Pro vs. con view
1031 arguments retrieved in 2.0 ms

PRO

  • PRO

    I appreciate you taking the time to debate me on this...

    Feminism is irrelevant in today's society

    I appreciate you taking the time to debate me on this issue. Anyways... So I would consider myself an anti-feminist, but I believe in equal rights. Women are people and they have the ability to do what they please in society, but what I mean by anti-feminism is that today I feel that more and more, feminists are fabricating an evil system to fight against when the fight was won years ago. I also feel that some feminists these days are mistaking equal rights with equal results in life, which is ridiculous to fight for absolutely equal results in life. I also feel that feminism in this day and age could and does harbor true misandrists, which truly believe that women are superior to men in every facet of life, and wish to reduce them down to 10% of the Earth's population, or just celebrate International Male Castration Day. But never mind what my assertions are, let's get into the nitty-gritty. I'm just going to pull out of a (nonexistent) hat three issues of feminism... Domestic violence Consent and... The pay gap Let's take a look at domestic violence first. We all have the image of an abusive drunk of a husband smacking around his defenseless wife burned in our minds by the news and popular media, but when do we ever hear of the other way around? The abusive woman smacking around his husband? "Well why doesn't he fight back?" Because the media and feminists tell him day in and day out that by fighting back, he's an abuser and shouldn't do it. But don't just take my word for it, here is some information from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health put into layman's terms: "This statistic was undoubtedly the most striking: in committing acts of domestic violence, more women than men (25 percent versus 11 percent) were responsible. In fact, in the 71 percent of nonreciprocal partner violence instances, the instigator was the woman. This flies in the face of the long-held belief that female aggression in a relationship is most often predicated on self-defense." Also in an article, another quote: "The Department of Psychology at California State University, Long Beach, compiled a bibliography that examined 286 scholarly investigations, 221 empirical studies and 65 reviews and/or analyses demonstrating that which we are reluctant to discuss " the uncomfortable reality that women are as physically aggressive, or even more so, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners." So maybe, feminists should stop suggesting that women are victims all the time. So let's roll right into the next issue, consent. It seems that feminists these days like to paint any sexual encounter that a woman didn't enjoy and/or wasn't sober to say yes to as a rape and make the man a rapist, but I have a problem with this, because I believe that implied consent is a thing. I'm not alone here, Camille Paglia, who most feminazis (as they are sometimes called) deny as a real feminist, once said in an interview, "If a girl goes to a fraternity party dressed like Madonna, is drinking 11 tequilas, and goes up to a man's room, she is communicating below the level of language." Besides, here's a feminist quote for ya: "In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent." " Catherine MacKinnon If you believe her, women are not strong enough to do what they want and make their own choices in life. Which I don't believe, because women are individuals. Now, let's segway right into the last issue, the pay gap. No matter how often this gets debunked, it always survives, somehow (maybe because it's a bit of inconvenient truth) In the words of Miss Christina Hoff Sommers, "The bottom line: the 23-cent gender pay gap is simply the difference between the average earnings of all men and women working full-time. It does not account for differences in occupations, positions, education, job tenure or hours worked per week. When such relevant factors are considered, the wage gap narrows to the point of vanishing." Plus I also cited some more information for you. Just to put the cherry on this sundae, the wage gap, if it ever existed, it legally should have gone away in 1963 when JFK signed such legislation. Now, feel free to add to the debate, because, I'd like to have an actual debate about feminism without getting called misogynistic, a mansplainer, a rape apologist, and every other feminist name from A-Z. Also, I wanted to point out that I meant to say in the title Feminism is unnecessary, not irrelevant. I apologize for the inconvenience. Sources: http://web.csulb.edu... http://www.mintpressnews.com... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... http://www.consad.com... http://time.com... http://www.thedailybeast.com... http://www.huffingtonpost.com... http://en.wikipedia.org...

  • PRO

    But fighting for equal rights is actually second wave...

    Third Wave Feminism Isn't Needed

    I agree that feminism is needed in some countries. But fighting for equal rights is actually second wave feminism, and it is very much needed in third world african and asian countries. Third wave feminism in the United States if you do any research has to do with fat acceptance, abortion (which is already legal) and extending the gender spectrum, and no feminists I have met or researched are devoted to helping women in Mauritania or other such countries. Fat acceptance and body positivity are two different things. Body positivity is when a person is proud of their bodies, and dont want to change regardless of the health risks obesity can cause. Fat acceptance is when obese people complain about how they arent welcome into society and teach children being fat is a good thing. Being fat is not a good thing. It's unhealthy. My stance on abortion is that people should have the choice. If you dont want to get an abortion, dont get one. If you do, get one. I really couldnt care less. However, abortion is already legalized, and any further protests are unneccesary. There are two genders. Male and Female. There are rare exceptions of which people are born in the wrong body and transition to the other gender, or are born with neither, or male and female genitals. These again are RARE exceptions. There is no such thing as any other gender. Any other gender is simply a way of making yourself feel special, and get the attention you so desperately crave.

  • PRO

    Here is an analogy if a Father raises two Sons and claims...

    Feminism more like sexism or more like (Female supremacy).

