Pro vs. con view
1031 arguments retrieved in 0.0 ms

PRO

  • PRO

    Like look at the first word it says "BOYS". ... If you...

    Today feminism is cancer

    Third wave feminism has turned out to be mean, vindictive, sociopathic, man-hating movement and it makes me sad its gaining popularity in USA, UK and other developed countries. Like seriously? feminists are asking for girls having equal rights to join BOYS SCOUTS. Like look at the first word it says "BOYS". If you wanted your daughter to join scouts then there is GIRLS SCOUTS too. Women now have equal access to education, equal access to the workplace - they get paid the same for the same work. 'A female Harvard economist attempted to establish the existence of a wage gap last year and failed to do so. Just as the term 'bitch' used to mean a female dog, every word can change over time and I think feminism has.

  • PRO

    Unlike the First-wave feminists who were concerned with...

    Feminism is no longer about gender equality

    Feminism is the belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes. Unlike Women's Rights which is focused exclusively on the rights and freedoms of women, Feminism is about gender equality, the civil rights of women and men. ...Or at least that's what its suppose to be. The egalitarian First-wave of feminism was killed by the radical Second-wave feminists of the 60's and 70's. Unlike the First-wave feminists who were concerned with equal legal rights and opportunities for women, Second-wave feminists instead launched a gender culture war. The feminist movement became dominated by angry women who questioned whether a man could be a feminist, and began limiting male participation in the movement because of their "patriarchal tendencies". Men could only be "pro-feminists" at best, but not a "real" feminist. This shift led to feminism becoming gynocentric, misandric, and dogmatic. Ever since Feminism has had a complete disregard for equality, and is only concerned about status and well-being of women and girls. For Example: Girls are outperforming boys in school and are enrolling in college and university at significantly higher rates than males (among Americans ages 25 to 34, 34% of women now have a bachelor's degree but just 27% of men). [Kay S. Hymowitz: Where have all the good men gone? http://online.wsj.com...] "In the United States, a proposal to do something special for boys usually gets plowed under before it has a chance to take root. In 1996, New York City public schools established the Young Women's Leadership School, an all-girls public school in East Harlem. The school is a great success and many, including The New York Times, urged then Schools Chancellor Rudy Crew to establish a "similar island of excellence for boys." Crew rejected the idea of a comparable all-boys school. He regarded the girls' school as reparatory for past educational practices that neglected girls." "[In] Prince George's County, Maryland, just outside Washington, D.C., to help boys, the county organized a "Black Male Achievement Initiative." Beginning in the early nineties, approximately forty young men met two weekends a month with a group of professional men for tutoring and mentoring. The program was popular and effective. But in 1996, it was radically restructured by order of the U.S. Department of Education Office of Civil Rights, which found that it discriminated against girls." ...So the boys continue to struggle, while the girls get more support than they actually need. The Feminists lobbied for the success of girls in school, but they could not care less about the boys struggling and the academic gender gap. [Christina Hoff Sommers: The War Against Boys http://www.nytimes.com... and http://www.theatlantic.com...] Whatever the goal of Feminism is, it's no longer equality of the sexes.

  • PRO

    However, this debate is open to anybody. ... Modern...

    Modern feminism is cancer.

    Apologies to thebestdebater.org for forfeiting the previous debate. The time limit was shorter than I thought. However, this debate is open to anybody. Modern feminism is cancerous to today's society.

  • PRO

    If a boy is scrawny or small he is often bullied by other...

