The Instigator
The_Immortal_Emris
Pro (for)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
blackkid
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

3rd wave feminism has made notable progress for civil rights

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
The_Immortal_Emris
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/8/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,323 times Debate No: 60073
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (35)
Votes (6)

 

The_Immortal_Emris

Pro

My opponent believes the 3rd wave of feminism has not made any progress.

I disagree.

Debate will be limited to 4 rounds.

First round is for acceptance only.
blackkid

Con

I hope this actually is challenging...
Debate Round No. 1
The_Immortal_Emris

Pro

"Third Wave feminism and Civil Rights"

A. - What is the Third Wave:

In order to fully examine the impact of Third Wave feminism on the civil rights struggles of the last few decades, two things must be done.

- Identifying the ideas of the movement.

- Demonstrating an impact of those ideas.

I will first seek to outline a few of the more universal ideals of third wave feminism, and explore their roots, then I will attempt to show the impact those cultural movements have fueled.

It does bear mentioning that 3rd wave feminism is still a very young idea system, and as such is still very fluid and changing as more social concerns and injustices come to light.

"In contrast to those voices (2nd wave feminist thinkers), thirdR08;wavers do not completely reject the agenda of secondR08;wave feminism (Heywood 2006a, 139); they simply seek to rid feminist practice of its perceived ideological rigidity." (1)

It evolved from many long-established schools of thought which were part of the discourse of the 2nd wave feminist movement.

"Feminism is itself problematic, because the theories that inform it are heterogenous (p.25). (8)

Like any logical divergence from an academic school of thought, the evolution of feminist theory is an entirely natural progression of a social, cultural movement, and as such, the schools of thought share many similarities, just as they share differences.

Additionally, many "modern" (still living) feminists hold beliefs from both 2nd and 3rd wave feminist theories.

"Within the body of third wave feminist thinking, there exists strains and influences of other feminist epistemologies, including standpoint theory, queer theory, postmodernist, poststructuralist feminist thought and anti-essentialism." (8)

There are still several "Ideals" which are selective to what is defined as 3rd wave feminism, which I will highlight below.

I. - The Ideas of Third Wave Feminism:

To best understand the nuances of Third Wave feminism, one must understand how it differs from the ideas which helped shape it.

"Additionally, and perhaps because of the significant gains made by (1st and second wave) feminism, young women today experience sexism, racism, homophobia, and classism that is more underground, more insidious, and much more difficult to pinpoint than its previous incarnations. " (8)

I will now highlight just three of the many facets of the movement.

1. Sex positivism: 2nd wave feminist thinking tended to err against pornography as detrimental and exploitative to women. Third wave feminists tend to subscribe to the belief that nudity and nude expression, even in pornography, can be empowering to women, so long as it is not exploitative. (2)

There are many "3rd" wave feminists who do not share this ideal, but still subscribe to other ideas of 3rd wave feminism. However, sex positivity/positivism is widely practiced by 3rd wave feminists.

This difference was analyzed well by Gayle Rubin (Rubin, 1984). To save space, the crux of the analysis can be found in the wiki source below. (3)

2. Transfeminism - transexual, transgender, gender-queer acceptance/advocacy: One stark contrast between previous feminist schools of thought and that of third-wave feminism, is the acceptance and advocacy of transgender and transsexual individuals, as well as gender-queer individuals.

2nd wave feminism was not wholly accepting of LGBTQ individuals who were female, nor was the movement overly interested in championing LGBTQ advocacy, this caused several splinter groups to form during the early stages of the 2nd wave. These groups would contribute to the formation of a more accepting and comprehensive third wave feminist viewpoint.

2nd wave feminism was not accepting of the LGBTQ movement, or those female individuals who were not hetero-normative or binary. (4)

3rd wave feminism takes a sharp divergence from this, and actively champions LGBTQ equality and acceptance.

"This way of ordering the world is especially difficult for a generation that has grown up transgender, bisexual, interracial, and knowing and loving people who are racist, sexist, and otherwise afflicted. (Walker 2006b, 22)" (5)

3. Education and dialogue - Third Wave Feminism takes an active role in encouraging discourse within and outside of the various feminist communities.

"Outreach education to trans youth has become an increasingly important endeavor as well."

Some differences are categorized in this source under Education as a "Right to be Myself". (7)

3rd wave feminism has ushered in several organizations which focus on sexual education and health for women.

- WHAM!
- Voice
- Fearless
-Womanist
-Students Organizing Students
- FURY
-YELL
(8)

B. - What has Third wave feminism done for civil rights:

1. Sex Positivity -

"Moral authorities throughout Western history have shaped how we as a society view sex, labeling it as sinful and indecent..." (10)

The sex positive aspect of third wave feminism has resulted in the mellinial generation becoming the most accepting of other sexual orientations and genders.

"The surprisingly detailed OkCupid dating insights data suggests that over 34% of young men and women have either had a same-sex encounter or would like to " an increase that dovetails nicely with the 81% of people under 30 who now support gay marriage." (11)

"A recent survey conducted by University College London found that we (millennials) in general have a broader sexual repertoire, and are more likely to be satisfied with our sex lives than older people. We're less judgmental of kink, and less likely to stigmatize around sex." (10)

Of course, this cannot be attributed entirely to third wave feminism, as it is part of the greater struggle for civil rights, however this proves third wave feminism espouses ideas which have had a direct impact on civil rights.

2. Transgender Acceptance/ voice - Transgender identity was seldom talked about prior to the 1990s, but with the rise of gender equality discourse, and a greater examination of what it means to identify as male or female, these issues have come to the forefront.

