PRO

  • PRO

    If egalitarianism means equality for absolutely...

    Feminism

    Hello Ilan. I look forward to a productive exchange of ideas. I do apologize, but my response for this round won't be as elaborate since I wasn't able to respond sooner and I now have less than 15 minutes to answer lol The argument I present is that being egalitarian does not exclude you from being feminist. In fact, I argue that being feminist is a necessary condition for being egalitarian. "feminism is merely about getting equality for women whereas egalitarianism is equality for absolutely everybody." If egalitarianism means equality for absolutely everybody, as you stated, then it must include equality for women and therefore, feminism. You made valid points about the feminist movement and I think they are indeed to focused on giving women a better place in society, but I think they deviate slightly from the true meaning of feminism which seeks equality of the sexes.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/26/
  • PRO

    P1: Feminism is defined as "the belief that men and women...

    Feminism

    Okay, I have no issues going first. P1: Feminism is defined as "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities". [1] P2: I am for men and women having equal rights and opportunities. [2] C: I am for P1: Feminism is defined as "the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities". [1] P2: I am for men and women having equal rights and opportunities. [2] C: I am for Feminism. I have one question for Con: Do you believe men and women should have equal rights and opportunities? 1. http://www.merriam-webster.com... 2. http://www.debate.org... (Comment #4)

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/21/
  • PRO

    it seems my opponent escaped his first opportunity to...

    Feminism

    it seems my opponent escaped his first opportunity to start his argument, So i'll do it instead. Many people mistake feminism with misandry, However it isn't equal. My side is pro-feminism, Not pro-misandry. The definition is clear: FEMINISM:"the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes. " MISANDRY:"dislike of, Contempt for, Or ingrained prejudice against men (i. E. The male sex). " both groups of people may protest, But overall feminism still play the sane part. They just ask for equality and rights. Equality not absolute oligarchy. The things feminism may protest would be like: "STOP Gender Pay Gap! " "Girls Can Do This! " these types of people protests in an assertive way. They just ask for the line being pushed back to the center, Not all the way to the other side. They protest on a basis of women being less rightful, And they most likely won't make up a random scenario that women is already superior at such fields. on the other side, What we most likely to see, And what would be in the spotlight, And what whom wanted the spotlight on themselves, Are the misandrists. They are less sane and more aggressive. Being mistaken for feminists, They actually push the fault onto the true feminists. such topics misandrists would argue are: "Men are stupid" "Girls should rule" all these leads to superiority and sexism, Not anything "sane". Notable feminists: (not necessarily, But they contribute to the women) Marie Curie(scientist):first woman to win a Nobel Prize, The first person and only woman to win twice, And the only person to win a Nobel Prize in two different sciences. " Hillary Clinton: Democratic Party's nominee for President of the United States in the 2016 election, The first woman nominated by a major party. Rosa Parks:"American activist in the civil rights movement best known for her pivotal role in the Montgomery bus boycott. The United States Congress has called her "the first lady of civil rights" and "the mother of the freedom movement". " Don't blame the fault of misandry to the feminism. These are 3( yes only 3) example of female empowerment and contribute against discrimination. What we see as misandrists discriminates, And are not equal to feminists. Feminists reduces discrimination.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/35/
  • PRO

    I feel like you were hoping a real feminist would accept...

