Feminism is no longer beneficial to our modern society
Debate Rounds (5)
Feminism: Any group that declares themselves as feminists and/or A movement for granting women political, social, and economic equality (or advantage) with men.
Our society/modern day society/our modern day society/the like: A lot of feminists point out data that are quite exclusive to third world countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen. This should need no further explaining, if you try to twist my definition or haunt me with political correctness, you are doing it wrong.
Beneficial: does more good than harm to everyone.
Pro states: "This round is for acceptance."
But do they have any evidence to back this up?
cha-the-politician forfeited this round.
Pro has forfeited the 2nd round.
1) Feminism had been beneficial but now we already have left the prejudice behind us. I am not saying that gender equality is no longer at presence, but only that it doesn't really matter anymore. If male truly have a significant advantage towards woman, if we really have control simply for being who we are, why would feminism even exist? And yes, you would ask me for evidence and I do have it, LOGIC. If man do have the upper hand wouldn't we want to control any outcry? Any voices? If not, wouldn't that mean we are NOT the sexist person feminism portrays us to be?
2) Feminists fail to uphold gender equality. They are hating on men and developing into a supremacy or at least gender exclusivity. If both genders are supposed to be equal, how come in every Japanese train/subway there are one whole car reserved for woman? How come feminist Marilyn Frenc's quote saying all men are rapists are still such a popular ideology with feminists? How come Room to Read and many famous foundations alike only offer academic education to women and in fact have a ad saying "Transform a Girl's Life, send her to school" on the home page and noone says anything meanwhile boy only schools are considered sexist? (St. Mary's, classic example). How come the "sorry, it's a boy" commercial was passed on to the Superbowl and even considered "Not Sexist" and to date not a single person apologised?
I get it, you may think that these are just individual examples, and you may be right, however, without feminism this would be much harder to do. What I am insisting is that we simply drop feminism as an ideology in our world. Or at least introduce some kind of Masculinism without being called sexist.
I would say it doesn't matter anymore because in our society women don't have it much harder and the work they have to do to achieve a similar amount of materialistic success as men. As of the payment gap, there are a few problems with using that as a source of argument. The minor problem is that the information is rather updated and women gets a paid maternity leave for about a year. The bigger problem is that it is a global data, not fitting with the rules of this debate. These is not factors listed under your sources. Boys are also often exposed to sexual harassment and the only reason men are not is because of natural physical advantage which men are slowly losing. As of birth control and reproductive rights, again, if you read the rules of this debate properly, third world and developing countries are out of the picture and I don't see UK and US having birth control problems right? You didn't define reproductive rights but I think you meant abortion which should totally be banned. Women should, just like men, be held responsible for their actions. Again, as of rape, we see a loophole, we can strengthen law enforcement but allowing abortion is like twisting the whole system to allow rape. Because the men do not have wombs, men don't have to care about abortion and birth control as much as women, but if they do, for some reason, well, they don't have much more rights.
As of the second rebuttal, yes, you can say they are not true feminists, but you have to admit that they are indeed sparked by feminism. And feminism is what makes them look appropriate and proportionate to some people. Quotes aren't that powerful, I just used a famous one to support my point because I was running out of time. Do you see any major feminist campaign that 1, doesn't call itself humanist/equalist and 2, provide equal service to both men and women? As of the racism thing, I have a similar view. At first it was great, Martin Luther King did a great job and achieved a lot. But today, if there are still people constantly stressing the fact that blacks don't receive equal treatment which, in some cases is true, I will be solemnly annoyed. The movement was good but if it is pushed any farther, it is a little too much.
I apologise for the Japanese example which you seemingly have no experience in (no offense, very few do). However, I can prove that I am right. (I am not going to now. If you want me to, you can tell me to in the comments section, I really am not trying to search for excuses, I simply want to stay on topic). In fact, I will post it in the comments section right afterwards.
I think you do have to remember that a lot of feminists still go by the "tell men not to rape" ideology.
The program will be perfectly fine IF it is not sexist to create a similar program that is boys only. "Pro has yet to demonstrate that such programs are a result of feminism". Umm... They are not, sort of. The fact is, without feminism, there will be no programs like this. Again, I wonder if you read the definitions and rules of the debate. Just read the definition of feminism...
Yes, it is true that the commercial didn't paint it in positive light, but that argument can be used on a lot of things. Can you defend ABC by saying Jimmy Kimmel didn't put killing all Chinese people in positive light? The fact that if the person said sorry it's a girl will cause an outcry proves my point. And you can try to prove me wrong in the comments section.
Again, what you said is true but you should have read my definition of modern society which is not correct but we have to settle for for the sake of this debate.
Yah, it wasn't very clear, but what I mean is that we need to be able to oppose feminism without sounding like trolls and keyboard warriors. Right now, this isn't entirely feminism's fault but it seems as if it is immoral to oppose feminism and anyone who is doing so is crazy and adsorb.
Now that I finished countering your rebuttals, here is another point I would like to introduce.
In our modern society, again, referring to my definition, feminists are simply too close minded. It seems as though they will just dismiss anyone who disagrees with their ideology as trolls and I think that is part of the reason it developed men hate. Men are less "proficient" at being "brainwashed" by this ideology while women, generally, become immediately attached to the concept.
Pro: "I would say it [the gender pay gap] doesn't matter anymore because in our society women don't have it much harder and the work they have to do to achieve a similar amount of materialistic success as men."
