: Feminism is based around equality True feminism favors the person who deserves something, not on the basis of sex Feminism is helpful for both men and women. But before I begin, I will concede that there are some "feminazis", or people that take the name of feminism and go onto misandric hate-spewing talks. But this debate isn't about the select minority, or even the majority if feminazis were the majority, it's about the idea of feminism in and of itself. Good luck and I wish for an excellent debate.
-
CON As for the broad philosophy of feminism, I believe it is...
Modern Feminism Is Pointless
1) Yes, I've heard of the Jodi Arias case. What does that have to do with feminism, though? 2) "The feminist movement is putting the idea into people's minds that they are the victims." Huh? And later in that paragraph, you accuse ME of propagating a victim complex. Um, no. It is not my inherent womanhood that makes me a victim; I'm merely affected by external societal attitudes and roles imposed on me, and those attitudes and roles need to change. I wish you'd made it clear to me which subsect of feminism you wanted me to discuss. As for the broad philosophy of feminism, I believe it is important. Whether the movement is changing anything tangible nowadays is a different issue, but just because it isn't changing much doesn't mean that it's "pointless," as you put it. It's an important philosophy to keep in mind to eliminate discrimination. The things feminism opposes are not tangible and can be pretty tough to tackle. Feminists are working to get abortion legalized, provide rights for transgender people, and emphasize sexual consent and anti-rape sentiments in the public discourse. These are all things that improve people's lives. Wendy Davis attempted to block a law that would prohibit women's reproductive rights, a law providing transgender equality is coming to California in 2014, and the SlutWalks broadcasted anti-rape sentiments very clearly. Is everyone paying attention? Is society truly going to change due to this? Maybe they aren't, but even so, these strides are an improvement to SOME. We still have a way to go if equality is to be reached, and feminism does need a major overhaul after going awry in some ways. But the philosophy of feminism is necessary.
-
CON C. Hitchens 4. ......
Feminism is not sexist.
Intended to do this with a specific user, however, they have not responded yet, and i do not think they will, so i am opening up this debate. A few Rules before we begin: 1. We will be using the definition of feminism from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... states that "[Feminism is] The advocacy [or support thereof] of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes" 2. We will be using the definition of Sexism from http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... states that "[Sexism is] Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex." -I hope these terms are generally understood, however, i shall include links to the preferred webpage to use for the definition of these terms. -Prejudice: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...; -Stereotyping- http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...; -Discrimination: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...; -All of these are used in the verb form. *"typical" here is to be considered within the informal connotation, which suggests that Sexism is expected, or popularly associated with women, though not necessarily usually directed at women,* 3. All propositions must be supported, and sources must be utilized. "What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."- C. Hitchens 4. Logical Fallacies may be pointed out, but the truth or untruth of the conclusion must be independently assessed. (See the Fallacist's Fallacy here > http://www.logicalfallacies.info...) 5. I have presented the webpage that i used to produce these definitions. As such, they are not to be considered a debatable topic. Round 1 is to be used for Acceptance, and a brief statement of your position in relation to the resolution. Round 2 is to be used for Opening Arguments ; Rebuttals by PRO will be dismissed by myself and the audience, Round 3 is to be used for Rebuttals. Defense by PRO will be dismissed by myself and the audience. Round 4 is to be used for Defense, and a Cross Examination Question. Round 5 is for Closing Arguments. NO NEW ARGUMENTS MAY BE PRESENTED IN ROUND 5. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I shall present my brief statement in syllogistic form: 1. Any movement which actively supports bias towards, or against, a single group within the Legal, Social, and Political arenas. is discriminatory. 2. Any movement that does this on the basis of gender is sexist. 3. Feminism does this. C. Therefore, Feminism is sexist. I shall unpack this as this debate moves forward. This is simply a brief statement of what i intend to try to prove. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you wish to accept, comment with "I accept" and a paraphrase of the above resolution, THIS DEBATE IS IMPOSSIBLE TO ACCEPT.
-
CON Many anti-feminist's try and assert that because men are...
