Pro vs. con view
1031 arguments retrieved in 1.0 ms

PRO

  • PRO

    Extend

    Feminism

    Extend

  • PRO

    Utah and Idaho follow in 1896, Washington State in 1910,...

    Feminism

    The fight for equal rights and the abolishment of Sharia law will not be easy. It will result in death of many women and probably some men. It will take years, but it will be worth it. No equal rights movement has ever been quick. [1] The first American women's rights convention was held in Seneca Falls, New York in 1848. In 1893 Colorado was the first state to adopt an amendment granting women the right to vote. Utah and Idaho follow in 1896, Washington State in 1910, California in 1911, Oregon, Kansas, and Arizona in 1912, Alaska and Illinois in 1913, Montana and Nevada in 1914, New York in 1917; Michigan, South Dakota, and Oklahoma in 1918. Finally on August 26, 1920, the 19th Amendment was signed by Secretary of State Bainbridge Colby. It wasn't even until 1903 when the National Women's Trade Union League was established to improve wages and working conditions for women. No equal rights movement has ever been painless. [2] In spite of peaceful public protests, meetings with Congressmen, parades and petitions, the activists were at a standstill and became frustrated. In 1917, they started picketing outside the White House. This cause quite an uproar and it wasn"t unusual for the police to arrest the suffragists for blocking the sidewalk and causing a public nuisance. They were threatened, beaten, chained, and force fed by a rubber tube. The fight for women's suffrage in the middle east has already begun in certain areas. However they obviously have a log way to go for full equality [3] : -In Egypt at Tahrir Square, men and women protested together for weeks. Hundreds of women slept in the square during the Egyptian revolution to preempt a takeover by regime forces. -In Yemen, women were active in the protests against former President Ali Abdullah Saleh. Female Yemeni journalist and activist, Tawakkol Karman, became one of the faces of the Arab Spring and received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2011. -In Syria at the start of the uprising, women organized protests, provided basic supplies to affected families, and spoke out against the regime. Women in Tunisia joined male protesters in efforts to oust long-standing ruler Zine El-Abidine Ben Ali. Equally, women were also victims of the former regime's crackdown. Like I said, the fight for world wide equality will not be easy. Just like we have seen before, people will be beaten, tortured, and killed. Just because it will be difficult to achieve something, does not mean an attempt shouldn't be made. [1] http://www.infoplease.com... [2]http://www.momsrising.org... [3]http://www.fairobserver.com...

  • PRO

    I would like to thank my adversary for conceding and...

    Feminism

    I would like to thank my adversary for conceding and offering his opinion on the issue. I will admit that I too have reserves about how often this topic is often used and abused by people. People can simply take the name and abuse it, but at its core as we both agree, it is merely about restoring equality. Thank you for the concession and a wonderful debate. I will merely type no argument due to concession for the following rounds. Be sure to award much needed conduct points to my adversary, as he was so polite with his concession. Thanks to everyone who read all this

CON

  • CON

    However, the wage gap does not account for the following...

    Feminism is necessary in modern day United States.

