Pro vs. con view
1031 arguments retrieved in 0.0 ms

PRO

  • PRO

    oldsaltshippers4 days ago (edited) Feminists would like...

    Is Radical Feminism Hurting More than Helping

    You have not stated any rules; therefore I will act as I please in this round. Definition Radical feminism-is a perspective within feminism that focuses on the hypothesis of patriarchy as a system of power that organizes society into a complex of relationships based on the assertion that male supremacy oppresses women. Harmful Protests There is many cases of harmful protests with radical feminists. Namely, and In these videos, we are able to see the harm radical feminism has done. From blocking entrances/exits to pulling a fire alarm, much harm has happened with with radical feminists. This clearly shows the one case of harm done by radical feminists. Ruining The Movement Radical feminism is constantly having others believe feminism is a terrible movement. We can see comments from this video Dracoa797 months ago The more of this crap that I see, the more I think feminism is a terrorist group. oldsaltshippers4 days ago (edited) Feminists would like to think that they are all about equal rights, but there is already a name for those people, they are called egalitarians, something which feminists are not. As we see in these comments, many are bashing the movement of feminism as well as being confused by radical feminists and feminists. To these people, feminism will look like a terrible cause and one which will seem distasteful. Rebuttals I believe my opponent is confused. I am on the side of pro, meaning I am trying to prove radical feminism is hurting more than helping. You, as con, are trying to prove otherwise. Your argument helps my case. Conclusion A number of sources show radical feminism is hurting more than helping.

  • PRO

    It’s interesting how Watson’s choice to objectify herself...

    Feminism is men-hating

    "Here seems to be confusion about the definition of feminism, aided by quotable celebrities who have become vocal on the issue. “If you stand for equality, you’re a feminist,” according to Emma Watson. In response to criticism for her topless photo shoot for Vanity Fair in March of this year: “Feminism is about giving women choice. It’s about freedom. It’s about liberation. It’s about equality.” If these mantras sound friendly and palatable, it is by design. Modern feminism has been reconstructed through individualistic rhetoric which largely ignores the social constraints of male rule. It’s interesting how Watson’s choice to objectify herself reflects exactly what men would have women do, anyway: instead of being forced to be objectified for male consumption, women can now enjoy the freedom to choose objectification. In this way, it is implied that our oppression becomes empowering if one chooses it. Neoliberal feminism, which uses terms like gender equality and choice, focuses on individuals rather than systemic sexism, and rejects analysis of how choices impact society . It is at best, misguided, and at worst, used to produce outcomes that are actively anti-feminist and more closely resemble rhetoric from the men’s rights movement than the women’s movement. More recently, in light of the many women who have come forward about being sexually harassed or assaulted by Harvey Weinstein, Watson posted to twitter: “In this instance it was women affected but I also stand with all the men, indeed any person, who has suffered sexual harassment.” Gender Equality is Male-Centered Equality Let’s go back to Emma Watson and her declaration that feminism is about freedom, liberation, and equality. Her ideas are by no means hers alone; they represent a mainstream misunderstanding of what it is women need to achieve the freedom of choice she advocates. To begin with, the mainstream left places these ideas together as though they are synonymous as though equality will manifest as liberation. Then, we need to ask: what is meant by equality? In order to understand what equality means in this context, we need to understand how it is being defined in society. Equal pay for equal work, for example, is a cause being advocated by many women in Hollywood. It is propped up as a feminist issue rather than an economic one. The push for equal pay acknowledges that money is power while strangely ignoring the reality of the system of capitalism, which depends on inequality. Equal pay for equal work does nothing for the women who do a disproportionate amount of housework in heterosexual relationships, no matter how much more they might make than their male partner. It is also curious how granting women an opportunity to gain equal work is not frequently addressed by proponents of equal pay advocacy, presumably because educating women is not an individualistic endeavor, but requires labor and restructuring of systems. Indeed, wealthy white women advocating equal pay comes across as self-serving, and rightfully so, since they have shown themselves to be unwilling to lift women who lack the skills or resources to gain employment in fields of prestige similar to their own. Or, perhaps, to criticize capitalism itself, and recognize that “equal pay” within an unequal system is an oxymoron. In this case, it becomes clear that equality is being defined by the left as becoming equal to men : advocating for the same rights and privileges that men enjoy under patriarchy is the standard by which mainstream feminism is measuring women’s freedom. When feminism is defined as becoming equal to men, it is a clear admission that men are the default by which we ought to measure ourselves, and therefore, no longer feminism at all. Instead of saying, “Women can do anything a man can do,” we ought to recognize that women can do amazing things men can never do. Our biological differences, the ability to create life is a gift. Men and women are more the same than different, aside from this point, yet it is very telling that the perceived weakness of our bodies, along with our ability to give birth, are among the main obstacles in men perceiving us as, and allowing us to be, fully human." [1] Source: https://radfemfatale.com...

