The Instigator
SeventhProfessor
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
EndarkenedRationalist
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points

Anyone who doesn't enjoy Disney's Frozen has no place in civilized society.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 5 votes the winner is...
EndarkenedRationalist
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/14/2014 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 9,041 times Debate No: 48918
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (64)
Votes (5)

 

SeventhProfessor

Pro

Right now this debate is impossible to accept. Leave a comment if you're interested, first round for acceptance only.
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

I accept the debate and wish my opponent the best of luck!
Debate Round No. 1
SeventhProfessor

Pro

While it should have been inferred, no semantics.

There are two groups of people that don't enjoy Frozen-
I. Those that haven't watched it
II. Those that have seen it but not liked it, with several sub groups
-a. Religious nuts
-b. People who go overboard on political correctness
-c. People that disliked it but with no reasoning (if I missed any let me know next round and I'll tackle them)

Now, I'll show why each group of people I listed (or at least the people in them that don't like Frozen) has no place in civilized society.

I. Those who haven't watched it
These people haven't watched it for one or more of several reasons.

a. They can't afford it. This seems reasonable, but if they haven't seen it due to a lack of money, than they either don't have internet access/computer skills, making getting any job nearly impossible which removes their societal role, or is one of those people that says "Piracy? Can't you get arrested for that?", which shows a lack of world experience and/or intelligence.
b. They don't have time. Now, Frozen is 108 minutes long, including credits. I'm assuming most people have at least 108 minutes of free time per day, and what sort of freak chooses to masturbate or sleep in that time? Not one I'd want in my society.

II. Those who watched it and disliked it.

a. Religious nuts. Now, this is as in super religious fundamentalists, that are offended by the magic in this movie. This is the type of person that holds back society, not the kind that should ever be in it.
b. Overly politically correct people. These people are against it for one of two reasons, both of which shows a lack of intelligence/critical thinking skills:
1. Lack of PoC's in the movie. Now, the legal system is similar to that of medieval Europe, minus the organized religion. So, one could assume that it takes place in Disney's equivalent of medieval Europe, making PoC's extremely rare, especially in one isolated country.
2. Giving every man at least one negative trait. Now, many people are saying that Disney thinks every man is a moronic, immature, backstabbing jerk because men had these traits in the movie, which is complete BS. What? Disney had NOT PERFECT characters? What sexists!
c. Now, someone who has so little thinking skills to the point where they are unable to back up such a simple thought with rational arguments clearly can't have an everyday conversation.
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

I thank my opponent for presenting his case! I shall now begin constructing my own.

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines civilized as "marked by well-organized laws and rules about how people behave with each other" and "polite, reasonable, and respectful" [1]. It defines society as "people in general thought of as living together in organized communities with shared laws, traditions, and values." Thus we may define civilized society as a community of people with laws regarding their behavior and interactions.

I maintain that people who do not enjoy Frozen can still have a place within civilized society.

I accept the groups my opponent lists as disliking Frozen. I might even add radical feminists [2] to that list.

Now, my opponent presumes that the only reason people wouldn't see Frozen is because they lack money or time. The people who lack money, my opponent claims, could simply pirate the movie. Perhaps these people do not have computers. People who cannot afford a movie ticket likely cannot afford a computer. So the question becomes, can people without computers be beneficial to society? Well, once Skynet takes over the world, people without computers will become all that's left of society. Surely we have an interest in preserving the human race?

There are potentially people who lack the time, but there might also be people who lack children. This may come as a great surprise, but the primary age demographic of Disney films is children. There are some couples that just do not have children of any age. Apparently, 43% of Gen-X women and 32% of Gen-X men do not have any children [3]. These people would then be unlikely to see Frozen. Additionally, there are many states where gay and lesbian parents cannot adopt. Is my opponent revealing homophobia by decreeing that gay and lesbian couples, since they do not have kids and thus are more likely to not see Frozen, have no place in society? Do all of these people have no place at all in civilized society? It is not too late to correct the error of their ways. These people can still be rehabilitated and made to understand the brilliance of Frozen.

There is even evidence that Frozen itself wants this occur. Remember, love is an open door. We cannot go against the wishes of Frozen and slam the door shut on the poor and childless. We have a responsibility to help these people understand the glorious film they've been missing out on.

Those who watched Frozen and still disliked it are a different story. Generally, they prove immune to rehabilitation efforts. However, I still believe that even they have a place in civilized society.

Religious nuts who dislike Frozen for having magic in it also dislike some of the greatest films and stories in existence, such as Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter (those these are not quite as good as Frozen). Such people cannot be reasoned with. They are highly unlikely to ever realize just how magnificent a film Frozen is. They are unable to let it go, it referring to their own intolerance. Now, my opponent claims that these people hold back society. This is true if they are allowed to wield influence or power. However, if we reduce the status of these people, they cannot hold society back. They still have a place in civil society. We all have a need for janitors, waiters, maids, garbage men, people who fetch coffee, etc. By allowing the people who have seen Frozen and still dislike it to take over menial jobs, we afford other people more time and resources to see Frozen. This also provides the benefit of removing one of the problems mentioned earlier - those without the time to see Frozen now have more time and thus can see the movie.

