The Instigator
igaryoak
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
FREEDO
Con (against)
Winning
39 Points

Males are superior to females

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/28/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 19,918 times Debate No: 18079
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (15)
Votes (10)

 

igaryoak

Pro

This round is for debate acceptance only.
Terms and Conditions: I am debating that sexism has been established over legitimate grounds and not pointless discrimination towards females. I am NOT debating that males are superior to females in every aspect nor am I debating that females are insignificant. I am merely debating that males are, in the grand scheme of things, superior to females.
Debate Round No. 1
igaryoak

Pro

There are essentially three aspects to what makes us human. Our physical bodies, or the physical attribute, our minds, or the mental attribute, and our emotions, or the emotional attribute.

The physical attribute is a given. The fact that most, if not all, athletic records are held by males proves that males are just built to be stronger and faster. Look at (http://records.unitarium.com...) if you need additional proof.

The mental attribute is also pretty simple. Men have higher IQs on average (http://www.psychologytoday.com...). Please read past the first line, which says "They aren't." IQ, which measures potential to learn by testing for problem-solving abilities, attention retention, multi-tasking capabilities, and pattern-finding capacity, among others, is directly correlated to one's intelligence. If that isn't enough, philosophy, mathematics, science, medicine and all of the important building blocks of modern society were created by men. If you are still unconvinced, look at inventions. The computer you're using, the electricity running through your house, the car you drive, the cellphone in your pocket, the desk you sit at, the pencil you write with and even the paper you write on were invented by men. Comparing the contributions that men made to those that women made reveals that women have made almost no significant contributions in the history of man.

Finally, the emotional attribute, which will be defined as being in a healthy state of mind. This is a much harder point to debate, so please bare with me. Mental health is defined as one's abilities to enjoy life, persevere through problems and cope with stress. For starters, women have twice the chance of getting depression (http://www.nytimes.com...) which obviously hinders one's ability to enjoy life. Women also seem to be less willing to persevere through problems as 75% of divorces are initiated by women (http://parentalalienationcanada.blogspot.com...). Also, coping with the stress of a divorce seems to be too much to handle. Not only are single-woman-parents 2.5 times as likely to abuse or kill their children (same source as last time), but also are more likely to rely completely on child support (46.9% vs. 26.9%) and less likely to pay support to a custodial father (20.0% vs. 61.0%) (http://www.mens-rights.net...). Finally, to wrap it all up, I will point out that psychological problems often create three common health problems: eating disorders, low self-esteem, and depression, all of which are higher in females than males (http://www.apa.org...).

In conclusion, since males are physically, mentally, and emotionally superior, they are superior.
FREEDO

Con

INTRODUCTION

I thank my opponent for instigating this interesting debate and I welcome him to the site and his first debate.

To clarify, though my personal taste may say that woman are better than man, the burden that I have in this debate is not to substantiate that woman are better, only that men are not.

REBUTTAL

My opponent split his arguments based on three attributes, "physical, mental and emotional". I will address them continued along this line.

a. physical

Pro asserts that because men hold more athletic records, they are physically superior.

My counter-arguments is:

1. That female physicality is responsible for the reproduction and nursing of the species.

2. That this characteristic has more value than any athletic dominance present in males.

The survival of the species has had a level of dependence on the physical abilities of men. But this ability has both secondary and temporary value in comparison with the physical abilities of women in the contextual realm of human survival. Men have largely been responsible for the need of hunting in our ancestral past and even in current primitive societies. But if a civilization were required to make a choice between it's ability to hunt and it's ability to reproduce and nurse, the superior choice becomes obvious. Furthermore, once a civilization has become fully developed, the need for hunt no longer applies, unlike reproduction and nursing.

Your argument has been negated.

b. mental

Pro asserts that because men have higher IQs than women, they are mentally superior.

