Are Women needed for the development of the society?
Debate Rounds (5)
Who Says NOOO???
I say no, but I will post my reasons later, as I assume round 1 is for acceptance.
I look foward to a good debate!
Before I begin my contentions, I'd like to say that my opponent Technically forfeited the debate. THe topic is that woman are 'needed' for the development of society. However, my opponent said in his speech that "developement will rapidly decrease by 50%" This means that while development may slow down, it still happens. Therefore, development continues, upholding my side of the debate..
Anyway, let's get to it, but let's lay down some definitions, as my opponent set none
Society- Development- the process of developing or being developed.
In other words, we must develop our own protection, continuity, security, and national identity. Each of my contentions will reflect each part of said development
Contention 1:Protection/security is upheld by men.
Let's think about this: Men love guns, fights, etc. So, this is a relatively easy thing to dismiss. You don't need women to defend national security, do you?
Contention 2: Continueing our nation is additionally upheld by men.
You don't need women to continue a nation politically. I mean, male politicians are just as good as female ones. Therefore, politically, you don't need women to keep running a country
Contention 3: National Image
Originally, men made the national image. After all, when you think of America, you think of baseball, guns, American football, hunting, and so on. Women don't really contribute to the national image, for good or worse.
Overall, men still can develop society! Vote CON!
Even though I have not set any definitions, they are not needed as every one know what is meant by these basic words he has defined which is actually a useless thing to do.
He says that men loves gun and fights and that protection is upheld by men. Today even science and society both denies this fact he has provided as women have come to the standard of the man today. I also say that today women does participate in national security activities, example : army, military, police and they help for security activities to the standard of men in military. I would like to question my opponent : haven't u seen women in wars? Example : LTTTE war. Also you say that men loves guns and fights which causes an effect in social development. Men only have physical strength but today women have both physical strength and mental strength than men.
I would also like to say that women are better in studies than men which is also scientifically proved. Also statistics show that women have more IQ men (John Phillips) and statistics also show that women qualify for university entrance than men now. We also see women in all kinds of jobs, from a carpenter to a president. I would also like to say that society has accepted women as there leaders and that's why they are chosen for parliaments and as presidents.
Women are also needed by a country to handle problems which men cant do, for an example, women and children's need (scientists and statisticians have proved that women are more attentive towards problems than men).
Can men exist without women?
Women basically carries a child for 10 months and gives birth to this child and cares for them until they are matured. Society accepts that women are the main cause for the development of great leaders and national heroes. How can you say that women are not needed for national image? Women are the main cause for the national image and you have only talked about sports and guns in your round. Does that really matter on national image? Please understand the term 'National image' properly and try to get to the point. All of your points are useless. Try not to define simple words but understand the whole concept of the topic correctly!
Pls Vote for PRO
ComradeMeow forfeited this round.
Con has said that development will be still happening even if woman is not helping. Even though development will happen, development will rapidly decrease which will finally stop in the mere future without the help of women.
for an example, just look at your mom. Your mom does all the house work and if the father tries to deal with both house work and office work, he would get stressed and even resign from his job. Therefore, starting from the mother, woman is helping for development.
Taking sports development into consideration, woman plays a major role in it. Have you ever seen gymnastics at olympics performed well by men? No. Not only gymnastics, today woman takes part in every sport,
Woman also helps in child development, from the baby to youth to a middle aged, woman is needed. A wife who helps in your daily work, a caring mother, a loving teacher : all of these professions are played by mother. Hence, a major part in social development is done by woman.
Just because I forfeit does NOT mean i give up my facts.
Round 3 Defense/attack:
Just because women are not around does not mean development will stop. I defined Development, and 'continuing the via new children' is not part of it. Men offer protection, security, continuity, and national identity. While I'm not saying women do not contribute to this (as they are contributing more and more as the days pass), men contribute the most.
Women are not /made/ for security and national defense. The only reason why women are in the military now is because they train 24/7 to reach such a goal. Naturally, with regular/natural amounts of exercise, women do not have the same strength as men.
Men love 'guns and fights' because they are pumped full of testosterone,naturally. Those things naturally come to them. However, just because all men have more testosterone does not mean they're automatically dumb. Albert Eistein, Alfred Wegner, Werner Von Braun, were all great minds and happened to be men.
Just because women 'on average' have better IQ's does not automatically mean they're smarter. Sure, on average, they might be 'smarter' but not the smartest.
Women may be in all kinds of jobs, but they may not be the best for them. Besides, what's the point? Sure, they can /do/ it but they're not the best at it. You also mentioned leaders and how they're culturally accepted. They're not. In fact, only a few women have been leaders, and only one or two has kept power successfully. Additionally, the middle east does not recognise women leaders. It's simply against their culture. It is not 'wildly accepted' as you state.
Again, birth is not part of this topic. Quit talking about it. This is not about 'existing without women' but rather 'developing society's image without women'
Round 4 Defence/Attack:
Lets assume that magically, women all disappear. People don't put paper bags over their heads and cry it out, but they'll ADAPT to it! That is the wonderful thing about the human race, that we can adapt, survive, and win at anything! A father may be stressed, but he can live with it.
Sports? While I hate to say it, but women dont contribute to sports that much. You've got your gymnastics, sure, but that's one sport. What about Soccer? Football? Pole Vaulting? Professional shooting? All of these sports preformed by men very much outweight the ones preformed by women.
Once again, child development is NOT part of this topic. The definitions do not allow for this.
Overall, my opponents tries to fight me culturally where men have dominated throughout the ages. Additionally, women giving birth is not part of this resolution, as he has not defined this.
