Is modern feminism too scattered to be an effective movement?
(This is my first debate, glad to be here.)
My opponent as shown examples of a disorganized small minority under the guise that they represent the whole of feminism, and then use their example to justify "need" organizational changes to a moment that already did the suggested changes 60 years ago.
But even besides that, I've noticed one thing. Feminism seems to just be in the wrong place. In first world countries, there are already laws for gender equality. That was feminism's goal, to achieve legal equality. This makes feminism redundant in first world countries. Third world countries such as Vietnam have no such laws. Men can discriminate against women just fine there, no repercussions. Sounds like a place feminism should be if I ever heard it. Yet here we are, feminists complaining about first world problems while women can be legally discriminated against in third world countries. This is a point of contention between feminists such as Hoff Sommers and feminists such as Sarkeesian, whether first world women are discriminated against. This kind of drastic disagreement on what to do next is what I mean. With such drastically different views on what to do next, and the seeming silence of this majority, if it even is that, is bound to lead to more and more arguments, until it's just a collective mess, even if it's just showing signs. (Kinda big to just ignore, but still signs, I guess.)
In over 200 years Americans have also been all over the place in our fight to for equality. Under my opponents logic it has all been pointless. We have too many view points and can’t agree on what it means to be an American. Progress is slow this way but it does happen.
My opponent also fails to understand that most people that are feminist do not claim they are feminist. Do only 16% of people think a woman should stay barefoot, pregnant, and under her husband’s complete control? No, way more people do. While feminist can’t always agree on what a woman’s place in the world is but we all agree it is not just the kitchen.
In the 1st world woman’s rights are not equal to that of a man’s. While under the law she may be in the hearts and minds of the general population she is not. For example under the law a woman doing the same job should get paid the same she does not. According to the Woman’s law center a woman misses out in typically $10,000 per year. (1) I find it honestly arrogant to think you can change millions of years of human social structure in 60 years. When the current state of American economics we greatly need even more feminism. When is the last time any of us seen a science toy for girls?
Your points using the 3rd world are not logically sound. It is like saying to a black man stop talking about racism we have a black president in America. There is still racism in the 1st world and there are still some people that think a woman is nothing more than a sex toy that cooks and cleans.
My point with the third world was not that sexism does not exist in any form in the first world, or to shut people up about it, my point is that the issues women face there are a hell of a lot worse, and because of that, a hell of a lot more worth feminists' time. Yet here we are, with people like Anita Sarkeesian talking about how "video games are sexist," while women in third world countries are legally discriminated against, can be legally harassed, can't even leave home without a male escort, etc. Point is, there are a lot worse issues out there, with a lot more scale than first world countries, that probably should be prioritized, yet they are not. It does not mean sexism does not exist in first world countries, it just means priorities should be made.
Your claim that many people believe women should be sex toys...where did you get this from? A simple Google search will turn up few to no results, depending on search criteria. However, if you look for criteria pertaining to female superiority, you'll find several articles saying "women are better than men at multitasking," or something of the sort. If what you said was true, then I would expect that this would show in a Google search, seeing as the Internet is a pretty vast void of ideas that are not particularly censored at all.
That is all I have to say on this issue. I believe my point has been thoroughly made, and once you make your point, it will be up to the people on this website. Thank you for accepting my debate, and I hope we may debate something else someday, as this was a good experience for me.
gomergcc 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:||1||0|