    Alright then. Round two begins. I keep this simple, since it is only the first round. I would first like to point out that I am all for equality between men and women, and that I myself am female. In fact, if feminists actually stayed true to their morals, I'd call myself a feminist. First off, I would like to address why the movement is unneeded in the U.S. Secondly, I will explain how feminism is now corrupted with dogma. Finally, I'll discuss the good things feminists could do if they focused on underprivileged women in third world countries rather than a false wage gap and the inevitable sexual desires of men. Many feminists claim that the wage gap is a reason why feminism is still needed in America. However, the wage gap does not account for the following the fact that men are more likely to pursue STEM jobs, which pay more [1], and that women take off work for maternity. In fact, if you compare childless men to women under 30, women make $1.08 on a man's dollar. [2] Women also receive lesser sentences than men for the same crimes. [3] Most importantly, there are no rights men have that are denied to women, and there are laws protecting them from being discriminated against. Next, I would like to discuss the feminists who have given this movement a bad name: - Amanda Childress thinks that men accused of rape should be considered guilty until proven innocent. - Robin Morgan believes hating men is honorable. - Andrea Dworkin wants to see a man beaten and gagged. - Sheila Cronin believes marriage is slavery, and Andrea Dworkin believes it is rape. - Sharon Stone wants to use her power to hurt men. - Catherine MacKinnon believes that if a woman doesn't like sex, even if she consented, she was raped. - Jodie Foster believes that women are victims by nature. - Susan Griffin believes a vast majority of men are rapists. - David Angier believes women shouldn't be punished for trying to get men falsly arrested. - Catherine Comins believes man who are falsely accused of rape can learn from the experience. - Barbara Jordan believes men are incapable of compassion. - Sally Miller Gearhart believes that the population of men should be reduced to 10%. Mary Daly wants the male population to be reduced as well. It seems that more and more people are adhering to these feminist hierarchs. Even the feminists who aren't radical pay no heed to the issues men face and have at least a little bit of misandrist values instilled in them by notorious radical and semi-radical feminists who exaggerate issues and even directly lie to the women they are trying to help in order to evoke emotion. On top of all that, these radial feminists are the same people who tell first world women they are victims of the "patriarchy," start charities benefiting the most privileged women on earth, and completely forget about women and girls who are actually being oppressed. Then, when you tell them their movement is useless, they will remind you about all the females in third world countries that need their help. Instead of helping, they complain about it on Tumblr, and even have the audacity to lump these poor women's problems in with their own. I know not all feminists are like this, but many are, and their voices are loud. Too loud. Sometimes their voices can drown out the wales of women in need. I will now present to you an example: Lets talk about a online video series outspoken feminist Anita Sarkeesian is raising money for. It is called Ordinary Women: Daring to Defy History, which as of May 31, 2016, Sarkeesian has raised $207,138 for it to be made. Remember that, because she herself states, "In an astounding, humbling turn of events, Tropes vs Women in Video Games drew international attention"both positive and negative"and Feminist Frequency raised over twenty-five times the amount we sought. We put it to good use: in the four years since, Feminist Frequency has transformed into a non-profit organization devoted to critically engaging with media." [4] Did she put it to good use? What she promised to do with to money she got was create a series of twelve videos about how women are portrayed in video games. The videos she promised are as follows: The Damsel in Distress, The Fighting Fucktoy, The Sexy Sidekick, The Sexy Villan, Women as Background Decorations, Voodoo Priestess/Tribal Sorceress, Women as Reward, Mrs. Male Character, Unattractive = Evil, Man With Boobs, Positive Female Characters, and The Top 10 Most Common Defenses of Sexism in Games. As of March 8, 2016, she has made three. Sarkeesian said she needed $6,000 all twelve videos, she raised $158,922 for them, and in four years, she has made three of the twelve videos. [5] The worst part about all of this, it that she is tricking deluded feminists into putting money right in her pocket. Don't let the fact that it is labeled as a non-profit trick you into thinking she didn't get any money. [6] All of that money she made could have gone to girls who are forced into marriage and treated as objects in countries where women have limited rights, and instead western feminists trick women (and themselves) into believing they are victims even if they aren't Citations: [1] http://www.pbs.org...... [2] http://miamioh.edu...... [3] http://www.huffingtonpost.com...... [4] https://www.seedandspark.com...... [5] [6] http://990s.foundationcenter.org...

  • CON

    That this enterprise is often successful is not an...

    Many women no longer identify themselves as feminists, associating feminism with man-hating, sex-hat...

    Opponents of the feminist movement have always sought to stereotype feminists in order to reduce their support. That this enterprise is often successful is not an argument against feminism; in any case, many of the women who dislike the label ‘feminist’ turn out to hold what would until recently have been seen as extreme feminist views, such as the belief that women are perfectly capable of competing with men on equal terms. Feminists have always argued that women are just as capable of men; they have campaigned against legal, cultural and social barriers which have worked against women, preventing them from achieving equality.