    Feminism- Full Definition of FEMINISM 1: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests http://www.merriam-webster.com... feminism [fem-uh-niz-uh m] Spell Syllables Word Origin noun 1.the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men. 2:(sometimes initial capital letter) an organized movement for the attainment of such rights for women. http://dictionary.reference.com... Feminism is in itself on definition is sexist regardless if you are radical or regular feminist. I cannot word this any better than The Amazing Atheist or Tj Kirk "Feminism is the idea that we can make both sexes equal by focusing solely on the issues of one of them" - TheAmazingAtheist. Here is an analogy if a Father raises two Sons and claims to love them both equally wishes to treat them equally. Son A has (possibly) has more struggles in his life. Son B seems (possibly) to have equal problems as like Son A has. But the Father pursues to fix the problems of only Son A. If you don't get this analogy let me fill you in: the Father is society or in this case is a feminist with feminism ideologies, Son A are woman and Son B are men. If you think this analogy is reasonable just by itself (w/o comparing it to feminism) can a rational person claim this to be "equality" between the two sons? What I am basically conveying is that feminism only addresses the problems of females' oppression and won't even acknowledge or even as ignorantly deny the male issues. This is how feminism by its very nature is sexist. If you are a feminist Con and you truly believe in equality and both gender's problems should be addressed equally I very much urge you to call yourself a Humanist or rather an Egalitarian. Egalitarian: asserting, resulting from, or characterized by belief in the equality of all people, especially in political, economic, or social life. http://dictionary.reference.com... Humanist: a person having a strong interest in or concern for human welfare, values, and dignity. http://dictionary.reference.com... Another reason feminism is sexist because it actually undermines women. Modern feminism creates the delusion that women are oppressed constantly and are under the control of men. This idea is called the patriarchy which is very faulty in the Western world (and if you Con personally believe the patriarchy exists in the western world like for example the USA I can explain to you easily why it doesn't) , but lets say the patriarchy is real. If a woman honestly believes in the western world that a group of men or all men have actually controlled every one of her actions. Basically feminism is saying women are just brainless sheep to men , which is ridiculous and completely hates on women's intelligence. Now I shall explain to Con how feminism takes another leap SOMETIMES further to female supremacy.For the most part I am talking about radical feminism basically what it has become today. Radical feminist make ridiculous claims or arguments like: Women are naturally better parents so therefore have more rights than man to raising a child, Men accused of rape should be castrated, if a man sleeps with a prostitute that man is a rape supporter, if a man goes to strip club is demeaning women, and if a person is a anti-abortionist that person is sexist. Setting aside this debate I am fully for equality ,but I am not willing to wrongly label what I am, I love women. for shits and giggles though. I have taken several feminist quizzes and here some of my results: http://gyazo.com... http://gyazo.com... http://gyazo.com... And of course they suck because I disagree with feminism and with equality between the genders.......

  • PRO

    You must stick to Western Feminism, I have no problem...

    New Western Feminism is pointless and oppresive.

    My position is the position implied by the title. I'd like a rational discussion. You must stick to Western You must stick to Western Feminism, I have no problem with it where the rights of women are still obscured. Good luck.

  • PRO

    The notion of only representing one sexes issues to...

    Feminism is wrong

    The notion of only representing one sexes issues to create equality is ludicrous.Masculism has pretty much died but the growth of men civil rights groups such as MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way) have increased.These civil rights groups have pretty much just turned into finger-pointers mostly at the opposite civil rights activists.I agree with an interesting point that you brought up about the sexes mimicking the other sex.I think its sad when society thinks its great that a man would rather be a stay at home parent and the mother working. I'm not saying there should be gender roles frankly that is ridiculous. These activists need to stop viewing each other as enemies.Both civil rights claim they are fighting for the same thing right?So why are they bashing each other?We need equalism not feminism nor masculism.It is almost a shame that this debate has instead turned into a discussion board.But I enjoyed it and thank you.

  • PRO

    Yes because I want to tell you that men are much more...

    Feminism is harmful to society

    Yes because I want to tell you that men are much more likely to face discrimination than women 1. They represent most of homeless population 2. They are more likely to commit suicide 3. They have fight and die for war 4.they are over represented in dangerous work occupations 5. They had little to no protection against domestic violence 6. They get longer prison sentence And what did feminism do ? Nothing. MEN Do Not Benefit anything from them.

  • PRO

    By making man as the sole perception of life, you are...

