Feminism is for equal rights for all genders not just women.
Thank you, VoiceofEquality; wording things like this just takes practise :) I will
use this last round to summarise the contentions and respond to what my opponent wrote.
Negative Case Premise: The myth of gender equality My opponent has entirely ignored
this, despite it being very relevant to the arguments being made in other areas. The
fact is that women and men are different; they can never be equal in a real sense,
hence attempts for gender equality are often sexist and ignore the real biological
states of both or one of the sexes. A1: Unequal rights in STEM fields Completely dropped.
This argument shows clear evidence of feminism being sexist against men. A2: Pay Gap
Theory is inherently sexist against men Completely dropped. Again, this argument shows
clear evidence of feminism being sexist against men. A3: Feminists show unbridled
hatred for men Dropped, in the complete sense. I quoted half-a-dozen feminists espousing
hatred for men; this is a clear example of feminists wanting nothing to do with equal
rights for all genders, ESPECIALY none for men. Counter-arguments The faulty definition
of feminism: equality of the sexes Since my opponent did not respond to this, it appears that
we agree this definition should not be used. Eliminating stereotypes because we do
not understand human psychology Short-hair: The objections of short-hair and make-up
seem to be roughly the same, so I will address them at once. Make-up: The fact is,
as explained next to this title in my last round, that men are attracted to women
with clear skin more so than women with less-than-clear skin. Again, my opponent’s
feminist argument fails to realise that societal recognition cannot change the biological
imperatives. In other words, men will always be attracted to women with clear skin, regardless
of what society or any external influence says. My opponent then continues to make the ridiculous assertion that women do not have
to wear make-up to impress men. Well, as shown in my studies, which reference biological
imperatives, yes, women do need to do that. If she wants to be less attractive, then
by all means she does not have to wear make-up. But to say that she can be as attractive
without at least modest make-up is to completely ignore the science of evolutionary
psychology. As I underlined from my research: mechanisms involving evolutionary psychology
are highly resistant to cultural modification, AND in regards to long-hair, long-hair
is attractive across ALL cultures, despite the wild differences in cultures. Society
cannot change evolutionary psychology by simply telling people to stop doing things,
much like heart will not stop beating simply by wishing it would. Finally, my opponent
runs a mitigation argument against my surveys. Whilst my surveys are not the absolute
ideal in terms of research, they are far better than the zero research my opponent
has given to support his/her theory that it is purely society dictating these trends
(men liking long-hair and unblemished faces on women). In conjunction with the other
references to evolutionary psychologists concluding upon research done in field, there
is not simply my surveys that I rely upon to make my argument, too. Evidence for stereotypes:
My opponent simply cites a few sources without explaining as to why they are relevant
to this debate. Voters should not be required to read through sources in order to
have an educated guess as to what the debater intended as argument. The debate happens
on DDO, so everything should be explained on DDO, elsewise I could reference 250 sources
and say “read these to understand why I have won”. Via reductio ad absurdum, I shown
why my opponent’s conduct with source referencing is illogical [1]. But even if you
were to take whatever argument made with these sources, my contention was never that
stereotypes do not exist, rather that in the context of feminism, feminism often gets the fact wrong in blaming things on stereotypes, rather than evolutionary
psychology. For example, women with short-hair are not stigmatised because of the
patriarchy, rather because men find women more attractive with long-hair. My opponent’s
list of bare assertions My opponent has decided to defend some of the bare assertions
made last round. I will address those. Feminism changed the definition of rape: My opponent has provided evidence to show that the
definition of rape has indeed changed. However, there is no link to this being a feminist
initiative. Control+f the FBI document for “feminism” or something that is directly related to feminism, and you will see that whilst a change in terms did occur, there is simply no link
to feminism. Employed fathers now entitled to at least two weeks’ paternity leave on the birth
of their child: Again, whilst this did indeed occur, there is simply no link to feminism. Just because there are equal rights, it does not necessarily mean that feminism has pushed for this, and we certainly cannot say if there is no reference or mention
of feminism. Conclusion: Why you should vote for me My opponent completely drops every aspect
of my negative case. Since my arguments there clearly show that feminism is not about equal rights for the genders, and is rather about hatred or unequal
rights for men, my opponent loses due to all of these contentions. In terms of negation
from my end, I provided numerous scholarly work to show that it is evolutionary psychology
largely at play, in regards to women with make-up and long-hair, not patriarchy or
society being mean to women. My opponent could only run a mitigation argument against
my surveys, dropping the rest of my scholarly work on this point. My opponent also
tried to link some of his/her bare assertions to ways in which feminism has helped both men and women, but he/she failed to link this feminism. Thank you, VoiceofEquality, for this debate. Thank you, Mr/Ms reader for reading our debate =) Reference: [1] http://rationalwiki.org...
Pro vs. con view
Topic space view