Here are examples of how third wave feminism resulted in the propagation of this civil rights discourse.

"Enter jammer girl. A jammer girl is defined as a pre-adolescent or adolescent girl whose identity is not based on physical appearance and passivity, but on health and social activism." (12)

Transgender, transsexual, lesbian and gender queer individuals now have a voice in the movement, bringing their issues to light.

"thirdR08;wave feminism rejects grand narratives for a feminism that operates as a hermeneutics of critique within a wide array of discursive locations, and replaces attempts at unity with a dynamic and welcoming politics of coalition." (9)

"The "grrls" of the third wave have stepped onto the stage as strong and empowered, eschewing victimization and defining feminine beauty for themselves as subjects, not as objects of a sexist patriarchy" (13)

There are organizations now funding efforts to bring these civil rights issues more awareness

"The RHJI has supported over 50 young women and trans youth-led groups across the country and their diverse range of strategies and tactics." (13)

3. A small list of achievements.

1994: The Gender Equity in Education Act (14)
2000: CBS paid $8 million to settle a sex discrimination lawsuit.
2007: The Gender Equality Duty of the Equality Act 2006 came into effect in the UK.
2013: The first woman to bring a gender discrimination lawsuit in China

SOURCES: 1. http://www.jstor.org...
2. Wolf, Naomi. Feminist Fatale: a reply to Camille Paglia. The New Republic. March 16, 1992
3. http://en.wikipedia.org...
4. http://beingfeministblog.wordpress.com...
5. http://www.jstor.org...
6. A. Mackinnon, Catharine. (1991). "Toward A Feminist Theory of the State." Harvard University press.
7. http://web.archive.org...
8. http://pi.library.yorku.ca...
9. http://web.archive.org...
10. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
11. http://urbanfifth.com...
12. http://school.credoreference.com...
13. http://www.thirdwavefoundation.org...
14. http://www2.ed.gov...
blackkid

Con

I feel bad because I knew this would happen.

First, there are no provisions that 3rd Wave has directly impacted anything in the above presentation.

Sex Positive Feminism (http://en.wikipedia.org...) began in the 1980s and the Free-Love movement is from the 1960's however Third wave is presented as a 90's movement, "Third-wave feminism is a term identified with several diverse strains of feminist activity and study, whose exact boundaries in the historiography of feminism are a subject of debate, but are generally marked as beginning in the early 1990s and continuing to the present. The movement arose partially as a response to the perceived failures of and backlash against initiatives and movements created by second-wave feminism during the 1960s, '70s, and '80s, and the perception that women are of "many colors, ethnicities, nationalities, religions and cultural backgrounds".[1] Rebecca Walker coined the term "third-wave feminism" in a 1992 essay." (http://en.wikipedia.org...)

There's a chronological error. This means that, "The sex positive aspect of third wave feminism has resulted in the mellinial generation becoming the most accepting of other sexual orientations and genders." is unsupported by the general happenstance after the world's sexual revolution and other major occurrences and movements that happened prior to the birth of 3rd wave feminism.

Transgenderism (http://en.wikipedia.org...) has been active for years long prior to the inception of 3rd Wave Feminism, I would point to the 1970's and 1980's specifically as the beginning of the tide of what would become the fruition seen in the 1990's and 2000's. Much like presidential plans most of the effects of a movement aren't seen for years after it's creation and the same goes here; Transgenderism has not been shown to directly correlate with 3rd wave's progression as claimed here above. What is true is that 3rd wave supports (as proven by my opponent) Transgenderism but 3rd wave also supports racial issues and a wide array of groups which does not mean that it directly impacted the actual presence of modern political and social placement for these issues. The battle had been waged for years.

However the claim was not that 3rd wave supports the cause. The claim was that 3rd wave has furthered the cause. It has the same failings as the previous claim that 3rd wave has somehow furthered sexual openness when it is relatively sensible to attribute this to the major shifts in the country (and world) revolving around the sexual revolutions and movements that were en mass at least 30 years prior to the decade of the birth of 3rd wave feminism.

For the small list of achievements:

1. "This data snapshot highlights several differences in educational
opportunities between males and females from prekindergarten
through higher education. The information herein, gathered from a
variety of education data sources, shows that"despite the enormous
progress made in ensuring equal educational opportunities since the
passage of Title IX in 1972"much work remains if we are to achieve
full gender equity among our nation"s students."

( http://www2.ed.gov... )

1972: (https://www.aclu.org...)

The concept had been established long prior. This is a 2nd wave battle and this is a continuation of that molding instead of a "victory". Not only that but again it proves support, which is not equivalent to direct intervention, from the 3rd wave community. It is not a product of 3rd wave thinking and furthermore it is only being listed as such because of when it occurred instead of accurately being assessed for it's actual value and involvement with the 3rd wave movement.

The only other example I will example is the Gender Equality Duty of 2007 (http://wnc.equalities.gov.uk...) which is indeed a victory for 3rd wave. Sadly this is the only thing my opponent has posted which has validity. It has since been replaced by a new act in 2010 which covers far more than just gender such as age, disability, etc.

Even using Pros definition for 3rd wave he has not shown with any clear indication most of his examples to be attributed even in part let alone in significance to 3rd wave feminism.
Debate Round No. 2
The_Immortal_Emris

Pro

Before I begin my rebuttal, I would like to thank Con for engaging in this debate, and offering a rebuttal to my assertions.