    First World Feminism in the USA

    Conduct I understand that Con is source bombing, but please note that his intention were just to give me something to go on. Waive any source bombing penalties that you might think of. Although, It is also important to note that I am under NO OBLIGATION to respond and refute every single 'Personal MRA Life Experience' that he referenced to, since this was essentially a source bomb. I'm doing this just to spark the last round, since he has given me nothing to go on at this point. That said, let's continue arguing, I'm bored with technicalities. Video: MGTOW GENERATION - Young Men Are Giving Up On Women The video is filled with unappealing rhetoric, intended to exemplify suffering from a 'Man's perspective'. It is a complete reversal of liberal feminism, which uses the same "Please lift me in terms of status" argument. The video purposely said that it's intention was to refute radical feminism, however that is untrue. Radical Feminism is a minority which falls under a movement intended to abolish the social status of gender, not put it on a pedestal wheel. Moreover, It falls under what Simone have called the divide between one from the other(1). By making man as the sole perception of life, you are essentially dividing yourself from other groups. I understand the appeal of Non-conformity, but to be utterly selfish and self promote one's gender without any consideration of other social groups is absurd. Not only does it promote misinformation, but it promotes an apathetic, cynical environment which is highly destructive to societal cohesion. Individuals have an obligation to promote social cohesion, not denounce it by digging one's self into a rabbit hole and expect sympathy from the general public. 2nd Video: Girl DESTROYS feminism in 3 minutes (Lauren Southern) (Twitter: @PLAYBOYSTRESS) This is filled with an enormous amount of emotional appeal that is completely irrational. The video also moves and talks like a conspiracy UFO theorist, filled with adequate amount of emotional suspense intended to arouse uninformed audience. She makes the point about having received "supposed assaults" from liberal feminists and blabs on for a significant amount of time to make the audience appeal more towards her view. The only valid point she makes is Suicide rates, which is higher among men than it is among women. It does not, indicate the source of the suicide, however hard she tries to blame it on liberal feminism. The rest are a cluster disproportion of arguments. First of all, Women are raped more than men. they are more objectified than men. It is an intrinsic drive of men to have sex whenever he walks and moves along the earth's atmosphere. Objectification of men doesn't necessarily end in a negative light, as I'm sure they very much prefer to be objectified. Stroking men's ego is the easiest way to win his heart, especially when it comes to the the amount of 'cleavage' they possess, especially down there, right when they're measuring how long it is while contemplating what to do when the time comes. I am in under no position to argue beyond a personal viewpoint, since what she's essentially doing, is the EXACT same thing, by riling one's personal experience and expect it to be socially valid and representative. If personal experiences are valid, then I can use mine to counter hers. 3rd Video:Feminism vs. Truth Again with the rhetoric. This is the problem with youtube sources, especially if one doesn't have proper information over the issue. It does not help, whatsoever to reassert and restate how you're smarter than professors in women's studies, nor does it help to reassert a blanket and useless statement such as "Women are doing better than men in most cases". She criticized the wage gap as being non-existent, when most feminist have clarified that the wage issue isn't a sweeping statement that applies everywhere, but rather, it applies on an individual case. Domestic chores, sleep deprivation and nurturing schedules all contribute whether or not a certain family has a wage gap. This has been proven time and time again by Radical Feminist Philosophers. In conclusion, the arguments she provided are grossly misinformed and tends to rely too much on generalizing social issues. Sociological studies, require in-depth measurements to prove themselves as valid since there's simply no way to quantify social norms. There is no way Con can prove this video as valid argument, since the issue is non-existent in the first place. 4th Video:PROFESSIONAL VICTIM TACTICS (Guest video by Vernaculis) And how does real life examples, such as social status issues of manspreading(or shebagging) address inequality? How does complimenting one party and completely dividing the other as 'infamously ignorant' helps? The video clearly perpetuates everything that is wrong with society, simply being the obvious lack of social cohesion and the lack of tolerance. Disproving a sensitive issue requires one to have valid arguments, not backtrack themselves to an emotional appeal. Conclusion I thank Con for presenting me with those videos. It informed me on what appeals to the popular audience and what triggers them, which I'm usually unaware of in most cases. Good luck and I trust my opponent to have a civil response. Thank you again for this debate.

  • PRO

    1: Feminism: “the belief that men and women should have...

    On balance modern Feminism is beneficial to the modern United States.

    Resolve:On balance modern Feminism is beneficial to the modern United States. 1: Feminism: “the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities”(1) 2: Benificial: "producing good or helpful results or effects : producing benefits."(2) 4 Rounds, 10,000 Characters, 72 hours Round one: acceptance Round two: opening arguments Round three: Rebuttals Round four: Final Rebuttals and closing Statements (no new arguments) Thank you Mister_Man for agreeing to this debate. Good luck to you! Burden of proof on pro. (me) (1)http://www.merriam-webster.com... (2)http://www.merriam-webster.com...

  • PRO

    However, we have not discussed it because it is not...

    Feminism! Hooray!

    Hey, thanks again for the kind words. Like You, I'm going to have to keep this fairly ad hoc. I've been super busy with a publication that is coming out fairly soon and had to put this on the back-burner. I'm afraid that this 'post' will be far less detailed or considered than previous contributions and will be mainly dedicated to clarifying pervious points you have taken issue with, because I've only about half an hour. So, my apologies. Rape Culture I think that your point regarding non-gendered violence which primarily victimises males is somewhat misleading. While it is not the primary focus of feminism I don't think, as you appear to be arguing, that this failure somehow invalidates the concerns of feminists. You and I have been having fruitful discussion on the topic of violence, yet neither of us has brought up gun culture. Does that therefore mean that we do not have opinions or concerns on this topic? I can say that, in my case, absolutely that is not the case, and doubtless a thoughtful person such as yourself will also have views on that. However, we have not discussed it because it is not relevant (or has not yet been made relevant) to the agenda of our discussion. By the same token doubtless most feminists also have a position on the problem of violence as a whole, but that it is not pertinent to the specific issue that they are campaigning about. I also wholly disagree with you regarding the issue of the importance of their being a rape culture. As I believe that academic sources I provided earlier show, significant evidence regarding rape suggests that our culture, and the way in which it is gendered, and tends to objectify women, has a direct impact on rape as a crime. I think I've made this case in fairly clear terms. Regarding the way that women dress in reality, as opposed to media constructed notions of femininity, I think that it is something of a none-issue. As discussed earlier, rapists tend to select victims based on perceived ability to dominate them. Whether a woman wears a thong and short skirt or not is very unlikely to influence the odds on whether she is attacked by a sexual predator. It is also misleading to homogenise feminism in this kind of fashion, some feminists would oppose the way that young women dress while others would see it as empowering. Regarding your example, until you can show that women can take meaningful measures against being raped, then the point is moot. Anita Again, I don't think that, despite her popularity, that she adequately showcases feminism to be worth giving the oxygen of further discussion. I don't think that, despite her recent e-fame that she is representative of anything, and I also strongly suspect that she is not completely 'genuine'. I don't want to libel her with unsubstantiated accusations, so I'll leave it at that. You sound like you have played a fair number of games in an online environment, as have I. Perhaps it is the different games that we both tend to play, but I would say (and it is only my experience, but one I think is well backed up by commentators I've referenced in previous rounds). Female Nudes You contend that this happens to men as well, and that may be true. However, it seems to disproportionately happen to women. Why else is it, that this vast invasion of female celebrities privacy seemingly effected only female celebrities? Where men were involved, they were incidental to the main target of the hack. Steubenville Again, as I noted, I picked that example because it was so egregious. As I hoped I showed with my follow up, the wider point is to show general media attitudes which studies of discourse analysis have showed are undeniably gendered. Pay gap While you are correct that I have not directed you to the raw data, I think that given the other supporting evidence provided (including the conclusions of the US Department of Labor) that the material I provided can be considered a truism. Meanwhile, the articles I provided, which explained the phenomenon on a psychological level, have not really been addressed in your replies. Anyway, again, I'm sorry that this reply is somewhat perfunctory. I hope to make it up to you in my concluding remarks.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism-Hooray/1/
    • score
      BM25 score: 19.54
      feminism: 19.54
      conclusion: 11.41 (boost 1.50, idf 5.97, tfNorm 1.27)
      premises: 6.18 (idf 5.90, tfNorm 1.05)
      sourceText: 1.95 (boost 0.20, idf 4.68, tfNorm 2.09)