  • PRO

    Latino rights (more specifically Chicano Movement):...

    Feminism is morally good

    I would like to thank my opponent for the opportunity to debate this interesting topic. My opponent: "will you deny the existence of the radical feminist movements that are so ant-male that it would seem they would wipe them out if given the chance?" I was hoping my opponent would care to give examples but, based on likeliness, I will agree to my opponent's premise and assume such groups exist and are considerable. At this point, however, we must ask ourselves whether these people really constitute the essence of feminism or are they just women blinded by hate who take advantage of the movement to justify their misandry. Let us exemplify : The African-American civil rights movement was a successful rally against race discrimination. Today, no one doubts the success of individuals like Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X in fighting inequality. Nevertheless, there were also violent, radical "black power" groups who claimed to be fighting for equality, such as the Black Panthers, known for their violence and brutality [1]. The point I'm trying to make is that the movement wasn't judged by the actions of several radicals, but by the noble cause it was chasing. Today, equal rights exist for African-Americans, and they exist thanks to the civil rights movements already discussed. So the main issue here must not be the radicals, but the ones compromised with making the change from a peaceful and moderate position. My opponent: "If women want equality, is claiming a title the way to go about it? how can one achieve equality when they're under a collective banner?" Yes, I believe equality is achieved by the suppressed organizing under a collective banner and demanding their rights. Let us consult history: LGBT rights movement: Lesbian, gay, bisexual and trasngender social movements have accomplished great feats in the subject of same-sex rights. They are organized under a collective name and banner (they literally have a flag that represents their cause). Latino rights (more specifically Chicano Movement): Hispanic-Americans advocating for migratory and social rights for Americans from Hispanic descent. Again, a movement organized under one collective name that is successfully fighting for Latino rights. American Indian Movement: Social movement that fights for Native Americans' rights. They also possess their own flag. The list goes on, but it's clear that giving a movement a name, a title and a collective banner serves to empower the movement and give its members a sense of identity and belonging. It is important to point out the fact that these groups have all achieved great improvements in the civil rights area. "Is a group consisting of an entirety of a single gender really helpful? they aren't receiving any feedback this way...they would only ever hear like-minded opinions from followers they knew they would already obtain (AKA women)" Here, my opponent makes an interesting point. To be clear, whether it has been to support it or to oppose it, men have always taken part in feminism [2]. The pro-feminism and anti-feminism postures are clear examples of men's reaction to feminism. Feminists are in fact receiving feedback, plenty of feedback in my opinion. In fact, many women's studies experts claim it is desirable for men to embrace feminism, because having the "oppressor" accept their rights is a determining point in the quest for equality [3]. When it comes to feminist organizations not wanting to accept men among their ranks, I find it completely understandable. It is dangerous for the movement that the oppressor would attempt to control it the same way they control other aspects of society. In conclusion, the idea behind feminism is not women supremacy or male exclusion. Pro feminist men are an important part of the movement, the same way heterosexual allies are important to the LGBT movement. However one must understand that men cannot take such an active and leading role inside the feminist movement. What would have been of the African-American civil rights movement if controlled and led by white individuals? Certainly not the same. Having strengthened these points, I maintain the premise that feminism is morally good and it's an effective way to end gender oppression. Sources: [1] Austin, Curtis J. (2006). Up Against the Wall: Violence in the Making and Unmaking of the Black Panther Party. [2] https://en.wikipedia.org... [3] Men: Comrades in Struggle, in Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center (1984).

  • PRO

    This means that there is no pay gap of any sort which...