    Modern Feminism is Necessary

    While your argument about masculinity has some valid points i believe you are too stuck in gender roles for instance the athleticism pressure on boys yes it great when a boy is athletic and pursues this and i don't want to stop it however the problem lies within our culture of taking sports and physical ability to seriously. If a boy is scrawny or small he is often bullied by other boys for being weak and not being able to play sports and even worse is when a boy is athletic and muscular but isn't interested in sports not only is sometimes bullied by peers but even ridiculed by coaches and adults for not wanting to join out for a team. With feminism boys don't have that kind pf pressure if a boy wants to join a sport then great but if he doesn't that's fine too I am indeed aware of that whole shirt incident and i too thought it was ridiculous but like every other group your going to get some radicals in your mix and the feminists that were upset about it were more misandrists then anything none of the feminists i know cared about it and same goes for your links and Facebook petition all those women are radicals because women do have to minimize risk sadly they are caught up on a perfect world where men never rape and while i agree that boys should be taught to respect women and that they should stop if a girl says no there will always be men who rape. I'm going to keep this brief i am not aware of any feminists groups that go around trying to end any types of men's problems because as i've stated earlier the examples you gave were not very good ones and not really issues that need protesting for. However the things i listed have been looked and fought for by If a boy is scrawny or small he is often bullied by other boys for being weak and not being able to play sports and even worse is when a boy is athletic and muscular but isn't interested in sports not only is sometimes bullied by peers but even ridiculed by coaches and adults for not wanting to join out for a team. With feminism boys don't have that kind pf pressure if a boy wants to join a sport then great but if he doesn't that's fine too I am indeed aware of that whole shirt incident and i too thought it was ridiculous but like every other group your going to get some radicals in your mix and the feminists that were upset about it were more misandrists then anything none of the feminists i know cared about it and same goes for your links and Facebook petition all those women are radicals because women do have to minimize risk sadly they are caught up on a perfect world where men never rape and while i agree that boys should be taught to respect women and that they should stop if a girl says no there will always be men who rape. I'm going to keep this brief i am not aware of any feminists groups that go around trying to end any types of men's problems because as i've stated earlier the examples you gave were not very good ones and not really issues that need protesting for. However the things i listed have been looked and fought for by feminism so i would say feminists are helping men even if they don't go our and scream about it i mean where would we go protest anyway? I am aware that men have problems and are not perfect however feminism much like the BLM movement LGBT movement and others are about the minority and the downtrodden and for centuries men have been in power and not kept down. However this doesn't mean feminism is about man hate it just means of course were going to focus on women's issues primarily so men can't get angry about this if they want a movement for their own join the meninist movement or create a new one.

  • PRO

    So why does everyone need to walk on eggshells over a few...

    Feminism is bad

    In todays society, i believe feminism is just another ploy to distract us from whats really going on. Nevertheless, I would love to hear a Feminists side of this. I believe that Feminism is bad in our society because Feminists do nothing but try to lower equality. Look around and think, what comes to your mind when you hear "Feminist"? For me its stupid, ignorant, liberal. irresponsible, and greedy. What is the point of them? Every feminist i've ever seen argue believes that they are right, even when everyone knows their nit. They will argue an invalid point and like most politicians, avoid every single question you ask by looping around it. One of the main topics Feminists love to fight for is the female image. And i believe that this is complete crap. The Reason that the "sexy" skinny model is on your magazine isnt because men hate fat women or hate women at all, Its because thats what most are attracted to. Same for women. On Most magazines, Instead of a large man, its some ripped man with "the perfect smile." Now Men realize that not all of us have that image, but we know that the general female population is attracted to it so we dont fuss over it. While women take it as a sign of hate. So why does everyone need to walk on eggshells over a few women with poles up their butt? Another reason they believe they are right in arguing is the little, beautiful subject of hitting a woman. They say all men are pigs who treat all women like crap and beat them. And although i believe that you ahould never hit a woman, like most men, it is a complete lie that there isnt a reason to. There are many reasons to hit a woman, it depemds on your situation, but you just dont do it, its just not right. So hopefully a feminist can spew their crap at me so i can see what they can come up with.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism-is-bad/1/
    • score
      BM25 score: 20.87
      feminism: 20.87
      conclusion: 11.41 (boost 1.50, idf 5.97, tfNorm 1.27)
      premises: 7.48 (idf 5.90, tfNorm 1.27)
      sourceText: 1.98 (boost 0.20, idf 4.68, tfNorm 2.12)
  • PRO

    They can go work in a dangerous and higher paying job if...

    Feminism is Wrong

    "I stated that women make way less than men" - Yeah and what is wrong with that? It is a byproduct of the choices women make.There is actually a trend where single women under 30 make more than men their age.In some cities it is up to 20% more. http://content.time.com... "No, not all women do." Correct, but it is the overall trend that women in general choose specific types of jobs. They can go work in a dangerous and higher paying job if they want to but they don't. Women are not as capable as men in some areas. When the job requires strength and physical stamina it is rare that a woman can do the job as well as a man. Lifting really heavy things is not something most women would even want to do for a living. I used to work in a copper/brass factory. It had a few women. They worked in the shipping department, cleanest and safest part of the company. "you're stating that its almost unethical to find a woman working in an oil rig, because they would rather be teachers." - Well if women want to be teachers they should be teachers. That is just what society is. Women can work on oil rigs if they want to and are physically capable but that is not what they want to do. " everyone can do everything, and not be judged for it." - No, not at all. Women can't be a starting QB in the NFL. Men cannot play in the WNBA. If Bruce Jenner tries to be in the olympics as a female he should be judged for it. My young opponent has done a decent job but said nothing that makes this new wave They can go work in a dangerous and higher paying job if they want to but they don't. Women are not as capable as men in some areas. When the job requires strength and physical stamina it is rare that a woman can do the job as well as a man. Lifting really heavy things is not something most women would even want to do for a living. I used to work in a copper/brass factory. It had a few women. They worked in the shipping department, cleanest and safest part of the company. "you're stating that its almost unethical to find a woman working in an oil rig, because they would rather be teachers." - Well if women want to be teachers they should be teachers. That is just what society is. Women can work on oil rigs if they want to and are physically capable but that is not what they want to do. " everyone can do everything, and not be judged for it." - No, not at all. Women can't be a starting QB in the NFL. Men cannot play in the WNBA. If Bruce Jenner tries to be in the olympics as a female he should be judged for it. My young opponent has done a decent job but said nothing that makes this new wave feminism appealing. Feminists won the argument a long time ago and need to stop arguing. Nothing can be done to close the wage gap because it is a byproduct of choices women make. Now feminism is nothing but making women superior. They want to make it appear that men are nothing but perverted woman hating bullies. There are many feminists who are outright man haters (Andrea Dworkin).