CON

  • CON

    It wouldn't be necessary if people stop belittling the...

    feminism NEEDS to be stopped

    The feminism is necessary, because the woman has always been despised by the society. It wouldn't be necessary if people stop belittling the figure of the woman, but this never happened, and It will never happened with closed mindsets. That's why you need one, two, three waves, it doesn't matter, It matters the message that woman isn't an object of the world. When we stop being treated as inferior people... we do not stop fighting, because It's many years treating us like this. And we want our place. The vocabulary, the culture, the history, the works... in many areas the woman is denigrated, in the XXI century, and that is rather worrying.

  • CON

    I have heard a lot about it being about equality, and...

    Modern Feminism

    Modern Feminism in the united states has no place. I have heard a lot about it being about equality, and that women are treated less than men in society, they act and make the situation appear as if they were an African American in the late 1800's. What i would like to point out is that there are people in other countries, such as Afghanistan, or china, where women legitimately are objectified and they are oppressed, here in the United States they have many rights, we also have had a women's suffrage movement where they were granted rights they did not previously have. In the current day they act as if we are still in that day and age, when women get raped it's because someone who has serious mental issues was allowed that opportunity, some are under the influence of illicit drugs and or they're potentially more uncontrollable counterpart, alcohol. Not many men rape or even have thoughts of rape, nor any desire to do so. A simply hello or a casual comment that is meant in a flirtatious or even a courteous way does not signify or blow a whistle (that's ironic) signalling rape. Thinking in that way is a very paranoid and self destructive way to think. "Rape culture" is not a real thing and thinking so is downright delusional and signifies a very mislead mind.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Modern-Feminism/3/
    • score
      BM25 score: 19.59
      feminism: 19.59
      conclusion: 11.41 (boost 1.50, idf 5.97, tfNorm 1.27)
      premises: 6.33 (idf 5.90, tfNorm 1.07)
      sourceText: 1.85 (boost 0.20, idf 4.68, tfNorm 1.98)
  • CON

    Ads that show women in bikinis aren't going to raise the...

