The Instigator
youssefkv
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Stephen_Hawkins
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Men are physically superior to Women.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Stephen_Hawkins
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/24/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,845 times Debate No: 30639
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (13)
Votes (2)

 

youssefkv

Pro

I believe that women are physically inferior to men because they are biologically born weaker. This can be seen in sports as well as in any mundane workplace.

Women are usually more languorous when it comes to the workplace as their body is not resolute enough to hold them throughout the day. Certain partisans may agree to a point that they are the better gender as they are tired from after work duties as their reverence is questioned everyday at home. I believe that they actually work as hard as men.

When a man returns to his home he is confronted with the duties of not only the rest of his work, but also the stodgy effects of trying to fix every single nook and cranny in the home. In any modern household accidents are bound to happen and with the man too busy mollifying the woman trying to relieve himself from the pains of a women crying all night long, he also considers the fact that he is the one that will clean up afterwards. Finding a balance between these two points is not easy as a man must work to also show a sense of elation on his face in fear of his house being torn apart by the lack of coherence among his wife and children.

While a woman's only worries are whether she "remembered to turn off the oven" or "put the clothes out to dry" these acquiescent women were meant to be subservient as they are for they are truly physically incapable of performing the audacious tasks demanded daily from a man.

The paramount example demonstrating society's acceptance of this fact is the olympics. In all sports, with no exception, men beat out women's world records superlatively. This is because men are built to be the load bearers of the human race. They were built to be the intrepid warriors protecting the meeker minority, and if they see their troubles as too much, may they know that all they endure is merely a dearth of what the men have to face everyday of their lives.
Stephen_Hawkins

Con

Are women worse physically than men? No, and that is due to one simple word: pregnancy. This ability trumps the minor physical advantages men have, to the extent that it is perfectly balanced. Women are necessary for the race to continue, and their ability to procreate makes women physically essential to society, unlike men.

The majority of my opponent's argument is sexist drivel, such as man returning to home to fix up the house. Simply put, the evidence of this comes down to outdated, naive and childish stereotypes which have no bearing to reality. There are some cases where it is true man does most of the work, and just as many cases where women do most of the work: it's not relevant.

Moreover, women repeatedly work and work as self-sufficient women in the large industry, and as such claiming things as stereotypically naive and frankly comically idiotic as "While a woman's only worries are whether she "remembered to turn off the oven" doesn't bear weight.

In short, the minor advantages men have in the department of physical power does not create an impassable divide to woman, and the female ability to procreate gives women an extreme physical power which deserves recognition as being more important.
Debate Round No. 1
youssefkv

Pro

Women are physically inferior to men for one simple reason: the menstrual cycle. It is well know that women lose about half a litre of blood during their period. This creates a physical abatement of their energy depriving them of some of the many physical advantages men are adorned with. Studies have shown my point is true as shown by a

Although my opponent has gone completely off-topic, attacking me personally which is a sign of prostration to moral and civilized talk, I will gladly answer him only to justify my point furthermore. My "sexist drivel" is not nonsense as it is based on purely naive and childish stereotypes as I have two infallible truth behind me science and history.

History does not lie, over a course of 80,000 years since the dawn of civilization a patriarchal structure can be seen across all civilizations. The most prominent exception might lie with the Minoan civilization which saw a high priestess as its ruler until its unruly demise due to misguided actions by the high priestess. The reason men make good leaders is their physical dominance over women. Simply put if women were physically superior they would be the ones calling the shots. Survival of the fittest.

Now scientifically speaking men can withstand more pain than women which is why they are physically superior as, again, they are genetically built to withstand more pain. Research shows that women have more pain receptors on their skin thus making them feel pain differently, more intensely. The protein GIRK2 is a protein that affects the pain threshold of a human being among other things. Studies have shown that women have more of this protein thus making them feel more pain. It can even lead to a women needing double the amount of painkillers than a man, just to allay their aches.