  • PRO

    Con's sole evidence in round 1 is anecdotal: specifically...

    Feminism in Today's Society

    Thanks, Phuzzie. Con's argument is essentially this: given that mainstream Feminism has been supplanted by female supremacy ideology, is Feminism worthy of political endorsement? The question is moot because Con's core assumption is entirely unsupported. Con's sole evidence in round 1 is anecdotal: specifically and exclusively,, Con's personal survey of news and social media. In an era when media is customized to gauge and quantify political perspective and to satisfy individual presumptions rather than challenging with objective assessment, such anecdotal evidence is subject to distortion if not outright manipulation. Against Con's single anecdote I will apply my own. I attended January's Women's March and keep in my acquaintance mostly Feminists, ranging from ordinary egalitarianists to radical anti-patriarchalists, with no experience of the supremacist ideology Con invokes. To the extent that one personal experience is not preferable on first impression to another, Con's anecdote is negated by contradictory evidence. To make the case, Con must show that supremacist ideology is the majority position within To the extent that one personal experience is not preferable on first impression to another, Con's anecdote is negated by contradictory evidence. To make the case, Con must show that supremacist ideology is the majority position within Feminism. It won't be enough to simply supply radical essays, Con must demonstrate that Feminist leadership endorses supremacy with popular support. Con must demonstrate that women politicians publicly support supremacist legislation without reproach from the majoritarian Feminist community. As far as I can tell, feminist supremacy ideology was never more than an extremist, minority position, reaching its high-water mark in the 1970's, mostly in French-speaking countries, and with little appreciable influence on Feminist activism then or now. Let's distinguish female supremacy from the notion that women, comprising the majority of the population and the electorate, ought to enjoy majority representation in elected offices or business leadership. Majority rule is just Democracy and need not imply superior civil rights or the disenfranchisement of the male minority. Let's also distinguish female supremacy from female separatism, the notion that women ought to only be governed by women or that some elements of the franchise ought to be exclusive to women. As radical and antiegalitarian as any segregationist movement, they don't necessarily imply supremacy, the subjugation of men to women's interests. I support today's Feminist movement and find Con's caricature of modern Feminism less than believable hyperbole. I look forward to Con's evidence based refutation in the second round.

  • PRO

    As for the feminism spreads lies i don't know of any...

    Modern Feminism is Necessary

    I will address victim blaming and feminism spreads lies first i don't know a feminist or even just a woman out there that doesn't agree that women need to minimize risk of sexual assault however it isn't the prevention that most feminists are upset about what we are the most loud about is that when women are victims of sexual assault how she is treated and handled. Take the college rapes for example in many cases these boys are given little to no punishment at all often not even a suspension while the girl is either slut shamed demeaned for her style of clothing or behavior and in many cases she isn't even believed some girls have to practically scream at the top of their lungs and do outrageous things just to get the college to take them seriously. Another one that i am glad to say is lessening is the the victim blaming you are probably speaking of when a woman is raped or assaulted especially if she was a sex worker a "slut" or was behaving or dressing in a more provocative manner. She is often dismissed as if her assault didn't matter particularly with sex workers whose lifestyle choice often makes people see them as somehow less. As for the feminism spreads lies i don't know of any besides the pay wage gap and i think that was an honest mistake which is why most people except the radical feminists aren't still perpetuating it. As for men they have indeed been helped by feminism today young boys are able to much more freely play with toys considered more feminine dress in a more feminine manner and don't have such pressure on them to play sports and be athletic. Which doesn't mean we will have a gender neutral society it just means gender roles won't be so set in stone another thing would be men expressing emotion for many years a man was taught he shouldn't cry and he shouldn't be upset in front of people even though sadness and crying are human traits that shouldn't be squelched it has caused men many problems including depression,drug or alcohol abuse,extreme anger,and even in some cases PTSD and other psychological trauma. I refute your claims that playing with dolls and such confuses children about their sexuality because sexuality in inborn into you and if a child turns out gay then it is because they were born gay not because they had a doll growing up. Now as for feminists helping men there have been many causes the feminism movement has picked up for men including the LGBT movement men's rape and sexual assault combating gender roles freely expressing male emotion and so and so forth prison rape isn't nearly as common as people think in fact much of the homosexual sex that goes on in prisons is consensual and often times men's rape and sexual assault is not taken seriously usually by other men if the man is raped by another male he is seen as weak for not being able to fight the male off and if he is raped by a woman he must have enjoyed it right? because a man could never not want sex from a woman. This is further exploited by the myth that if you become aroused during a rape you must have enjoyed it when in fact arousal and even orgasm happens more often during rapes then people once thought however is usually not reported out a victims shame. The feminist movement has helped to educate and highlight these facts and we are seeing attitudes shift now women's sexual assault is being taken more serious then ever and men's are even being legitimate none of this would have happened without feminism.