    Modern Feminism is Necessary

    Thanks, Orange. I'm glad we can agree that "objectification" isn't the best word to describe this, but I can understand that it's hard to find a word. My solution would be to not put negative labels on natural human behavior. I'm attracted to women, like most men, and that doesn't mean I think of them as nothing more than something to have sex with. And even then, even if my sole purpose of getting to know a girl was to have sex with her, it still doesn't mean I'm treating her as less than human. There's this strange stigma going around recently, thanks to feminism, that it's bad to hook up with people. All thanks to the word objectification. By hanging out with someone simply to have sex, even if consensual, you are "objectifying" each other, which is a horrible thing, except both the people participating are just unaware of it. Alright, let's get to business. Over-sexualization of people Nobody is made to do anything in the media. A position opens up, and someone says they would like to do that. If a woman doesn't want to wear a bikini next to a burger, she doesn't have to. If a man doesn't want to stand shirtless next to an air freshener, he doesn't have to. Nobody is forcing people to do this. If they want a career in modeling or acting, they can apply to companies that they feel suits them. The choice that other people make on what to do with their own body isn't up to you to decide if it's right or wrong. This is one of the reasons I consider feminism to be a bad thing. More often than not, feminists claim to be for equal rights, opportunities, etc, but when someone does something they don't like, even if it doesn't affect them one bit, they try to put a stop to it. What you're doing, saying how horrible it is for a woman to look attractive next to a burger, is the exact opposite of what the original feminism's goals were. You're (in a sense) telling women what they should and should not do, because you do or don't like it. The women in these commercials have every opportunity not to call in and audition for the part, and they have every opportunity to leave if they feel uncomfortable. There isn't a problem here. I can't argue against every point your article brings up, but the main theme I noticed was basically "the less clothing a person wears, the more sexually they are looked at." Now, this isn't a bad thing, nor is it breaking news. If a woman sees a naked man, she will (more often than not) look at him in a sexual way. If she sees a man in a suit, or shirt and jeans, she will (more often than not) look at him in a non-sexual way. Same applies for men. Watching movies or ads or music videos with naked men and women isn't going to change anyone's perspective of men and women. The sexual crime rate has decreased [2], so obviously men are viewing women in a more respectable way, and more is being done to ensure women are safe. Ads that show women in bikinis aren't going to raise the sexual assault rate, nor will it change anyone's perspective of women. I can speak from personal experience... I'm a man. I see ads with attractive, scantily-clad women all the time. I don't view women as "objects" or give their ideas no value or significance. To think that men will all of a sudden not care about women, or think of them solely as "sexual beings" because they saw a semi-clothed woman in an ad is ridiculous. I also have one huge criticism of this article. The title alone is making women out to be victims, and men out to be aggressors. The title alone (as well as the rest of the article) portrays men as sex-crazed animals, and women as victims. If this is feminism, then feminism is horrible. Not only do women look at men in a more sexual way the less clothes they have on, they tend to (as well as men) buy products on impulse if an attractive model is used in the ad [1]. So what exactly is feminism trying to do, other than make women look like weak victims of horrible big bad sex-craved men? Well, stop people from doing what they want with their own lives. Slut Shaming I agree that someone who has a lot of sex should be looked at no different than someone who doesn't have a lot of sex, other than the chance of STI's etc. However, this isn't a feminism issue. This isn't even a human right's issue. This is a "people will be jerks" issue. I've been ridiculed for having many sexual partners, asked how many diseases I have, how my AIDS is, how much I pay in child support, if I'm happy not having any worth and looked at as a sex object (lol), and the list goes on. Considering a hell of a lot of this is strictly anecdotal, it wouldn't make a lot of sense to say "this happens to women way more than men." Although the term "slut," "whore," etc. is thrown around, this doesn't mean the male equivalent isn't happening just as much. In fact, with the SlutWalk and other events to stop female "shaming," this goes to show that bad stuff happening to women is taken more seriously than bad stuff happening to men. There isn't a "player walk" or organizations trying to put a halt on the word "gigolo" or "manwhore" or "player" etc. More often than not, women are the primary ones who receive support for negative stuff that happens to both men and women. Same goes for abuse. There are a thousand women's shelters for every man's. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, I'm saying feminists need to realize this - the only people who treat women poorly are bad people to begin with, and will most likely treat everyone poorly. And a side note; anyone in the porn industry is usually dismissed instantly. The reason it happens "more" to women than men is because nobody gives a damn about the men in porn. They're there for the attractive women. I can guarantee you if an equally well-known male pornstar and female pornstar were talking with their audience, they'd get ridiculed equally. Masculinity So like I said earlier, the definition of feminism has little to no effect on this argument, however I would like to bring up that it is "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men." So the original idea (and current idea) isn't to help men; it's to help women achieve equality to men - something they already have. Keep in mind that what you *want* to happen, or what your *idea* is, isn't going to dictate the movement as a whole. It's nice to say "feminism wants equal treatment for men too," but it's even nicer when it actually happens. Feminists aren't outside prisons chanting "end prison rape," they aren't outside women's shelters chanting "what about men," etc. Allowing boys to dress like girls and play with dolls is arguably detrimental to the growth of those boys, as they have a larger chance of growing up confused about their sexuality, and an even larger chance of getting bullied or picked on. Turning men into women and women into men (eliminating gender norms is your goal, I assume) is detrimental. Men are attracted to women, and women are attracted to men. If everyone acted like the same gender, it would be annoying and deter people from reproducing. Of course this isn't going to stick though, so I'm not concerned. And just out of curiosity, do you have a link or source to a feminist website about a feminist actually doing something about negative things that effect men? Not just writing a blog, I mean protesting or something along those lines. Because what I see are feminists addressing the very few issues that primarily effect women. Men are more likely to be murdered, assaulted, robbed, homeless, commit suicide, get injured at work, and many more. Men and women are equally victims of rape (if you take prison rape into account), almost equally victims of domestic violence [3], yet feminists focus solely on the issues that primarily effect women, or the female victims of bad things that affect men and women. When less bad stuff happens to women than men, yet feminists claim women are at a disadvantage, it says something. Oh and just for added pleasure, Bustle, a known feminist website, claims men cannot be the victims of sexism [4]. A feminist website claims sexual discrimination against men does not exist. This is not equality, this is actually detrimental to the whole of society. It pisses off men, and it turns every woman on Earth into an innocent, weak victim. I'm on women's sides, I'm not on feminist's sides. I also see you didn't argue against my points about Victim Blaming and that Feminism spreads lies. I urge you to argue against those, as those are kind of important points. Thanks! Talk to you soon. Sources [1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk... [2] http://reason.com... [3] http://www.theguardian.com... [4] http://www.bustle.com...

  • CON

    I probably should have clarified in our conversation, but...

    On balance modern Feminism is beneficial to the modern United States.