Humanism > Feminism
I accept this challenge. I will not be trying to argue that Feminism is greater than Humanism, instead I will be showing how they are equal and are essentially the same thing. First I will define terms so that we are on the same page: Feminism [1]- the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men Humanism [2]- an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems. Based on these definitions, we can already see a conflict with the scope both words are used for. One, Feminism, is more of a social construct while Humanism deals with humanity on a whole in a rational way. Pro's attempt at combining the two tells me that they believe Feminism is the assertion that women should be dominate and that Humanism is the belief in equality of all humans. In order to continue the argument in a rational way, I will address their belief about feminism. Feminism was an idea built on the notion that women have not been treated equally to men for quite a long time. They tend to point towards the subjects of Economic Opportunities, Social Expectations, and Sexual Expectations. Economic Opportunities- Simply put, women have not been afforded the same economic opportunities has their male counterparts for, at the very least, several centuries. They have been expected to only perform "woman" duties such as taking care of the house, the children, and the husbands needs even above their own. The notion of a working woman without a man to support her was an outrageous idea for quite a long time, and it still exists. Many anti-feminist's try and assert that because men are on average, physically stronger, physically bigger, and practically smarter (Practical being used to mean such things as Mathematics or Physical labor), they are more equipped to work and provide income than women. Feminism seeks to get rid of this idea that women are not suited to the same jobs that men have and there have been great successes so far, but there are still areas where a man would be chosen over a woman simply because she is a woman. Physical Labor jobs, running a corporation, holding a governmental position, etc. The pay of the women that DO work in the same areas as men are often lower [3] for no other reason than because of the gender difference. Social Expectations- Socially, women are expected to be emotional, irrational, physically incompetent, small, beautiful, and accepting. The more a woman go against these expectations, the more man-like she will appear, because of the notion that the opposite qualities are reserved for men only. A woman that likes to wear hats, jeans, no make-up, sneakers, and short hair will often be called a "tom-boy" in reference to her man-like, and thus un-ladylike, appearance. Women are essentially placed into a box of expectations and are ridiculed or defeminated, if they try to step out of that box. Yes, men have their own box, but that isn't the subject of this debate. Often, you will hear men say, "A man and a woman can't be real friends like two men can, because there will eventually be sexual feelings between the two". This, along with variations of that, are an example of the stereotype that have been infused within our society, so much so that men will often act in ways that are offensive toward women without ever realizing it; such as opening doors for them or assuming that they should carry the groceries. The social aspects of sexism towards women is a constant and complex battle with many variables to consider. Sexual Expectations- On average, women are expected to be sexy and to define their outward appearance to be a pleasing sight. A woman is looked down upon if she doesn't meet the criteria set by society, resulting in women being obsessed with their beauty. A woman is considered unattractive if she is: Fatter than acceptable, more muscular than acceptable, taller than acceptable, skinnier than acceptable, shorter than acceptable, etc. The narrow definition of what society views as "beautiful" forces women to try and conform to this almost impossible standard, lest they be considered ugly and distasteful looking. The result of this have been, overall, disastrous on both the physiological and emotional levels of the average woman. Evidence for this can be found when looking at the vast array of diet plans aimed almost exclusively at women, the vast array of make-up products, of age defying products, of clothing products, and many more. Women are expected to believe that if they don't strive to meet societies criteria of beauty, they are flawed and not being very lady-like. All of this beauty obsessed culture leads to the expectations of women in the dating and sexual scene. Women are typically expected to be demure and secretive with their sexual desires, they are expected to sit back and be courted by men. They are to be the prize men win after a lengthy competition with other men and the woman should save herself for the man that wins her over. In the bedroom, she is expected to be passive and giving, subservient to her man and willing to put his needs above her own. This can be seen when you notice that men typically will try and ejaculate first without ever thinking that the woman needs a release of her own. Feminism is not women hating on men and trying to be dominant, feminism is women trying to show men how they have been mistreated and that they demand to be treated equal to men in all regards, something which women do deserve. Hopefully this will show you how your definition of humanist coincides with what feminism really is. Sure, there are women who take it too far and believe feminism is about hating and insulting men, but they are the outliers and do not represent the feminist movement as a whole. Sources: [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2]http://en.wikipedia.org... [3]http://www.forbes.com...
-
CON While yes, the idea might have been solid in the 80's,...
Is feminism needed in today's society
My opponent claims that feminism is a movement trying to anchor equal rights when it's most entirely not. The definition I pulled about feminism was that "Feminism is a range of political movements, ideologies, and social movements that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve political, economic, personal, and social rights for women.". This nonsense is still taking place today which is why the debate has the question, is feminism needed in modern society. In modern society, a push for female rights (Or in this case, female supremacy) is utterly pointless. While yes, the idea might have been solid in the 80's, it's not needed in modern society. It has evolved into something much worse that you can't ignore. In many cases, the intention might've been good (Hitler trying to "save" his country by establishing a common enemy) the outcome was very bad and leads to a toppled society whether that be men fighting back and gaining more rights or women taking supremacy.
-
CON While this statement is not completely false it does have...
Feminism is useless in the west now.
"I firmly believe feminism has outlived it's usefulness in society and no longer has any use in the western world. " While this statement is not completely false it does have an issue with it, while i do believe that men are women are already equal in western societies in every way possible (if anything its arguable women have more rights nowadays) but it is not useless because when other women from countries like Saudi Arabia or somewhere in the middle east where women are not equal to men look for western countries and see how women are proud to be themselves voice their opinions strongly under a banner (feminism) they can put themselves under that same banner and rise above. while i understand that you "third world countries have nothing to do with this debate" written but it is a only valid reason that feminism in the west is still useful because they can look up to it. So my argument is, Feminism is useful because other people can look up to it, unite under a banner and feel powerful. By feel powerful what i mean is when any kind of person is in a group of people who you know are in the group because they share the same ideas (even though almost everyone agrees that both genders are equal) they feel empowered to share them and to be in that group.
-
CON However, even if i were to disobey the rules i set forth...
Feminism is about equality.
