The Instigator
MassiveDump
Pro (for)
Winning
16 Points
The Contender
STMAknight92
Con (against)
Losing
4 Points

As Long as Explicit Songs Exist, So Will Bullying.

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 5 votes the winner is...
MassiveDump
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/28/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 859 times Debate No: 36105
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (5)

 

MassiveDump

Pro

First Round is for acceptance only.
STMAknight92

Con

i will accept and i assume that i am going against the question just to clarify
Debate Round No. 1
MassiveDump

Pro

This idea debate was sparked after finding that Kidz Bop made a version of Thrift Shop by Macklemore & Ryan Lewis. While the sheer awfulness of the song made me wreak havoc in my undergarments, it also helped me realize some-

Infallible Logic:

P1. A few explicit songs will always be popular.

P2. If popular explicit songs exist, Kidz Bop will make a version of at least one of them.

P3. If Kidz Bop makes a version of it, an annoying soccer mom will make their kid listen to it instead of the original.

P4. If their kid listens to it instead, they will be socially deprived compared to their friends.

P5. If they're socially deprived, they are weird by Elementary School standards.

P6. If they're weird, they will be bullied.

C: As long as explicit songs exist, kids will be bullied.
STMAknight92

Con

first off your argument is only based off what you think, not actually studies or real evidence.

before there was explicit songs there was bullying, you can go back however far you want to in history and there was bullying. So history shows that even if there was a complete wipe out of explicit songs, there would still be bullying.
Debate Round No. 2
MassiveDump

Pro

Contention One

"
first off your argument is only based off what you think, not actually studies or real evidence."

A. Not all arguments necessarily have to provide evidence. My argument is based on logic, and a logic-based argument requires no citation.

B. Even if this argument did require evidence, my opponent didn't provide any either. In fact, he didn't offer a contradiction to my contention at all. Thus, the resolution remains intact.

Rebuttal One

"history shows that even if there was a complete wipe out of explicit songs, there would still be bullying."


Au contraire. My opponent is confused by what the resolution actually says. I never claimed that "Explicit songs are the only cause of bullying", I simply said "As long as explicit songs exist, bullying will exist also."

Which brings me to add,

Contention Two

Bullying will always exist.

"Kids don't wake up one day and physically say to themselves "I think I'll make Joey's life miserable to the point he kills himself because I hate his guts." Kids do what they do and sometimes that happens to be something someone finds mean. We don't communicate with each other; we expect people to know things by the looks we give them. You see that crap in relationships. If no one tells the "bully" what they are doing is hurtful and "bully-ish" then they will never know and will continue to do it. Often it is a case of them believing it is benignly funny, not realizing it actually isn't."

He goes on to say,

"yes, bullying is a problem. But legislating it away is never going to solve the issue. As long as children are around each other, there will be bullies. There always have been and there always will be."

Since the lifespan of bullying is infinite and the lifespan of explicit song is either infinite or finite, Bullying will exist at least as long as explicit songs exist.
STMAknight92

Con

From the title of the debate, it infers that if explicit songs were to end bullying would end.

as you are pro, meaning you agree with the statement, you would either agree with my above sentence, or should have rephrased the topic

as i am con, i would disagree with the statement, and would say even if explicit songs were wiped out, bullying would still occur.

this talks about segregation, which has many forms of bullying in it.

http://voices.yahoo.com...

since you maid a reference to rap here is when it first started:

http://www.askdeb.com...

now there is over 100 years between when these both started.

To your point about kids getting bullied because they listen to KidzBop and are weird because of it.

Kids get bullied for many other things besides the music they listen to. Such as clothes, physical level, weight, height, the family they come from. So this shows that explicit songs are not the only cause of bullying, and if it were to stop, bullying would still happen.
Debate Round No. 3
MassiveDump

Pro

All my opponent is doing is trying to rephrase the resolution because he didn't read it properly. He is still under the illusion that I'm arguing that explicit songs are the direct cause of bullying.