    • https://debatewise.org/debates/2701-feminism/
    • score
      BM25 score: 14.68
      feminism: 14.68
      conclusion: 4.96 (boost 1.50, idf 5.97, tfNorm 0.55)
      premises: 7.71 (idf 5.90, tfNorm 1.31)
      sourceText: 2.00 (boost 0.20, idf 4.68, tfNorm 2.14)
  • CON

    In fact, your choice is so influential that it makes it...

    The rise of feminism has negatively impacted relationships

    I feel my opponent might be chasing his tail a little. Like a dog who forgot where he buried his bone, my opponent seems to think that the holes he made trying to find it, are just as good a proof as the bone itself. NOPE!!!! And oh, how effective his "nodody is an island" spiel was. I ate it up like cheetos. But after reading his argument, I'm still not quite sure how he thinks public attitudes affect our relationships. I can't blame him though, rational people (like ourselves) are not easily swayed by silly wankerisms. Look, it's simple. If you prefer a traditional relationship with your spouse, that's YOUR choice of how YOU feel the household should be run. If your spouse rejects your notion of a well kept, functional household, that would be HER choice. If you choose to quarrel because of your disagreement, that would be both your choices and society has no say in any of it. Your choice is the most influential factor in all these situations. In fact, your choice is so influential that it makes it impossible for public attitudes to affect you, unless you accept public opinion as an influence, and even then, it's still YOUR choice to accept it's influence. I don't think my opponent realizes it, but when you boil his argument down, he's actually saying that the problem is that women DO have equal rights! Thankfully my opponent agrees that women should have equal rights, but his argument is based on the idea that because women are actually exercising their equality in relationships, that's what causes the "negative impact". That's pretty much the meat and potatoes of this debate. My opponent thinks that a quick peruse through the world wide web will show obvious evidence of the breakdown of traditional relationships (which I will call "armagrelashionship". Ok, maybe not). I must not be looking in the right place because I haven't found any proof of that. My opponent tried using a vague "study" done over a decade ago that says "satisfaction in life has decreased and flatlined in both the US and Britain". Shame on him for trying to use that as evidence of dissatisfaction in relationships, it doesn't really even have anything to do with this argument, it has to do with satisfaction in life as a whole. I'm confused on how satisfaction in life can flatline anyway. Like, what does that even mean? If I was a Russian soldier in the battle for Stalingrad and I just got captured by the Germans and was being sent to a prisoner of war camp, perhaps then my satisfaction in life would flatline, but a couple skirmishes with the old lady won't make me wanna snuff it. Perhaps I should apologize to my opponent for not specifying that I'm not a woman. I am a married father of two girls. We do not, I can't stress this enough, DO NOT teach our daughters to be ashamed of housework. In fact, doing the housekeeping is probably the main reason we had kids! My wife identifies as a feminist. She works full time now, but when she didn't, she always kept the house clean. Now that she works full time, we have to share the chores, and I have no problem with that! I can't think of any instances when we taught our children to hate the masculine traits I have and since they're girls, obviously we teach them to love their feminine traits. My older daughter plays football (American football, not soccer), and she's awesome. It seems that all my opponent and I have to use as references are our own relationships, which aren't very broad ranging. My argument hinges on the belief that your additude toward your spouse and your situation are