"Girls get special treatment"
Debate Rounds (4)
In my personal life I have discovered that if you act like a lady you will be treated as such. I have seen men who many would characterize as "rough" turn into perfect gentlemen when I'm around them. They watch their language, carry heavy things for me, open doors, and in general treat me with respect.
I am not saying that how a woman is treated relies solely on herself. The training of a man has a lot to do with it too. How women are treated is based on cultural norms and customs, and how men and women work together.
Even women in Islamic cultures who have to where head coverings and veils believe that they are treated with respect. (Voices Behind the Veil: The world of Islam through the eyes of women, Edited by Ergun Mehmet Caner. Copyright 2003)
In the last century or so, the feminist movement has been working hard to try to prove women deserve respect. While I do not completely agree with them, we must acknowledge that a woman these days has a lot of freedom and men are being exhorted to give women special respect.
Yes, some women are treated abominably, but that does not falsify the claim that many women right now, do see a lot of respect from men.
Unfortunately, people tend to hear the horrific bad news rather than the good news of chivalry.
Whether or not men get special treatment in certain areas is not pertinent to the subject at hand.
I disagree that 'The statement that not all girls have special treatment, (i.e. special privileges simply because she is a girl) does not directly disprove my statement that girls in general get special treatment. '. Pro, by generalising is saying that the majority of girls get special treatment just because they are girls. This is simply not true.
As my opponent has used personal experience as an argument, I will state mine also as it is quite the opposite. I have always been courteous and polite, said my pleases and thank-you's, but I have never been treated exceptionally compared to other women. Many men have treated me with respect, but this does not mean it is special treatment, as they treat other men with respect too. I am being treated as an equal.
My opponents wikihow link does not back up the point at all and is therefore redundant.
'Unfortunately, people tend to hear the horrific bad news rather than the good news of chivalry.' I agree with this statement, however, the horrific bad news is surely the more important? The facts are there. Women are not being treated equally and with respect.
On average, two women a week are killed at the hands of their current of former male partner. Is this not proof that women aren't being given special treatment?
Of all the women sexually abused, 45% were attacked by their husbands and partners, and only 17% were attacked by strangers. Women aren't even being given special treatment by the men they trust.
Using her own statistics, however, we see that she has not yet proved that the majority have been mistreated. If we take majority in the traditional sense, that is, more than 50%, we see that the only percentage she provided, (assuming it is correct) is 45%. 45% is less than 50%. Simple mathematics.
But that number is actually a percentage of the percentage of abused women in the UK only. Using the UK as an example, only 1 in 5 women have experienced sexual abuse. (http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk...). 45% of .2 (1/5) is .4%. So, according to both statistics, in reality, only .4% of all the women in the UK have had this unfortunate experience.
However way you look at it, we still see no majority. If Con is going to prove me wrong by saying in general, women are not treated well, she will need to demonstrate that a majority, i.e. more than half, are experiencing abuse.
Do not get me wrong, I am not saying to ignore the women who are hurting, for the purposes of this debate only, I say that their unfortunate circumstances do not disprove my argument.
Also, these incidents are only from the UK, which may have a different ratio from other countries.
I cannot address the "two women killed a week" argument since it was not backed up with any sort of evidence.
Even if the bad news is more important, it still does not make a majority. This is a touchy and emotional issue, but we must make the decision for this round on logic, not tear jerking examples.
While I do not deny the atrocities committed against women around the world, I would like to invite the reader to step back and look at the numbers 45% out of 1/5 equaling a total of .4%. As is likely obvious to any reader, any one of these numbers show only a minority being effected, not a majority.
Just for clarification, my usage of the words special treatment are intended to mean that men treat women with more respect than they treat fellow men. I am not saying one girl is singled out among others to be treated specially.
Please do not get carried away by the pathos here. Let me summarize one more time what we both have said in this round.
Con: Some women are mistreated, so women are not getting special treatment
Pro: Con still has not disproved that many women do receive it, you just don't hear of it, because that is not the type of thing the media publishes.