First, Con neglected to acknowledge where I stressed the significance of the contributions toward Third Wave Feminism which were championed by less accepted, earlier feminist thinkers who were divergent from 2nd wave feminism.

Such as sex positive Feminism, which was not accepted as mainstream until the Third Wave arose.

"Sex Positive Feminism (http://en.wikipedia.org......) began in the 1980s and the Free-Love movement is from the 1960's however Third wave is presented as a 90's movement,"

Con makes this statement as if the three movements are mutually exclusive.

The fact remains that sex-positive feminism was not an accepted widely until Third Wave feminism arose.

Con's own source highlights this reality.

" Some became involved in the sex-positive feminist movement in response to efforts by anti-pornography feminists, such as Catharine MacKinnon, Andrea Dworkin, Robin Morgan and Dorchen Leidholdt," (each of the examples given are 2nd wave feminists) (1)

Further, it was not until the 90's that these movements gained the momentum needed to continue the progressive discourse.

This time is often referred to as the "Feminist Sex Wars", and it is the crucible from which the third wave was born.

Also considered part of the third wave is sex-positivity, a celebration of sexuality as a positive aspect of life, with broader definitions of what sex means and what oppression and empowerment may imply in the context of sex. For example, many third-wave feminists have reconsidered the opposition to pornography and sex work of the second wave, and challenge existing beliefs that participants in pornography and sex work are always being exploited. (2)

To say sex positivity hasn't seen notable progress in the last 20 years is to ignore observable, documented facts to the contrary.

"Rebecca Walker coined the term "third-wave feminism" in a 1992 essay."

In order to label a group of movements which were influential, yet separate from the second wave movement.

Con also assumes that the movement only began upon the creation of the "term" rather than the term having been created to help define a series of similar movements.

"The roots of the third wave began, however, in the mid-1980s. Feminist leaders rooted in the second wave called for a new subjectivity in feminist voice. They sought to negotiate prominent space within feminist thought for consideration of race-related subjectivities." (3)

In the essay, Walker, a black woman, explained how second wave feminism continued the marginalization of non heterosexual women and black women.

"For many second-wave feminists, non-heterosexual women were seen as an embarrassment to the movement. The great feminist activist Betty Friedan, for example, coined the term "lavender menace" in 1969 to refer to what she considered the harmful perception that feminists are lesbians. She later apologized for the remark, but it accurately reflected the insecurities of a movement that was still very heteronormative in many ways." (4)

As the above quote and source illustrate, issues facing women of color and transsexual, transgender and non-binary orientations, were not well represented until the third wave arose in the early 90's.

Con claims -

"The sex positive aspect of third wave feminism has resulted in the mellinial generation becoming the most accepting of other sexual orientations and genders." is unsupported...

Because "other major occurrences and movements that happened prior to the birth of 3rd wave feminism."

Con ignores the reality that these movements were not accepted or practiced until the rise of third wave feminism.

Con's own arguments against the Third Wave's influence have been used against the emergence of the second wave, over a century ago.

"The "new" feminism that emerged among the citified, educated daughters of the 1910s embraced the modernist impulse to leave the past behind. "Women, if you want to realize yourselves," Mina Loy wrote in her 1914 Feminist Manifesto, "the lies of centuries have got to be discarded. . . . Nothing short of Absolute Demolition will bring about reform." (5)

This rather detailed essay explores how second wave feminism formed, despite the resistance of those who supported the status quo.

"The new consumer culture substituted sexual liberation for political power, promoted shopping "choices" over real-life options, and promised young women the "freedom" to display their bodies, smoke and drink with the boys, and adopt the male perspective. As the New York Times noted approvingly in 1922, the modern girl "take[s] a man"s view as her mother never could." (5)

By this analysis, the emergence of second wave feminism was marred by the consumerism and the adoption of "male" traits by flappers, in order to become "equal".

Third wave feminism rejects the "male and female" roles, and instead allows each individual to choose their own gender role.

I include this essay to show how 1st wave feminism evolved into second wave, with significant growing pains, just as second wave later evolved into third wave during the late 80's, thought it was not defined and labeled until the early 90's.

Con claims Third Wave feminist beliefs predate the existence of Third wave feminism, which is entirely true, however Con is incorrect when they assume those movements did not evolve into Third Wave Feminism. America was a Capitalist nation long before Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels coined the term in the late 1860s.

By Con's logic, America wasn't a capitalist nation until the early 1900s.

It is far more often that social movements "begin" before they are "defined".

This is the only argument Con has provided on any issue, including the below:

"Transgenderism (http://en.wikipedia.org......) has been active for years long prior to the inception of 3rd Wave Feminism"

1. Con again argues that because the term "third wave" came after these movements began in theory, that these movements are not part of the third wave.

2. Con provides no sources, aside from a wiki definition of transgenderism, to support these claims.

Con ignores the reality that the transgender feminism movement was rejected by the second wave, and was only accepted and widely discussed when the third wave arose.

"Though second-wave feminism argued for the sex and gender distinction, some feminists believed there was a conflict between transgender identity and the feminist cause; e.g., they believed that male-to-female transition abandoned or devalued female identity, and that trangender people embraced traditional gender roles and stereotypes. Many transgender feminists, however, viewed themselves as contributing to feminism by questioning and subverting gender norms. Third wave and contemporary feminism more greatly accepts transgender people." (6)

There have been conflicts with second wave feminist organizations which do not accept transgender individuals or the movement.