    Feminism

    XD you request that someone argue that feminism is fair based on FACTS!?... I think we both know that's not possible because feminism is based completely on emotions and not statistics. I feel like you were hoping a real feminist would accept your challenge so you could destroy them... lets be honest, feminists aren't brave enough to go on a website and take up an argument by themselves. you would probably make a lot of good points, but you would loses because the feminist will just go an wine to there friends and get them to come back her up. While I'm not a feminist, in fact I hate feminism, but I will be happy to represent a fair argument in there favor of there beliefs, regardless of how ignorant and retarded they might be XD I have dealt with a lot of feminists so I trust I can at least try to give you a good fight. Okay -breaths deeply- lets do this... in the situation of two people getting divorced, and assuming the woman gets the children who pays alimony? the woman isn't going to pay alimony to herself! Ha ha men only ever pay alimony when the woman gets the children so I think your questions should be, why do women get the children more often. well it has been proved by science, history, and personal experience that women are better with children. men don't pay alimony because of sexism, they pay alimony because the situation just happens to favor women. I don't understand how people can say that you would probably make a lot of good points, but you would loses because the feminist will just go an wine to there friends and get them to come back her up. While I'm not a feminist, in fact I hate feminism, but I will be happy to represent a fair argument in there favor of there beliefs, regardless of how ignorant and retarded they might be XD I have dealt with a lot of feminists so I trust I can at least try to give you a good fight. Okay -breaths deeply- lets do this... in the situation of two people getting divorced, and assuming the woman gets the children who pays alimony? the woman isn't going to pay alimony to herself! Ha ha men only ever pay alimony when the woman gets the children so I think your questions should be, why do women get the children more often. well it has been proved by science, history, and personal experience that women are better with children. men don't pay alimony because of sexism, they pay alimony because the situation just happens to favor women. I don't understand how people can say that feminism is man hating. it's not hateful of men it is hateful of hate towards women which happens to be more prevalent in men. (P.S. let me know if you thought I was going to go with that "feminism is the belief of equality" BS XD) it isn't our fault you hate women me than women do.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/22/
  • PRO

    According to the definition of feminism, it does not;...

    Feminism is not sexist.

    According to the rules, I can't make my rebuttal now, so I will skip directly to my second point: Based on my opponent's definition, feminism is not sexist. Now that I start to think about it, I don't really have a BoP, since my opponent is the one claiming that something (feminism) has a particular characteristic (sexist). Nonetheless, I will do my best to provide good reasons to reject the assertion that feminism is sexist. Reminder: Definition of feminism as stated by my opponent: '[Feminism is] The advocacy [or support thereof] of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes" Definition of sexism as stated by my opponent: "[Sexism is] Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex." The definition of sexism contains three important words: Prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination. I will address them one by one. Prejudice: Definition: 'Preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience' http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... Does feminism advocate prejudice on the basis of sex? According to the definition of feminism, it does not; feminism advocates equal rights between men and women. Experience (as well as reason) as thought us that a society in which everyone possesses equal rights is better of than one where that isn't the case. Therefore, one can not say that feminism advocates prejudice on the basis of sex. Stereotype: Definition: 'A widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or thing' http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... Does feminism use stereotypes on the basis of sex? According to the definition of feminism, it does not; advocating equality between men and women is actually a good way to ELIMINATE stereotypes, which historically have been mostly directed at women (a few examples: http://www.businessinsider.com...). Therefore, one can not say that feminism is using stereotypes on the basis of sex. Discrimination: Definition: 'The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex' http://www.oxforddictionaries.com... Does feminism advocate the use of discrimination on the basis of sex? Again, according to the definition of feminism, it does not; advocating equal rights is a good way to make sure that we live in a JUST system. Feminism actually seeks to eliminate the idea that men and women are 'different categories of people'. (I have already covered prejudice). Therefore, one can not say that feminism advocates the use of discrimination on the basis of sex. (My other arguments address what my opponent says in Round 2, so I will keep them for the rebuttal) Since feminism advocates neither prejudice nor stereotype nor discrimination, we can safely conclude that, according to the definitions of feminism and sexism, feminism is not sexist.

  • PRO

    Allegations should always be taken seriously, But if they...

