The Instigator
Pfalcon1318
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
em2000
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Feminism is about equality.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 1 vote the winner is...
Pfalcon1318
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,204 times Debate No: 46421
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

Pfalcon1318

Con

I will be arguing against the above resolution. My opponent will be arguing for the above resolution.

Definitions
Feminism: Definition 1: the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes.
Definition 2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

Equality: the quality or state of having the same rights, social status, etc.
-from merriam-webster.com

Burden of Proof will be shared. Above definitions are not subject to change.

RULES

Round 1 is for acceptance ONLY. Any arguments will be disregarded by myself and the audience.

Round 2 is the beginning of the Debate. Opening Statements only, no rebuttals.

Round 3 is for Rebuttals. Pro and Con may only attack the argument that has been presented by his/her opponent. Previous points may not be defended.

Round 4 is for Defense and Cross Examination. Pro and Con may defend his/her previous position by attacking the rebuttal presented in Round 3. New evidence may be presented. No new arguments are allowed in this round. Pro and Con may ask a clarifying question of his/her opponent, in order to move into round 5. Cross Examination may NOT be based upon circular reasoning. The answerer of this question (the person being asked) must address HOW the question contains circular reasoning in order for them not to be required to answer.

Round 5 is for Answering the CX question, further Defense and Closing Arguments.

Failure to follow the above rules will result in a 7 point loss. Forfeiture of a round will result in a 4 point loss.

Further Clarification

Arguments may be made regarding the way feminism and feminists has affected the lives of ALL people, this includes laws, media, literature, etc. However, I will be basing my argument from a North American Standpoint. If my opponent wishes to address other countries, this must be discussed in the comments section.
em2000

Pro

I will be arguing against my opponent for the debate feminism is about equality. My opponent stated that the first definition of feminism is, "The theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes." But what I'm wondering is, isn't that pro? I am excited to continue this debate. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1
Pfalcon1318

Con



I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate. I hope it will be an enlightening and challenging one for both of us.



Moving forward, I believe it to be prudent to address the issue of the definitions of “Feminism”. As it stands now, there are two separate definitions; as such, it will prove difficult for my opponent and myself to continue debating if we are using “Feminism” in differing contexts. Given this, I believe combining the definitions will allow this debate to be more insightful, enlightening, and challenging. The definition I propose is as follows:


Feminism: organized activity, on behalf of women’s rights and issues, aimed at the political, social and economic equality of the sexes, or approval thereof.


This definition does not include the intricacies of feminist theory, however, it does encompass the overall goal of Feminism, in that it strives to make men and women equals on all applicable fronts. The clause “approval thereof” allows for those who are not active, outspoken advocates in the feminist movement to be included in the definition, as they are, most likely, not against what other feminists strive to put into effect. The clause “organized activity” specifically references any attempts at making a tangible difference in the lives of women, from legal reform to organizations.


From this point forward, I will use “Feminism” as it is defined above. In keeping with this definition, and considering the history of the women’s movement as a spectrum of activism, I will be referring to federal benefit laws, current domestic violence laws, as well as current rape laws.



Federal Benefits


In the US, certain federal benefits are derived from US citizenship. One key difference in women’s federal benefits and men’s federal benefits is the fact that men are required to sign up for Selective service in order to receive student financial aid or work federal jobs and receive federal job training. Even men who are not born in the US, and seek citizenship, if they are under 26 years of age, are required to sign up for selective service in order to receive citizenship. Any male 26 years of age or younger who has not registered is liable to be tried and convicted of a felony offense. Convicted felons in 11 states permanently lose their voting rights. As it stands, I have found no evidence of attempts by those who would be described as feminists towards advocating for this to be changed. As this is indicative of inequality between the sexes, it follows that it should a feminist issue. Assuming a man does not sign up for Selective Service, and does lose the aforementioned federal benefits of citizenship, he is liable to lose federal aid in his push for a college education, should he want one. This is an economic inequity, based solely upon the fact that he did not sign up for the draft. If feminism is to be about equality, this is something that must be worked on, at least to some degree. Advocating for women’s right to vote, as the Suffragettes did, but not ensuring that right came with a compulsory obligation, shows a willingness to promote inequality, which is in direct contradiction of the definition of feminism stated above.


Source for the above: https://www.sss.gov...


http://felonvoting.procon.org...