My counter-argument is:

1. Gender is not the deciding factor in male/female intelligence differences.

2. That, when the deciding factor is removed, women have a higher intelligence than men.

The myth that men are mentally superior than women is firmly rooted in the minds of many, due to many studies that appear to back up the claim. But further investigation shows that this is another tragic case of confusing correlation with causation. As the studies confirm, it is true that when the average man's IQs is compared with that of the average woman, the man's IQs is higher. But this is not an indicator that men have higher IQs because they are men. In-fact, other studies confirm that the actual factor being displayed here is that taller people have higher IQs, not men. Men, on average, are taller than women and tall people, on average, have higher IQs than short people. Not only do men no longer have higher IQs when the numbers are adjusted for height but it turns out that it is actually women who have the higher IQs. This effect is still seen when we adjust for health, physical attractiveness, age, race, education, and earnings as well [1]. This may be why we find that, on average, women have higher grades than men [2] and that more women become college graduates [3].

But, to be more thorough, I'd like to address the fact that IQ tests are not a way to completely understand one's intelligence. It is becoming more well understood that there is no one specific form of intelligence, that there is a wide variety of different cognitive abilities and they are not as strongly correlated as the reasoning behind IQ tests would seem to suggest [4]. IQ tests focus entirely on logical-mathematical skills, only one aspect of intelligence. There is also creative, musical-artistic, kinesthetic, spatial, linguistic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, factual, multi-attentive and many, many more. In-fact, women are superior to men in many of these aspects. On musical-artistic, it seems females tend to be better musicians. You may personally disagree with that but Facebook charts show that all of the top liked musicians are female [5]. Furthermore, there are really only two kind of people who become fashion designers and decorators, women and gay men, a job which requires a high degree of creativity and artistic thinking [6]. On linguistics, women are shown to use more of their brain for language skills than man, particularly in the way that men's language skills are more right-brain dominated whereas woman use both sides of the brain to a larger degree [7]. Furthermore, the parts of the brain which control linguistic reasoning are observed to be proportionally larger in women than in men [8]. This may be why women are more adapt at learning a second language than men [9]. On interpersonal and intrapersonal, women are shown to have a higher EI score, emotional intelligence, than men [10]. The last thing that I would like to bring up for now is multi-tasking skills, which scientific research, as well as common understanding, suggests that women are more adept at [11].

Your argument has been negated.

c. emotional

Pro asserts that because women have more depression and stress, they are less mentally healthy than men.

My counter-argument:

1. Men and women express negative emotion differently.

2. The expressions of negative emotion in men are more dangerous to society than those of women.

3. Men are extremely violent in comparison with women.

It is observed that men are inclined to becoming angry whereas women are inclined to becoming sad [12]. These are two different expressions of stress and there is nothing to suggest that women are particularly under anymore of it when this is taken into account. Furthermore, the expression of angry has far more potential for inflicting harm than does sadness, especially when combined with man's more innate violent nature.

The violent nature in men becomes apparent when reflected in these statistics:

88% of homicides are committed by men. 93.5% for multiple homicides [13].

99% of rape is committed by men [14].

80% of the United States military(similar to most other nations) is made up of men [15].

This is understandable, since, as I pointed out earlier, men were made so adept at hunting whereas women would nurture the children. However, it points, quite unavoidably, to the fact that women have extremely better emotional health. After-all, by what other standard should we measure mental health than it's affect on the rest of society? A mental state that has killed so many and causes so much suffering would not be considered healthy by my own standards I hope not by yours.

Your argument has been negated.

CONCLUSION

I have negated all my opponent's arguments and have consequentially established, in fulfillment of my burden in this debate, not only that men are not superior to women but also, in going beyond my call of duty, with reasonable and vast substantiation that women are, in-fact, the superior gender.

I rest my case for now I turn over the floor to Pro.

SOURCES

1. http://www.psychologytoday.com...
2. http://www.bbc.co.uk...
3. http://www.nytimes.com...
4. http://www.miresearch.org...
5. http://www.likescale.com...
6. http://ww2.prospects.ac.uk...
7. http://brain.oxfordjournals.org...
8. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
9. http://www.aclacaal.org...
10. http://www.investigacion-psicopedagogica.org...
11. http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
12. http://www.jiskha.com...
13. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov...
14. http://healthcenter.ucsc.edu...
15. http://usmilitary.about.com...
Debate Round No. 2
igaryoak

Pro

I thank my opponent as well, and as I am still unfamiliar as to the workings of debate and this website, excuse me for my relatively inexperienced debate style and etiquette.