"Perhaps the most visible site of conflict between feminists and trans women has been the Michigan Womyn's Music Festival. The festival ejected a transsexual woman, Nancy Burkholder, in the early 1990s.The activist group Camp Trans formed to protest the "womyn-born-womyn" policy and to advocate for greater acceptance of trans women within the feminist community" (7)

To pretend second wave feminism accepted these ideas is contrary to the facts. Third wave, however, embraced them and brought them to the forefront of public discourse.

For the small list of achievements:

1. "This is a 2nd wave battle and this is a continuation of that molding instead of a "victory"."

Con chooses not to include the date of the newer legislation, which was finished in the early 90's, Con ignored the fact that third wave feminism was instrumental in getting it passed.

Con offers no sources to refute this fact, aside from statistics indicating the effort worked.

2. "It is not a product of 3rd wave thinking"

It directly bans gender-role stereotyping in the classroom, which is a third wave thought.

Con also admits the example "Gender Equality Duty of 2007" fits the BOP.

Con offers mostlywiki sources.

SOURCES:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
2. Johnson, Merri Lisa, ed. (2002). Jane Sexes It Up: True Confessions of Feminist Desire. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows.
3. Hayes Taylor, Kimberly (March 8, 1995). "Feminism reaches the next generation " Walker underscores need for inclusion, change in 'third wave'
4. http://civilliberty.about.com...
5. http://susanfaludi.com...
6. Hines, Sally. TransForming gender: transgender practices of identity, intimacy and care. The Policy Press, 2007.
7. Hand, Michael and Sreedhar, Susanne (2006). "The Ethics of Exclusion: Gender and Politics at the Michigan Womyn's Music Festi
blackkid

Con

Con's time is precious so quit with the whole "Thanking" thing. You were incredibly rude and harassed me for days about this nonsense; I'm not one for the two-faced so just spare me. You're forgiven this time.

Con didn't neglect anything. You didn't prove what you stressed. 3rd wave feminism didn't cause what you said it caused, it supported what you said it caused, therefore there's not even a reason to explore point A further. You didn't support your own claim (again) and now are twisting it into another claim (again) to maintain some form of integrity. Your own source defeats your claims that 3rd Wave had any real hand in Sex Positivism, instead it took on Sex Positivism, that is Sex Positivism effected 3rd Wave after the rejection of 2nd.

"To say sex positivity hasn't seen notable progress in the last 20 years is to ignore observable, documented facts to the contrary.". this is again a shifting of the same arguments because it's an attempt to push ownership for Sex Positivism by 3rd Wave when it is clear that they are not the same seeing as Feminism's 2nd wave, as cited by you, rejected Sex Positivism making the movements separate and their integration is definitely Feminism absorbing the pre-existing instead of Feminism driving it.

These two pillars are sufficient to undermine the rest.

"Con claims Third Wave feminist beliefs predate the existence of Third wave feminism, which is entirely true, however Con is incorrect when they assume those movements did not evolve into Third Wave Feminism. America was a Capitalist nation long before Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels coined the term in the late 1860s.

By Con's logic, America wasn't a capitalist nation until the early 1900s.", straight red herring. No one was even talking about Capitalism. Furthermore Pro starts off by attempting to assert that the Third Wave existed before the Third Wave which is not equivalent to saying "Not All 2nd Wave agreed on matter X" which is just intellectually dishonest and a means to inject one's vantage point into any time period or situation. Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent (http://en.wikipedia.org...) as shown through the logic "If X supports concept A and A is a core of group B and then X is a member of group B." Written out "If a person pre-90's identified as a Feminist but supported Sex Positivism then they were actually a 3rd Wave Feminist." It's false.

[ 1. Con again argues that because the term "third wave" came after these movements began in theory, that these movements are not part of the third wave.

2. Con provides no sources, aside from a wiki definition of transgenderism, to support these claims. ]

Misstating the position (again); 1. Pro stated that third-wave feminism, in their opening, had a direct impact on the GBLTQ, specifically the T, and failed to prove it which was shown through yet another chronological error. 2. The citation was sufficient to prove the chronological error. There is no evidence of Pro's claim. Pro however does support Con's claim by showing that 2nd wave by and large rejected the concept (as with sex positivism) which in turn means that 3rd wave again absorbed rather than directly effected T but instead simply supports it which was not Pro's claim.

Achievements:

Con notes that the process began in 1972 and is an old battle. Con does not hide this. Con beats his chest in rage and sticks his tongue out because Pro decided to attempt a chronological war yet again which is not sufficient to prove any form of furthering or ownership by 3rd wave. There is no evidence or reason to believe that a group specifically dedicated to the cause of 3rd wave influenced this legislation which is what Pro needs to prove; general support is again insufficient.

Con admits the example of the GED fits the BOP because Con did not have the energy to bother with looking up the history of the decision considering that Pro did not cite any of the "Achievements" and forced Con to look them up himself, by which Con was found to be falsifying statements and using allusions instead of proofs (that the new legislation is a direct result of 3rd wave, which is still unproven ) and con regrets his mercy.

Let that be on record. Con REGRETS his mercy. Ha!

Also, Pro's sources are terrible and Con uses functional sources when it comes to legal documentation while con uses random lines out of assorted sources to prove nothing again and again and make up claims that they cannot back over and over.

And waste cons time. Con is displeased.

Is this over yet? This farce? Can we just vote for this guy so I can do better things?
Debate Round No. 3
The_Immortal_Emris

Pro

Again, I thank Con for the rebuttal and for taking the time with this debate.

I asked Con to participate due to some comments regarding feminism which I believed to be poorly informed. I simply wished for Con to defend their assertions in an organized format. I appreciate Con's willingness to engage on this issue.