far more influential than In fact, your choice is so influential that it makes it impossible for public attitudes to affect you, unless you accept public opinion as an influence, and even then, it's still YOUR choice to accept it's influence. I don't think my opponent realizes it, but when you boil his argument down, he's actually saying that the problem is that women DO have equal rights! Thankfully my opponent agrees that women should have equal rights, but his argument is based on the idea that because women are actually exercising their equality in relationships, that's what causes the "negative impact". That's pretty much the meat and potatoes of this debate. My opponent thinks that a quick peruse through the world wide web will show obvious evidence of the breakdown of traditional relationships (which I will call "armagrelashionship". Ok, maybe not). I must not be looking in the right place because I haven't found any proof of that. My opponent tried using a vague "study" done over a decade ago that says "satisfaction in life has decreased and flatlined in both the US and Britain". Shame on him for trying to use that as evidence of dissatisfaction in relationships, it doesn't really even have anything to do with this argument, it has to do with satisfaction in life as a whole. I'm confused on how satisfaction in life can flatline anyway. Like, what does that even mean? If I was a Russian soldier in the battle for Stalingrad and I just got captured by the Germans and was being sent to a prisoner of war camp, perhaps then my satisfaction in life would flatline, but a couple skirmishes with the old lady won't make me wanna snuff it. Perhaps I should apologize to my opponent for not specifying that I'm not a woman. I am a married father of two girls. We do not, I can't stress this enough, DO NOT teach our daughters to be ashamed of housework. In fact, doing the housekeeping is probably the main reason we had kids! My wife identifies as a feminist. She works full time now, but when she didn't, she always kept the house clean. Now that she works full time, we have to share the chores, and I have no problem with that! I can't think of any instances when we taught our children to hate the masculine traits I have and since they're girls, obviously we teach them to love their feminine traits. My older daughter plays football (American football, not soccer), and she's awesome. It seems that all my opponent and I have to use as references are our own relationships, which aren't very broad ranging. My argument hinges on the belief that your additude toward your spouse and your situation are far more influential than feminism. Perhaps my opponent is a snot, and expects his spouse to do all the cooking and cleaning and leave him free for his manly pursuits, like getting drunk at the pub and watching football (soccer). Perhaps she's not a very nice person and refuses to help out at all. Or maybe like BB king said, the thrill is gone. I don't think feminism plays that big of a role in those situations, perhaps your both just mean people. (I hope that wasn't offensive. I just meant it for the sake of the argument) My opponent suggested that I was arguing that males and females have no differences?!? I call on my opponent to come up with a quote in any of my arguments that shows that I actually feel that way. I may let my daughters do things that were traditionally considered "boy things" in the past, but that doesn't mean I don't understand the many obvious differences between males and females. So obvious that I don't think it should have been brought up, but my opponent never ceases to amaze us. By the way, I wasn't insulting your grammar, I was insulting your observations. Trust me, I'd be the last guy to insult someones grammar. I've met glue sniffing addicts with better grammar than me! I would like to thank my opponent for such an interesting debate, and am very pleased no meet you as well. Good luck, mate!