CON

  • CON

    Observations: To truly answer this question we first need...

    Feminism is still a force for good in western civilization

    Observations: To truly answer this question we first need to define a "force for good" which I will define as achieving something that is a societial problem and "good" as beneficial for the society. Keep in mind force for good requires an actual method to achieve the goals. C1: Feminists leaders and vocal feminists are biased to the point where sexism is perceived to be everywhere. I will provide a video, keep in mind this doesn't represent all feminists, but as of now the leaders and representatives of feminism have turned it into a force of destruction and anti-discussion There are more videos of attempting to talk to these Feminists which result in name calling and ad hominem attacks frequently. My opponent may attempt to argue this saying this isn't "real Feminism," however, I would ask my opponent to take a stroll through Tumblr or any other Feminism site and you will soon see the double standards they set up. While Feminism might supposed to mean something else, at this moment in time it has a negative connotation due to the fact it's leaders are promoting anti-discussion and major biases. Therefore, Feminism cannot be a force for good when such biases exist. Feminists claim that feminism is about equality. That is not really the case. Feminism, as long as gender is concerned, is about granting more privilege to women. A noble cause, since women are known to be oppressed throughout history. But does it end there? In areas where women are underprivileged, supporting and giving them more power will indeed lead to equality and is something that is greatly needed but also majorly achieved in most countries of western culture. However, in areas where women are not underprivileged or even equally privileged, doing so causes just another imbalance which immediately leads to discrimination, this time against males. The kind of one sided and absolute view of oppression is distinct in feminism and not only in gender: The opinion that if a specific group is in average more privileged than another, that means that members of the same group CANNOT be oppressed or treated unfairly by the latter is quite popular with feminists, especially in the academic space. They demonise masculinity and have come up with the term "hegemonic masulinity" to reinforce this idea. Since feminism has never ACTED in support of underprivileged straight, white males against overprivileged females in cases where male discrimination is a really serious and prevalent, this alone tells me that feminism is really, really far from egalitarian. These three reasons (lost of focus, bias and scientific neglect) is why feminism isn't only irrelevant but also harmful to the western culture. C2: A Feminist point of view, with the connotation it currently has, cannot ever solve the problems it claims exist. There is absolutely no denying that genders are not equal, and there are problems that need to be solved, however, Feminism in it's current state cannot possibly solve for this. Looking at gender problems through the biased view point of Feminism can only cause more problems, instead, we need to look at both genders problems and help both male and female. You can't find a single article about men's rights in Feminist literature because, by definition, they are only concerned with the female gender. This creates problems, because instead of attempting to help both genders, they only want to grant themselves more "privileges" B) Feminism not only ignores but downright denies the impact of BIOLOGICAL effect on gender and race even if there are many studies to prove them wrong. Instead, they interpret the various social phenomena based on their own experiences and ideologies. The fact that such a scientifically inaccurate movement has thrived in the academic space makes wonder: Why has the patriarchy allowed this? Does the patriarchy really exist? So if feminism does not rely on science to reinforce its positions, then what does it rely on? Victimisation. Feminism is no longer just about gender equality (if it ever was). It has expanded to race,class, age, religion etc with the same feeling of self righteousness and bitterness it had when it started. However, if this kind of suspicion was once a strength of feminism, now it is its weakness. The need of feminism to constantly find enemies has led it to deplecity and ideological narrowness. It is no longer about truth but advancing an ideological agenda which is not powered by cold hard evidence but theorems and opinions as well as clearly biased interpretations of reality.

  • CON

    The characterization of Cassandra is both somewhat...