He has said that continuing the via new children' is not part of it. This is socially and scientifically disproved. Children are a part of development. What is the basic unit of economics ? Home. If Home does not run well, what will happen to the overall economy of each country? He also says that Child development is not a part of development. This shows again that he has not understood the topic correctly : Do the topic just lock you in one type of development? No. It is overall development which is divided basically into Social and economical and these two main categories divide into many other sub categories of which the CON has not understood properly.
He says men offer protection, security etc. How many men are weak today? Statistics show that 60% of men in Asian countries have only physical strength. However, woman has more mental strength and is more attentive towards problems than men. If men does not behave so badly, will there be need for security. I say, all these are mens faults that causes security problems. However, 21st century shows that women can look after them selves as well as there children without men and that only 10% of men out of the total population can do this.
If you say that women are now there in military to achieve a goal, what can you say of men? Both men and women play an equal role in military activities. He says that women do not have the strength as of men. Socialists and Scientists will definitely disagree with this opinion he had provided (this cannot be a fact as this is utter lies) as scientists, socialists and statisticians have proved that men and women have equal strengths in there body, that women do not use as men because men perform unnecessary activities and spend time uselessly than women. Women care with more strength of theres for her children than men. 60% of divorces happen due to mens faults. Women are most of the time required to look after the children(shows great strength) which men simply takes it simple!
He gives another point of that men loves guns and fights and are pumped full of testosterone. What has this caused? Wars. Men cannot think what is right or wrong : he simply takes things wrong which causes huge trouble. Testosterone is also not relevant to the topic. Does actually the untrue opinion of CON's telling that men like guns and fights, is relevant to the topic? The topic says are women needed for the development of the society'. All will see no point in developing from fights and guns.
He says men are not dumb. Yeah, I completely agree 50%. IQ Results have proved that women have more IQ knowledge and concentrating skills than men and statistics show that women percentage are more qualified to university entrance than men. Who made these great people today? They were maid into these great people with the help of their mother's and teachers.
Women are more smarter than men and it was proved by Jhon Phyllips. Your idea on women does not mean they're smarter is proved wrong here.
If you say that women are not needed, why was that small percentage of women chosen to the parliaments and as great leaders? Take a look at the business world : 50% are women and take a look at the great leaders. Sirimavo Bandaranayake , Sri Lankan Prime Minister, First Woman Prime Minister in the World, Founder of a leading Democratic Party in Sri Lanka, Mother of President , Chandrika Bandaranayake(also a woman) was the person who increased the standard of living in Sri Lanka after the country was down to 10% economically. She was the woman who proved the importance of culture in Sri Lanka. Also take a look at other great people, Margret Thatcher,Mother Theresa, Marie Curie(who helped to cure cancer through radio activity) in the world. They were the people who helped out this world to be a better place.
Culture is greatly recognized by women than men. Take a look at the Sinhala Tamil Cultural New Year, Christmas , New Year Celebrations etc: what do men do? They just light some crackers but women haddles 75% of all cultural events.
Birth is really important in this topic : You just want to make it silence ;
What will be the status of the society if birth does not happen? You are so wrong here not to take it into consideration.
Man cannot adapt without a woman. How will they survive? Woman are females so you are taking this as if all females disappear. Then where will be the children born? Will the children fall out from the sky? This is not scientifically proven that children will fall from skies so your point is definitely untrue here.
The CON has agreed that the father will mentally be stressed. Please understand the meaning of Stress properly and then write your opinion. Stress means that you cannot perform that job again.. It is too tiring... So how will development be happening? The CON has definitely proved his status of down fall here.
Sports : Women participate in all the sports you have mentioned above. If you want to break my point, google it? You will get nothing to break my point.
Women also perform really well in men in sports. It is proved that women participate in all sports as in men and get awards for there achievements as of men but men cannot perform gymnastics as well as women. Thats why I have taken that point into consideration in my earlier rounds.
Child Development is a part of development. Debate this topic and be CON and you will definitely loose!!!
He has seen only 1 point in my debate. I have taken down from the beginning to the end and has broken all his points through out this debate.
He says that I have considered only culture but the judger's reading this will definitely see my wide range of points through out the debate which the CON has not yet seen.
I definitely says that the CON have not understood the topic clearly and is talking nonsense in all three rounds and in which one, he forfeited.
Therefore, I finally conclude my proposing side of the debate finalizing that women are needed for the development of the society and is definitely proved by my points in all the rounds that I have posted because I was not so busy!!
Being busy is definitely not an excuse but his forfeit proves the lack of understanding and proving ability of the CON.
Thus CON has showed his very low potential through out the debate and my sympathies to him.
Thank you for the debate!
PLEASE VOTE FOR PRO
Children are and essential part of economics:
This is completely false. First of all, my opponent commits the Post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy (meaning that one thing leads to another, so they're directly related.) Also, children do not commit to the stock market, the inflation, or anything dealing with general economics.
Child development is not part of development (said by me)
And, as a fact, it is not. At least not by my definition. Remember, having kids was not part of the topic, according to my definition.
Men of today are weak:
This is completely false. He states that "60% of men in Asian countries have only psychical strength, but women have better mental strength and are move attentive" My opponent only quotes that men in ASIAN countries are weak. What about the rest of the world? This is not evidence that men are weak. This is just evidence saying that men only have PSYCHICAL STRENGTH, what my claim was all about. Thank you, pro.
If men does not behave so badly, there will be [no] need for security:
Our world will always remain divided, women or men only. Thats why you have to have some sort of pyschical strength to protect your goods. After all, an ISIS woman won't join hands with an American woman and sing Kumbaya together.
I have to cut it short here. Vote CON!
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.