    Feminism

    I realised I have joined a pitched battle. The google search "Arguments supporting feminism" has actually turned up only pages of arguments against feminism. I'm not even joking, You can see for yourself. And I must say, Even though this will look bad in the voting period, ALL MY OPPONENT'S ARGUMENTS ARE VALID Because of this, I will have to make my own arguments. Feminism is a complicated subject. The base idea of equality and possibly superiority has picked up many supporters that are toxic human beings in general. The confusion ensuing from less smart people joining a once-noble movement has muddied the waters greatly. But, Even though a large chunk of feminists are hypocritical, Discriminating, Patriarchy-screaming people, They are not all bad. There are some feminists that directly argue an egalitarian agenda, Even though they don't proclaim themselves as egalitarian. Sure, A lot of women don't want to be bricklayers or plumbers or fast food workers, But do men really want that either? Do you grow up as a kid thinking: I want to work at a sewage plant for half my life! You don't. But if an egalitarian agenda is fought for in the name of equality for women, Then the people who screw up and need to work an undesirable job would become equal. And that is true equality. In some areas, Feminism has overreached in ways of red herrings or kind politeness. (Looking at you Amy Schumer) However, In some ways, It hasn't gotten far enough. While it is possible to sue a sperm donor for child support and win, It is also possible to have a president with 21 sexual misconduct allegations including a teen beauty pageant. While rape jokes are frowned upon by most people, When the roles are reversed they become funny again. The concept of the 'perfect girl' is still a thing focused upon by too many girls in my school, Middle aged mothers, And recently graduated college students. Women's ability to vote was just the beginning. Another recent event that has come in the name of equality is the 'me too' movement. Allegations should always be taken seriously, But if they are false, The victim has to own up to his or her lies, And the bad news around the blamed person should be cleared up. In a perfect world, That's how it would be. But it isn't a perfect world. It's a world with greedy, Misaligned people who falsely accuse or suppress true accusations. People who, Up until very recently had no troubles with that underground gas line. In conclusion of this paragraph, Feminism pushes a good point under this topic. In an egalitarian movement, Everyone has the right to express whoever they want to be. This is not something I see in my school. There are about 50-150 girls in my school that if you put them side by side, You would have trouble telling the differences. I have talked with my ex as well as other girls about this standard, And they always shut down the idea of embracing their ideals as if they were scared of the concept. (As you may be able to tell, I'm not the average teenage boy) The feminist movement pushes strong, If not necessarily equal women. A mixture of feminism (as in girls being strong too) and egalitarianism (Everyone having equal advantages and disadvantages) Would be the best way to go. So, You may not be wrong in some points of your argument, But you are incorrect in your stance against ALL forms of feminism. Some responses: Quote: "Women's suffrage is not 'feminist, ' and it was the result of a shift in culture and subsequent advances a result of the introduction of birth control and other scientific advancements. " Was it right and just that women got to vote or no? Quote: "should be treated equally to men. " What about the double standards? Should girls be treated like they shouldn't cry and need to compete in sports? Should men be forced to cook and tend the babies for women who have higher income than them? Thank you for your recommendation, But I will stick to what I said. Yes, We are different, But we are still equal. We are all intelligent to a degree and had the same ancestors. So, Women should be exactly equal to men. There is a difference between equality and equity. Equality is where everyone gets treated the same no matter what, Equity is where everyone gets exactly what they need to come out equal in the end. Quote: "And that makes them angry" This is both a micro-aggression and stereotyping. Do all feminists or even all contemporaries become angry at the concept of a person not being fooled by a lie? A look at "The New Yorker" reveals that feminism itself recently shattered. With one side becoming "so soft they're becoming useless" and one side becoming "too strict an ideology. " And you can't argue against both. You argue against the contemporary movement, Which is more women>men, But you fail to realize there are two more pieces of the shattered movement. The contemporary movement is the biggest, And the loudest, And the most hateful, So it is the one plastered on all the news sites. But the original movement still stands. Brave women who want to be soldiers, Who want to feel equally safe, Who want to compete, Who want to preform physical labor, Who want to live their life to the fullest in co-existence with everyone. They fight for the concept that women=men. In conclusion, Some feminism is bad, As with every group in existence, But some of it is good too. Therefore, You cannot argue against all forms of feminism. Your floor

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/34/
  • PRO

    Being a minority does not excuse you from ruining...