A. Physical

My opponent insists that reproduction and nursing are female components that make females physically superior to males.

Reproduction is as dependent on males as it is on females. Females are unable to inseminate themselves. Reproduction is not something that can be done with only one gender (at least when dealing with the human species). Therefore, for the intents of reproduction, males and females are equal. To address nursing, fathers are as important if not more important that mothers, not necessarily in nursing, but rather, the growth of the child. Children that grow up in fatherless homes are five times more likely to commit suicide, nine times more likely to drop out of school, 10 times more likely to abuse substances, and finally 20 times more likely to end up in prison [1]. Since my opponent's counterarguments have been negated and my argument about athletic records still holds, males are physically superior to females.

B. Mental

My opponent makes three claims:

1. The IQ difference can be attributed to height differences

2. Females get higher grades than males.

3. IQ tests cannot possibly test for all kinds of intelligence.

Whether or not the IQ difference is based on height is not the matter. Males are, on average, taller than females. Therefore, males have, on average, a higher IQ. I am not debating that a male of the same height as a female is superior, but rather that males, in general, are superior.

If my opponent says that IQ tests cannot measure intelligence, how can he make the assumption that grades can measure intelligence? Grades measure how smart a person is, not intelligence. Grades measure a person's knowledge pool, not one's capability to learn. Grades test nothing more than whether a person pays attention and studies; a less intelligent person can get higher grades than a more intelligent person if he/she studies more.

I understand that there many types of intelligence and because Facebook "Likes" shouldn't really be a basis of argument, take a look into history. My opponent bring up musical and artistic intelligence. Can you name three famous female composers in history off the top of your head? How about three famous female artists? Now try to name three famous male composers or male artists. The same goes for the various fields of intelligence. More famous male writers, poets, psychologists, philosophers, mathematicians, scientists, inventors, rulers, music players, etc. exist throughout history.

Which brings me to my final point, my opponent did not address the second half of my argument, which begs the question, if women were superior to men, why are the contributions made by women so insignificant compared to those made by men?

Seeing as the counterarguments of my opponent have been negated, I believe my argument still stands.

C. Emotional

My opponent claims that men are more violent and, in turn, are more emotionally unstable.

The rape statistic is a very skewed one. Even if women wanted to commit sexual assault, it would be a lot more difficult for a woman to rape a man. That is a very unfair comparison. As for the military statistic, there are many reasons why there are more men in the military. I could claim that men are more patriotic, for my opponent presented no evidence stating that enlistment into the military has anything to do with violence.
It seems as if men are a lot more violent than women, but this is due to the media. Surprisingly, more than 40% of domestic violence victims are male [2], meaning the violence towards partners are close to even. Even more shockingly, a single mother is 33 times more likely to abuse their child and 73 times more likely to kill their child [3]. So men may commit more homicides, but women are about as violent as males, especially towards children.
But this is all besides the point. Even if I were to accept that males are much more violent than females, it is merely a red herring, for violence proves nothing. Emotional stability is defined as the steadiness of mood and the ability to withstand minor setbacks, failures, and difficulties [4]. Women are both less likely to have a steady mood [5] and are more likely to become stressed [6]. Violent or not, according to the definition, women are less emotionally stable than men.

Conclusion

I have found flaws in my opponents counter-arguments, which keep my arguments standing. Seeing as males are still superior physically, mentally, and emotionally, males are still superior to females.

The floor is now yours, Con.

Sources

1. http://www.deltabravo.net...
2. http://www.guardian.co.uk...
3. Marriage, the Safest Place for Women and Children by Patrick F. Fagan and Kirk A. Johnson
4. http://www.ucc.uconn.edu...
5. http://www.mood-swings.net...
6. http://www.naturalnews.com...
FREEDO

Con

REBUTTAL 2

a. Physical

Pro asserts that men and women are equally responsible for reproduction and thus his athletic ability argument still stands.

My counter-argument:

1. It is false that men are equally responsible for reproduction as women.

2. Women are healthier and live longer than men.

Males do not play the same part in reproduction as females. Men and women are equally needed for conception but it is only the woman who is actually responsible for reproduction. Men do not carry a fetus or give birth. Furthermore, they do not give suckle after the infant is born. Pro's reply to my argument regarding nursing, that a father is needed to raise a child, does not concern physical attributes.The woman is of a much more important role in the continuation of the species than the man and it is due to her physical attributes. This makes women physically superior to men.