    Modern Feminism is Not Needed in America

    I would like to begin the rebuttal stage by stating that my opponent has broken a rule of "All sources made after arguments." As I have already broke a rule of using my opponents name, I will nullify it. For clarification, at the end of all the arguments, not each individual point. Further my opponent has added rebuttals in the argument stage. The Wage Gap: The Washington Post only includes one factor for equal pay. They accounted for people who work in the same positions and got a result of 92% pay. This does not account for many factors such as I had stated in the first round where women work less. Glassdoor does not include hours worked either. Though Glassdoor includes more than one factor for pay, unlike the Washington Post, they still leave out one of the most dominant factors for pay. With all factors accounted for, and the illegality of discriminatory pay, there is no logical basis for feminism to be needed as fair payment is protected by law, and statistics reflect the equality of earnings. This means that there is no pay gap of any sort which feminism would be needed for. Equal Opportunity: Equal opportunity does not imply equal outcome. Just because equal results are not achieved does not mean equal opportunity has not been. There are no laws which hold women back from achieving the same results of men in the workplace. To be a CEO of a fortune 500 company you either have to have started the company or have been replaced by an existing CEO, neither of these routes are blocked by law. The number is likely low as pre-established companies often stay at the top, and profiting CEO's do not give up their spots, it is a hard market to get into now regardless of sex. 50% of the companies from the 1990's and 65 from the original 500 are still at the top. Rape: First the CDC does not include prison rape which I have stated prior, losing 200000 rape cases every year. Second they are very vague in their wording, using that 18.3% "experience" rape, however do not directly state that they were raped. This vague language would be easier to decipher if the experiment was defined, and the questions were as well. Until I can see the study resulting in those statistics, or an article explaining them, they are not definite examples of rape. There is also not proof that they examples do not include other factors such as unreported cases outside of word of mouth. Last, my source showing that women are raped 3 times as much does not include prison rape, which I stated with the source. Female Representation: Again for this, like for the fortune 500 companies, equal outcome is not indicative of an equal society, equal opportunity is, as equal outcome would have to be forced, and against individual rights. Just because there are not equal amounts of female writers, does not mean that society is not equal, it means that women are making different choices. In role playing games, there is character customization, therefore there are not main characters set to a specific gender in most cases. Call of Duty, the biggest game in console FPS has female character options. Lastly differing body types is something women care more about, in commercials about men, most are tall, muscular, and tan, typically without much change in body type outside the size of their muscles. Further Points: Feminism has rightly been under attack as the radical feminists have taken over the movement. Myths such as the wage gap are used to justify violence and silencing of speech. People realize that, in the west, feminism is not needed, and as a result it has been dying. There is no definition that can define a group, and as a result people look towards the prominent figures in feminism to find out the attitudes feminism has. When looking at figures like Amy Schumer and Lena Dunham, many are offset by feminism, and when looking at the hysteria in college campuses, they will not go near it, that is why feminism is dying. Disclaimer: I will address any rebuttals, which were wrongly placed in the argument stage, in the next stage. Sources: -https://www.forbes.com... -https://askwonder.com... -http://wwg.com... -http://variety.com... -http://www.google.com... -http://www.mainstreethost.com... -https://www.forbes.com...

  • PRO

    This isn't to say that science and math teachers are...