I would like to thank my opponent for her response, however, I do not accept the definition that she has provided. As stated in the first round, when i was laying out the rules for this debate: Definitions Feminism: Definition 1: the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes. Definition 2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests Equality: the quality or state of having the same rights, social status, etc. -from merriam-webster.com Burden of Proof will be shared. Above definitions are not subject to change. While i did explicitly state that Round Two is not for refutations, i find it strange that my opponent does not take into account the definition that i provided in my argument. I also find it strange that she does not provide any evidence to support her argument. Given that feminism is an ideology AND a form of activism, i presented a definition that would encompass both of these to further the goals of this debate. My opponent attempts to argue for only one piece of feminism. As with any ideology or philosophy, simply defining the ideology does not explain it's effects, nor does it actually express what the ideology actually expresses. Were I to state that "racism is a feeling of pride in one's nationality or ethnicity", that would not explain the results of said ideology. As the Burden of Proof is shared, i request that my opponent provide evidence of her position; simply defining a term "feminism" does not show that feminism is actually about equality, especially given the fact that (per merriam-webster.com) feminism can be referring to two separate ideas or topics. It seems to me that this is a fallacy of equivocation on the part of my opponent, as she conflates one definition of feminism to be the definition which we are to be debating, despite me having defined Feminism in Round One, as i was outlining the rules of this debate. The main reason i combined the definitions in my Opening Statement was to ensure that my opponent and myself had a reasonable definition of the term we are debating. However, even if i were to disobey the rules i set forth when outlining this debate, and allow the definition my opponent provided, my argument will still hold. **Using my opponents definition, rather than my own, my argument remains sound. Please go back and read the argument i have provided, you will see that this is true, as any legislation, organization, or people who "advocate for women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men" would be dubbed feminist by both my definition and her definition.** Despite this, i request that my opponent follow the rules of the debate as they are laid out. As she was unable to construct an argument, i would also like to request of her an Opening Statement. If any audience members/voters would be so kind as to allow this slight bending of the rules, it would be much appreciated. I do this in the hopes that my opponent will be able to provide evidence that supports her claim and position. There is not much for me to refute in her opening statement, as it is simply a re-definition of the term, an assertion that my definition is not applicable, and an assertion that i have not provided evidence that is contrary to the resolution "Feminism is about equality." If my opponent would be so kind as to provide evidence to support her claim, as well as give a refutation to my own claims from Round Two, i believe this debate may become more than a simple game of the meaning of words. I look forward to recieving a response from my oppenent, and thank her in advance.
-
CON But in my example with an established game like Mortal...
Feminism is ruining video games
Apologies for the very delayed response. I’ll try to be more punctual in the future. My opponent has proven his point that feminism is, in some shape or form, influencing video games. However, he fails to articulate, fully, the exact nature of his argument, which is that feminism is ruining video games. In order to prove this point, I’ve taken the liberty of highlighting a few of his quotes from his previous argument. 1. “But in my example with an established game like Mortal Kombat, they just decided to change the story drastically in favour of a female antagonist being the main hero.” My first question is how does feminism directly affect this? How can we assure it was feminism that caused this creative change and not the simplistic idealism of the team in charge of crafting this editions story? Secondly, what evidence is there that this creative change ruined the game? While it may have negatively impacted my opponent’s own gameplay, this does not mean that the majority of others felt the same way. Now, full disclosure, I am only somewhat familiar with the Mortal Combat series, so my reaction to this creative choice was not nearly as dramatic as others. However, the main point is that feminism may not have been the root of this change, which means feminism may not have ruined the game. 2. “The question I ask is why? I know its up to the developers of the game but was it needed for the story, or was it just for the sake of pandering to feminist women who always want a perfect female dominated story?” My opponent asks this question, which is the root of my argument: there is no knowledge if the root of the change was because of creative direction or feminism pandering. 3. “Its only an issue because feminist women are insecure, and that personal emotion bring the value down of the game.” This is a fact statement, therefore it needs credulity. If my opponent wishes to state such things, then they must fully support these assertions. 4. “Imagine if every game had to politically pander to a certain group, then stories won't be interesting, and lose the creativity and imagination that games are known for.” Yet again, my opponent assumes that political pandering is at the root for every change in video games that may be attributed to feminism. However, he continues to fail at properly stating why and how he knows this. 5. “Mainly what I am saying is that feminist feel entitled to point out characters that they deem inappropriate, but the majority of gamers, and even society, don't agree with their values.” This last statement is a truly troublesome one for my opponent. He provides a fact statement rooted in incredulity. Firstly, he has no evidence that the majority of gamers, let alone society, disagree with feminist values. Secondly, he still has no proof that feminism directly caused these changes. Lastly, and by far most importantly, he is basing the whole of his argument on the changes made in ONE GAME. This is not conclusive, whatsoever. In short, while my opponent has raised an interesting idea, he has yet to support it properly. Because of this, I ask that he provide more evidence in the next round lest he allow the inferences of his argument be the weight of his arguments. That’s all for now. Thanks for your patience! I’m quite enjoying this.
