Are feminist facts actually truthful? Or are they just lies?
Hi, thanks for posting this debate! I look forward to a good discussion. I'll go ahead and dig right into the points you've raised in your opening argument.
Feminism - the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities (1)
Earnings Ratio = (Women's Median Earnings) / (Men's Median Earnings) (2)
Pay Gap = (Men's Median Earnings - Women's Median Earnings) / (Men's Median Earnings) (2)
The Gender Wage Gap
First, I would like to address your contention that "It's a complete garbage study." Information regarding the wage gap comes from not one, but many studies that have been done over the last few years. The base statistics for many of these studies appear to originate with the U.S. Department of Labor/U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; the studies in turn draw conclusions based on these statistics. I would like to know which statistics you consider to be garbage and which you consider to be worthwhile statistics for discussing this problem.
In the meantime, using the American Association of University Women's 2016 Gender Pay Gap study, I would like to address your contention that "it does take it actual made by both genders, but it doesn't take into account, career, hours worked, salaries asked for, time put in, vacation, if the job was more dangerous or not, and so on."
According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the 2014 pay gap was 21%, and the 2015 pay gap was 19%. This is the aggregate of all U.S. workers, and yes, this raw number does not account for variations between fields. However, when broken down by individual fields, the wage data clearly demonstrates that, while there is variance with regards to the actual amount, wage gaps are still present between men and women doing the same job.
http://imgur.com...;(Chart with pay gap data)
According to this data (3) regarding "the gender pay gap in median weekly earnings among full-time workers [of] selected occupations [from] 2014," the pay gap not only favors men in traditionally "masculine" occupations such as finance, law, and technology, but also in traditionally "feminine" fields such as teaching, nursing, and secretarial work.
You contend that "Childless Women, outearn Childless men by 8%." This "reference comes more directly from an analysis of Census Bureau data performed by James Chung of Reach Advisors" back in 2008. According to Chung (the mind behind this study), this statistic doesn't take into account that the study analyzed median incomes between men and women. These median numbers compare men's and women's incomes in aggregate, rather than comparing by profession. Thus, your 8% number suffers from the same problem as the 79% number you take issue with. The young, single, childless women living in metropolitan areas (the only women to whom the 8% number applied) were 50% more likely to graduate from college in this case, leading to the disparity. Chung himself stated that it "would be totally incorrect to imply that these women outearn men with similar jobs or similar educations." (4)
Regarding your assertion that "This can be proven by simple biology. Men naturally like masculine toys ... Girls like feminine things," this has less to do with biology and far to do with social conditioning. According to a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2009, countries with low gender equality show a high gender gap in math aptitude. Social bias, lack of attention from teachers, and lack of math and science role models contribute to the lack of girls pursuing math and science careers, among other things. (5)
Your first assertion under this heading is that "I know many women who have been catcalled, and they will even tell you it's a very rare minor occurrence that happens not often." This is anecdotal, and thus difficult to have an accurate debate over. For instance, I can say that as a woman I have been catcalled many times, as have several of my friends, and it is neither minor nor infrequent, but that is merely my personal experience with the issue, as is your statement.
According to a 2008 study by a group called Stop Street Harassment, "99% of American women reported being catcalled or street harassed at least once in their lives. … Moreover, 82 percent of female respondents said they’ve been a target of vulgar gestures, 57 percent said they’ve been sexually touched or grabbed by a stranger, and a frightening 37 percent said they’ve had a stranger masturbate in front of them." (6) These statistics certainly indicate that this is not a rare occurrence for American women.
Catcalling can also lead to far more serious problems. From a 2013 article by MsMagazine, "In Georgia, a woman was walking alone at night and three men approached her, trying to talk to her. She ignored the men and, without warning, they pushed her to the ground. Two men held her down while the third man sexually assaulted her until a passerby scared them away and helped the woman home." (7) These are the types of incidents women have to worry about when being catcalled by strangers in public.
"I don't see a problem, and neither do women" - I certainly can't speak for you, but many women do in fact see a huge problem with this type of behavior.
I believe I've seen the video to which you are referring - I'm inclined to agree with your assessment of this video (the creators seemed to be trolling for a certain response), but the poor action of one group does not negate the very real problems that many women face.