    Feminism is ruining video games

    While my opponent has listed several changes in which Feminism might have influenced video games, he has yet to A.) Affectively persuade me that they’ve ruined video games (singular or plural), B.) Prove that feminism is the direct root of the change he mentioned, and C.) Provide sufficient evidence that suggests these games are worse because of their depiction of women. I, on the other hand, will suggest an instance where Feminism might have positively influenced games. The example that first comes to mind is the Dragon Age series, which depicts feminine characters in a much more positive light than games before it. 1.) The characterization of Cassandra is both somewhat masculinized, but does not suffer because of this. The depiction of Women in Power, especially in that of Inquisition, could be seen as a direct change because of Feminism. To argue that this is a negative aspect of the game would be somewhat ludicrous, being that it bears no influence with how the story is told. However, my second argument is not based on feminism’s influence on games; it’s actually based on its lack of influence. It is my contention that society’s changing viewpoints of sexualization and objectification caused a greater need to have female characters whom are portrayed as far more than sexual objects and damsels in distress. If one were to look at films, television series, and games throughout the past few decades, female characters have undergone a very specific evolution in attempts to battle the Male Gaze. Because of this, it is only natural that a video game will mirror the rest of society’s thoughts. Lastly, my final rebuttal deals with a specific point made by my opponent. In regards to a sexualized character in Metal Gear Solid 5, my opponent stated, “There was a big controversy over Metal Gear Solid 5 because one of the females had a typical athletic but sexualized body. So what is a developer suppose to do, make a woman fat? Well they did with Fat Princess and that got heat for depicting woman as fat, even though there are plenty of comedic fat male characters.” My opponent erroneously thought the complaints were directed at the woman’s body, whereas they were actually directed at the woman’s clothing. Here is an image of the woman: This is clearly sexualization, if not objectification. My opponant assumes feminists had a problem with her body, but it is my conjecture that they were more disappointed with the clothing depcition of this woman. If the woman had been more naturally dressed, the issue would be far less severe. That's it for now. I look forward to my opponents arguments!

  • CON

    And my first contention is that, well, we have equal...

    The world needs more feminism

    I thank my opponent for his argument and for using good sources. Sorry, I'm rather late as well. Here is my opening statement While the Oxford dictionary may define feminism as such, I will also consider what feminism actually is in the United States, and the impact it has had on the western world. Also, I would like to point out quickly that if someone considers everyone equal, they must also be considered meninists (or whatever you may consider this to be)as well as feminists, and so on. The premise of my argument is that feminism is an unnecessary and contorted association, that does no good for women or men alike. I would like to first define being "equal" as having equal opportunity, because in this country that is what matters. If you say "equal" as we refer to it in math, that is leaning towards a communist government where each person is treated as another robot, and the individual does not exist. This point here should not be too debatable, that when we say we are equal, we mean we have equal opportunity. Now, because the topic is about the world in general, I will also address the western world. And my first contention is that, well, we have equal opportunity here. We technically have the same opportunities and benefits, and the law prohibits discrimination against someone due to sex, so legally they are covered. Women are equal under the law. BUT, beyond this, I belive western feminists have gone too far, and are now promoting a more socialist agenda of radicalism rather than equal rights. If we begin to define equality as simply "equal", we come out with the idea that humans are exactly the same, and should be treated as such. This is where regimes stifle individualizations and living your life how you want to see it lived is simply a dream. So, here, I just want to show that women are legally equal, but if you venture into personal equality, you start to go down a path of socialism. Because you cannot, no matter how hard you try, force someone to change his or her mind. People are seperate and individual, and we have our own thoughts because we were meant to, and shutting that down is a violation of our rights as human beings, at least here. Sorry I didn't quote definitions here, by the way. I figured these simple ideas didn't need an official definition, because of he different ways we use it. Although the far majority of the population believes in sexual equality, and legally females are equal (in the western world), feminism still has a chokehold on how we think, and I would like to point out a major effect of this movement- the degration of the value of a woman: think about a relationship in the 50s- a guy would usually need to court a girl and win her trust before anything happens, and parties were more of a social interaction than mass orgies[1]. Today, girls are treated as absolute objects, only serving a temporary purpose before the guy moves on to his next choice. Divorce rates are at about 50% [2], showing that women and men alike are not being taught how to preserve a sustainable relationship. In conclusion, I would now like to say that developing countries would have more of a problem than a solution with feminism. Great societies have been built on traditional relationships and standards, and to be honest, I don't believe I need to cite a source here, the west has only experienced decline and relative turmoil since the liberal/feminist push began. In developing societies, what is necessary is the traditional roles of men and women, no matter how much it sounds bad. It is psychologically and sexually [3] beneficial to a couple to sustain normal gender roles. I don't believe a lack of feminism has anything to do with keeping developing nations down, being more about influence of the west in these nations and not allowing them to develop on their own power. Feminism is, beyond equal laws, a Marxist organization that shows itself to support equal rights, when instead it really represents the idea that everyone is the same, and people are no different from one another. [1]-http://www.plosin.com... [2]-http://www.apa.org... [3]http://www.mercatornet.com...