I understand that your data is from 2010 and that still makes it five years behind. You could get data from this year, and the information could be easily manipulated as most companies don't reveal their employee pay rates. America has an unpaid 12 week maternity leave according to Wikipedia which isn't a lot compared to other countries but is still something not offered to their male co workers. Again, the data can not be confirmed and therefore shouldn't be your main argument or even an argument. Parental leave is different from maternity leave.
Yes, I was only rebutting an argument and even if feminist groups redefined rape, it still doesn't prove my point wrong. Boys are just as vulnerable as girls.
I know, a lot of people oppose feminism but usually they are simply considered sexist or trolling. The republican party isn't that anti feminist. AND they lost quite a few elections
Sources... Well, brainwashing really wasn't a good word but you do realise that most feminists are women and most women are feminists. Again, if you want to prove me wrong you can just go ahead and ask every women you see whether they are feminists. They are still majority. And yes, they are quite close minded, at least the ones I have see. It seems like they would not consider any other ideology and dismiss any attempt proving them wrong as trolling. And what is MRA? This is voting period so I am not going to add anything.
Feminism is NOT beneficial to our modern society. Vote PRO!
Pro: "I understand that your data is from 2010 and that still makes it five years behind."
1: My data might be 5 years behind, but it's infinitely more recent than Pro's source -- none.
2: Pro has failed to show why 5 years is significant; reject this attack on my source.
3: 5 years is in fact insignificant, given that the wage gap has not shifted much in the past decade.
Pro: "You could get data from this year, and the information could be easily manipulated as most companies don't reveal their employee pay rates."
1: I *could*. I don't need to, because Pro hasn't provided a better alternate source.
Pro: "America has an unpaid 12 week maternity leave according to Wikipedia which isn't a lot compared to other countries but is still something not offered to their male co workers."
1: Yeah, I don't think an unpaid 12 weeks of "we can't fire you yet" counts as maternal leave.
2: This also means that Pro's argument that women get compensated via having a maternal leave is effectively null -- they don't get paid for it, meaning it doesn't factor into their pay in a significant way.
Pro: "Again, the data can not be confirmed and therefore shouldn't be your main argument or even an argument."
1: Pro states that the "data can not be confirmed" yet consistently fails to invalidate the data that I have presented, which univocally shows a wage gap between women and men. Pro has failed to provide *any* counterstudies. You, judge, *must* accept that a wage gap exists and hurts women in the workforce.
Pro: "Yes, I was only rebutting an argument and even if feminist groups redefined rape, it still doesn't prove my point wrong. Boys are just as vulnerable as girls."
1: Pro first argued that feminist groups argue all men are rapists and are insensitive to male rape. I showed that major feminist groups advocate for expanding coverage for *all* genders and types of rape. Pro's viewpoint is, in fact, the *opposite* of the truth.
2: Sexual violence affects both males and females. However, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention state that 18.3% (1 in 5) of females have been unconsensually penetrated or recieved an unconsensual penetration attempt, compared to 1.4% (1 in 71) of males ; furthermore, 4.8% (1 in 21) of males reported that they were made to penetrate someone else during their lifetime ; furthermore, an estimated 13% in of females and 6% of males have experienced sexual coercion in their lifetime and 27.2% of females and 11.7% of males have experienced unwanted sexual contact . 16.2% (1 in 6) of females and 5.2% (1 in 19) of males have experienced stalking victimization in their lifetime . 35.6% (1 in 3) of females and 28.5% (1 in 4) males have experienced rape, physical violence, and/or stalking by an intimate partner in their lifetime. Sexual violence is a massive issue and should not be downplayed. However, sexual violence is statistically more significant for females than for males, especially for more violent and invasive forms of sexual violence.
Pro: "I know, a lot of people oppose feminism but usually they are simply considered sexist or trolling."
1: That's because a lot of the people who oppose feminism *are* sexist or trolling. Of the others, almost all are able to voice their views without opposition.
Pro: "The republican party isn't that anti feminist. AND they lost quite a few elections"
1: The party that thinks "Kinder, Kuche, Kirche" is a good domestic role for women is antifeminist in my books.
Pro: "[M]ost feminists are women and most women are feminists."
1: And? Most black civil rights advocates were black. Does this invalidate civil rights?
Pro: "And yes, they are quite close minded, at least the ones I have see. It seems like they would not consider any other ideology and dismiss any attempt proving them wrong as trolling. And what is MRA? "
1: Again, some evidence (even analytics) is necessary to support this claim.
2: MRAs are "men's rights activists", the modern antifeminism .
REASONS FOR DECISION
Arguments: Clear Con vote. Pro had the burden to prove Feminism is not beneficial to modern society. They have failed this burden. Pro has no standing arguments as to why feminism is hurtful. Feminism has not been shown to censor opposing opinions. Feminists do not promote false ideas about rape. Feminists aren't necessarily closeminded. In opposition, Con has cited studies to show that a wage gap exists and that Pro's responses do not affect this fact, which means that feminism is still relevant in its efforts to seek equality. Con also showed that feminists opposed rape and male rape, showing positive impact on today's society. In summary, Con had no burden, but fulfilled it; Pro had a burden, but failed it.
Sources: Clear Con vote. Con used 11 sources; Pro used 0. Con cited government studies; Pro didn't.
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.