Feminism is morally good
Understand feminism as a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women and morality as the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are "good" (or right) and those that are "bad" (or wrong).
Under this context, I will be arguing pro, which means I defend the case of feminism being morally good, as opposed to any ideology that enters in direct conflict with feminism.
First round is for acceptance.
Based on such a definition, I'm afraid Ill have to respectfully disagree. Let it be known, there may be few individuals as hard-pressed for equality as I am. But, Morally I believe the feminist movement has strayed a tad too far from their main goal. to which I understood as "all people are equal in the eyes of the law". As with any groups as well, I have noticed that there are more than one sub-group of feminists and I feel this could be detrimental to their cause, but I digress.
The Moral is defined as:
"Concerned with the principles of right and wrong behavior and the goodness or badness of human character."
I fail to see the morality of trying to come out on top. will you deny the existence of the radical feminist movements that are so ant-male that it would seem they would wipe them out if given the chance? They are under the banner of "feminism" correct? Is this healthy for society? If women want equality, is claiming a title the way to go about it? how can one achieve equality when they're under a collective banner? It's similar to the Boyscouts of America, (they consist of ALL male followers and leaders, and women are not allowed) Is a group consisting of an entirety of a single gender really helpful? they arent receiving any feedback this way...they would only ever hear like-minded opinions from followers they knew they would already obtain (AKA women)
And to be perfectly honest, the strategy seems a tad "off" to me. I would gladly elaborate further but It would seem that my points might be jumping in several directions at once. Please, proceed. I shall organize these points to make them a bit less obtuse.
I would like to thank my opponent for the opportunity to debate this interesting topic.
"will you deny the existence of the radical feminist movements that are so ant-male that it would seem they would wipe them out if given the chance?"
I was hoping my opponent would care to give examples but, based on likeliness, I will agree to my opponent's premise and assume such groups exist and are considerable. At this point, however, we must ask ourselves whether these people really constitute the essence of feminism or are they just women blinded by hate who take advantage of the movement to justify their misandry.
Let us exemplify :
The African-American civil rights movement was a successful rally against race discrimination. Today, no one doubts the success of individuals like Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X in fighting inequality. Nevertheless, there were also violent, radical "black power" groups who claimed to be fighting for equality, such as the Black Panthers, known for their violence and brutality . The point I'm trying to make is that the movement wasn't judged by the actions of several radicals, but by the noble cause it was chasing. Today, equal rights exist for African-Americans, and they exist thanks to the civil rights movements already discussed. So the main issue here must not be the radicals, but the ones compromised with making the change from a peaceful and moderate position.
"If women want equality, is claiming a title the way to go about it? how can one achieve equality when they're under a collective banner?"
Yes, I believe equality is achieved by the suppressed organizing under a collective banner and demanding their rights. Let us consult history:
The list goes on, but it's clear that giving a movement a name, a title and a collective banner serves to empower the movement and give its members a sense of identity and belonging. It is important to point out the fact that these groups have all achieved great improvements in the civil rights area.
"Is a group consisting of an entirety of a single gender really helpful? they aren't receiving any feedback this way...they would only ever hear like-minded opinions from followers they knew they would already obtain (AKA women)"
Here, my opponent makes an interesting point. To be clear, whether it has been to support it or to oppose it, men have always taken part in feminism . The pro-feminism and anti-feminism postures are clear examples of men's reaction to feminism. Feminists are in fact receiving feedback, plenty of feedback in my opinion. In fact, many women's studies experts claim it is desirable for men to embrace feminism, because having the "oppressor" accept their rights is a determining point in the quest for equality .
When it comes to feminist organizations not wanting to accept men among their ranks, I find it completely understandable. It is dangerous for the movement that the oppressor would attempt to control it the same way they control other aspects of society.
In conclusion, the idea behind feminism is not women supremacy or male exclusion. Pro feminist men are an important part of the movement, the same way heterosexual allies are important to the LGBT movement. However one must understand that men cannot take such an active and leading role inside the feminist movement. What would have been of the African-American civil rights movement if controlled and led by white individuals? Certainly not the same.
Having strengthened these points, I maintain the premise that feminism is morally good and it's an effective way to end gender oppression.
 Austin, Curtis J. (2006). Up Against the Wall: Violence in the Making and Unmaking of the Black Panther Party.
 Men: Comrades in Struggle, in Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center (1984).
The reason? I simply have not done enough research on the Feminist movement and it's stand on morality to make a solid case as to why it would not be within moral standards. Once again I do apologize, for the start of our debate was very interesting. I look forward to a debate with you again, (perhaps on a topic to which I have particular expertise). Let it be known readers that my opponent has won this case not be default, but by a simple edge in expertise to which I lack.
Congratulations to my opponent on his honesty and humilty. It was an interesting debate, I look forward to debating you again.
Awood8964 forfeited this round.
|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:||6||0|