People who are overly political correct can serve the same function in civil society as super religious fundamentalists. This also applies to those who didn't enjoy Frozen but are unable to articulate any rational arguments as to why. I repeat, the place of these people in civil society is to take over menial tasks and grunt work, thereby affording the rest of society more time to watch Frozen (or watch Frozen again, as it is impossible to see Frozen too many times).

Thus, although the opinions and thoughts of people against Frozen are invalid, they can still possess a valuable place in civil society, and the people unfortunate enough to have not yet experience Frozen can still be saved. For the first time in forever, once they see Frozen (which, yes, can always be viewed, even in summer), they will doubtlessly recognize the genius of the film and become worthy members of society.

If they dislike the film, we can always use another dishwasher.


[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...

[2] https://medium.com...

[3] http://www.dinklife.com...
Debate Round No. 2
SeventhProfessor

Pro

To address the feminists, it seemed that their complaints are extremely hypocritical. First, she claimed that some of Elsa's and Anna's flaws were unnecessary to the plot, and then complained when they had different flaws (Anna rushing into an engagement, for example)! I feel confident putting the feminists in a group with the PC guys, what with the not wanting flaws and such.

"Perhaps these people do not have computers."

They could watch it with a friend or coworker. If they have neither, then their role in society would be like the sound a tree makes when it falls, but no one hears it.

"Well, once Skynet takes over the world..."

Hold the phone. This will NOT happen, at least in this universe. All possible dates have already passed, so nope [1].

"This may come as a great surprise... can still be rehabilitated and made to understand the brilliance of Frozen."

Of course they can be rehabilitated. But until then, they are all probably on welfare, leeching off of the government to survive [2]. Now, about 1/5 of same sex couples have children [3], and the rest went to see it to support Satan's movie that was trying to turn children gay [4]. What LGBT person wouldn't support the fight against God and heterosexuality?

"Thus, although the opinions and thoughts... become worthy members of society."

There are two flaws with this plan.
1. These are the type of people that will refuse to work with someone who disagrees with them.
2. They're taking away jobs from good, Frozen-loving Americans. Why would we want that scum touching our laundry or making our food, when we could have someone with good taste in movies do it?

1. http://terminator.wikia.com...
2. God
3. http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu...
4. http://www.rightwingwatch.org...
EndarkenedRationalist

Con

In response to my point regarding some people not having computers, my opponent states that: "They could watch it with a friend or coworker. If they have neither, then their role in society would be like the sound a tree makes when it falls, but no one hears it."

Suppose their friends/coworkers also lack computers? Many people make friends within the same social class.

My opponent claims that Skynet cannot take over the world because all of the dates have already passed. However, my opponent forgets one key detail. Skynet can time travel. Thus we can never be guaranteed safety. Even my opponent's own source acknowledges this, saying "Both the Resistance and Skynet are actively seeking to interfere with the timeline."

Or perhaps Skynet started buffering and was slowed down.

I reject my opponent citing God regarding people leeching off welfare. Many poor people work, hence the title working poor. There were about 10.4 million working poor in 2011 [2]. Imagine! 10.4 million more people seeing the majesty and magic of Frozen!

"Now, about 1/5 of same sex couples have children [3], and the rest went to see it to support Satan's movie that was trying to turn children gay [4]. What LGBT person wouldn't support the fight against God and heterosexuality?"

How do we know all of them went to see Frozen? Maybe some were afraid to see it because they live in small towns where they would jeopardize themselves by exiting the closet, and because of the NSA, they can no longer pirate the movie.

Additionally, my opponent fails to address my point regarding childless couples that are neither gay nor lesbian. These people have not seen Frozen but are both capable of rehabilitation and contributing to society. This point alone freezes my opponent's case. If my opponent did not drop this point and is referring to childless couples (or singles) when he says leeching off welfare, then he is implying that everyone without a child is a leech and parasite to society. This is obviously false. In fact, poorer people tend to have more children than richer ones, and educated women generally have fewer children than other women [3].

My opponent points out two flaws in my plan. First, he believes many people will refuse to work with someone who disagrees with them. Maybe they will. This is why they have to work for those of us who love Frozen, not with us. All of them dislike Frozen, so all of them will have no trouble working together.

Secondly, my opponent points out that the misguided Frozen-haters are taking away jobs from good, Frozen-loving Americans. This is true to an extent. They are taking away undesirable jobs that most people would otherwise not want to perform, leaving the more attractive jobs for those of us with good taste in movies. It's not a loss of jobs so much as a rearranging of who gets what. For example, a CEO who dislikes Frozen could no longer be a CEO. His job would go to a Frozen-loving American, and he would become a janitor or a cleaner or a gardener or something. Thus no jobs have been lost.

Additionally, this allows the rest of us more leisure time to watch Frozen. Menial tasks are often rather time-consuming, and by allowing people who dislike Frozen to perform them, we gain more time to bask in Frozen's radiance.