Rebuttal:

"3rd wave feminism didn't cause what you said it caused, it supported what you said it caused, therefore there's not even a reason to explore point A further"

Con offers no sources to support this opinion, nor can he point out, using my sources, where this opinion is at all supported.

"You didn't support your own claim (again) and now are twisting it into another claim (again) to maintain some form of integrity."

Con has already admitted the BOP has been met. That being said, Con still offers no sources or quotations to indicate where I have "twisted" a claim.

" Your own source defeats your claims that 3rd Wave had any real hand in Sex Positivism"

Con is incorrect, and offers no quotations from the sources to support this opinion. The fact is, Sex Positivity is a tremendous aspect of third wave feminism, which joined together many more defined feminist schools of thought.

Gayle Rubin (Rubin, 1984) summarizes the conflict over sex within feminism, between the 2nd and third waves:

"...There have been two strains of feminist thought on the subject. One tendency has criticized the restrictions on women's sexual behavior and denounced the high costs imposed on women for being sexually active. This tradition of feminist sexual thought has called for a sexual liberation that would work for women as well as for men. " (1)

"Also considered part of the third wave is sex-positivity, a celebration of sexuality as a positive aspect of life, with broader definitions of what sex means and what oppression and empowerment may imply in the context of sex. For example, many third-wave feminists have reconsidered the opposition to pornography and sex work of the second wave, and challenge existing beliefs that participants in pornography and sex work are always being exploited."(2)

"This is again a shifting of the same arguments because it's an attempt to push ownership for Sex Positivism by 3rd Wave"

Con claims that suggesting Sex Positivity in general influenced third wave feminism nullifies any civil rights advances the movement has created, which is not logical.

If we operate under this logic, historians would say the French Revolution had no influence on the American Revolution, because it happened beforehand. They would say Thomas Payne had no hand in creating the structure of our Constitution, despite his tremendous philosophical influence on the authors.

If one will look above, they can see that I haven not once claimed that Sex Positivity was a result of Third Wave feminism, only that the progress made toward that objective is owed in great part to the third wave feminism movement which adopted Sex Positive theory and brought it to the public eye. Blogs such as the below, illustrate this fact.

"Sex-positivity is quite simple. It holds that there is really no wrong way to do human sexuality as long as all parties involved give their consent. The sex-positive movement is closely intertwined with (third wave) feminism because the oppression of sexualities which fall outside the normative (white, monogamous, and heterosexual) is a major tool of the patriarchy. "(3)

"straight red herring."

Not at all.

Con suggests that a movement or designation can only exist once the terminology has been set in stone. The term Capitalism did not exist prior to Marx's writings, therefore, Con must believe America is not a Capitalist nation.

Sex positive theory was codified into the greater Third Wave Feminist movement once that terminology was established, just as America became a "capitalist" nation when Marx coined the term. This is another example of the theory pre-dating the terminology.

"Furthermore Pro starts off by attempting to assert that the Third Wave existed before the Third Wave "

Just as Capitalism existed before "Capitalism". This is a simple correlation to make.

"which is not equivalent to saying "Not All 2nd Wave agreed on matter X" which is just intellectually dishonest and a means to inject one's vantage point into any time period or situation."

Con offers no sources to support the assumption that Third Wave feminism formed spontaneously, rather than transformed over time from positions which were not accepted by the mainstream 2nd wave.

Con claims my argument uses the "Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent", because I assert that the theories which formed Third Wave Feminism had an impact on civil rights.

Con claims this by misdefining the term:

"If X supports concept A and A is a core of group B and then X is a member of group B."

Con's example above is not the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent.

The actual fallacy is represented as "If A results in B, and B is present, that must mean A was the cause."

EX.
If Bill Gates owns Fort Knox, then he is rich. (the true statement)
Bill Gates is rich. (the true variable)
Therefore, Bill Gates owns Fort Knox. (the fallacy)

Let's attribute this to Con's example:

If a person pre-90's identified as a Feminist but supported Sex Positivism (the true statement)
then they were actually a 3rd Wave Feminist. - (The true variable)
*****Missing (The Fallacy)

Con is missing the last half of the "fallacy", because they have misattributed it. (4)

It would have been better represented as:

If a Pre-90's person is Sex Positive, he/she is a Third wave feminist. (the true statement)
So and so is a Third Wave Feminist. (The true variable)
Therefore so and so is Sex Positive. (the fallacy)

Not all third wave feminists are Sex Positive, but all Sex Positive people are Third Wave Feminists, at least in that regard (obviously not on every subject), whether they are aware or not. Just as America was a "Capitalist" nation, even before the term was coined.

"Pro stated that third-wave feminism, in their opening, had a direct impact on the GBLTQ, specifically the T, and failed to prove it which was shown through yet another chronological error."

Again, Con offers no sources or citations to support this statement, save for their own opinion.

"Trans feminism"that is, transgender perspectives on feminism, or feminist perspectives on transgender issues"is one of many so-called "third-wave" feminisms. Its origins are closely linked with other feminist submovements"specifically, sex-positive feminism, postmodern/poststructuralist feminism, queer theory and intersectionality."(5)

"3rd wave again absorbed rather than directly effected T"

1. In no way has anyone suggest trans feminism was influenced by the third wave. It influenced the creation of and was incorporated into the Third Wave, much like the Sex Positive movement.
2. This does not demonstrate that Third Wave trans feminists have not had a notable impact on civil rights.