    Thanks very much for challenging me to this debate! I probably should have clarified in our conversation, but we should both be able to agree that when we refer to I probably should have clarified in our conversation, but we should both be able to agree that when we refer to Feminism, we are implying the movement - actions of others based on this belief. I'm sure everyone can agree men and women should be treated equal, but it would be up to you to prove they currently are not treated equally, and one gender is treated as inferior; given less opportunities for schools, jobs, etc. My side of the argument is that we do have equal opportunities and we are treated equally - this means we can have practically any job, and the very few jobs that the majority of one gender dominates, there are equal jobs for the opposite gender to dominate in. Same goes for school classes and such. Hopefully we can agree that when we talk about feminism, we aren't only referring to the idea that men and women should be treated equally, but actions of others influenced by feminism and movements aided toward achieving "equality." Looking forward to a good debate!

  • CON

    Definition 2: organized activity on behalf of women's...

    Feminism is about equality.

    I will be arguing against the above resolution. My opponent will be arguing for the above resolution. Definitions Feminism: Definition 1: the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes. Definition 2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests Equality: the quality or state of having the same rights, social status, etc. -from merriam-webster.com Burden of Proof will be shared. Above definitions are not subject to change. RULES Round 1 is for acceptance ONLY. Any arguments will be disregarded by myself and the audience. Round 2 is the beginning of the Debate. Opening Statements only, no rebuttals. Round 3 is for Rebuttals. Pro and Con may only attack the argument that has been presented by his/her opponent. Previous points may not be defended. Round 4 is for Defense and Cross Examination. Pro and Con may defend his/her previous position by attacking the rebuttal presented in Round 3. New evidence may be presented. No new arguments are allowed in this round. Pro and Con may ask a clarifying question of his/her opponent, in order to move into round 5. Cross Examination may NOT be based upon circular reasoning. The answerer of this question (the person being asked) must address HOW the question contains circular reasoning in order for them not to be required to answer. Round 5 is for Answering the CX question, further Defense and Closing Arguments. Failure to follow the above rules will result in a 7 point loss. Forfeiture of a round will result in a 4 point loss. Further Clarification Arguments may be made regarding the way feminism and feminists has affected the lives of ALL people, this includes laws, media, literature, etc. However, I will be basing my argument from a North American Standpoint. If my opponent wishes to address other countries, this must be discussed in the comments section.

  • CON

    Woman are encouraged to take risks and do something they...

    Feminism is needed in America

    Response to A) That is not really an argument, more of introduction to any argument. Woman are not discriminated against, that is why we do not need feminism. Response to B) You argue that woman are horribly under represented in STEM fields. You say this is because of "the fact that women are not encouraged to pursue these fields" Well, there are hundreds of groups and origination's dedicated to get woman into STEM jobs. I would say that is encouragement to pursue these fields. Woman are encouraged to take risks and do something they are passionate about especially if it is a STEM job. "The fact that this attitude (referring to the attitude of girls usually encouraged to switch to easier subjects at the first sign of trouble) still exists, and is robbing us of bright young scientific minds, is an excellent reason for feminism to exist." This "attitude" doesn't exist. Today, It is constantly enforced that woman are supposed to go into STEM fields. Woman get hired more easily in STEM fields because people are afraid of being labeled sexist for hiring a man. http://en.wikipedia.org... http://stemwire.org... Response to C) -"Many, especially the older generation, still expect women to raise children and stay home, and frown on the childless, career motivated woman" This proves some people are still sexist. But that does not justify a movement because of that. Some people are racist against white people or are sexist against men. -"Lots of women take their husband's surname when marrying, a tradition that hearkens back to the days of women being literal property." So? Woman deserve the choice to take there husbands surname if they want them to identify in the same family. -" Well, the Bechdel Test isn't meant to evaluate specific movies, but to observe trends across Hollywood." No it is just a random test to see if a movie has the right attributes to be "feminist approved". Which is stupid. -"While the results point to more gender diversity in film, the results are still skewed in favor of male centric films." This is because of movies wanting to make money and artistic freedom. People should be allowed to right whatever script they want and people want others to like there movie. If it is targeted towards men then it tends to have a male protagonist.

  • CON

    I understand where you're coming from, And yes I agree,...

    Feminism Needs to die out

    I understand where you're coming from, And yes I agree, unfortunately women are taking feminism way too far But that doesn't mean rights for women should be taken away; First we need to know the exact definition of feminism : It is the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of sexes. So women want to be as equal as men and I do not see a problem with that. Back in the old days, and up until today; women have been buried alive, slaughtered, treated as slaves, being beaten up till death and the list just never ends. In India, there is a higher population of men than women, because there are still families there that just bury their new born daughter alive.. how cruel is that? Obviously women who are gonna here these sort of things are going to stand up for themselves and tell the world that they have a place in society. I am not saying that women should go to a point where they think they are more superior to men; I mean that they should have the same equal rights as men have in society. A woman's role isn't just staying home, cleaning and cooking; women have a voice, they have a role in being outside the real world, they don't deserve to just be treated as housemaids. And also, how many girls today are being treated badly by their boyfriends; they start dating and making out, next minute the girl falls pregnant and the guy just dumps her; it happens a lot these days. A true feminist won't take it too far and act so superior against men

  • CON

    I'll start by saying I'm not a feminist. Just someone who...

