Topic space view
1031 arguments retrieved in 1.0 ms
  • PRO

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

    Is third wave feminsim still feminism

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

  • PRO

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

    Feminism is counterintuitive and hypocritical

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

  • CON

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

    Third Wave Feminism Isn't Needed

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

  • CON

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

    Today's types of Feminism isn't needed

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

  • PRO

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

    current state of feminism in first-world countries

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

  • 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.