    Feminism is needed in America

    Con picked three very weak arguments to attack here. 1. Wage gap: No one is saying a woman and a man with the exact same job make a different amount of money. Its not sexist, just a fact about what jobs women have and what the average pay between the genders is. Women take years off work to have kids, and are less likely to advance at the same rate as a man because of it. No issue here. 2. Rape: How is this relevant in any way to feminism? Men get raped too. Rape happens. Women are very well legally protected from getting raped. 3. Power: I find it odd Con uses this argument, because it actually contradicts her point. It is very true that CEOs and top government officials are overwhelmingly male. Look at the statistics Con provides. Women still do not seek positions of power for whatever reason (discrimination, peer pressure, desire to have a family, etc) and this is a reason for feminism to exist. A government should represent its people, and a country half filled with women should be represented by a government roughly proportional. There should also be more people of colour in congress, but that's a different issue. Now to my own arguments. I'll concede that so-called feminazis have given feminism a bad name recently. Any group will have radicals that make the whole look bad, we can't judge the idea of feminism by a few loud voices. A) Feminism, by definition, pushes for equality. We can all agree that equality is a good thing in society, and while women are not legally discriminated against (anymore), there are many other forms of discrimination. Saying we do not need feminism is like saying we don't need to worry about the rights of black Americans because there's no legal discrimination. This view ignores things like racial profiling, voter suppression, harsh drug laws, a broken welfare system, low quality access to education and healthcare in poor neighbourhoods. This view is naive and narrow minded in both cases. B) Women are horribly under represented in STEM fields. The amount of women choosing to study in the STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) fields are at an all time high, yet are still abysmally low. This is due largely to the fact that women are not encouraged to pursue these fields, even when they show promise at a young age. In elementary school, there are no real differences between female and male test scores in math and science. However in high school, the scores are very different, with boys outscoring girls 3 to 1. This is a stark contrast from scores in the 1980's, which were 13 to 1 in favour of boys. The reason for the change is not biological, but social. Girls haven't gotten smarter in the last 30 years, but it has become more normal for them to study math and science without judgement. This isn't to say that science and math teachers are actively discouraging girls from studying in their fields, but rather research shows that parents, guidance counsellors, and other instructors tend to push intelligent boys to persevere in tough subjects like physics and calculus, whereas girls are usually encouraged to switch to easier subjects at the first sign of trouble. The fact that this attitude still exists, and is robbing us of bright young scientific minds, is an excellent reason for feminism to exist. http://www.nytimes.com... http://news.sciencemag.org... C) The vestiges of the patriarchal society we are just recently emerging from still remain. While society is rapidly progressing towards equality, there are many holdovers who still think in terms of the past. Many, especially the older generation, still expect women to raise children and stay home, and frown on the childless, career motivated woman as "selfish" or "masculine". Many women also think like this too. Lots of women take their husband's surname when marrying, a tradition that hearkens back to the days of women being literal property. The media rarely showcases women for their intelligence, benevolence, or athletic ability, but often showcases them for their beauty. There's nothing wrong with being beautiful, or being proud of it. Men are also sometimes praised for their aesthetics, but much more often for athletic endeavors, business practices, charitable donations, innovations, and other features. This shows men as a varied, balanced group with a range of skills and attributes, and no one way to be useful. Take the Bechdel test for example. The test is for films, and to pass a film must have A) At least 2 named female characters B) Those two characters exchanging dialogue about something other than a man. Surprisingly, well over half of all Hollywood films fail to meet the requirements of the Bechdel test. In recent years this has been improving, with female driven film series doing well at the box office (Hunger Games, Divergent, etc). The Reverse Bechdel Test (2 male characters who talk to each other about something other than a woman) is almost never failed. So what does this tell us about feminism? Well, the Bechdel Test isn't meant to evaluate specific movies, but to observe trends across Hollywood. While the results point to more gender diversity in film, the results are still skewed in favour of male centric films. http://www.forbes.com... http://www.jhunewsletter.com...

  • PRO

    I challenge you to a debate on the topic of feminism....

    Modern Day Feminism Has No Legitimacy.

    I challenge you to a debate on the topic of feminism. I believe I can offer statistics to combat your assertion that feminism is not sexist and still about equality. The rules are as follows: R1 - Acceptance Only. R2 - Opening Arguments. R3 - Question Round, Where we Each Ask The Other as Many Questions as We Want R4 - Answer Round, Where We Answer Each Other's Questions R5 - Closing Arguments. I look forward to the challenge!

  • PRO

    85% of women believe in equality for women. ... They do...

    Is third wave feminsim still feminism

    For reference this is what feminism means from several sources: Merriam-Webster - the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes https://www.merriam-webster.com...... Dictionary.com - the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men. http://www.dictionary.com...... Oxford - The advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...... Feminism is about equality of the sexes, that"s it" as I posted in the first round. When you say third wave feminism or intersectional feminism or whatever other label you add to feminism to try and discredited all you are doing is trying to change the meaning so you have a strawman to justify your sexism because you can "defeat" feminism if you make it about more than just equal rights. Next let"s talk about Fallacy of composition. It"s where you infer that some small portion of a group (like the ones who say that men should be eliminated) and judge the whole group on that small subset of data. It"s like saying all men are rapist because there are men that rape. It has no bases in reality, and it"s dishonest. 85% of women believe in equality for women. There are roughly 160 million women in the US, that means 136 million women believe in equality for women, but because of BS like what you are doing to smear feminism, and make it a dirty word only 18% of women identify of feminist. So even though they have very valid proof that the world is not equal for them (as I proved in the first round that you have not refuted any of" I mean ANY of, you just ignored it completely), they have stop fighting for equality" And response to the 5-8% wage gap is the very heart of the problem. You see a sexist wage gap, and rather than thinking it needs to be fixed" you think it"s ok she should have to work harder. You think it"s fine that a woman gets paid less than you to do the same work. You spout about how there is no need for feminism, and you have NO problem screwing women out of money they deserve. And as I"ve already show it"s not just pay, there is a gap in many different fields. Sure, it"s close, but it"s not equal, and it just pisses you off that they won"t shut up and just be happy with getting close, right? Look I get it Vincent. You are a guy, and now women want to be treated equal to you, and that chaps your butt because it makes your life harder, so you corrupt their movement to get equality, and make them out to be the bad guys even though they have facts showing that you are the bad guy. Finally, after you"ve beaten them down enough, most of them getting tired of fighting, and think just like you" it"s close to equality. And they think, is it worth all this hate just to get a few more percentage points? So, they give up, but that"s nothing more than being a bully, and that sure doesn"t make you RIGHT. They do NOT have equality, and you are NOT the victim in this scenario.