    Today's types of Feminism isn't needed

    I'll start by saying I'm not a feminist. Just someone who enjoys playing devils advocate. Secondly I'd like to pull a definition of Feminism, "Feminism is a range of political movements, Ideologies, And social movements that share a common goal: to define, Establish, And achieve political, Economic, Personal, And social equality of sexes. This includes seeking to establish educational and professional opportunities for women that are equal to those for men. " Now, I'd like to point out that in your title you said 'types' and in your argument you referred to feminism in general not being necessary and stating there is no inequality between Men and women anymore. I'm going to assume your argument takes precedence over the title. With that being said I agree that Men and Women both are entitled to the same set of rights. I do think it's bold however to assume that no gender inequality exists despite Men and women being equally entitled to the same rights. While I for one am not in favor of any extremist ideology whether it be in the form of Man hating feminists, Pro-communist left wingers, Or Ku Klux Klan robe wearing alt-righters, I'm also not in favor of the dissolution of any group of people on the basis of their opinion being invalid, And especially so when I think that there are in fact valid points they're making, Like in the case of a woman's rights activist citing studies that show income gaps on a large scale for men and women in the same field. I won't sit here and argue physiology or Biology with you, I'm aware that Men and Women have different body types and on average are better suited to different types of physical labor, But I've come across no reasonable evidence that men and women with the same occupation outside of physical/manual labor are predisposed to work more efficiently than one another based solely on their gender. Perhaps there is an argument to be had there, But again none that I've come across being irrefutable proof. With that point in mind, There are multiple studies that show an albeit narrowing pay gap, But one that still exists. I referenced A department of Labor study and a payscale. Com study that show the overall pay gap between men and women at somewhere around 79 cents on the dollar in general, But more pertinent to my argument they showed a controlled pay gap study where the gap was 98 cents on the dollar, And widened to about 94 cents on the dollar for executive positions. Now the controlled pay gap study is better in my opinion in that it compares men in women in the exact same fields, And in the case of the Executive's being studied a job that requires essentially no physical strength or ability but rather use of ones mind and a prerequisite of having been educated, And mind you there is statistical evidence showing that now in recent years more women have been receiving degrees than men. So, Presuming the data collected in these two studies I referenced and the many more that exist and can be easily found online there does still exists a gender pay gap, Though albeit one that is narrowing. But if one still exists on the basis of what can be concluded as discrimination based on gender when all other variables are controlled, Then the need for a feminist movement in favor of eliminating an in-equality like the one mentioned above does in fact still exist today. Now looking at issues other than those pertaining to economics and job opportunities I'll cede to you that it is much harder to quantify and qualify data. It's like asking if racism still exists in America, Which then you can have a big philosophical debate as to what qualifies as racism and whether or not its ingrained in us to be predisposed a certain way given our upbringing etc. , Etc. I don't want to delve to deep into that side of the debate in regards to women being socially oppressed as it's a more case by case scenario, Where you can observe different subsets of the population embracing rather old fashioned and misogynistic views and treatment of women, But I also feel that on the whole, Mainstream Western society has embraced more social equality for women. Now that doesn't mean like I say certain subsets of the population still exist where women are treated unfairly, And it doesn't mean that in other parts of the world women aren't treated equally either, And because of those instances of social oppression of women still occurring, Again I don't think one can make the argument for feminism and its goal of eradicating social inequality for women being eradicated can be made. In closing, While I agree that calling for the death of all Men and extreme feminism as with any other extremist viewpoint is typically not something to be deemed as productive for society but to make the argument that Feminism isn't necessary anymore implying that the social and economic inequality the movement strives to rid the world of has already been accomplished is altogether incorrect. Pay-Gap Studies: Department of Labor Report: https://www. Dol. Gov/wb/resources/Womens_Earnings_and_the_Wage_Gap_17. Pdf Payscale. Com report: https://www. Payscale. Com/hr/gender-pay-gap College Degree Gap in Favor of Women: https://www. Aei. Org/publication/prediction-no-2017-graduation-speaker-will-mention-this-the-growing-gender-college-degree-gap-favoring-women/

  • CON

    But even putting aside that fact, First World feminism...

    Feminism is necessary in modern First World countries.

    Many of the arguments feminists utilize to justify the existence of a feminist movement in developed countries are outdated or myths. For example, the wage gap does not exist. Putting aside the fact that it is illegal to pay someone less for doing the same job [1], discrepancies in wages result from the fact many women simply are not going into higher paying jobs, and often quit early to take care of family [2]. While it can be argued that this wage gap is a result of the 'patriarchy' forcing sexist social norms upon us, it does not change the fact that the modern-day First World woman has a great deal of freedom when choosing their education, career path, and even family life. Personal choices must be taken into account. Other myths are described at [2], but listing them all would be tedious. Suffice to say that First World feminism often relies on falsehoods. But even putting aside that fact, First World feminism often engages in other terrible acts, such as co-opting movements to promote men's health [3], treating all men as potential rapists (guilty until proved innocent, essentially) [4], among others. This may have been tolerable if feminists actively tried to regulate their movement, but criticisms of feminism are taken as either sexism or internalized misogyny, depending of the gender of the one criticizing it. Indeed, even when feminists are clearly doing terrible things, such as being shown as sexual abusers, some feminists may still defend them [5]. In all, it is clear that First World feminism runs on the spread of falsehoods about women's plight in developed countries, and it could even be argued that it is causing more harm than good. [1] http://www.eeoc.gov... [2 ] http://time.com... [3] http://www.huffingtonpost.com... [4] http://blog.simplejustice.us... [5] http://time.com...

  • CON

    A3: Feminists show unbridled hatred for men Let me show...

    Feminism is for equal rights for all genders not just women.