    Feminism

    Sorry for the late argument, I had stuff to do over the weekend and forgot to pull out my laptop. To begin, Mi"cro"ag"gres"sion [G6;mīkr! 3;əG2;ɡreSHən] <--- (wow English is weird) NOUN a statement, Action, Or incident regarded as an instance of indirect, Subtle, Or unintentional discrimination against members of a marginalized group such as a racial or ethnic minority. "students posed with dry-erase boards documenting their experiences with microaggressions on campus" indirect, Subtle, Or unintentional discrimination against members of a marginalized group. "they are not subject to daily acts of microaggression" I learned the term and definition of microaggresion from South Park, So take that with a grain of salt, But the point still stands. Second, My opponent is changing their definition of feminism to fit their own arguments, Calling points of equality strived for by many "Not feminist" I never claimed my opponent was arguing against the people. I claimed that he is arguing against "all forms of the idea" of which even the smaller forms need to be taken into account. Yes, People prefer to make fun of the postmodern movement, But what about movements of the past? Equal pay, Equal opportunity, Equal rights. Those were in the name of feminism. An argument for equality of outcome is exactly what we need, No? Outcome being how people are treated and respected on the streets. Outcome on where we end up when we start to die. Similar to giving people glasses so that they can see as well as any other person. If female biology means that they need a little bit more help to have quality-of-life equal to men, Give them that help. " There is no reason for a false-victim to own up to her lips as she's a victim of the patriarchy. " There is every reason for a false victim to own up to lies. Accusations destroy lives almost as much as the assaults themselves. Being a minority does not excuse you from ruining someone's life because you feel like it. Switching the roles, If a man were to accuse a powerful woman of something she didn't do, And ruin her image in the process, He would receive so much hate he would basically need to go into witness progression to escape it, Especially if it was false. The argument presented was seeing the accusation from the POV of only the postmodern feminists. Maybe not all women want to be held equally accountable for their actions, But surely some don't like the fact that exposing themselves to a police officer might get them out of a ticket. Surely some feminists want equal responsibility for their gender. And if some want it, Then not all of feminism is wrong. " they're emulating a perceived ideal" That ideal is what is wrong. If a girl wants to be like that, Nobody is stopping them. But if the girl wants to be different or wants to stand out, The fear of being looked down upon by guys or friends scares them into conforming. One is normal, Two is a coincidence, More is a trend, But doesn't it get to a point where it seems unnatural? Does it not seem like some of the girls may not want to be the polite little princesses they are? Sure, It is a societal norm, But that doesn't mean that the "strong woman" portrait of feminism won't help them be themselves a little more. I argue a focused point and make it broad, But that is basically the standing ground of my argument. I argue to prove that not all feminism is bad, And if any parts of feminism are truly good, Then your argument against all forms will lose. Some say the good of a few outweighs the bad of the many. I say the good points of feminism can eventually be seen past the dyed hair, Self-centered screeching of the individuals that stole the spotlight and cast a negative shadow.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/34/
  • PRO

    This is largely due to the biological make up. ......

    Feminism

    I accept this debate. My goal is to provide evidence that feminism is a logical and correct argument. Feminism can be defined as "a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women. This includes seeking to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment. A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women." [1] In a society where both men and women are required to reproduce life and keep our species existing, it should only be logical to think that both genders should be granted equal rights. Of course there are biological differences that result in certain inequalities, but having different biological make up should not be grounds for unequal rights. Throughout human history, males have maintained a level of dominance over females more often than not. This is largely due to the biological make up. Men have a higher rate of basal metabolism than women, meaning they have a greater capacity to expend energy. Men are also 50% stronger than women in terms of brute strength and the lung capacity for women is 30% less than that of men [2]. All of these biological traits helped lead to men being more dominant in societies where physical strength and ability was the key to survival; when hunting for food and fighting in hand to hand combat were necessary for survival. But the female biology, while very different, should not be viewed as subordinate. Though a female body generally posses less brute force than a male, it serves other functions that males cannot; functions necessary for the continuation of our species. Thus it should be logical that both sexes deserve to have equal rights in a society, even if they serve different roles at times. Also, as our societies continue to experience technological advancements in various fields, certain factors that used to cause a greater division between the sexes, such as child birth, are becoming less significant. As we understand more about pregnancy and child birth, the risks involved with child birth have decreased and doctors understand far more about what the female body goes through during the process, so they are far more capable of aiding in the recovery following birth than in the past [3]. This all boils down to the fact that equal rights for the sexes is the logical way. This does not mean that we should not acknowledge or celebrate the differences between the sexes, but in terms of political, economic, social and cultural rights, both sexes should be on equal footing, since both sexes are required for us to continue existing on this planet. Finally, I just want to clarify that we are dealing with Feminism here, which is as I defined in my opening statement, and not radical feminism. Many see feminism as a group of man-hating women who want to take the power away from men and have the women as the dominant group. "Radical feminism aims to challenge and overthrow patriarchy by opposing standard gender roles and oppression of women and calls for a radical reordering of society" [4]. Too often people think of this when they think of feminism, but such is not the case in the same sense that Muslim extremists who commit international acts of terror do not represent the entirety of the Islamic faith. The bottom line is that females should have every right to vote, they should be paid based on their professional skills and they should be given equal opportunity to work a job, so long as they are qualified to do so. I believe that equality in gender rights is the logical and correct path. I await my opponent's opening arguments. Thank you. [1]http://en.wikipedia.org... [2]http://www.drjamesdobson.org... [3]http://www.takingcharge.csh.umn.edu... [4]http://en.wikipedia.org...