Thus, through men's higher pain threshold, men are clearly capable of withstanding more pain as proven not by any "naive or childish" stereotypes as per my opponent's request, but by pure hard facts.
Stephen_Hawkins

Con

My opponent claims I misrepresent him by saying all societies have been patriarchal since the "dawn of time", except there's masses of simple falsehoods regarding this: many of the Native American Tribes, such as the Hopi and the Iroquois tribes all were matriarchal in nature. Moreover, modern societies in the west are explicitly androgynous and based on equality in the eyes of the law and equality of opportunity. His Minoan example is comical in fact as all he is correct the Minoan civilisation was matriarchal, but it fell when an expansionist aggressive nation effectively wiped out the nation, after natural disasters ruining the country's success.

Also, my opponent's claims about women needing more painkillers, or being able to take less pain, is again simply fictitiously making claims up. This is not grounded at all in fact, and simply has no reason to be true. Moreover, the fact women feel pain more acutely is a benefit, not a loss. We grow pain receptors in our body to tell us when something is wrong. Thus, having more pain receptors makes women better off, not worse.

And finally, and most importantly, my opponent completely ignored my case, which is pregnancy makes women just as if not superior in a physical aspect to men.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
youssefkv

Pro

In regards to your argument concerning pregnancy I have to give you this that the same article that has proven the GIRK2 protein in women states that during pregnancy it is true a woman is more capable of withstanding pain, only until the baby arrives.

Now back to my main argument which is "MEN ARE PHYSICALLY SUPERIOR THAN WOMEN" men are physically superior because of their higher pain tolerance as stated not by me but by any google search containing "GIRK2 women men protein" my point is not who is more important in society as that is a very debatable issue to be opened on a new debate i would be happy to have with you Ms. Stephen hawking.

Concerning the fact that you ignorantly refuted my painkiller claim simply because it may have seemed as a deduction not a fact is offensive which is why i implore you to try to educate yourself and research a little bit more before you speak because the more i research the more i solidify my argument.
And, because i see you have difficulty researching yourself i took the liberty of pasting a link containing a neutral point of view by simply saying test results, which backs up my claim word by word:

http://www.scientificamerican.com...

and again i plead you focus on my statement Ms. Hawkins, I stated why men are physically superior not why they are better leaders, better fathers or anything else this is not of my concern.
Stephen_Hawkins

Con

Firstly, you seem to lack the fundamental ability to check my argument: a physical benefit of women is pregnancy. This is extremely important; moreso than being slgihtly stronger. I made this explicit, and I implore you to actually address it. Instead, you basically help my case saying that women become better able to handle pain during pregnancy than men normally.

However, there is a massive difference between pain acuteness and ability to handle pain. A superior human can feel pain more acutely, so they know where the problem is in their body: that's why we have pain receptors. Without them, we wouldn't recognise danger. This is a benefit. Moreover, the source does not prove that women are less able to deal with the pain. As women can deal with the pain just as well, then it makes them physically equal.

Moreover, I don't understand your menstrual nature about the topic. You bring up the Minoan civilisation and how "men make good leaders", then criticise me for talking about "why they are better leaders". You simply cannot make your mind up, can you?

Also, I am not a woman. How many women are called "Stephen"? And you criticise my researching skill...
Debate Round No. 4
youssefkv

Pro

This is getting really fun.
This argument is getting a bit off-topic, opening into things that have no relation to our main topic so I took the liberty of organizing the arguments under these titles: With the one bold, italicized and underlined , to be debated.

Your Name: Your name is not my matter of debate. Reading again through your lines I simply misunderstood your definition of we (have pain receptors) as it was ambiguous. My name "Ms. Stephen" was simply a jab at that. Now, Mr. Stephen can we continue?

Which make better leaders: Now, I saw this argument being diverted to another direction (which make better leaders) so I simply ignored it but did not overlook it because my main argument was meant to be which are more powerful physically .

My argument:

Pregnancy*:
I have researched across many articles all of them state that during labor their pain threshold is higher allowing them to withstand the pain intensive labor. So yes women are stronger during labor (I'm sorry if I wsnt clear enough). Now stronger is a very loaded word as it comes with a backstory. it has been determined (and will be will be elaboated upon) that women already have a weaker pain threshold than men. We must take care when saying women are stronger than men during labor as no basis has been given by neither you nor anyone else on that.