Con: It is false that the majority of women have special treatment. 45% of sexually abused women were attacked by their husbands.
Pro: 45% is less than 50%. My point that the majority of women receive special treatment has not yet been disproven.
I am convinced that my point is still standing and that in order to effective disprove that the majority of women are treated badly, we need a real statistical majority.
Firstly I would like to address the fact my opponent keeps using the argument '45% is less than 50%' to disprove my argument. Clearly she has not read over it fully. Cleary my argument with that point was Women aren't even being given special treatment by the men they trust. Despite what you may believe, Pro, I do have basic math skills and I know 45% is less than half.
Also I have only used statistics from the UK as that is where I am from. It's not so difficult to understand is it?
Now on to my opponents arguments. She claims only 1 in 5 women have experienced, sexual abuse, however she mustn't have read her own statistics very well either as her source (http://www.rapecrisis.org.uk...) says, " 1 in 5 women (aged 16 - 59) has experienced some form of sexual violence since the age of 16."
If you read it correctly, this is not a statistic that encompasses all women. This is a statistic that encompasses a very select group of women. Females, from the UK, aged between 16 and 59 who have experienced sexual abuse from the age of 16 onwards. So my opponents statement " in reality, only .4% of all the women in the UK have had this unfortunate experience." Is simply not true.
The burden of proof is still on my opponent to show that girls experience special treatment.
Maybe my opponent can address the satement that two women are killed a week if she correctly reads this evidence (http://refuge.org.uk...)
Domestic violence has a higher rate than any other crime. 81% of domestic violence victims are women, now surely you can see this satistic is much, much more than half? Not only that, but only less than half of domestic violence cases are even reported and on average a woman is attacked 35 times before she goes to the police. Think about how many women are being abused behind closed doors.
My opponent stated: Just for clarification, my usage of the words special treatment are intended to mean that men treat women with more respect than they treat fellow men.
Even if this is what she meant by her initial statement (which was vague and unclear) my last argument clearly shows that men do not treat women with more respect.
She also stated: I am convinced that my point is still standing. Yet she has still not given any arguments or proof to show that women are treated differently and better than men.
I look to you mishapqueen, to prove that women are treated with more respect.
As to why you used UK numbers, I did understand why you chose them, but I live in America, a totally different country with different people. UK numbers, while valid, are not universal.
As, to the clarity of your point, I would have thought you would have expounded more on a main point than simply one sentence.
It is impossible for a statistic to encompass all women. Yes, it was from a select group. Sorry for my earlier mistake.
I was curious about Con's own statistic, so I looked at it again. (http://www.womensaid.org.uk...) First it establishes that "1 in 4 women experience domestic violence over their lifetimes and between 6-10% of women suffer domestic violence in a given year."
Then it says, "When the researchers asked women about the last incident of rape experienced since the age of 16, they found that 45% were raped by current husbands or partners," So, this is 45% of the 1/4 of the women interviewed, which equals .5%. So, out of all the women interviewed, only .5% reported abuse from their partners.
But reading the article in detail, I found this interesting quote: "However the figures of 1 in 4 women and 1 in 6 men experiencing domestic violence fail to identify patterns of abuse over time and the coercive control which typifies intimate partner violence. Using these statistics to establish a picture of the prevalence of intimate partner violence is therefore not recommended."
The last sentence is the most important. Unfortunately, Con, you are using the data provided to draw a conclusion that the people who collected the data are hesitant to do. Therefore, since the experts themselves recommend we not use their work to draw such conclusions, I propose that we drop our use of statistics to draw the conclusion of men mistreating women.
I would now like to move on the the subject of whether or not women get special treatment.
Firstly, if 1 in 4 women are experiencing abuse, that leaves three women who are fine.
Secondly, women's rights have improved in the last century or so. (http://americans-world.org...) It is not perfect, but it has been improving. Even in places where it has been bad in the past, it is beginning to improve. (http://www.gulfoundation.net...)