  • PRO

    I believe that the core beliefs of feminism are either...

    Feminism is counterintuitive and hypocritical

    I believe that the core beliefs of feminism are either way too vague and include almost every human or are way too radicalized.

  • PRO

    In some areas the gap is smaller, in others larger. ......

    current state of feminism in first-world countries

    I look forward to debating this topic. Good luck to both of us, con. I will be taking the "pro" position of this argument, "Feminism is not obsolete." Feminism still has a large place in the parts of the world con mentioned. There are several issues that warrant the existence of the feminist movement. For example, the huge wage gap issue. Women are paid on average about 70% less than men doing the same job. In some areas the gap is smaller, in others larger. However, there are extremley few lines of work where pay is equal between sexes. Feminism activley works to bring this issue to light and work to give men and women equal pay for equal work. Another issue is what is commonly called "rape culture." Contrary to a certain conception, rape culture is NOT the assertion that men are all wired to rape women or that all heterosexual sex is rape. It is simply the widespread trivialization and sometimes even condonement of rape. Such examples include the popular phrase "she was asking for it" or the cultural view that men cannot be raped because of the belief that all men want to have sex all the time (More on that later.) These two things barley scratch the surface of misogyny in modern society. Does gender equality really exist in a society where this is the norm? Next, I'd like to address con's critiscisms of feminism. The "feminist" backlash over a shirt depicting sexualized women was irrational and disgusting. Such body shaming goes against everything feminism stands for. However, this potrayal of feminism as the view of the entire movement is simply rediculous. This misrepresentation of a sincere movement that works for the good of men and women is foolish and counterproductive. Con also said something along the lines of "most [feminists] dont do anything to help." (sic) Feminism has and still does do much in the pursuit of gender equality. Since the advent of the feminist movement, more women have started to take elected office, the pay gap has lowered, and society's view is slowly but surley changing. Lastly, I will assert my own claim: that feminism is in the best interest of women and men alike. For starters, the perception that only women may be feminists is false; our lot is as diverse as the day is long. I said before that a part of rape culture was denying that men could be raped. This is only one way a male dominated society harms men as well as women. Mem are denied custody of children under the grounds that women are superior caregivers. Men are mocked for doing housework. Men are shamed for displaying any "feminine" qualities. Feminism would eliminate these problems plaguing men. In light of all these facts, can it really be said that feminism is obsolete? If the state of feminism is so bad, as con claims, why not become a feminist yourself so you can do what others fail to?

CON

  • CON

    Definition of feminism : the theory of the political,...

    Feminism is men-hating

    Definition of feminism : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes https://www.merriam-webster.com... I just gave an example so it may seem easier to understand.

  • CON

    One of the fundamental difficulties with the issues we...

    Feminism is no longer necesary.

    Feminism is absolutely still necessary. One of the fundamental difficulties with the issues we deal with today is that most of the easy problems have been solved, Things like women legally being able to vote or join the work force or the military or a multitude of other rights are out of the way. On paper that might look like we have reached full equality of the genders, But thing aren't that simple. When you look at things such as the gender earnings gap or the rate of sexual harassment within the work place or the amount of backlash to female representation in different forms of media, Its clear to see that there are deeper rooted issues culturally that haven't been attended to and that we still need feminism to explore these complex and multifaceted problems. I would definitely love to hear exactly which rights men lack in first world countries?