My resolution is, "As long as explicit songs exist, so will bullying."

This literally means that bullying will exist as long as or longer than explicit songs, but my opponent wishes to argue the "implications" or "subtext" of the resolution, which I was never arguing.

I'll repeat it one more time: I am not arguing that explicit songs are the only direct cause of bullying, and I never was.

Contention One

I understand that children can be bullied on other basis, but I'm not refering to any of those. As long as children listen to Kidz Bop, they can be bullied for it. Kidz Bop will exist as long explicit songs do, Therefore as long as explicit songs exist, kids will be bullied.

"So this shows that explicit songs are not the only cause of bullying, and if it were to stop, bullying would still happen."

And thus Con proves my point. Not only will bullying exist as long as explicit songs exist, it will exist for even longer.

Con Concedes Contention Two

I'm not going to continue this debate if Con doesn't start arguing the resolution I presented.
STMAknight92

Con

well then why don't i just bomb the headquarters of kidz bop then, because that would seem like that would make this debate end a little faster. i have no further explanations because what i need to say has been said.
Debate Round No. 4
MassiveDump

Pro

My opponent concedes. Vote Pro.
STMAknight92

Con

i stated my final points, i did not forfeit.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 4 years ago
xXCryptoXx
Proper reasoning and logic from Pro.

Well played.
Posted by MassiveDump 4 years ago
MassiveDump
Sorry. Source from Round 3:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com...
Posted by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
I'm leaning toward pro right now. Right or wrong, he presented a strong argument, and presented it well.

Con missed the clear path to victory, of blaming Kidz Bop instead of the songs; thus interrupting the flow of points from pro's argument. In fact with advancement in Drone technology, I'm confident we could wipe Kidz Bop off the face of the earth, wherever they hide.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Ameliamk1 4 years ago
Ameliamk1
MassiveDumpSTMAknight92Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro is annoying, and is incorrect that logic is a valid individual makeup of an argument. And he is wrong. But he did do a better job, so I guess I have to give him some points.
Vote Placed by Themoderate 4 years ago
Themoderate
MassiveDumpSTMAknight92Tied
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 Checkmark--1 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: Pro did good. Con should have kept this argument going and used it to his advantage in the last round.
Vote Placed by Sargon 4 years ago
Sargon
MassiveDumpSTMAknight92Tied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con practically concedes the debate in R4. He claimed that he was giving closing points, but that doesn't work. For one, his "closing points" were irrelevant and off-topic. Secondly, closing points should have gone in R5, not R4. Pro gets arguments because Con dropped all points in the last two rounds. When he was attacking Pro's argument, he didn't answer any of the premises. The contention wasn't that all bullying is caused by Kidz Bop, but that KidzBop leads to some amount of bullying. Therefore, most of Con's attacks were predicated on a straw man of Pro's argument. Pro argued better than Con, and that's why he gets the vote. Everything else is tied.
Vote Placed by sweetbreeze 4 years ago
sweetbreeze
MassiveDumpSTMAknight92Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:22 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to Pro. Spelling/Grammar goes to Pro, since Con did not use punctuation. Sources go to Con.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
MassiveDumpSTMAknight92Tied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: First of all, not nearly enough follow through on the trolling. Pro started off strong on a trollish argument, and shifted away from that but without the presentation level that went into the trolling. Conduct: We weak as con became (blowing up the offices, but without the follow through of tracking them all down to end bulling via genocide), pro's claim of a concession was premature (FYI con, there's a huge difference between forfeit and concession). Argument: I could do lawyering about how pro did not respond to con's final claim, but at the same time con waited a couple rounds to present such an idea, and did it weakly. True or false, pro had the stronger argument, with better presentation. As much as I admit I was actually confused by the resolution by the end, since both sides were arguing over what it meant (which is usually secondary to the points presented). Sources favor con, but not by enough to tip the scales (pro next time wait until next round, don't source in comments).