The 1 in 5 Statistic
According to a 2012 sexual violence fact sheet published by the Centers for Disease Control, "nearly 1 in 5 (18.3%) women and 1 in 71 men (1.4%) reported experiencing rape at some time in their lives, [and] approximately 1 in 20 women and men (5.6% and 5.3%, respectively) experienced sexual violence other than rape." (8) I won't post the complete descriptions here, but you can check the CDC's publication & source list for all the details. However, they do separate rape from other forms of sexual violence and coercion in their statistics, so unless you can provide me with a source for your assertion that " 1 in 5 was very faulty, low response rates, very broad descriptions of rape," I don't know that this is a point that can really be argued. This isn't an urban myth or a study done by a hyper feminist group - this is the data that government organizations have made available.
False rape allegations (like any false criminal allegations) are understandably difficult to quantify. However, estimates by the FBI put the number at between 2% and 8%. (9)
I hope I've adequately addressed your points enough to get the ball rolling on some good discussion here, as I definitely think that many of these assertions are up for debate, rather than being "completely wrong and should be shut down immediately without any questioning."
3. U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Current Population Survey annual average data tables. Table 39. www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.htm
Let's look more deeply into the wage gap statistics and websites you have brought up, lets first look at the chart.
I have my own chart at the same thing to make it in, here it is:
Once again, I haven't seen much into anything upon the things I mentioned. I also didn't see that the website that it's from (if you can find this, I will try to debunk it, I will also appreciate it a lot.)
Regarding you saying the masculine social conditioning, it is biological, I do have some sources to support my claim about this.
The monkey research, conducted with two different species in 2002 and 2008, strongly suggested a biological explanation for children's toy preferences. In recent years, the question has become: How and why does biology make males (be they monkey or human) prefer trucks, and females, dolls?
New and ongoing research suggests babies' exposure to hormones while they are in the womb causes their toy preferences to emerge soon after birth. As for why evolution made this so, questions remain, but the toys may help boys and girls develop the skills they once needed to fulfill their ancient gender roles.
First, in 2009, Gerianne Alexander, professor of psychology at Texas A&M University, and her colleagues found that 3- and 4-month-old boys' testosterone levels correlated with how much more time they spent looking at male-typical toys such as trucks and ballscompared with female-typical toys such as dolls, as measured by an eye tracker. Their level of exposure to the hormone androgen during gestation (which can be estimated by their digit ratio, or the relative lengths of their index and ring fingers) also correlated with their visual interest in male-typical toys.
"Specifically, boys with more male-typical digit ratios showed greater visual interest in a ball compared to a doll," Alexander told Life's Little Mysteries.
Kim Wallen, a psychologist at Emory University who has studied the gender-specific toy preferences of young rhesus monkeys, said, "The striking thing about the looking data shows that the attraction to these objects occurs very early in life, before it's likely to have been socialized."
Further buttressing the idea that toy preferences are caused by hormones, last year, a group of British researchers found that girls with a condition called congenital adrenal hyperplasia, who experienced abnormally high levels of the male sex hormone androgen while in the womb, prefer to play with male-typical toys. [Why Is Pink for Girls and Blue for Boys?]
But why would male sex hormones make people favor wheeled vehicles and balls? A common explanation holds that these toys facilitate more vigorous activity, which boys are evolutionarily programmed to seek out. But the 2009 study indicated that their affinity for balls and trucks predates the stage when children actually start playing with toys. At just 3 months old, the newborn boys already fixed their eyes on the toys associated with their gender.
"Given that these babies lack physical abilities that would allow them to 'play' with these toys as do older children, our finding suggests that males preference for male-typical toys are not determined by the activities supported by the toys (i.e., movement, rough play)," Alexander said.
Wallen approaches the data more cautiously. "It's hard to interpret what the looking data mean because we don't know why people are attracted to specific things. Clearly children recognize that certain objects in their environment are appropriate for certain activities. They could be looking at a certain toy because it facilitates an activity they like," he said.
The debate over why boys prefer toy vehicles and balls continues. In a new study, Alexander and her colleagues investigated whether 19-month-olds move around when playing with trucks and balls more than they do when playing with dolls. According to the study, they don't. Toddlers with higher levels of testosterone are more active than toddlers with lower levels of the sex hormone, but the active toddlers moved around just as much when holding a toy truck, ball or doll. "We find no evidence to support the widely held belief that boys prefer toys that support higher levels of activity," she wrote in an email. A paper detailing the work has been accepted for publication in the journal Hormones and Behavior.