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/3/
  • PRO

    However, if a man wishes to divorce his wife, he simply...

    Feminism

    From the time the Constitution was signed in 1776 to today, I'm pretty sure everyone can all agree that feminism has caused some major changes in American history. Because of feminism, women have gone from having no place in the workforce to complete legal equality to men. Just a century ago, women could not even vote. Look at us now. It is possible that a woman will be the President of the United States in just a few short months. Despite what your opinion of Hillary Clinton is, you must admit this could be a major step for American history. Unfortunately though, women in certain other countries do not have equality to their male counterparts. Many middle eastern countries with Sharia-based laws are no where near the gender equality level of America. In some regards to marriage, women have much less of a say on who they can and cannot marry than men. Sharia law basically restricts a Muslim woman from marrying a non-Muslim man. This does not apply to Muslim men. Under Sharia law, if a women wants a divorce from her husband, his consent is required. However, if a man wishes to divorce his wife, he simply has to say "talaq" (I divorce you) three times. Above all else, in my opinion, one of the most sickening parts of Sharia law has to do with restrictions on a woman who has been sexually assaulted. If a man rapes a woman, under Sharia law, she could be forced to marry him. All these reasons and many more are why feminism is still needed today. It may not be needed to enforce legal equality in America anymore, but it is so desperately needed in the middle eastern countries that follow Sharia law. Everyday women are dying and being forced to do things because of gender inequality. They need feminism more than anything else.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/20/
  • PRO

    My opponent claims that, since these laws treat women...

    Feminism is not sexist.

    I thank my opponent for his second round of rebuttal. I would like to start by addressing my opponent's complaint that I neglected the 'women's right' part of the definition of feminism. While I grant that I did not downright say the words 'women's right' everytime I talked about equality, I thought that it was obviously implied. I do not see how someone can talk about equality in society without obviously referring to equal rights; the only things that society can actually change are human rights. So, to me, that was obvious, but I apologize to my opponent for the misunderstanding. Most of my opponent's arguments seem to be focused on convincing me that that the laws he presented (VAWA and Selective Service) are sexist, but my arguments had nothing to do with that. So, for the remainder of this debate, let's work under the assumption that I grant that these law are indeed sexist. Now, my arguments were focusing on the association that my opponent makes between these laws and feminism. My opponent claims that, since these laws treat women differently than men, they must be feminist in nature and therefore feminism must be sexist. As I said earlier, that is an unsupported association. According to the definition of feminism, a law could be considered feminist if it supports equal rights between men and women, not if it supports women in general. Does my opponent thinks that the VAWA and the Selective Service support the latter? If so, then they are not feminist. Therefore, pointing to these laws as a justification for claiming that feminism is sexist is unjustified. 'I agree that we are addressing the IDEA of feminism, however, rather than argue that the focus of Feminism on women's rights specifically is sexist, i chose to argue that the laws that are supported in order to give women equal rights in America is sexist.' The problem is that the laws my opponent has presented are not promoting EQUAL rights and therefore cannot be associated with feminism. My opponent then completely misunderstands my analogy, focusing on what atheism and feminism are rather than actually addressing my point which was basically that you cannot judge an ideology by its abuse and misuse (because then you are judging people, not the ideology), which is what my opponent seems to be doing with feminism. It has nothing to do with what atheism is. 'PRO tries rebuts my arguments by attempting to argue that since Feminism does not support the VAWA, it cannot be sexist' No... what I'm saying is that since feminism is not the support of the VAWA, one cannot point to this law to accuse feminism of being sexist. My opponent then tries to explain why he associates the VAWA with feminism, claiming that they both support women's rights. But my opponent is doing exactly what he accused me of doing; he is leaving out part of the definition of feminism, focusing on the 'women's rights' aspect and leaving out the 'equality of the sexes' aspect. Then my opponent goes on to explain how Selective Service is sexist which is, as I have said, irrelevant. 'The argument is not for prevention of the law, the argument is against misapplication of rights' I would ask my opponent to clarify what he means by 'misapplication of rights' so that I can answer this point. The analogy with taxes seems rather pointless. The conclusion I draw from this round is pretty similar to the one I drew for the last round; once again, my opponent is confusing the idea of feminism with some aspects of society that favor women. I do not have any CX question either.