  • CON

    Whereas men have more accessability to such treatment....

    Feminism fights to harm men.

    Rebuttal to Opening Argument: To begin, I would just like to note that Pro's opening statement is practically a concession. By stating that the resolution is 'Feminism fights to harm men', then saying that you are only arguing against radicalism within the ideology, instead of the ideology itself, it a concession. Also, by only limiting their arguments to the western world, it is again a concession. The resolution is 'Feminism fights to harm men', not 'Radical misandry fights to harm men in the West'. However, I will still continue with my arguments. I. My opponent says that today's society is feminist, when it clearly isn't. The definition of feminism, as provided in my opening argument, is the abolition of patriarchy in favor of gender equality. Even if we were living within a female privileged society, it wouldn't be feminist. Since there is simply a new hierarchy that would've been established (matriarchy) instead of gender equality. II. My opponent bases his first point on an unsourceable event. Saying that you have been the 'victim' of feminists, then speaking about such event isn't a legitimate source. It is completely biased by your view of the event. Even then, these people you speak of aren't exactly the most prominent theorists within feminism. III. My opponent stereotypes that all feminists 'assume that men are predators'. This is a complete association fallacy, just because some feminists have a certain radical quality (misandry) doesn't mean that all feminists have a radical quality (misandry). IV. My opponent did not provide a source to back up point 3. V. There is evidence that shows that the number of women incarcerated has actually increased. The number of incarcerate women has increased fivefold from 2001, partially due to lack of treatment for women who violate laws. Whereas men have more accessability to such treatment.[1][2] VI. Solanas was both mentally insane, and highly criticized by fellow feminists. Solanas suffered physical and sexual abuse from both her father and grandfather[3][4], and would later in life be diagnosed with schizophrenia and be sent to a psychiatric hospital. Betty Friedan, who is noted as writing the famous book, The Feminist Mystique, said that Solanas' views were far too radical and polarizing.[5] VII. The Violence Against Women Act does not imply such by title. The Violence Against Women Act, by title, implies that women have been the main target of domestic violence historically. Women have only started to be seen as actual human beings with feelings rather than just house-keepers since the end of the Victorian Era. Which has been roughly 100 years. Pro also did not provide a source for point 6. VIII. Many of men's problems, such as homicide, are not caused by class struggle within a gender context. The statistics my opponent has mentioned are not directly caused by patriarchy, so why should strict (meaning they only adhere to this one ideology, that being feminism) feminists deal with such an issue? Are some of the numbers involved in those statistics caused by patriarchy, yes. However, saying that they don't care about men because their ideology isn't able to deal with every problem is baseless. However, most of those numbers were caused by different struggles within society, such as poverty. IX. Male rapes are also the result of patriarchy. Male-male rape usually occurs when one male either a) fails to meet the standards that the male gender has set upon them, and are seen as 'weak' and are more likely to be raped, or b) is seen as a means of achieving sexual satisfaction in a place (such as prison) devoid of females (which by many men can be seen as sex objects) and are used as a substitution. Male rape commited by females also occurs due to patriarchy, since males have to meet a standard of 'becoming a man' and are sexually assaulted by women who seek to gain sex out of such under this guise. This itself can actually cause some men to grow up hating women. Many feminist articles have been published in favor of ending male rape and female rape. Even then, it doesn't matter who gets raped more. Feminism is about trying to end patriarchial culture that harms both women and men. What feminists argue for is to stop rape and rape culture in general. X. The last few paragraphs provided by my opponent were just a copy/paste job.[6] Rebuttal to Second Argument: My opponent starts by reposting some of which they already posted in the first argument, please see above for my rebuttals to such. I. A dictionary definition cannot be 'tainted'. The radical feminists you mention are only more 'popular' since media can make more money by creating a story that is completely out of proportion and spread dishonest information than by telling the truth. Ideological definitions don't just 'change', anyone who is a misandrist or believes in feminine supremacy isn't a feminist by the definition I provided, since they obviously don't support gender equality. Also, your 'proof' doesn't 'defeat' a dictionary definition. Sources: 1- http://en.wikipedia.org... 2- Zaitow, Barbara H. and Jim Thomas. Women in Prison: Gender and Social Control. Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2003 3- http://en.wikipedia.org... 4- Watson, Steven (2003). Factory made: Warhol and the sixties (1st ed.). New York: Pantheon Books. pp. 35–36 5- http://en.wikipedia.org... 6- http://anti-feminism-pro-equality.tumblr.com...