If it isn't vigorous activity they're after, it could be that boys simply find balls and wheeled vehicles more interesting, while human figures appeal more to girls. As for why evolution would program these toy preferences, the researchers have a few ideas. According to Alexander, one possibility is that girls have evolved to perceive social stimuli, such as people, as very important, while the perceived worth of social stimuli (and thus, dolls that look like people) is weaker in boys. [The Smarter Sex? Women's Average IQ Overtakes Men's]
Boys, meanwhile, tend to develop superior spatial navigation abilities. "Multiple studies in humans and primates shows there is a substantial male advantage in mental rotation, which is taking an object and rotating it in the mind," Wallen said. "It could be that manipulating objects like balls and wheels in space is one way this mental rotation gets more fully developed."
This is purely speculative, Wallen said, but boys' superior spatial abilities have been tied to their traditional role as hunters. "The general theory is that well-developed skills in mental rotation allowed long distance navigation: using an egocentric system where essentially you navigate using your perception of your location in 3D space," he said. "This might have facilitated long distance hunting parties." (Source: http://www.livescience.com...).
As you can see it has very little to do with social conditioning, more as the social conditioning that feminism is doing with young boys telling them their masculine traits are wrong and vice versa with women.
To address, I didn't really go into more depth, and that's really my fault, now let's look at the studies. that you have cited.
The 2008 study I looked more into it. 99% I thought this would come from usually young boys that are obviously horny, then I read into more recent studies. The number has dropped from 99% to 85% over recent years, which is obviously a good thing, and I see very obvious changes in the belief of catcalling, 3% did find it flattering, I'm surprised that anyone would find it flattering. I've been catcalled, and even men in Saudi Arabia get catcalled. It's not only a women's issue, and that's really one gripe I just have with feminism, it's truly not that I hate everything about it, just the Cons outweigh the Pros .A Saudi shopping centre has reported 16 cases of sexual harassment of men by women, prompting outrage in the ultra-conservative kingdom.
The abuse reportedly took place in the largest shopping mall in Jeddah, the second biggest city in Saudi Arabia.
Men were catcalled and followed around the mall in a growing trend that is challenging gender roles in the Middle Eastern kingdom. (Source: http://www.dailymail.co.uk...)
Just before you might say that the cases are pretty low, but considering that it's Saudi Arabia, it's obviously high there, in fact I'd think it would be zero, because of how oppressive the regime is.
1 in 5
I will address this on another one (I don't have enough characters to get my point across).
Continuing Arguments from Round 1
First off, I would merely like to mention that my points under the 1 in 5 Statistic were not addressed in Pro's first rebuttal and thus extend all points made under that heading through this round.
I would also like to point out that my definition of feminism as a "belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities" was not challenged and thus stands.
I'm going to change up the order in which I tackle your other points to address the shortest points first, but I hope the clear headings will prevent any confusion.
"The number [of women catcalled] has dropped from 99% to 85% over recent years, which is obviously a good thing"
You did not cite any source for this statistic, so I am unable to discuss it in depth as I do not know where it came from - I would like to see this source. However, assuming that it is an accurate number, the mere fact of marginally declining catcalls does not invalidate the assertion that it is a problem. Thus, this point does not fulfill your resolution that feminist facts are not truthful. 85% is still a statistically significant number as a portion of the population that deals with catcalls.
The cause of this decline is also unclear, and as I said, without a source I am unable to analyze it in detail, but I would hypothesize that the decline may be due to the effects of modern feminism in bringing this issue to the public's awareness and educating people on equality and inclusive attitudes; this would demonstrate a useful and beneficial result of feminist efforts.
"I've been catcalled, and even men in Saudi Arabia get catcalled. It's not only a women's issue, and that's really one gripe I just have with feminism"
As to men being catcalled, I'm not entirely sure what relevance that has to the debate. However, as feminism is in fact concerned with equal treatment of both men and women, rather than raising women over men, I would argue that this is not a positive development from a feminist standpoint and is also indicative of a culture that objectifies people instead of treating everyone with an equal level of human dignity.