It's irrelevant but I'd also like to add that I didn't have a father, I graduated from high school two years early and have no record of violent crime. The president of the United States, Barack Obama, also grew up without a father.

Even if men were as important to reproduction as women, it still does not prove than men are physically superior due to athletic ability. Women are physically superior in other ways as well, namely health. In the US, women have an average life-span of 79 years, compared to 72 years for men and in many countries the difference is as much as 10 years. Centenarians, those who live past 100 years, are essentially all women by a 9 to 1 margin [1]. There is a big difference, healthwise between men are women. Men are 5 times more likley to have heart disease and are also at greater risk for cancer, high blood-pressure and diabetes [2].

I have reaffirmed that Pro's agument is negated.

b. mental

Pro asserts that it does not matter that height is the factor causing one gender to score higher on IQ tests, since the fact remains that men are taller than women.
He asserts that grades measure knowledge, not intelligence.
He asserts that there have been more famous men throughout various feilds of intellgence than women.

My counter argument:

1. It does in fact matter that height is the deciding factor, rather than gender.

2. Pro did not confirm that grades do not show higher intelligence and he concedes that women have more knowledge than men.

3. Men have different motivations than women that account for different areas of success.

The fact that height is the deciding factor in intelligence difference between the genders and not the gender itself plays a great importance to the issue of which is mentally superior. Pro could justifiably add the argument that men are taller and thus score higher IQs to his arguments on physical ability but could not do so with mental ability. The fact that women score higher on IQ tests than men, when all proper adjustments are made, demonstrates that a woman's mind is superior to a man's mind in that subject. Statistcal observations on any matter whatsoever should never be concluded unless the proper adjustments have been made or else misconceptions will develope, as they have with the IQ/gender issue.

Pro did not make a sufficient case for why higher grades would not demonstrate a higher intelligence. This needs a source and more expanded argument. Further, he concedes that women, by having better grades, makes them knowledgeable. He also implies that women may study more than men. I say that this is a mentally superior attribute.

I concede that there are more famous men in many fields of intelligence than women. However, I assert that this is due to a different set of motivations. I also assert that these motivational differences do not make men superior. Men are much more likely to adopt obsessions. It is these obsessions that can compel them into fame in certain subjects. It can also get them into a load of trouble. This is why men are twice as likely to have substance abuse as women [3]. Men are much more likely to be compulsive gamblers [4]. Men have strong emotional impulses to conquer and over-power, which requires fixation. Sometimes this can be beneficial if the desire is channeled in a productive way such as excelling in a field of intelligence. But most of the time it is not. Most of time these masculine impulses are the bedrock for the majority of destructive human forces, namely in the form of violence. Women do not have these same impulses. Rather, feminine impulses are mostly centered around social construction. As I have already pointed out, women excel above men in their social intelligence. Women's more socially constructive tendencies are evidenced by their increased mental faculties for things like communication and empathy. Research suggests that men only use half their brain when listening and understanding what is being communicated, whereas women use both sides and have 4 times as many neurons between the two sides of the brain as men [5]. More research suggests that women have increased brain faculties for empathy, making it easier for them to understand the emotions of others [6]. These different motivations that women have cannot be channeled destructively as men's can. The motivations of men are two-sided, as women's are not.

I reaffirm that my opponent's argument is negated.

c. emotional

Pro asserts that women are as violent as men and that, regardless, violence is not a factor in emotional stability.

My counter-argument:

1. Men are significantly and indisputably more violent than women.

2. Violence is very important to the evaluation of emotional stability.

Pro makes the odd assertion that I did not make any link between the military and violence, as if I would need to. I will retort that the purpose that militaries exist is for the use of violence. It is estimated that around 137 million people died in only the two World Wars combined, a fraction of the total [7]. A toll almost single handedly initiated by men.

Pro brings up the fact that more children are killed by women. This can be accounted for by the fact that women tend to spend much more time at home with children than men.