  • CON

    So I bring you a series of facts to prove you that...

    THBT feminism has failed

    "Thank you for your point. Researchers found that women with a degree born in 1958 earned nearly three times as much as women in unskilled jobs born in the same year - compared to a difference of less than half between men in the same groups. We see that it is unfair for women because they have to work twice as hard as men to achieve a professional status in the society. We believe that we should reap according to what we have sown and it should be the same for everyone, no matter who they are. Some may say that we are too idealistic, but we hope to improve the problem, no matter how little a step we take." If we put this to your original statement, you have said that feminism has failed because women with a degree born in 1958 earned nearly three times as much as women in unskilled jobs in the same year - compared to a difference of less than half between men in the same groups. This is interesting because you did say you hope to improve the problem, no matter how little a step we take. So I believe the floor would agree that if I find an example of how this has been improved upon, no matter how little it is, or how this is actually an improvement, no matter the scale at how the situation before was worse, then I have won this round. So I bring you a series of facts to prove you that feminism hasn't failed, according to what you said. http://www.bbc.co.uk... - Please take time to read this article. "The mid-point salary of graduates aged 22 to 64 was "29,900, compared with "17,800 for non-degree holders, the Office for National Statistics found." You stated that women people born in 1958 earn three times more than women without a degree. Well over time, this figure is now 1.6. Here is an improvement, helped by the ideology that women are equal to men, which started with first-wave feminism, also known as the Suffragette Movement. This is an improvement, so feminism hasn't failed. Also, the percentage of women in a non-agricultural field of work is 44% in Europe and 48% in the United States, according to the World Bank(citation below). As you can see, I don't need to extend my point on how this is an improvement to your second point. This is fairly similar in the western world at least, and back to what I said in round one, you didn't specify a region or specify much, so in the world, this is still an improvement. You may think it is small, but you stated yourself you hope to improve the issue, no matter how little the step. So again, it isn't a failure. Finally, in case the floor still is skeptic, I should find an example of how what you said was still an improvement on before, and I will take you back to Sweden, in 1947, where only here were women allowed to have an equal salary. Unfortunately, you didn't specify, so in the whole scheme of things in the world, the fact that women had the chance to try to work was an improvement. Various countries only started opening universities which allowed women not too long before 1958, so the fact that women could get a degree is a success. For a list of successes for women's rights, view this article: http://goo.gl... (The article link wouldn't work) Everything here is a success, there isn't more at all I need to say, other than you weren't specific enough and said yourself that every little win is a success, and with successes of such a high magnitude, feminism has not failed. Read my sources as well. http://goo.gl... http://datatopics.worldbank.org... http://datatopics.worldbank.org... http://www.bbc.co.uk... http://www.ilo.org...

  • CON

    There are no rules in this debate. ... Whoever wants to...

    Feminism: Positive or Negative

    I am obviously against Feminism, because I feel it's no longer just a movement for equality, but a movement implying that all men are misogynistic pigs, which I obviously refute. There are no rules in this debate. Whoever wants to debate, accept the challenge and post your argument.

  • CON

    But really, a rape victim gets an abortion for the same...