The Wage Gap
First I will address your chart. One of its major points is the aforementioned 8% statistic. You did not provide a source for this statistic in your original post, so I had to go looking for it. I pretty quickly located many articles discussing the study (like the one linked in my first post - source #4). That article directly quotes the author of the study, James Chung, who states that it "would be totally incorrect to imply that these women outearn men with similar jobs or similar educations." However, that is exactly what your chart is implying. It gives no indication that "the reason why young women in metropolitan areas earn more than young men is that they are 50 percent more likely to graduate from college." The 8% number in this chart is being used totally out of context according to the author of the study from which it came, rendering the chart unreliable and not a valid source of information for the purposes of debate.
" I also didn't see that the website that it's from" - I believe this statement from you is referring to my chart & wage gap information. The paper on the study is #2 on my source list, and the actual data from the chart comes from the US Department of Labor statistics as noted in the footnotes of the paper (#3 on my source list).
Masculine vs. Feminine Instincts/Aptitudes
I've broken this out into a separate heading, both because the bulk of your second post seems to focus on this and because I don't believe it really falls under the wage gap heading any longer. Regardless of the reasons that more men go into STEM fields or more women go into social fields, once a man and a woman are in an equivalent field with equivalent levels of education/experience/tenure, they should receive equivalent compensation.
To be honest, I mainly addressed your original point about masculine and feminine aptitudes (which was brief and seemed to be almost in passing) mostly because I don't like to drop any contentions in a debate. Your original resolution in this debate was that certain feminist facts were untrue. I would like you to clarify what feminist fact is untrue that this line of argument is addressing so that I can discuss it in more detail.
Your contentions under this point appear to be taken (for the most part) directly from the LiveScience article you referenced; I did some checking around and found the scholarly paper done on the study. (10) According to the abstract, "boys typically show strong preferences for stereotypically masculine toys, while girls often do not show a statistically greater preference for one toy type over another." Your article makes the statement that "male adolescent monkeys also prefer to play with wheeled vehicles while the females prefer dolls." This twist on the actual scholarly paper makes me question the slant of the article you've cited.
Points from the original Pro post and subsequent responses:
In the next round I would like to see sources for your statements so that I can do some fact checking of my own.
Looking forward to continuing the debate!
nes2704 forfeited this round.
My opponent did not respond within the allotted time and thus has forfeited the last round of this debate. Just to recap, I've once again provided the summary of the points under debate thus far.
1. Pro stated feminism is against the rights of men; Con countered with a definition of feminism that included equal treatment for both genders; Pro did not provide an alternate definition.
2. Pro stated that the wage gap was a myth.
a. Pro stated that the $0.77 figure did not include career variation; Con provided sourced chart & stats to show that wage gaps exist in both traditionally male- and traditionally female-dominated fields; Pro did not provide any sources or evidence in rebuttal to this.
b. Pro stated that childless women outearn childless men by 8%; Con provided sourced evidence stating that this statistic was a misinterpretation of the data; Pro responded with a chart that included the same misinterpretation of the 8% statistic; Con reiterated this point.
3. Pro stated that biology dictated that males and females had certain preferences for toys (and assumed that this extended to career preferences); Con responded that this also involved social conditioning and provided sources indicating the lack of girls in math and science fields can be traced to social factors; Pro responded with an article/study regarding the biology of toy choices in males vs females; Con responded with the original scholarly paper on the study; this point needs further clarification.
4. Pro stated that catcalling is a rare/minor occurrence; Con responded with sourced statistics indicating that a vast majority (99%) of women have experienced catcalling; Pro responded with an unsourced claim that this number is closer to 85%, still a significant majority of women.
5. Pro stated that there was no problem with catcalling; Con responded with sourced statistics showing that catcalling was often accompanied by or escalated into sexual harassment and that catcalling was often a precursor to more serious problems; Pro did not respond to this assertion.
6. Pro stated that the "1 in 5" rape statistic is a myth; Con responded with a sourced government statement that nearly 1 in 5 women (18.3%) reported experiencing rape; Pro has not yet responded to this assertion.
7. Pro stated that there are too many false rape allegations; Con responded with sourced statistics stating that the FBI estimates false rape allegations at between 2% and 8%; Pro has not yet responded to this assertion.
Pro asserted that feminist talking points were myths and listed some of these points. Con brought evidence showing that these points were accurate and not myths. Due to Pro's lack of rebuttals to Con's evidence and Pro's forfeiture of Round 3, please vote Con.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|