Pro asserts that the degree of violence has nothing to do with emotional health. Medical professionals believe otherwise. Measurement of general emotional stability, devised by psychologists, is separated into 6 dimensions; Pessimism vs. Optimism, Apathy vs. Empathy, Dependence vs. Autonomy, Anxiety vs Calm and Aggression vs. Tolerance [8]. I have demonstrated that women are more empathetic and less aggressive than men. However, Pro claims that women have higher anxiety than men and that this factor alone is enough to account for the degree emotional stability. Isn't it curious then that men are 4 times as likely to commit suicide as women [9]?

I reaffirm that my opponents argument is negated.

SOURCES

1. http://www.news.harvard.edu...
2. http://www.ncahs.nsw.gov.au...
3. http://www.health-mind-body.com...
4. http://www.personalityresearch.org...
5. http://findarticles.com...
6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
7. http://en.wikipedia.org...
8. http://www.industrialpsychiatry.org...
9. http://www.sciencedaily.com...
Debate Round No. 3
igaryoak

Pro

Physical

Con claims that women are more important than men in reproduction. He also claims that women live longer and are healthier.

Both statements, however, are untrue. Males are as important as females in reproduction. Seeing as females are unable to reproduce without males and males are unable to reproduce without females, both are two necessary parts and therefore equally important. Removing one would make the other useless, reproduction-wise.

Although women live longer than men, that does not mean that they are healthier. "While women do tend to live longer than men, they are generally less healthy in their old age than men of the same age" [1]. If you want to bring up cancer, high-blood pressure and diabetes, women are more likely to get autoimmune diseases, Alzheimes disease, and osteoporosis [2][3]. And at such an age, people do not have much of a purpose. In almost every situation, people aren't remembered for what is done after retirement, but actually what they contribute before retirement. So if men are healthier, stronger and contribute more during their lifetime, then they are physically more capable. Therefore, physically superior.

Mental

Con states that height is a factor of importance and that addictions, rather than intelligence, is what makes males more successful.

Height is not an important factor. Males are taller than females. Taller people are more intelligent. That must mean that males are more intelligent than females. Height is a genetic factor in men. Using a hypothetical world is not valid because in the real world, men are taller and therefore undeniably more intelligent.

Women may get the better grades, but what does that amount to in the long run. If women get better grades and get into college more often, yet they don't contribute anything to mankind like men do, what's the point? And since you requested it, I posted the source of why grades are indicative of intelligence [4].

Women may be socially more intelligent, but what does that mean when, like you said, there are many more types of intelligence? Almost all mathematicians, scientists, inventors, writers, poets, screenwriters, directors, artists, musicians, politicians, rulers, doctors, philosophers, etc. are males. There is no comparison to women being socially more intelligent.

You bring up the fact that men are likely to become compulsive gamblers and substance abusers, but they are also more likely to excel at the aforementioned positions. Simply stated, men have made almost every single contribution to every single field. Every single pillar of society. If men are more likely to be handicapped by substance abuse or gambling addiction, why is it that men have made all the contributions?

Emotional

Firstly, I did not say armies have nothing to do with violence. I said that there are many reasons that there are more males in the army than females for reasons such as social stigma and the draft.

Secondly, my statistic does not say that mothers are more likely to abuse their children than fathers. It states that SINGLE mothers are more likely to abuse their children than SINGLE fathers. Spending more time at home and with the children cannot account for single parent homes.

Finally, con brought up six dimensions of emotional stability.
Pessimism vs. Optimism: My previous arguments have shown that women are more likely to become depressed than men. Therefore, women are more likely to be pessimistic.
Apathy vs. Empathy: I concede. Women are more empathetic than men.
Dependence vs. Autonomy: Women are more dependent than men not just psychologically, but genetically. Since the dawn of man, women had to take care of the children and so the instinct of dependence came upon women. Also, single mothers have a 61% chance of getting child support from fathers whereas 20% of fathers get child support from mothers [5]. Therefore, women are more dependent.
Anxiety Vs. Calm: Negative conceded on this point. Women are more anxious.
Aggression vs. Tolerance: I do not concede on this point, but it does not matter. Even with this point, the score stands at:
Three for men and Two for women.
Therefore, men are more emotionally stable. By the way, women are at least twice times more likely to attempt suicide [6]. They just don't succeed.

