args

Humanism is a better ideology then Feminism

Wage Gap Response: Wage gap is women getting paid less for doing the same job. The factors you listed were for reasons why women might not get hired. There is a difference. You give reasons like maternity leave, but the person who's video I linked was young and someone less qualified, and a male, was getting paid more. I'd look up which shade of grey this is but that book is sexist too. 2. Lack of Representation: Ma... maternity leaves? Periods??? Women shouldn't be allowed to hold office because of periods and maternity leave? Not to mention fathers, in some countries, also go on leave and you are also assuming all women want to have a child, is a sexist argument in my eyes. 3. Laws on the Bodies of Women: Here's the thing you aren't getting. These are bills that control women bodies. You know bodily autonomy? These rules go against that. If there were 700 bills proposed to regulate the bodies of men, even if it was only relating to pregnancy (which I'm pretty sure they aren't all about pregnancy, but okay), and 80% of the people voting on this stuff were female, I would assume some matriarchy stuff going on there. However, it's the opposite, and the idea that "Oh, well, if we lived in a system that systematically favored men over women then all of democracy would collapse because reasons." We do still live in a democratic republic, you know? There are rules that are in place so you can't just go "You know what? Women can't have abortions. Make it illegal!" Pretty weak argument. 4. "Strawman" and Humanism: When saying such a broad statement as "Feminists are lucky to gain ANY (especially when feminists had already had a place in politics, so kind of confusing) ground in politics" there may be confusion. You didn't specify "gain ground in today's politics" or "modern-day feminists". You say blanket statements as "ANY" and "feminists." Your inability to explain is not my strawman. On the humanism topic, what I see here is you admitting humanism can't fix Africa. So what you are saying is that you claim Humanism is just as ineffectual as feminism. Your premise is that Humanism is better. Sounds like you just negated your own premise. 5. Men are victims too. Notice how I have said many times before that men can be victims of sexism but women are victims to it in more areas. 1 in 4 women are victims of domestic abuse[1]. I already stated rape statistics. It sounds like you are misconstruing my argument here. I even listed the dismissal of male victims in rape and domestic violence situation, so preaching to the choir, mate. To say that men are victimized to the same extent by women from sexism is wrong. You then talk about how MRAs are truly the knights in shining armor for men everywhere. Not women, though. You haven't shown that they are for equality between the sexes. Your quote about feminists by TJ "High School Dropout" Amazing Atheist applies more for MRAs than feminists. 6. The Exceptions and Rules: Oh. I see. You don't see it that way so I'm wrong. I'm glad your subjective reading on the facts is enough to apply to an objective truth. It'd be cool to, you know, see the facts so we could all make sense of them. No? Okay. By the way, you did contradict yourself, you just clarified later. 7. TJ "HSDO" AA. You misunderstood. He is qualified to speak about these issues. He is not qualified to be an authority on these issues on his word alone. George Carlin was insightful on issues. Was he an authority? No. TJ can offer insight. He is not an authority. You don't really offer anything here to defend your premise in this round, which is that Humanism is better than feminism. Thinking about that now, it is not really a specific resolution. Are we arguing whether or not humanism has better ideas for humans than feminism, or that humanism is more effective than feminism? You didn't say anything about new arguments in the fourth round, so let me launch into why the debate is itself a logical fallacy. It is called a false dilemma. It suggests one cannot be both a humanist and a feminist, and supports an either/or but not an and/both choice. The point of feminism to combat misogyny and promote equality of the genders. You mention somewhere (it's late and I don't want to find an exact quote) but you imply that being a humanist would solve these issues because humanism promotes well being of both genders. Actually, humanism promotes the well beings of humans in general. Feminism addresses a different but just as deadly foe to humanity that humanism does; humanism addresses well being, feminism addresses inequality. Men's rights activism is a backlash against equality, it is a backlash against feminism. Because these men aren't trying to fix the issues, they are trying to defend their privilege. Sure, there are legitimate issues they can bring up. But who is hurt more, the person hit by the recoil, or the person hit by the bullet? Besides, you aren't supposed to be defending MRAs (which I assume if you are against a "one sided and *heavy sarcasm* sexist movement like feminism, surely you'd be against the response to that), you should be defending humanism. So let's talk about humanism. Here's an excerpt from an article about its origins. "But humanism’s foundations were lain during the European Enlightenment, which attempted to remake the humans of the New World (and the Old) in the image of its own “enlightened” crusaders: privileged white European men. Contemporary humanism is touted as the “outcome of a long tradition of free thought,” but this grand tradition is not free from bias. As Judith Butler explains, humanism “supposes that there is just one single idea of what it is to be human.” Humanism turns away from difference and diversity. Equality in humanist terms means equal our way.[2]" Maybe that whole making the exception the rule argument is looking more valid, right? Sources: [1] http://www.ncadv.org...(National).pdf [2] http://thefeministwire.com...

Resolved: Modern American Feminism is Both Correct and Needed

I will be taking the position that modern American feminism is basically incorrect in it's worldview and counterproductive. This debate is specifically about America feminism dealing with women in America. Oppression of women abroad is not therefore relevant in this debate. This is about women in America. Since I am con on this, my opponent will be pro and the first arguments will be pro stating their case for modern american feminism in round one. Since I will be arguing against them, I will begin by putting my own arguments and responding to them in round two. That is how this debate will go.