  • CON

    Doctoral.............$1,352........$1,686...

    This house believes that the feminist movement should renounce the title of "Feminism".

    What Pro fails to realize is that the feminist movement is not over. Like I said last round (the one pro didn't forfeit) there are still places in the world where women have to fight for rights. This is still a women's movement, hence the name feminism. 1. Money: Pro says that when you control for a bunch of different factors, the gap shrinks. Well, if we look at earnings by degree level, men earn more every time. Doctoral.............$1,352........$1,686 Professional........$1,362.......$1,881 Master"s..............$1,127.......$1,488 Bachelor"s............$909..........$1,188 Associate"s..........$677............$886 no college............$543...........$710 [1] Since it takes about the same time to earn these degrees, you would expect each gender to make about the same. 2. Rape: pro says that women aren't raped more on average, but his follow-up argument has nothing to do with this. He's just saying that women rapists tend to rape weaker men. That doesn't mean women rape men more often. He also doesn't provide a source. 3. Middle East: he says that women are allowed to be educated in the middle east. I gave a source, he didn't, so... Since none of the issues I brought up have been shown to be equal between the sexes, it's obvious that this is still a women-centric issue, so the name is apt. Pro is wrong, so vote Con! 1. http://www.catalyst.org...

  • CON

    Studies have shown that when the name is removed from the...

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

    Thank you for the debate. There seems to be a general misunderstanding about how the pay differences occur. It is not simply the boss says Larry gets $20 an hour and Tina gets $10 an hour. It is more complex than that. The base salary for example can be negotiated. And it is legal. It just so happens that women tend to get paid less of a base salary than men. When the women ask for more, studies {and there are studies] show they are viewed negatively for asking for a higher starting base salary. If a man asks for more, he is usually viewed in a positive way. http://www.news.com.au... This is one of the ways that the pay gap occurs. As pointed out in my previous response, when women join an industry in huge numbers, the pay of everyone goes down. That is legal and it is linked to gender. There is also the issue of blind resumes. Studies have shown that when the name is removed from the resume {so one can't tell if the name indicates a woman or that the person is likely not to be white} those people are more likely to get called in for an interview. Actually the same resume, the only difference is that one is a man and one is a woman and the man will get called in more. This link is specific to science but it exists in other sectors. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com... I would remind people that there is also a promotional gap in every single industry even where there are far more women. I would also note that there are in fact studies that do factor in women taking time off work {post the recovery time} to have children, etc. {I would also point out that the fact that women are the ones that usually take extended time off and not the men is viewed by some as a gender issue as well. Yes, women do need time to recover after birth but women are the ones that usually stay home to look after the kids over the long-term. This is viewed as a gender bias by some. Why is it assumed that the woman should have to stay home because it is viewed as a woman's job. This impacts her ability to work outside of the house. I would point out that the link included in my previous response includes studies that a} show women being paid less than men for the same job, despite the law. B} The fact that some men work more hours has actually been taken into account but the studies still find a pay gap. If a person wants to believe there is no gap that is one thing but if a person claims that there are no studies showing that there is a gap that is simply not true. I do agree that women who choose to stay home or quit their jobs for their family can be criticised by some feminists. And I do think that is unfair. What I am curious to know is why there is such a resistance to accepting what studies do show? There is gap and there is still big discrimination. I would love to know why some {not all} men refuse to accept there is a gap? The problems facing men and women like poverty and unemployment are not caused because of Studies have shown that when the name is removed from the resume {so one can't tell if the name indicates a woman or that the person is likely not to be white} those people are more likely to get called in for an interview. Actually the same resume, the only difference is that one is a man and one is a woman and the man will get called in more. This link is specific to science but it exists in other sectors. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com... I would remind people that there is also a promotional gap in every single industry even where there are far more women. I would also note that there are in fact studies that do factor in women taking time off work {post the recovery time} to have children, etc. {I would also point out that the fact that women are the ones that usually take extended time off and not the men is viewed by some as a gender issue as well. Yes, women do need time to recover after birth but women are the ones that usually stay home to look after the kids over the long-term. This is viewed as a gender bias by some. Why is it assumed that the woman should have to stay home because it is viewed as a woman's job. This impacts her ability to work outside of the house. I would point out that the link included in my previous response includes studies that a} show women being paid less than men for the same job, despite the law. B} The fact that some men work more hours has actually been taken into account but the studies still find a pay gap. If a person wants to believe there is no gap that is one thing but if a person claims that there are no studies showing that there is a gap that is simply not true. I do agree that women who choose to stay home or quit their jobs for their family can be criticised by some feminists. And I do think that is unfair. What I am curious to know is why there is such a resistance to accepting what studies do show? There is gap and there is still big discrimination. I would love to know why some {not all} men refuse to accept there is a gap? The problems facing men and women like poverty and unemployment are not caused because of feminism for the record. I would also point out that the claim she made about American women being the most free and liberated in the world can be seriously questioned. The abortion debates would show otherwise. The lower level of women in higher positions compared to some other countries. The lower social mobility in America {for both men and women} is lower than some other countries. Therefore, I would disagree with the claim that women in the US are the most free and liberated.