Lastly, my opponent concedes my argument that Frozen itself teaches us to love and care for everyone. Love is an open door, and my opponent is advocating shutting that door on everyone in society who dislikes Frozen. This goes against the wishes of Frozen. We must care for these poor (unfortunate) souls and help them to see the error of their ways. After all, people who have not seen Frozen will doubtlessly love it just like we do, and those who dislike it, after some hard work and elbow grease, might just come to see the error of their ways.

All hail Queen Elsa! All hail Princess Anna! All hail Frozen!

[1] http://terminator.wikia.com...

[2] http://www.bls.gov...

[3] http://www.unfpa.org...
Debate Round No. 3
64 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by EndarkenedRationalist 2 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
The debate isn't over whether Frozen was a good movie or not...but okay then.
Posted by bubbatheclown 2 years ago
bubbatheclown
The movie was okay, but it had several faults in it.
To name one, it seems like they didn't give enough attention to the male protagonist's adopted troll family. They appeared for maybe ten minutes of the movie in total. Also, the extreme hype generated by the movie was not worth it, except for perhaps Elsa's "Let It Go" song.
Posted by Buckethead31594 2 years ago
Buckethead31594
meh, frozen was ok.
Posted by digitalbeachbum 2 years ago
digitalbeachbum
I wish I could vote. Frozen was a crap filled movie. Hans Christian would be vomiting if he knew "they" had hacked his story in to little tiny pieces then discarded 99% of the story to make a... such a horrible move.
Posted by EndarkenedRationalist 2 years ago
EndarkenedRationalist
Does nobody understand what a joke debate is? *sigh*
Posted by WaterTipper 2 years ago
WaterTipper
Frozen is basically a kids' movie, and that's it. It's a decent kids' movie, but it's so overrated as this epitome of contemporary movies >.>
Posted by kaister 2 years ago
kaister
I gave a quick glance through the debate. Pro's arguments are mainly a restricted view. Nit picking the few outstanding people that may exist. Forgoing the majority that do not fall under those descriptions. Further more, the argument that any one who hasn't watched frozen isn't civilized is as good as saying anyone who hasn't seen a picture of me naked isn't civilized. It's a debate I feel is a bigger waste of time than watching frozen. I myself have not watched frozen because I am not into Disney films. Does that make me uncivilized? So what up people who are not into watching documentaries? Are they uneducated?
Posted by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
LMAO - this was a great debate from both sides.

I really like Con's arguments that we have to follow the lessons from Frozen and "Let it go" and be accepting of those without computers or children. It brought forward kind of an impossibility for Pro - either deny the glory of Frozen by saying it was wrong or embrace letting his hatred of Frozen-haters go.

I also really liked Con's argument that Frozen-haters should become janitors. I had a good laugh from that one, especially when Con says that CEO's who don't like Frozen would lose their jobs and get a less desirable one. I thought it was hilarious how this ended up mimicking a right wing debate on immigration.

I think Pro had a really good refutation to Skynet, but Con is right that Skynet might have found time traveling technology. But I find it hard to vote for this argument because even if the computer-less people survived, a world without computers (and thus Frozen) is not worth living in. So there lives are worthless.

But I vote on the "Let it go" argument. :D

I also really liked Pro's points about Feminists being hypocrites.
Posted by 2Sense 2 years ago
2Sense
I just thought the movie was tired, predictable, and a generally empty movie with little impact. But that's my opinion.
Posted by thatguyfromouterspace 2 years ago
thatguyfromouterspace
This debate is kind of useless. i personally LOVED Frozen, but people can have opinions of their own.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by ruiran0326 2 years ago
ruiran0326
SeventhProfessorEndarkenedRationalistTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: while most of Pro's arguments were pure speculation, Con had at least some valid sources. I applaud this debate, however, for not being one of the troll debates on pop culture that pepper DDO... good job!
Vote Placed by funwiththoughts 2 years ago
funwiththoughts
SeventhProfessorEndarkenedRationalistTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con won the Internet with his Skynet argument.
Vote Placed by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
SeventhProfessorEndarkenedRationalistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments
Vote Placed by imabench 2 years ago
imabench
SeventhProfessorEndarkenedRationalistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:32 
Reasons for voting decision: while con did manage to produce reasons why people who did not like the movie frozen still can be useful to society, the resolution was whether or not those people have a place in CIVILIZED society, which is no place for poor people, religious nuts, or stupid people.... That being said I give argument points to the pro, but i give source points to con since pro tried to cite god as a source, and what god has had to say about ANYTHING has been speculation for the past 2000 years or so now. Other then that, fantastic debate, FROZEN NOW AVAILABLE ON DVD :D
Vote Placed by CJKAllstar 2 years ago
CJKAllstar
SeventhProfessorEndarkenedRationalistTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: So much of what Pro said was based on either speculation or assumption. Apply Hitchens' Razor and Pro doesn't even have an argument. Con at least dealt with some of these and used sources.