  • CON

    However, for the sake of intellectual honesty, I'll...

    Third Wave Feminism Isn't Needed

    "I agree that feminism is needed in some countries." I'd like to say, "I rest my case." This line right here is a blatant admission that feminism's role has yet to be completed. However, for the sake of intellectual honesty, I'll continue onwards with your intent, not your written word because, honestly, it'd be rude to say you've forfeited when I know full well you did not mean this in this way. "But fighting for equal rights is actually second wave feminism," While it is true second-wave feminism in the US (and probably Canada) fought for equal rights, it's unreasonable to say that every feminist that did this in the world was a second-wave feminist. So far, no wave of feminism has really concerned itself beyond the level of its own nation's borders in terms of action, albeit some feminists may have claimed it within their ideals... but ideals don't equate to practice. (Just look at Communism of an example of political ideology not matching the actual effects.) "Third wave feminism in the United States if you do any research" I used to be a third-waver, so please do not assume I am ignorant. If you paid attention to my last argument, I acknowledged blatantly that the actual third-wave has a turned a blind eye towards actual problems in the world. You telling me this once again, using my own example of Mauritania at that, is just downright insulting. Your argument is that third wave is not needed. I turned the argument back on you and said "It is needed, just not in the form we actually have it in." "Fat acceptance and body positivity are two different things." I don't care about off-topic tangents. This has nothing to do as a response to anything I replied with and only served as filler and a way of distracting from the fact you were unsure of how to respond to somebody who was highly critical of third-wave feminism's shortcomings. "My stance on abortion is that people should have the choice." Just as off-topic and tangential as your rant on fat acceptance. "There are two genders. Male and Female." Even more off-topic and tangential than the previous two "points". That said, while I largely agree with you, I do think you ignore certain anthropological aspects to the 3+ gender argument... but 99% of the time, your enby assessment is pretty much spot on. But this would be a whole different debate if you cared enough to host it and if I cared enough to respond. As a debate, it doesn't really belong here. In short, your Round 2 argument is as follows: 1) Agree with the content of my Round 1 argument, 2) Act as though I am ignorant of third-wave feminism, and 3) Rant about things third-wave feminism does which my Round 1 argument has already acknowledged as being a waste. In Round 1, I agreed that the Third Wave Feminism we have isn't needed, but that a third wave, in a different more egalitarian form, most certainly is. Do you contest what I said? If so, tell me why. If not, concede. It is unfair to your opponent to drag things on in such a way.

  • CON

    You said and I quote in full context "Todays feminism...

    Today's types of Feminism isn't needed

    You said and I quote in full context "Todays feminism isn't needed, They have no rights that they need to fight for, And are establishing a bad name for feminism, As if when some of them think that all men should die and that sort. Women have the same rights as men do, So change my mind. " Your title says and I quote "Today's types of Feminism isn't needed" As for your title you did in fact say "types", Plural, But then you said "isn't needed" which would be grammatically correct if referring to one type of feminism, But instead you were referencing multiple? Then in your argument as quoted above you went on to refer to feminism in general as one ideology. So perhaps I was just confused what your argument was given the grammatical inconsistencies. In any case I conceded that the more broadly defined gender pay gap study showing women earning at approximately 79 cents on the dollar to Men wasn't an ideal to study when compared to the controlled pay gap study. The example I looked at in particular highlighted men and women working in the same Executive positions which are salary positions, Or in other words they receive a flat rate, Not an hourly wage and therefore eliminating the question of overtime being involved. I would say that the pay gap does in fact exist but is somewhat justified on the broader scale given the fact that more men work in high demanding labor intensive jobs than women (like construction, Carpentry, Etc. ) which typically command higher hourly wages and more Overtime pay than an entry level office job or non-labor intensive position. This at least can explain why such a large gap exists in a reasonable manner. As for the controlled wage gap study though the same cannot be said. So again looking at a snippet of your argument "They have no rights that they need to fight for" would be an incorrect statement given the nature of what the studies I cited show.

  • CON

    How, feminism wants extra rights for women, and why are...

    feminism is not needed in the west

    How, feminism wants extra rights for women, and why are you giving these statics I'm not saying there's male privilege, or these things don't happen so why are you giving me these statics

  • CON

    Now as you and most rational human beings know, this is...