CON

  • CON

    If we were in Iraq today it would still stand. ... Next...

    Feminism is bad

    First to answer the attack on Observation One: Pro's response to this was that we are not in Iraq. This piece of evidence was from 2010, and since then nothing has changed as we still have people supporting feminism. During the Iraq war, it was true that they were more likely to be raped than shot. If we were in Iraq today it would still stand. Next he said he was never talking about pornography, however it can be inferred from his opener. Now the big argument he made in this last round was that all my arguments were about equal rights, not feminism. However, this argument is flawed. A quick google search indicates the definition of feminism is "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men." This meas that feminism, by its very definition means equal rights to women. Pro admitted they are pro equal rights, so therefore, by the very definition of feminism, they are pro feminism. Additionally, note Observation 2 and Advantages 1 and 2 were untouched in the last round, which is reason alone to vote for con. In conclusion, by the definition of Next he said he was never talking about pornography, however it can be inferred from his opener. Now the big argument he made in this last round was that all my arguments were about equal rights, not feminism. However, this argument is flawed. A quick google search indicates the definition of feminism is "the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men." This meas that feminism, by its very definition means equal rights to women. Pro admitted they are pro equal rights, so therefore, by the very definition of feminism, they are pro feminism. Additionally, note Observation 2 and Advantages 1 and 2 were untouched in the last round, which is reason alone to vote for con. In conclusion, by the definition of feminism, pro conceded that feminism is good, as well as not denying that feminism is bad by not attacking my advantages of feminism.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism-is-bad/1/
  • CON

    First off, I did some searching, and the Marriam-Webster...

    Feminism

    First off, I did some searching, and the Marriam-Webster dictionary is made in liberal Massachusetts. They clearly bended the definition to serve their needs. I don't agree with that definition. You see, if a said a was a "masculinist", people would say that I'm male supremacist, but if I called myself a feminist, I would be called a "champion of rights". So, since "masculinism" is male supremacy, then feminism is female supremacy. I consider myself an "equalist". Feminism today is so twisted and hypocritical today, that it is best to abandon it. I am for the rights of men AND women, not JUST women, and not ONLY men.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/21/
  • CON

    But the way the organization itself belittles the male...

    Feminism.

    But that is still promoting FEMALES as you said. It in no way promotes men. It simply belittles men in the eyes of the public. I agree that women are raped and sexually assulted by men but that has really nothing to do with the feminism I am speaking of. That is where feminism has come. It started as a civil rights movement in the 20s when women gained the right to vote. It has since pushed for women's rights which is fine. But the way the organization itself belittles the male population is disgusting. It has turned from a civil rights movement to a full blown rape awareness campaing. Rape has nothing to do with the rights of women. Rape is simply an action performed by an ignorant human. Women can rape too. Although not as common, it has happened and cases have been dismissed involving a man being raped. It is very clear that feminism does have a gender and that gender is female. It may have male supporters but it is a organization that promotes women and women only.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism./1/
  • CON

    Women can now vote. ... I agree that radical feminism is...