Domestic Violence And Rape Laws


The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) is based upon the Duluth Model, which suggests that domestic violence (DV) is a tool used by men to exert control over their spouse. This act changed intimate partner violence into a sexually directional offense, making it more likely that a man will be arrested for retaliating to his spouse’s abuse than his spouse being arrested for abusing him. While the VAWA does ensure that female victims of DV are protected, it has the negative consequence of preventing the protection of male victims. In this instance, a women’s right to equal and fair treatment under the law is not being applied. In keeping with the above definition of Feminism, and what “equality” would entail in this instance, a male abuser and female abuser would be held to the same standard. This would be a major piece of what feminism should take into account. While this may advocate for women’s interests, avoiding domestic violence, it does not provide equality for the sexes. Rather, in this instance, it shifts the balance of power in such a way that, even if he retaliates, a man is more likely to be arrested that a woman, in keeping with the Duluth Model. Ideally, advocating for women’s rights and interests would entail pushing for recognition under the law as a fully capable citizen, meaning a female abuser is recognized as an abuser, as much as a male victim is recognized as a victim. A program that holds women in “victim” status dehumanizes them because it makes the assumption that not only is abuse sexually direction, but also that women are wholly incapable of abuse, and solely capable of self-defense. As it stands, women are recognized as capable of the “positive” human characteristics (leadership, strength, intellect, compassion, etc.) but not recognized as capable of the “negative” human characteristics (aggression, ferocity, etc.) under the law. Whereas a man can be charged with sexual harassment for speaking inappropriately, a woman cannot be charged with rape, even after drugging and forcing a man to engage in sexual intercourse with her. While the dictionary definition of rape entails non-consensual intercourse, the legal definition entails penetration, making it impossible for a woman to rape a man through vaginal intercourse, regardless of his ability to consent to intercourse. Bringing alcohol, or other mind altering substances, adjusts the ability of an individual to consent. However, it is current law that if a drunk man has sex with a drunk woman, he can be charged with rape, regardless of the circumstances surrounding the encounter. If she initiates intercourse with him, it can be considered rape. Both individuals are drunk, both incapable of consent, and yet he can be charged with rape. There have been no pushes to change this. In fact, VAWA is the main reason the current situation exists. VAWA is the epitome of feminist legislation. “Women” is part of the title, so that suggest that these things are Women’s issues. Once again, there is the issue of equal recognition under law, the “equality of the sexes” is being adjusted by “organized activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests”. Even beyond this, it would be an intelligent inference to believe that being recognized as a full human, capable of good AND evil, is a part of feminism.



http://www.theduluthmodel.org...


http://www.whitehouse.gov...


http://www.merriam-webster.com...


http://www.justice.gov...


http://online.wsj.com...



Conclusion


Given the current status of United State laws, and considering the focuses that should be core to feminism, I assert that feminism is not about equality. From the definition above, we can infer that any person who approves of, or supports what feminism stands for is to be considered a feminist. From that, we can further infer that any acts committed and laws created by those people would be a feminist acts and laws. Given the definition of feminism that I constructed from the two definitions provided by Merriam-webster.com, I would further assert that putting the ideology of feminism into action results in a direct contradiction of its definition. As such the “organized activity” on behalf of women’s rights and interests directly ends in further inequality of the sexes, in the social and political arenas.



I look forward to reading and learning from my opponents Opening Statement.



em2000

Pro

Feminism - The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.


This is my definition of feminism, this is also the definition that comes up when you search "What is feminism."
Can my opponent please explain why in his definition of feminism it says, "equality of the sexes." Isn't that our whole debate about whether feminism is about equality? My opponent has already proved my point. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
Pfalcon1318

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for her response, however, I do not accept the definition that she has provided. As stated in the first round, when i was laying out the rules for this debate:

Definitions
Feminism: Definition 1: the theory of political, economic and social equality of the sexes.
Definition 2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

Equality: the quality or state of having the same rights, social status, etc.
-from merriam-webster.com

Burden of Proof will be shared. Above definitions are not subject to change.

While i did explicitly state that Round Two is not for refutations, i find it strange that my opponent does not take into account the definition that i provided in my argument. I also find it strange that she does not provide any evidence to support her argument. Given that feminism is an ideology AND a form of activism, i presented a definition that would encompass both of these to further the goals of this debate. My opponent attempts to argue for only one piece of feminism. As with any ideology or philosophy, simply defining the ideology does not explain it's effects, nor does it actually express what the ideology actually expresses. Were I to state that "racism is a feeling of pride in one's nationality or ethnicity", that would not explain the results of said ideology. As the Burden of Proof is shared, i request that my opponent provide evidence of her position; simply defining a term "feminism" does not show that feminism is actually about equality, especially given the fact that (per merriam-webster.com) feminism can be referring to two separate ideas or topics. It seems to me that this is a fallacy of equivocation on the part of my opponent, as she conflates one definition of feminism to be the definition which we are to be debating, despite me having defined Feminism in Round One, as i was outlining the rules of this debate.