    Feminism! Hooray!

    Well... well I'm busy being... Prime Minister.... of Canada. So I'm busy with being more important. LOL Rape Culture The "specific issue" feminists claim to be campaigning for/about is equality. And one cannot achieve equality by focusing on one bad thing that happens to one sex. If feminists want to fight for equality, they wouldn't refer to themselves as feminsists, a word (obviously) routed from female. I haven't witnessed any radical egalitarians, have you? Egalitarians seem to be rational, sane, non-biased, decent human beings, both men and women, who acknowledge hardships of both men and women, and address negativity's that deal with gender/sex as a whole, instead of the gender/sex that it effects slightly more. If black people and white people both suffered from, some kind of disease, let's just say H1N5, but 80% of carriers were white, would you (or most people, really) consider it racist to only treat the white people? You're damn right they would. So why is it when a feminist does the exact same thing but in relation to gender/sex, it's "equality!!1!"?? No matter how you want to word it or look at it, treating only one gender/sex simply because they're affected more than the other is sexism - something feminists are "fighting against." This would not happen with an egalitarian. HOW FANTASTIC, YEAH FEMINISM! The rate of rape cases is on the decline [1], so if our culture is geared to "objectify women" - and in turn lead to more rapes... it's not doing a great job at it. "Objectification" is a different subject than rape culture - as rape culture is the idea that a group of people support rape for doing things that feminists don't like, such as ask simple questions pertaining to a crime. The people that do support rape are... well, rapists. And we have a police force to deal with them. I'm sure if rapists aren't afraid of life behind bars and getting the crap kicked out of them in prison, a group of angry women yelling at irrelevant men who are also against rape isn't going to do much of anything at all... oh and a side note - demonizing men who practically agree with the feminists - that rape is bad - for whatever reason - is detrimental to society and shows how useless, backwards and unproductive feminism really is. I've been called a rapist for trying to justify the sale of the game Rapelay. I don't support rape because a fictional game exists that I believe shouldn't be banned simply because it deals with extreme violence - I believe actual "wannabe rapists" can have a sort of release if they play a simulation of a rape, and it could very well deter them from actually raping someone. I know I feel better after I kill a few hundred men (men) in Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto... Which Brings me to my next point - the banning of Grand Theft Auto in Australia because women are killed. That's right, if you hadn't heard, GTA5 was banned in Australia because feminists seem to think it promotes violence against women [2]. Now as you and most rational human beings know, this is simply not true. Not only are you required to kill men to advance the story in GTA, but if you kill any innocent person - not just women, another instance of feminists asking for special privileges - the cops come after you, kind of hinting that killing innocent people is bad in general. But hey, feminists found a way to ruin the fun for millions of people, take away freedom of expression and speech, and cause a major company to lose millions of dollars - because they would like special privileges. Although rapists don't always go after the girl who's dressed the "least," when someone wants to have sex, sex appeal is kind of a factor, no matter how you look at it. Ensuring your own safety is never a bad thing no matter what your gender or ethnicity or whatever, and to say it's adding to "rape culture" or "promoting rape" or "enabling rapists" is just ridiculous. The men (and women) who say people in general should "dress to be safe" if they are out at night are basically the exact opposite group of people that feminists should be addressing, if anyone at all... And feminists not being able to make up their mind on if it's empowering or endangering the girl's well-being is detrimental in the sense that there's way too much stigma on how to dress to look good for yourself/men while avoiding dangerous situations while pleasing feminists while having a good time... let it go, be safe. Saying "be safe" is not enabling rapists. Here's a list of ways to avoid sexual assault [3] from a very reliable source. I'd say these are meaningful measures women can take without blindly thinking "don't tell me not to get raped, teach men not to rape" and carry on their way down a dark secluded alley in a miniskirt at 3am drunk and flirting with every random guy that walks by. When an entire group of people (feminists) say no to "safety first," I tend to consider that group of people detrimental to society, and at the very least, not a good group - as feminists are endangering the lives of their own kind by making them believe they should be able to do what they want without suffering consequences (and believe me, I'd love that as much as them, but unfortunately that isn't reality). Anita Unfortunately having tens of thousands of feminists support her (not only by liking and sharing her videos, but by donating money by the truckload) does actually have an impact on