    Modern Feminism Is Pointless

    1) This is not a debate regarding the ethics of abortion. But the legalization of abortion isn't an issue of female superiority. The lukewarm rape exception completely spits on the rest of the anti-abortion arguments. You say killing an unborn child is murder? Well, what aspect of rape makes it non-murder? Abortion is immoral? How does the pregnancy's origin somehow make it moral? Nobody ever says why abortion is a must in those cases and not others. The anti-abortioners just don't want to see someone getting off (ha) scot-free. But really, a rape victim gets an abortion for the same reason as the girl whose condom broke: they don't want a child. "Take responsibility" is purely an emotional opinion. Should we restrict treatment for smokers' lungs because "they knew there was a risk of it physically happening"? Sure, keeping it may seem more humble and responsible, but the fact that abortion is lazy isn't enough of a reason to illegalize it. 2) Well, yes, the feminist movement needs a major overhaul. But, in case you weren't able to tell for the entirety of the debate, I have been referring to the philosophy of But really, a rape victim gets an abortion for the same reason as the girl whose condom broke: they don't want a child. "Take responsibility" is purely an emotional opinion. Should we restrict treatment for smokers' lungs because "they knew there was a risk of it physically happening"? Sure, keeping it may seem more humble and responsible, but the fact that abortion is lazy isn't enough of a reason to illegalize it. 2) Well, yes, the feminist movement needs a major overhaul. But, in case you weren't able to tell for the entirety of the debate, I have been referring to the philosophy of feminism, not its visibly notorious practices of some current members. I don't know where feminism has insisted its problems are worse than others, and the facts you've shown to "prove" feminism is awry aren't even the faults of feminism. You never specified how Jodi Arias, lazy servicewomen who don't want to combat, and women making their husbands lose their property are products of feminism. They appear to be merely products of anti-man sexism. And of course it's not necessary to start a national protest when a woman is wronged, but when women at large are systematically wronged for an injustice directly related to being a woman, there's a problem that needs to be addressed. 3) "Prove the stereotypes wrong" is an utterly problematic argument. It's still unequal--under this approach, a man can act how he wants and not have that impact how he's viewed as a gender, but a woman will have to conform to specific ideals in order to look "respectable." It also shifts the blame--instead of answering accusations of sexism with "Oh, I have a really crappy view of women as a gender, I should change," it's changed to "Well, your group has a crappy view, YOU should change." Um, what were the women doing wrong in the first place? If anything, the prejudiced folks are the lazy ones demanding respect without changing themselves. It also stereotypes women and puts them into a limiting, defining box--under this approach, if some women are prominent and successful, then all of them have the potential to be viewed that way. The right to equality is determined by society's impression of women, not from merely being a human like everyone else. If that's not prejudiced, I don't know what is. The point? By being people, we're all entitled to the basic birthright of respect. There's no "working for" something deserved by default. Let's quit the bizarre justifications and start being decent human beings.

  • CON

    1: You offer no source for your definition, and you never...

    Modern Feminism is dead

    Thank you for responding, I will refute what you have said in two ways. 1: You offer no source for your definition, and you never said in your first speech, meaning that my definition of dead was the first one, as well as the only one with an actual source. This means that my definition beats yours. 2: Even still, with the definition of "dead" being essentially none, all I have to do is prov that there was 1 legitimate act of 1: You offer no source for your definition, and you never said in your first speech, meaning that my definition of dead was the first one, as well as the only one with an actual source. This means that my definition beats yours. 2: Even still, with the definition of "dead" being essentially none, all I have to do is prov that there was 1 legitimate act of feminism recently (so, let's say in the past 6 months). With that in mind, let's look at the "One Billion Rising Revolution". In the past four years, this organization has helped feminism in huge ways. In 2016, "activists in 200 countries rose up to demand an end to violence against women and girls as part of the global One Billion Rising movement. Using dance as a form of protest – events, rallies, flash mobs, artistic uprisings, panel discussions, and concerts took place in locations where women felt safe or deserve to feel safe, in community with other activists or alone, with people of all abilities, demanding justice and systematic changes, or reclaiming their bodies, their lands or their narratives." This quote was taken straight from their website, where they describe what they are doing this year. Here is the specific link: http://www.onebillionrising.org...; So now I have proven that there is at least 1 actual feminist movement. This means that even real feminism is not "dead". I win even on your definition.

  • CON

    Women are sentenced to 40% less prison time than men, for...

    Feminism is not an ideology of equality

    "The problem with that definition, and the philosophy it describes, presupposes that men have superior rights than women in every single case." The definition presupposes no such thing! It merely states that feminism is a philosophy of equality between genders. There are cases where women get more rights than men, and vice versa, but this is not actual feminism. You have not provided any of your own definitions, so I had the burden of providing them. I provided them, from a dictionary, and you have provided none. "That's not true. Men are not treated anywhere near fairly when it comes to child custody and child support cases [1]. Women are sentenced to 40% less prison time than men, for equivalent crimes, and more likely to avoid conviction altogether [2]. Prostate cancer, despite having a more-or-less equal rate of mortality and severity, recieves drastically less funding than breast cancer [3]." I never said that women were treated worse than men in today's society. There are double standards on both sides, and the aim of GENUINE I never said that women were treated worse than men in today's society. There are double standards on both sides, and the aim of GENUINE feminism is to get rid of both. By definition, any movement which does not demand equality between men and women is not feminist. "The term 'equality for women' is a contradiction in and of itself." Nonsense! It simply means getting rid of gender-related double standards. Not implementing them on one side, but eliminating them altogether.

  • CON

    I would point out that the claim that men work more than...

    The west doesn't need feminism, it needs to move

    I would point out that the claim that men work more than women is not true. At least according to some of the facts and figures out there. For example, http://time.com... I agree that men are also victims of crime and in bigger numbers. This is not an argument against feminism though. Could it not just be arguing that as well as feminism other groups need to campaign or feminism needs to expand what it focuses on, etc. The school situation may vary. Girls have been suspended as well for violence.