Conclusion
Since males are physically, mentally or emotionally superior (these three aspects making up humans), males are superior. All of the opponents points have been negated. I rest my case to the negative.

Sources
1. http://www.physorg.com...
2. http://www.slate.com...
3. http://www.everydayhealth.com...
4. http://www.associatedcontent.com...
5. http://www.mens-rights.net...
6. http://www.sciencedaily.com...
FREEDO

Con

Unfortunately, I will not be capable of accessing my computer before the clock wineds down, so I am posting this from my phone, forcing me to keep it short. I will condense my three sections into one conclusion.

CONCLUSION

On the argument over reproduction, Pro simply restates his previous assertion and does not disprove my counter-argument. That's the equivalent of making "you're wrong" an argument.

Pro does the same thing later in the argument over height and intelligence. I explained why controlling for height in IQ tests is a valuable tool for evaluating cognitive differences between genders and Pro gave no clear argument for how I could be wrong.

In the argument over health, Pro concedes that women live much longer than men and yet in the same breath claims they are less healthy than men, citing that they are more likely to have certain illnesses than men, which I had previously shown the opposite of. Nevermind the fact that the illnesses I showed are for more widespread and fatal than Pro's. This is basically saying " X type of car has better durability than Y type of car because, even though it breaks down sooner, it's more durable when it's working...in some ways and not in other ways".

In the argument over grades and intelligence, Pro reasserts that grades are not indicative of intelligence and this time posts a source, as I asked. The source he gives is frankly bull. The source is a very short opinion article which cites absolutely zero material evidence for the claim.

On the issue of single mothers being more likely to inflict child abuse than single fathers, the point is null until it can be shown that single mothers would do this because they are female. Just as in the IQ issue, it is subject to variables that have not been adjusted. Single mothers are more likely to be poor than single fathers due to continued discrimination in employers. Poorer homes are more likely to have child abuse. There are many other factors that could be the cause as well. The point is that nothing can be concluded from the correlation alone. I gave actual psychological reasons that men are obsevered to be so much more aggressive than women, unlike Pro for otherwise.

This concludes the debate. Pro has given a good shot for a first debate. I encourage him to work on appropriate sourcing. I encourge voters to vote based on the debating efficiency displayed here, not on personal opinion and to not vote at all if they have not properly read the debate.
Debate Round No. 4
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Gotwired 2 years ago
Gotwired
Pro should have suggested that, if con really wants to know which sex is physically more capable of reproduction than the other, the ability to pass genes to the next generation to as many offspring as possible is the only real meaningful factor if you are refering to only physical prowess. I don't think it is even worth mentioning which sex is more capable at that aspect. Nursing and upbringing are not primarily physical activities and should be classified under mental or emotional or another aspect; behavioral.

Also height is meaningless to include in a comparison of intelligence. It would be like arguing that people with no eyes don't necessarily have worse vision than people with eyes because if they had eyes, they might actually have had better vision than the people with eyes. Basically ignoring the general undeniable fact that people without eyes have weaker vision than people with eyes.

Of course, I don't agree that males are superior to females. Both sexes have attributes that they are generally good at and generally not so good at. What I would argue is that men are generally better than women at activities that our society finds desireable regardless of sex. They are also better at (or more prone to?) activities that our society finds undesireable, basically cancelling out any advantage gained from the desireable activities.
Posted by XDebatorX 4 years ago
XDebatorX
"That female physicality is responsible for the reproduction and nursing of the species"
"men were made so adept at hunting whereas women... "

This is one of the main duties of a woman. The main duty of the man is the breadwinner.
Posted by Riza_Rosette 4 years ago
Riza_Rosette
I wish I was able to vote! Con did a fantastic job!
Posted by Oryus 5 years ago
Oryus
hahaha wow- brain size =/= intelligence
I'm glad Con won this debate or I was gonna have to lose hope for this site.
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
(cont from RFD) Pro argued it better. Con's argument that height should not be considered is unconvincing because men ARE taller than women, and doing so suggests a hypothetical world whereas this debate is talking about whether men are superior in the real world. Pro also argues the point about achievements better as scientific and historical achievements are more important than the social ones that Con mentions.
Emotional: This was the hardest one. After reading both arguments I felt that both men and women can be emotional and express it in different ways such as violence, suicide etc. Since men = women emotionally, Con wins by default.
Overall, it was very close but Con does an effective job of showing men = women which was all he needed to do.
Posted by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
Ore_Ele, Wierdman never provides RFD's.
Posted by kogline 5 years ago
kogline
freedo i think you did a pretty good job on the debate(you too, prof oak), however i have an issue with your argument about height/intelligence. if the average height of males is large enough to cause the avg intelligence of males to be higher than females then how do you justify removing this factor to support your claim?