the feminist groups, and does show that a large proportion of feminists are just not well-rounded good people, even according to you, saying how Anita is "a damaging spokesperson for feminism," you acknowledge that she isn't that great of a person. Unfortunately with a backing of around two hundred thousand people, that means 200,000 people are damaging spokespeople for feminism... and unfortunately again, you can't just say "eh, brush those fifth of a million people to the side, as I disagree with their viewpoint, so it's not reflective of modern day feminism" - it actually is very reflective of modern day feminism, as that's quite a large chunk of society, let alone the feminist society of North America. Here's an example of a girl irrationally getting upset (at something people do to men and women online) and right off the bat pulling out personal insults [4] and calling the guy "retarded" and having "special needs" before he even says anything rude or sexist or anything. In fact, just go here [5] and watch some of the videos if you want. And keep in mind, a popular argument is "well guys shouldn't be mean to girls in the first place!" - unfortunately saying "don't be mean to this group of people" is asking for special treatment. And when the guys aren't "mean" (they're just trolling, something they do to everyone) and the girl flips out or the girl just starts off by talking trash or whatever, it shows that girls are also just as rude as guys online. Female Nudes Once again, let me show you [6] that male nudes also leak - the difference is that the media practically begs for them. If you just type in "leaked male nudes" into Google, the second hit has an article that says, referring to "the fappening" - "Unfortunately, NOT ONE of the affected celebrities was male." So in other words, "look at the bad things that happened to these women, LET'S MAKE SURE IT'S EVEN AND EXPLOIT MEN." You're right that it does affect women more, however women are talked about more than men. More people in general (including women) are interested in female nudes than male nudes. This is just natural human tendencies, something feminism cannot "fix." And it definitely cannot "fix" it by addressing only one portion of the entire affected group much like with the domestic violence. And no, leaked male nudes are not "incidental to the main target of the hack," especially when the main targets are male. Steubenville "General media attitude is undeniably gendered." The general media attitude is geared toward whatever will get the most attention. When it's in human nature to be attracted to something more than something else, and feminism tries to... well, deny natural human instinct/emotion, that's kind of just not right. Feminists fight for women's rights, not equality. Egalitarians fight for equality. Whenever a man is killed, it's "man gunned down on 1st and Main." When a woman is killed, the entire news broadcast is dedicated to the coverage of the entire event and story. Women are favoured almost everywhere, so what is it that feminists want again? Oh yeah, special privilege. By pointing out that the media addresses females more than males in certain areas. Pay Gap Obama said he wants women to get paid the same as men. Unfortunately he also misinterpreted the entire "pay gap" thing. Your quote refers to "lover pay for women," which is wrong - earning less is not the same as getting paid less. Women have the same opportunities as men. Everyone is bullied in the workforce, if the majority of people who take offense to that are women... then they should fight their way to the top like men instead of call it "sexism" or "discrimination" when it's not. I'd like it if you did take a look at the female privilege list I provided in the last round, just to give you a sense of how easy women have it in North America. And that a couple "bad" things happening to people in general (and sometimes mostly women, like domestic violence or leaked nudes) does not mean feminism is necessary. Thanks for a good debate, Cartige! [1] http://www.fbi.gov... [2] http://www.liveleak.com... [3] https://www.rainn.org... [4] [5] https://www.youtube.com... [6] http://www.thegailygrind.com...

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism-Hooray/1/
    • score
      BM25 score: 20.94
      feminism: 20.94
      conclusion: 11.41 (boost 1.50, idf 5.97, tfNorm 1.27)
      premises: 7.57 (idf 5.90, tfNorm 1.28)
      sourceText: 1.95 (boost 0.20, idf 4.68, tfNorm 2.09)
  • CON

    Pro has not proven that chilvary could live, let alone...

    Feminism killed Chivalry

    Pro has not proven that chilvary could live, let alone die. Pro has not shown that in the event that chivalry died that feminism would be responsible... Ergo the resolution is negated.

  • CON

    Hello Pro, I am your Contender and today I would like to...

    Are women annoying hypocrites when it comes to feminism

    Hello Pro, I am your Contender and today I would like to argue and oppose your topic. To start off, I believe women are not annoying hypocrites when it comes to feminism because one, feminism is definition means:" the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men" Now this is the true definition of a feminism and according to the definition, Pro's first point does not correspond well with the actual definition, so may I ask pro to provide an examples of how or why women are annoying hypocrites when it comes to feminism.