It can be seen that Trans feminism is a facet of the third wave, and as we have already established, Trans feminism has had a notable impact on civil rights. The wider discourse in academia is proof of that. (6)(7)

Con again attempts to claim that a movement cannot be considered a movement until the terminology is created. This is the same flawed argument Con has based their entire rebuttal on. It has already been shown to be flawed.

ACHIEVEMENTS:
"not sufficient to prove any form of furthering or ownership by 3rd wave."

Untrue.

furthering - "(millennials) in general have a broader sexual repertoire, and are more likely to be satisfied with our sex lives than older people. We're less judgmental of kink, and less likely to stigmatize around sex." (8)

"Ownership", again, has no place in social movements. MLK does not "own" pacifism, yet it was a tremendous boon to his contributions to civil rights movement.

Con again admits the BOP has been met.

Con states my claims are false, yet cannot demonstrate how.
Con claims my sources are "terrible", yet cannot provide original sources to refute or disprove them.
Con has shown poor conduct throughout the debate.
Please vote Pro!

SOURCES:

1. http://books.google.com...'s%20sexual&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false
2. Johnson, Merri Lisa, ed. (2002). Jane Sexes It Up: True Confessions of Feminist Desire. New York
3. http://thefeministanthropologist.com...
4. http://en.wikipedia.org...
6. http://www.temple.edu...
7. http://powderroom.jezebel.com...
8. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
blackkid

Con

[ "3rd wave feminism didn't cause what you said it caused, it supported what you said it caused, therefore there's not even a reason to explore point A further"

Con offers no sources to support this opinion, nor can he point out, using my sources, where this opinion is at all supported. ]

Con doesn't need to offer sources as Pro already has proven that with his own sources.

[ "You didn't support your own claim (again) and now are twisting it into another claim (again) to maintain some form of integrity."

Con has already admitted the BOP has been met. That being said, Con still offers no sources or quotations to indicate where I have "twisted" a claim. ]

You didn't support your own claim. Con admits nothing.

[ " Your own source defeats your claims that 3rd Wave had any real hand in Sex Positivism"

Con is incorrect, and offers no quotations from the sources to support this opinion. The fact is, Sex Positivity is a tremendous aspect of third wave feminism, which joined together many more defined feminist schools of thought. ]

Con cited the Free Love / Sex Positivism movement and it's chronological inception. Pro did not show that Sex Positivism was something effected by 3rd wave however proves that the concept is supported by 3rd wave.

[ Gayle Rubin (Rubin, 1984) summarizes the conflict over sex within feminism, between the 2nd and third waves:

"...There have been two strains of feminist thought on the subject. One tendency has criticized the restrictions on women's sexual behavior and denounced the high costs imposed on women for being sexually active. This tradition of feminist sexual thought has called for a sexual liberation that would work for women as well as for men. " (1) ]

Fallacy of the Consequent based on chronological error.

[ "Also considered part of the third wave is sex-positivity, a celebration of sexuality as a positive aspect of life, with broader definitions of what sex means and what oppression and empowerment may imply in the context of sex. For example, many third-wave feminists have reconsidered the opposition to pornography and sex work of the second wave, and challenge existing beliefs that participants in pornography and sex work are always being exploited."(2) ]

Misleading, written in 2002 by another person altogether and not properly attributed to the writer in order to lead away from the continuous chronological error. Does not reflect the writings of the previous person. Does not prove anything but 3rd wave supports Sex Positivism, which is not in contention.

[ "This is again a shifting of the same arguments because it's an attempt to push ownership for Sex Positivism by 3rd Wave"

Con claims that suggesting Sex Positivity in general influenced third wave feminism nullifies any civil rights advances the movement has created, which is not logical. ]

Con makes no such claim.

[ If we operate under this logic, historians would say the French Revolution had no influence on the American Revolution, because it happened beforehand. They would say Thomas Payne had no hand in creating the structure of our Constitution, despite his tremendous philosophical influence on the authors.

If one will look above, they can see that I haven not once claimed that Sex Positivity was a result of Third Wave feminism, only that the progress made toward that objective is owed in great part to the third wave feminism movement which adopted Sex Positive theory and brought it to the public eye. Blogs such as the below, illustrate this fact. ]

Fallacy of the Antecedent.

(http://www.fallacyfiles.org...)

[ "Sex-positivity is quite simple. It holds that there is really no wrong way to do human sexuality as long as all parties involved give their consent. The sex-positive movement is closely intertwined with (third wave) feminism because the oppression of sexualities which fall outside the normative (white, monogamous, and heterosexual) is a major tool of the patriarchy. "(3) ]

Appeal to Authority

(http://www.fallacyfiles.org...)

[ straight red herring."

Not at all.

Con suggests that a movement or designation can only exist once the terminology has been set in stone. The term Capitalism did not exist prior to Marx's writings, therefore, Con must believe America is not a Capitalist nation. ]

Red Herring, Non-Sequitur, Con asserts no such thing.

[ Sex positive theory was codified into the greater Third Wave Feminist movement once that terminology was established, just as America became a "capitalist" nation when Marx coined the term. This is another example of the theory pre-dating the terminology. ]

"Sex Positivity" was around 30 years prior to 1990 as proven by the Wikipedia source Con posted in argument 2. The terminology existed prior, Falsehood.

[ "Furthermore Pro starts off by attempting to assert that the Third Wave existed before the Third Wave "

Just as Capitalism existed before "Capitalism". This is a simple correlation to make. ]

Fallacy of Ambiguity

(http://www.fallacyfiles.org...)

Pro refuses to use a standardized timeline spanning his arguments across and beyond up to two decades as per citations.