    Thank you, VoiceforEquality. I will first continue my Negative Case, then I will address my opponent’s arguments. Negative Case Premise: The myth of gender equality Wholly untouched, thus it stands. A1: Unequal rights in STEM fields My argument that shows clear inequality forced by the hand of feminism is wholly uncontested. A2: Pay Gap Theory is inherently sexist against men One of the most common arguments espoused by feminists is that there is a roughly 0.75:1 ratio in pay between women and men. This is fallacious argument that relies on dishonest manipulation of statistics, which includes ignoring the varying factors in the gap (things like hours worked, types of jobs worked etc.) [5]. Mark Perry and Andrew Biggs, two scholars at the American Enterprise Institute, found that the differences could be explained in a similar fashion, “men were almost twice as likely as women tow work more than 40 hours a week, and women almost twice as likely to work only 35 to 39 hours per week. Once that is taken into consideration, the pay gap begins to shrink… 88% of male earnings” [6]. They continued, taking similar factors that would affect pay, and effectively reduced the gap to a negligible amount. An OECD report, The Price of Prejudice: Labour Market Discrimination of the Grounds of Gender and Ethinicity, found that when examining UK data, merely “differences in motivation, expectations and field of study can explain up to 70% of the observed wage gap” [7] [8]. When all factors are controlled for, the pay gap vanishes in the U.S. It is only through feminist’s blatant ignorance and/or manipulation of statistics is there an unjust pay gap between the sexes. Thus, once again, feminism pushes towards inequality by arguing that the “patriarchy” discriminates aganst women when it does no such thing here. A3: Feminists show unbridled hatred for men Let me show you what some famous feminists have treated us to, in terms of quotes involving “equal rights for all genders”: “I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class is oppressing them” – Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor “To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo” – Valeria Solanas, Authoress of the SCUM (Society for Cutting up Men) Manifesto “Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation, and destroy the male sex” – Valerie Solanas “The male is a domestic animal which, if treated with firmness…can be trained to do most things” – Jilly Cooper, SCUM “I want to see a man beaten to a blood pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig” – Andrea Dworkin “The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men” – Sharon Stone; Actress “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race” – Sally Miller Gearhart, in The Future – If There Is One – Is Female If feminism is about “equal rights for all genders”, then these proclaimed and celebrated feminists advocate man-hating as “equal rights for all genders”, which is clearly contradictory. Counter-arguments The faulty definition of feminism: equality of the sexes. I completely reject this definition on this basis that I have shown it is not reality. We are debating whether feminism is about equal rights of the sexes, so my opponent’s appeal to definition is fallacious in that it is purely a ploy at semantics, rather than a sustained argument as to why the definition should be that way. Eliminating of stereotypes because we do not understand human psychology Short-hair: My opponent declares that this is merely a “stereo-type” without providing a shred of evidence, thus making this argument a logical fallacy as it is a bare assertion [1]. Hair-length is one of the many facets that rated in terms of sexual attractiveness, according to evolutionary psychology. In his book The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, which collaborates research on the topic, David M. Buss describes how multiple studies have found hair-length is highly correlated with female attractiveness, due to long hair indicating good health [2, page 309]. “Starvation causes loss of hair, nutritional deficiencies in vitamins and minerals cause damaged hair… hair, therefore, provides an observable record of an individual’s recent health and nutrition”. This is why, as Etcoff (1999) found that long-hair is attractive across ALL cultures, despite the wild differences in cultures [3]. Once again, feminism has the incorrect context of “stereotypes”, instead of the correct context of “evolutionary psychology”, thus feminism, in reality, feminism ignores our instincts rather than pursuing any notion of “equal rights for genders” by fixing “stereotypes”. Make-up: The notion that women put make-up on purely because society tells them is to ignore the context in which inspired women to put it on in the first place. Again, have a look at evolutionary psychology. David M. Buss’ book elaborates on why skin quality is another facet in which human males looked for sexual partners. In ages where insect bites, diseases, infections and a host of other ailments brought ill health, men would choose for women with the least blemished skin as that was the healthiest (and thus, most likely to continue the lineage) [2]. As Grammer et al. (2002) found in his research involving men rating the attractiveness of naked women, he found that there was a large positive correlation between skin “homogeneity” (a symmetrical face without blemishes) and general attractiveness [2]. Similar findings were found in Fink et al. (2001): “[when subjects were presented] with faces whose shapes were standardized… [it was] found that skin texture significantly influenced attractiveness ratings” [2]. Finally, in another article published by Fink and Pento-Voak called Evolutionary Psychology of Facial Attractiveness, which summarised the findings of researcher’s work into the field, it was concluded that “these mechanisms [involving evolutionary psychology] are presumed to be highly resistant to cultural modification” [4]. As you can see, make-up use has its origins in wanting to be more attractive to the opposite sex, rather than merely being “stereotypes”. My opponent’s list of bare assertions “Feminism brought women out of the household — if they so chose. Feminism broke barriers for little girls with presidential aspirations. Feminism triggered the FBI to change the definition of rape to include men. Feminism enabled men to spend more time with their children. Feminism demanded that the media change its representation of men.” My opponent provides no sustained reasoning as to why you should believe these claims. Thus, they are bare assertions, which is the second time my opponent has applied this logical fallacy [1]. Even if any of these are true, my opponent gives you no reason as to why to believe that, hence these are insufficient as arguments in a debate. References [1] http://www.toolkitforthinking.com... [2] http://books.google.com.au... [3] Etcoff, N. (1999). Survival of the prettiest. New York: Doubleday. [4] https://www.uni-muenster.de... [5] http://www.marketwatch.com... [6] http://billmoyers.com... [7] http://www.avoiceformen.com... [8] http://www.oecd.org...