    Feminism

    First off, thank you very much for accepting my argument. Now, to feminism, women often claim that they are given unequal rights, when in the past this is proven, yes. But, throughout time women have received every right that a man has. Women can now join the army. Women can now become president. Women can now vote. The list goes on for a very long time. So, in 1st world countries such as the USA, there should be no such thing as a feminist. The same can not be said for 3rd world countries, where women rights have not been established and women often have to be near a man to go anywhere in the city. However we still find feminists in 1st world countries. In fact, I dare to say that men are the ones who are the subordinate, because in a war, which gender is forced to go because of the deaths of volunteers? Men. Which gender still complains that they are given unequal rights? Women. I agree that radical feminism is a different debate altogether, but normal feminism itself is an extremely incorrect argument.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/3/
  • CON

    Next I would like to address the issue of domestic...

    Feminism

    Nobody has ever had the courage to actually debate this with me without forfeiting or using ad-homenim. Anyways, here's my argument: Modern feminism is harmful for many reasons. The first hint at this is the prefix "Fem", or about women. Not about men, because feminism doesn't care about inequality towards men. Now, I would like to address the issue of the "wage gap". The wage gap of 77% was a statistic measured many years ago. This is just assuming this statistic is true, which I don't think it is. Next I would like to address the issue of domestic violence. Is domestic violence against women a problem? Yes. Of course it is. However, statistics have pointed out that close to 40% of domestic violence victims are men. Little to no attention has been given to this issue Finally, I would like to address body image. Are women pressured to stay thin? As with domestic violence, yes. They are. But, again, so are men. If anyone has read this far, thank you. I hope that someone will debate with me to help me shed light on I hope that someone will debate with me to help me shed light on feminism.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/7/
  • CON

    Next I would like to address the issue of domestic...

    Feminism

    Modern feminism is harmful for many reasons. The first hint at this is the prefix "Fem", or about women. Not about men, because feminism doesn't care about inequality towards men. Now, I would like to address the issue of the "wage gap". The wage gap of 77% was a statistic measured many years ago. This is just assuming this statistic is true, which I don't think it is. Next I would like to address the issue of domestic violence. Is domestic violence against women a problem? Yes. Of course it is. However, statistics have pointed out that close to 40% of domestic violence victims are men. Little to no attention has been given to this issue Finally, I would like to address body image. Are women pressured to stay thin? As with domestic violence, yes. They are. But, again, so are men. If anyone has read this far, thank you. I hope that someone will debate with me to help me shed light on feminism.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/6/
  • CON

    I wish the best of luck to whoever accepts this...

    Feminism

    I personally think that feminism is a very controversial topic in many cultures as they all have their own way of viewing women, treating them, and what obligations they have. In the American culture, feminists are very active and there's not day that passes by where I don't read an article supporting feminism and many have very good points supporting their argument but others are just biased off of personal beliefs, impartial information, and experiences that many may see from different points of view. My opponent does not have to defend the entire topic of feminism, but basically why feminism is vital in a community, or whatever feminist topic they choose as long as its an important one whose impact on society effects many greatly. I wish the best of luck to whoever accepts this challenge, but first I need to set some rules so that everything can be as neat as possible: - If you decide to state a claim, such as one that is based off a study made or an event that occurred, etc, your claim must be supported with all links to them BELOW YOUR ARGUMENT! If not, then I will not consider you a worthy opponent and I will forfeit the rounds. - NO TROLLING! I hope that whoever accepts this challenge will be mature enough to give and argument without having to act like a child and use bad arguments. Also, no cursing unless your stating a quote, and because it is very unprofessional to do so. - Plagiarism will not be tolerated at all whatsoever, like it is in most arguments or schoolwork, etc. I will know if you did and if you do so, then I will forfeit the debate. I will not waste my time with someone who isn't original. Anyways now that all necessary has been stated, I will once again wish the best of luck against my opponent.

    • https://www.debate.org/debates/Feminism/20/