The main reason i combined the definitions in my Opening Statement was to ensure that my opponent and myself had a reasonable definition of the term we are debating.

However, even if i were to disobey the rules i set forth when outlining this debate, and allow the definition my opponent provided, my argument will still hold.
**Using my opponents definition, rather than my own, my argument remains sound. Please go back and read the argument i have provided, you will see that this is true, as any legislation, organization, or people who "advocate for women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men" would be dubbed feminist by both my definition and her definition.**

Despite this, i request that my opponent follow the rules of the debate as they are laid out. As she was unable to construct an argument, i would also like to request of her an Opening Statement. If any audience members/voters would be so kind as to allow this slight bending of the rules, it would be much appreciated. I do this in the hopes that my opponent will be able to provide evidence that supports her claim and position. There is not much for me to refute in her opening statement, as it is simply a re-definition of the term, an assertion that my definition is not applicable, and an assertion that i have not provided evidence that is contrary to the resolution "Feminism is about equality."

If my opponent would be so kind as to provide evidence to support her claim, as well as give a refutation to my own claims from Round Two, i believe this debate may become more than a simple game of the meaning of words.

I look forward to recieving a response from my oppenent, and thank her in advance.

em2000

Pro

em2000 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Pfalcon1318

Con

My opponent has forfeited the preceding round. I shall stand by my previous statement, and offer no further arguments or evidence.
em2000

Pro

em2000 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Pfalcon1318

Con

my opponent has forfeited once again. I will simply reiterate what i said earlier. Feminism does not have a focus on equality. This is mainly derived from the women-centric advocacy. To advocate for women's rights, but not do the same for men, is to increase the rights that women have. The areas that i mentioned (Selective Service/Voting, Domestic Violence, and Rape) are areas wherein women have been given protections, or rights, that were not extended to men.

For men, voting is not a right, it is a privilege. Men are liable to be arrested and convicted of a felony, should they not sign up for Selective Service. There is no compulsory public service for women, Feminism has not made it a point to fix this. By virtue of the clause "equality of the sexes" this should be a focus of Feminism.

Domestic Violence law is not based upon the fact that a partner is being abusice. Rather, the Duluth Model, from which the VAWA was made, assumes that men are the perpetrator. It should be said that, by virtue of the aforementioned clause of the definition of feminism, this should not be the case. Abusive relationships should not be tolerated, regardless of the gender of the victim. The fact that men are more capable of damaging their partner is not a viable excuse to ONLY punish men.

Legally, it is not possible for a woman to rape a man. The definition of rape requires penetration; consent is not a part of the legal definition of rape. Rape is only a punishible crime when a man is the perpetrator. The gender of the victim is irrelevant. The issue lies in the fact that "consent" is a mind-state. Penetration is an action, and herein lies the problem.

I believe i have provided sufficient evidence and support in favor of my position. Given my opponents consecutive forfeitures, and lack of evidence and support, i would also state that i have presented the stronger argument.
em2000

Pro

em2000 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Pfalcon1318 2 years ago
Pfalcon1318
There are only 2hrs left in this round "em2000", do you intend to respond? I am wondering whether or not your forfeit was intentional.
Posted by The_Serb 2 years ago
The_Serb
a woman must never be your equal
Posted by Pfalcon1318 2 years ago
Pfalcon1318
I stated that the definitions are not subject to change. If my opponent agrees to remove that part of the definition, i will do so. However, i will not go against the preset rules of this debate.
Posted by Pfalcon1318 2 years ago
Pfalcon1318
Feminism is defined in two ways. The first definition states equality, however the second definition specifies women. I will not be debating semantics. Many people use the moniker "feminist" without understanding it in its entirety. Pro will have to argue that feminism, despite Definition 2, is about equality. Considering we must define a philosophy by how it is enacted, and not what it says, it is entirely possible to show how definition 1 is incorrect. Feminism being defined in two ways is essential to explaining what feminism is. There is a historical framework. I am allowing for discussion on how feminism is, in fact, about equality. The BOP is shared, which means that my opponent must actually PROVE that feminism and feminists are focused on the equality of the sexes.
Posted by themohawkninja 2 years ago
themohawkninja
This debate isn't fair at all. You're first definition explicitly states that it is about equality.

You might want to specify that the debate is about whether or not the actions of feminists in recent years is about equality.
Posted by Bannanawamajama 2 years ago
Bannanawamajama
Maybe you should reconsider this debate. Definition 1 of your initial round kind of immediately conceeds the debate to Pro.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Relativist 2 years ago
Relativist
Pfalcon1318em2000Tied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture warrants loss of conduct. Con made an argument while Pro was lost in the field of semantics. I wished pro wouldve made an argument at least. Con receives all 6 points for the well presented essay along with reliable sources.