Third Wave Feminism Isn't Needed

"Nowadays that women have equal rights, there is no need for feminism anymore" Women have equal rights, do they? How about in the Middle East where women are forced to stay concealed and quiet? In Mauritania, women are not paid equally for equal work. Egypt does not have laws banning non-discrimination nor does it have laws mandating pay equality. Granted, these are not countries modern third and fourth wave feminism seem to be concerned with; however, the state of many countries does give support that a third wave was/is needed, even if the effective wave did not do what it should have. While the third wave as we have it isn't needed, a third wave was and is needed.

current state of feminism in first-world countries

Hello, Pro, and thank you for accepting my topic. I see your points about the differences in wages and "rape culture", and mostly agree, but my point still stands: I see your points about the differences in wages and "rape culture", and mostly agree, but my point still stands: feminism, in its current state, is obsolete. For starters, let's look at the wage issue. There is one major difference in paying wages to a man and a woman - the possibility of the latter getting pregnant. That means that, for at least half a year (the last trimester and newborn care) the woman is unable to work, and stays home with her child, while still getting her wages. And, if the goal of the employer is to maximize profits, that is an issue and can lead to losses. So, the option of the employer is either to not employ women (an even bigger inequality) or pay a smaller wage than to male employees. This is not a question of sexism and disrespect towards women. It is a question of economics. While this is obviously unfair, it is, by far, the most efficient solution. I cannot say much about the rape issue, and mostly agree with you. Good point, pro. Also, I would like to defend my representation of feminism. While the shirt issue might not be what feminism stands for, things like this is what feminism is known for in modern countries, and the most common association that people have with the word "feminism" is "angry women that dress up like vaginas" (http://proteinwisdom.com...). I know that this is wrong, and is a misrepresentation, but that's mostly what happens. The FEMEN movement is a textbook example. And let's not forget P***y Riot, the girls who danced in balaclavas in the main temple of Russia. They claimed what they did was "a social protest for equality". The feminist movement itself is noble, and has a good goal, but how they choose to portray themselves in public just shows what they are truly like. In a recent TIME vote over which word should be banned in 2015, the word "feminism" takes the cake, which just shows how tired people are of the condition of it in today's society. And, lastly, in the tangled mess of customs, standards, traditions and social rules in the society that is, women, while they may not know it, have more privileges than men. For example, in Russia (I'm Russian myself, that's why I refer to it more), all men over 18 are conscripted to the army, while women are not, which doesn't mean they are not free to join. People tend to trust women more and most civilized men are raised with a notion that all men and women should be treated and respected equally. The court issue is, too, an example. This is, too, an inequality that feminism claims to fight for, but lately feminist are just concerned with women's rights, and some even want to diminish the rights of men.

modern day feminism does more good than harm

First of all, my opponent provided no source for their 99.99% of feminists voting for Bernie Sanders claim, which makes it completely irrelevant within this debate. Second of all, my opponent says that I am talking about radical feminism, but no, in this debate we are talking about modern day feminism, and I am describing it for what it is. People like Malala are for EQUALITY, feminism is just a word sometimes used to describe that, but in actuality, it's called equalism. If feminism was for equality, then why is it called feminism, a word derivative of FEMALE? In my opponent's speech, they mention that feminists are good because they raise awareness for things like LGBT, but this isn't just feminists. Many people who aren't feminists do this also, so it isn't limited to feminism, and thus has no relevancy in this debate. Feminism is harming our society because of the hating on man, and that is why it does more harm than good.

Is Radical Feminism Hurting More than Helping

Radical Feminism has been more abundant recently. There is one case where there was a protest outside of a lecture hall at the University of Toronto. Radical Feminists blocked the entrance of the building. One person tried to enter the building and was denied access and humiliated by the protesters. That person was looking for closure after two of his friends committed suicide. Radical Feminism is usually criticized for believing that men are the ultimate source of women oppression. The "patriarchy" , laws created by men, are not the reason women are in "oppression", it is the gender roles created as a whole society which creates harm to both genders. (Not true ,but stupid common stereotypes) "Females are physically weak" causes the gender role of males being strong protectors. If males are not "manly" they get criticized by males and females. "Males always want sexual intercourse" causes men to believe that they want sex, and the stereotype stops them from reporting rape. "He probably liked it" Radical One person tried to enter the building and was denied access and humiliated by the protesters. That person was looking for closure after two of his friends committed suicide. Radical Feminism is usually criticized for believing that men are the ultimate source of women oppression. The "patriarchy" , laws created by men, are not the reason women are in "oppression", it is the gender roles created as a whole society which creates harm to both genders. (Not true ,but stupid common stereotypes) "Females are physically weak" causes the gender role of males being strong protectors. If males are not "manly" they get criticized by males and females. "Males always want sexual intercourse" causes men to believe that they want sex, and the stereotype stops them from reporting rape. "He probably liked it" Radical That person was looking for closure after two of his friends committed suicide. Radical Feminism is usually criticized for believing that men are the ultimate source of women oppression. The "patriarchy" , laws created by men, are not the reason women are in "oppression", it is the gender roles created as a whole society which creates harm to both genders. (Not true ,but stupid common stereotypes) "Females are physically weak" causes the gender role of males being strong protectors. If males are not "manly" they get criticized by males and females. "Males always want sexual intercourse" causes men to believe that they want sex, and the stereotype stops them from reporting rape. "He probably liked it" Radical Feminism does not address these utterly important points. There is active sexism against men too and Radical Feminism harms and adds to the stereotypes of men. Protest I was referring to