Many agencies, especially the UN, are working hard to make sure all women will be well treated.
One thing that makes it difficult is, as I mentioned before, the news only publishes the horror stories because they are much more interesting and get more viewers than the good news does. So, other than personal experience, it is impossible to prove without doubt whether women get special treatment or not. As the statistic I mentioned above, we cannot accurately use statistics to draw conclusions as to the real state of things.
The statistics of domestic violence presented only focused on the UK. The US has a lower statistic: "One in 4 women will experience domestic violence during her lifetime." (http://www.safehorizon.org...)
We cannot universally apply statistics in the UK to the entire world.
As for abuse behind closed doors, that is an unknown, so we cannot base decisions or draw accurate conclusions off of it.
I am not denying the fact that many women do experience domestic violence, and I am not saying we should not help them, I am contesting the claim that most women experience these dreadful things.
Arguments extended as Pro has once again failed to come up with any substantial evidence or proof that women get special treatment.
Her above post does not say anything about why my evidence (http://americans-world.org...) was not enough proof, she simply asserts it. It is now too late for her to attempt to disprove my point that more and more women are receiving better treatment and respect.
Con also did not respond to the very important argument from the statistics she herself presented that we cannot draw accurate conclusions of how men treat women from the numbers in that poll. Yet, that is what she has done. Her own evidence discredits her.
Here is the quote again for your perusal:
"However the figures of 1 in 4 women and 1 in 6 men experiencing domestic violence fail to identify patterns of abuse over time and the coercive control which typifies intimate partner violence. Using these statistics to establish a picture of the prevalence of intimate partner violence is therefore not recommended." (http://www.womensaid.org.uk...)
I will leave it up to you as the voter to decide if my interpretation is correct.
Con in addition failed to address the issue that her statistics of the UK do not necessarily apply to the entire world. Every society is different, and it is not wise to think we can apply one country to all countries.
I bring up these dropped arguments because I believe they are key to the round.
What have we seen in this debate? Here are the highlights:
First, I made a general statement that most girls receive special treatment from men.
Con then said that this is not the case because a poll said 45% of women were being abused by their partners.
I responded by first pointing out that this is not a majority, and secondly the 45% was 45% of the 1/4 of the women experiencing domestic violence, equaling .5%.
Con did not directly respond to this, she pointed out that I had made a mistake, (which I had, but later corrected), and then she brought up domestic violence statistics to disprove me.
I returned with saying that they were not applicable because the numbers were not true on the world wide scale. (For example, America's rate is 25%.(http://www.safehorizon.org...))
I also pointed out that her conclusion drawn from the statistic was discredited by the statistic itself (see above).
Con then chose not to respond to my points and simply assert I had not proved girls get special treatment.
On that note....
1. Showing that some women do not get special treatment does not disprove the fact that many women do. Con has never directly disproven that most women get special treatment. All she has done is state that I have not proven my point enough and presented facts showing that less than half of the women who have been polled on this topic have experienced abuse. Neither of these directly disprove my position.
2. Using logic, if only 1/4 of the women experience abuse, that leave 3/4 who have not. So it is true that most women are treated well.
3. I have presented evidence (http://americans-world.org...) showing that women have been treated with more and more respect in the past few decades. The situation is getting steadily better.
4. With all the horror stories of the women who have not been treated well getting so much coverage, it becomes more and more in a man's favor to treat women with respect.
Please do not misunderstand me. In this debate I have done my best to set aside the pity I feel for my less fortunate sisters and simply deal with the arguments and numbers presented. I request that you would do the same.
Even if you are of the opinion that I have not fulfilled my burden of proof, please realize that my opponent has not upheld her burden of rejoinder. Therefore, we are at least tied in that respect.
Please consider both of our arguments carefully and vote as you see fit. Thank you for taking time to read our debate!
I also thank my opponent for taking time to debate me. I really do appreciate it.
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.