[ Con offers no sources to support the assumption that Third Wave feminism formed spontaneously, rather than transformed over time from positions which were not accepted by the mainstream 2nd wave. ]

Con offered however a source that stated that Third wave is generally accepted to have begun in the 1990s; Pro rejects and posits that all aforethought that may have been popularized or embraced and cultivated and supported by 3rd wave is in fact an extension of third wave. Fallacy of the Consequent.

[ Con claims my argument uses the "Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent", because I assert that the theories which formed Third Wave Feminism had an impact on civil rights. ]

False. Non-sequitur. Con asserts Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent based on chronological errors. Pro has not shown for any theories which "formed" during Third Wave Feminism, only theories that were accepted and supported by Third Wave Feminism.

[ Con claims this by misdefining the term:

"If X supports concept A and A is a core of group B and then X is a member of group B."

Con's example above is not the Fallacy of Affirming the Consequent.

The actual fallacy is represented as "If A results in B, and B is present, that must mean A was the cause." ]

Con transcribed the fallacy in relation to a group. "A" and "B" are the same, "X" is the added factor representative to the group, however it can be restated as "If Sex Positivism is supported by 3rd Wave Feminism and 3rd Wave Feminism is present today then Sex Positivism was caused by 3rd Wave Feminism." It is the same.

[It would have been better represented as:

If a Pre-90's person is Sex Positive, he/she is a Third wave feminist. (the true statement)
So and so is a Third Wave Feminist. (The true variable)
Therefore so and so is Sex Positive. (the fallacy)]

Affirming the Consequent.

"If a person prior to the existence of a movement supported a cause then they had to be a member of that movement." It is the exact same example as above with focus on the person, "If a Sex Positivist exists prior to 3rd Wave Feminism and 3rd Wave Feminism is present today then the Sex Positivist was a 3rd Wave Feminist."

It just isn't true.

[ "Not all third wave feminists are Sex Positive, but all Sex Positive people are Third Wave Feminists, at least in that regard (obviously not on every subject), whether they are aware or not. Just as America was a "Capitalist" nation, even before the term was coined."

... but all Sex Positive people are Third Wave Feminists, at least in that regard (obviously not on every subject), whether they are aware or not. ]

Fallacy of Equivocation

(http://www.fallacyfiles.org...)

Pro states that all Sex Positvists are by definition 3rd Wave Feminists. False.

[ "Pro stated that third-wave feminism, in their opening, had a direct impact on the GBLTQ, specifically the T, and failed to prove it which was shown through yet another chronological error."

Again, Con offers no sources or citations to support this statement, save for their own opinion. ]

Con offered a citation directly after the term "Transgenderism" in argument two providing that the movements had been active long prior to 1990s when 3rd Wave is agreed to have started as shown by Con and acknowledged by Pro multiple times. Lying.

Bugger, I ran out of space. Vote for Pro so that he can win and I can not waste anymore of my time. Pretty, pretty please?
Debate Round No. 4
35 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by The_Immortal_Emris 2 years ago
The_Immortal_Emris
I pushed him into the deabte, that is true, but I offered him several opportunities to suggest a revised prompt for the debate. He could have dictated the wording of the prompt, but he chose not to do so.
Posted by schachdame 2 years ago
schachdame
As blackkid seems pretty offended by the votes against him, I propose he reports the votes or just mine to airmax1227, a main admin, whose job it is to deal with this.

For someone who did not put effort into this and had "years of logical training" I'd say this highly emotional reaction and incapability to consider critique as possibly true does not at all go well with his claim that he is open to lean from this debate. Still, if you feel mistreated you are always free to report people.

But keep in mind that when nobody agrees with you, the probability increase that you are wrong yourself.

As far as for the extended RFD; I wanted to give you as much feedback as possible. It's up to you if you think you don't need input or that nobody equals your abilities. A debate can have elo limits for voting or specific judges and you could have easily asked for that if it's true that your opponent pushed you into this.
Posted by The_Immortal_Emris 2 years ago
The_Immortal_Emris
Not to mention how disappointing your conduct has been throughout it all, and on this site in general.
Posted by The_Immortal_Emris 2 years ago
The_Immortal_Emris
You should be, your performance was terrible in this debate.

I'm disappointed in you as well.
Posted by blackkid 2 years ago
blackkid
I'm not angry. I'm disappointed.
Posted by The_Immortal_Emris 2 years ago
The_Immortal_Emris
See, you're still writing angry walls of text, which no one will read.

You're acting ridiculous and shaming yourself.

Clearly, you care far more about this debate than you were willing to admit.

The problem is you were just outclassed, and you refused to put forth any effort.

If you want something, work for it next time, rather than expecting it to be handed to you.

Your arguments were weak, you utilized personal attacks and misattribution of "fallacies", the voters saw through it.

You lost, now you're embarrassing yourself further. Adding insult to the injuries you have inflicted upon yourself.
Posted by blackkid 2 years ago
blackkid
There is only one difference between someone who Argues and someone who Debates and that is the willingness to actually learn. You argue to win thus your drag and drop style of "debating" where you do not prove that your assertions are not fallacies or back your logic or grab concise sources that prove more than "it happened" on a correlation basis that is usually false. We've done it multiple times in the opinions section where your own sources said you were wrong or didn't illustrate points you'd later bring up showing them inadequate for your own uses. I debate to see the other side. I like to learn. If you had been right I'd have been delighted; being wrong is fine to me, if you said "This is a fallacy!" and called me on something I would genuinely look at it as I had all your sources and all your stories even though you yourself didn't link them all or cite them all as claims or you would cite them out of order ( as with the two quotes that were back to back, twenty years apart, a completely misleading thing to do ) or inappropriately ( such as "this is proof that it exists, therefore it is effective" written by bloggers who are not proper authorities ) but instead you assert with no shame all forms of lies in an effort to claim and proclaim things, that Sex Positivism is defined by Third Wave Feminism, for one, or that Trans-Feminism, which was actually birthed nearly a decade after 3rd Wave was said to have started, was a form of Feminism when even the Wikipedia you sourced earlier stated it wasn't and was distinctly different solely based on the name itself.