im guessing that the increased height has something to do with increased brain mass, so you would be arguing that if males had smaller brains they would be dumber, but then couldn't pro turn around and say that if females had less neural connections males would be smarter?

tldr: if you correct for avg male brain size being bigger, why not correct for avg female having more neural connections.
Posted by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
Weirdman, please tell me you are going to provide more of an FRD than that.
Posted by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
RFD continued.

For Mental, Con showed conflicting evidence that Pro was never able to properly address. This left the mental section as "inconclusive" with then defaults to con (since pro has to prove). The same goes with the Emotional section, though I would say it was definiately leaning to con, it still falls as "inconclusive" which goes to con.
Posted by Raisor 5 years ago
Raisor
I havent read through the whole debate so I will refrain from judging. But a few facts in favor of Con:

Women/girls often perform better on standardized tests than males.

Women have a longer life expectancy and are more resistant to diseases. In general the survival rate of female infants is slightly larger than male infants (though the odds of conceiving a male are slightly higher).
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Dylip 3 years ago
Dylip
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: It's pathetic for anyone to think males are superior to women.
Vote Placed by Torvald 4 years ago
Torvald
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Instigator made generally erroneous claims based on skewed evidence and personal bias, with little legitimate evidence and faulty logic. Con successfully destroyed him in the debate, though very politely. Spelling and grammar is a tie, since both were flawed. Number of reliable sources is self-explanatory. Pro has been demolished in his own debate.
Vote Placed by mariahjane 4 years ago
mariahjane
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: More convincing arguments to con by disproving all of pros points. No one is better than another.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering Weirdman
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Physical: Men are stronger and faster but women actually give birth. Women live longer but men are healthier. Overall men = women. Since that was all Con had to prove, he wins the physical argument. Pro's argument about men being needed for reproduction didn't adequately address Con's argument because the core of this point was physical strength. Mental: Pro showed that men are taller and smarter. I personally think this is BS but both debaters accepted it to be true and (cont in comments)
Vote Placed by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Good debate. Physical: In terms of capability, men are superior, but women live longer. I give a tie. Mental: Cons case was far better stated and supported. Point to Con. Emotional: Women may be less emotionally stable, but mens inability to their control violent behavior wins this argument. Point to Con. 2-0-1 on the 3 aspects of this debate gives Con the most convincing argument. Although the score does not reflect it, Pro really hung in there for his first debate against a tough opponent.
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: igaryoak made a valiant attempt but could not prove Con's point that other variables must be considered in determining women's and men's relative intelligences...Con brought up height, the importance of women's physicality in reproduction, and difference in emotional intelligence that Pro could not refute entirely.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 5 years ago
RoyLatham
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: This was bound to lead to controversy over what is "better." Pro did not met the burden of proof hat his idea of "better" was correct. It was an interesting and insightful debate. I think Pro could have won with more careful tuning of the resolution. Con missed some superior attributes of women, I think. Being cuter counts. Pro's demand to "bare with me" loses S&G. I ain't taken my clothes off for no debate. Con risked losing conduct for condescention, but was within bounds.
Vote Placed by wierdman 5 years ago
wierdman
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: ...
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 5 years ago
Ore_Ele
igaryoakFREEDOTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:05 
Reasons for voting decision: This was a fun and interesting debate to read. I'm sorry that Freedo was unable to post his last round from a computer. For the three sections, P, M, E, Women won out on P, and tied for M and E. Pro said that simply because men and women are dependent on each other, they are equally important. This is a fallacy, since my engine and spark plugs are dependent on each other to keep the car running, but they are not worth the same. CONT.