2nd wave and 3rd wave/modern feminism is harmful and should not exist.
a1. Again not evidence but opinion and thus this point is un-weighted, and yes the
way you presented this point does fall back on you because you hold the burden of
proof and so far have not fulfilled it. a2. Actually Roosevelt was a key 2nd Wave
feminist, but you provided no evidence to show the opposite anyways thus the point
is mine by omission of the evidence. a3. I will address your relevant evidence, most
doesn't apply to your argument so it can be thrown out, and no men are not raped more
often then women, lets look at india, or china where women are scarce so human trafficking
is a problem. a3-1. This has nothing to do with rape or the VAWA a3-2. this is male
on male and its an issue in women's prisons too, any and all prison rapes are subject
to security and aren't tied to feminism. a3-2-2? This is a minute stat taken out of
context from the study, in the study he selected the only district in Canada with
this stat, in another part of Canada females have an 13.5% chance to be forcibly raped
as compared to 6% of men. Faulty stat faulty logic. a3-4. Lets just quote your study
that you didn't read, " Among older street-involved youth (ages 19-25), a higher percentage
of females reported sexual " a3-5. Realize in prisons men and women are separate,
your stat just shows there is more violence in women's prisons. a3-6.For your first card I will pull out another quote stated inside it "Men were
more likely than women to strangle, choke, or beat up their partners." and to the rest, this doesn't tie to feminism at all, your still showing substantial damage to women and most of your men being
raped cards is them being raped by other men. You have yet to fulfill your burden
of proof showing women aren't the ones being hurt. a4. no they don't directly correlate
to your arguments you cant paste a bunch of articles at the top and hope we all go
"I know where all of these refer to." The point of evidence is so in argumentation
I can asses where the evidence is coming from. and maybe you should bother to click
your own links, seeing as they them selves don't work, here is one you may like: http://www.glennsacks.com...
Wait that one, your first one, doesn't work. thus your arguments are invalid. A5.
I'm sorry but I think your arguing against Female Supremacists, not modern feminists,
and yes there is a difference. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1)My opponent cant even count, look at his arguments in A3. He himself has typos and
unformed sentences, most of his arguments are formed partially and uncompleted. He
himself should have deductions in correct/good grammar points. And so my opponent
realizes, grammar and spelling are different things. 2) I don't hold the BOP, it is
not my job as neg to provide arguments for aff to refute, he has also just attacked
how I debate, his lack of evidence however should lose him conduct points. 3)Apparently
my opponent never looked at the pay gap study, if he did he would see they didn't
look at all men and women, then compare the ceo men to unemployed women. They compared
men in the same job as women, Secondly the pay gap exists because of people like my
opponent, a women can work any job a man can. your statistics are showing the difference
in men and women overall, and this isn't what the pay wage study did. Lets look at
the census where they did the math; the Census Bureau released new numbers showing
that the gender wage gap is at 77%, meaning women make just 77 cents for each dollar
a man makes.The median earnings for men working full-time were $49,400 while women’s
were just $37,800. http://www.census.gov... http://thinkprogress.org... 3) no evidence
once again 4) no evidence once again Conclusion: My opponent has not fulfilled the
BOP he must provide in order to win todays debate. He lacks evidence overall and the
only things he does dont say what hes trying to paint them to say. Thus we can only see a ballot in negation of the resolution.