You wanted to win, and I knew that, so I put zero effort in, but if that's the case then what is the point in "Debate"? You don't explore ideas you just declare them, push them, and solidify them as though they were stone. Instead of growing you are stagnant, no different than the "indoctrinated" that you condemn in Opinions, because it counters your thinking.

And so you win. And we all lose.
Posted by blackkid 2 years ago
blackkid
Lying has never sat well with me. "Sportsmanship" requires that both sides don't cheat, and when one lies in a debate, one cheats, so I don't particularly see this as an act of desperation as this is nothing more than an exercise in watching you pretend through simplistic pseudo-aristocratic behavior citing the fact that you've won a debate you repeatedly harassed me to enter into, lied within, and then completely avoided answering for 5/8 claims you made despite refutations of example.

I cannot feel embarrassment based on presentation as I am a debater, I did not go through years of logical training for nothing, I can only feel embarrassment based on content, and if you had content of any sort other than even now fallacious reasoning and far-reaching emotional trivialized behavior avoiding the convictions placed before you I would see more than the kid who is on the Opinions forum posting all sorts of bizarre nonsense who can't back himself up for his own life.

My original post wasn't even posted, it was the "5W approach to 3RD Wave Feminism", and yet you posted something so poor, so impoverished, after making me wait two whole days, that I was taken aback. The debate was thrown into the fire. The outcome has been rigged since your first post. I mean in content did you cite any of your "Achievements"? Esp. the one relative to the woman in China, where is that a "victory" for 3rd wave Feminism? Correlation / Causation error; it simply happened, it had nothing to do with 3rd wave feminist groups at all, and ultimately it's happenstance isn't proof of effectiveness, but did I bring this up? No. Why not? It was too easy. The entirety was too easy. The fallacies flowed like water, over half not being mentioned, and even upon merely taking your word for it about the Laws in the UK and Ireland there's no actual evidence of it. More than one group rallied behind it and there are no financial records validating any particularly strong 3rd wave defined group.

Lies
Posted by The_Immortal_Emris 2 years ago
The_Immortal_Emris
Posting 4 angry comments back to back after losing a debate further shows you to be lacking in sportsmanship.

You're going to lose, because you had a poor argument and poorer attitude.

I'm not even going to bother reading your rants, because I've already provided a stronger argument than you can.

You're just embarrassing yourself now. Have some grace and some class.
Posted by blackkid 2 years ago
blackkid
Actually, I'll just summarize your logic for the whole thing:

"Not all third wave feminists are Sex Positive, but all Sex Positive people are Third Wave Feminists, at least in that regard (obviously not on every subject), whether they are aware or not."

Expanded:

"Not all people who eat unleavened bread are Jewish, but all Jewish people eat unleavened bread ... whether they are aware or not."

You can totally put the deleted part back in if you want. You can also transcribe this to any belief:

"Not all Buddhists are Pacifists, but all Pacifists are Buddhists, at least in that regard (obviously not on every subject), whether they are aware or not."

Dumbest sh*t ever. Actually sold. It ACTUALLY sold to people.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by YamaVonKarma 2 years ago
YamaVonKarma
The_Immortal_EmrisblackkidTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: "Bugger, I ran out of space. Vote for Pro so that he can win and I can not waste anymore of my time. Pretty, pretty please?" Con requested this
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
The_Immortal_EmrisblackkidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: con attacked pro
Vote Placed by LiberalLogic101 2 years ago
LiberalLogic101
The_Immortal_EmrisblackkidTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: I definitely agree with Pro on this issue, and Con did not change that viewpoint (though very little could have). Con was very rude to Pro at times. I'm not sure if what Con said about Pro's conduct previous to the debate was true, but since I didn't see it, I'm going to treat it as un-necessary. The arguments and sources from Pro were far more convincing and eloquent than Con's.
Vote Placed by Astal3 2 years ago
Astal3
The_Immortal_EmrisblackkidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro pretty much blanket statemented their entire argument and made more assertions than facts. Conduct goes to pro as con attacked pro. Pro simply used more sources despite the missuse of some not all were. It would have been better if con hadn't of given up. Good debate though
Vote Placed by schachdame 2 years ago
schachdame
The_Immortal_EmrisblackkidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comment section
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
The_Immortal_EmrisblackkidTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Pro. Con attacked Pro for thanking Con. Sources: Pro. Pro had numerous and authoritative sources relevant to the subject, while Con did not. Arguments: Pro. While Con's arguments about the pre-existence of movements for accepting sex, LBGTQ feministss, and black feminists are valid, they ignore the positive impact (which Pro has documented) that 3rd Wave Feminism has had on these movements and on making these movements more integral to feminism. As an analogy, feminism pre-existed the USA. Yet the accomplishments of 1st and 2nd wave feminists aren't chalked up to the liberality of the Hadenosaunee, because those feminists gave feminism's ideas actual power. That said, I think Con has a valid point on the limited scope of 3rd Wave Feminism's impacts.