"Feel pain more acutely": Women feel more pain, and with their lower threshold it is actually detrimental to feel pain. This argument is an extraneous detail that should not be considered as it is one with no scientific evidence or proof (so you don't become a smart-a$$: my article states that women feel more pain, not that this is superior in any way) deriving any conclusion from this other than the ones already in the articles is simply extraneous to my point.

Menstrual Cycle: Simply put.Women lose a lot of blood (0.5 litres). Losing blood makes you weak. Women are generally weaker.

The GIRK2 Protein:
Here is my argument clean and simple: If you read my link thoroughly it states the pain threshold for women is lower, which means they are capable of handling less pain. This has nothing to do with their ability to feel pain which is the same across both genders. This is very important as you seem to have misread the article. It states that across different species they found that mice with the inability to produce this protein had lower pain threshold. This protein is not as abundant in women as it is in men. It also stated that these same "mutant" mice could not respond to morphine or similar painkillers again adressing my previous statement

In conclusion, this shouldn't even be a matter of debate for one reason. It has been physically proven with science across multiple tests. The whole point of the experiment was to see which gender had a higher pain threshold. To prove my point i have compiled all the links of every single article backing up my claim that Men have higher pain threshold.
http://dft.ba...
http://dft.ba...
http://dft.ba...
Stephen_Hawkins

Con

My Name

If PRO just wanted to hook up, he could've just said.

My argument

My argument was pregnancy, a physical factor, is the single overwhelming factor which makes women more important. PRO hasn't managed to read this, possibly due to being abused as a child by a sheep, or not understanding my case. In case of the latter, we should vote against him. In case of the former, we should vote against him, even though he had a woolly childhood. I mean, it's just baa-d luck. No need to be sheepish.

My Opponent's case

The point on pregnancy seems to be my opponent boxing his shadow: he seems to still be claiming that women are stronger during labour.

Women feeling pain more acutely is an advantage, again. If we couldn't feel ourself being hit, we couldn't register how much damage the blows did, and act accordingly. If we didn't feel pain, we'd fight in foolish situations. Stronger pain receptors firstly make us more likely to flee from danger and take less stupid risks, and secondly it makes us more empathetic, sympathetic, and all-around nicer persons.

From here, the rest of the points are moot. The menstrual cycle is irrelevant, as it is a minor drawback to the massive benefit of pregnancy, and the GIRK protein falls into my previous case. However, women respond better to such drugs as olanine, another painkiller, making the morphine point moot. But in general the pain thing is irrelevant.

To conclude, my opponent didn't address my case. Pregnancy makes women in general better physically. Moreover, the ability to feel pain makes women better physically. Nothing else needs to be said. My opponent's sources agree with me on the basic facts, which point to the irrefutible key aspect: women are physically no worse than men. Vote CON.
Debate Round No. 5
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Dann 3 years ago
Dann
Wait a cotton picking minute here, Hawking.

You said this: "Are women worse physically than men? No, and that is due to one simple word: pregnancy. This ability trumps the minor physical advantages men have, to the extent that it is perfectly balanced. Women are necessary for the race to continue, and their ability to procreate makes women physically essential to society, unlike men. "

In what society are men not physically essential to society in terms of procreation? Unless of course you are talking about the giant hairy women of the Amazon who reproduce asexually by photosynthesis?!?
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
"My argument was strictly who is PHYSICALLY STRONGER."

Your argument was certainly about that, but the resolution was about physical superiority, of which strength is only one aspect.
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
"...although at first it started as sexist drivel which is my weakest argument/round, if you read the rest..."

I read everything. My comment about sexist drivel on your part was specific to round #1. That was enough for me to award conduct to your opponent.

Good day.
Posted by youssefkv 3 years ago
youssefkv
And by the way i'm not the sexist "pig" that has been conveyed through the first round, the first round was just intended to stir up debate which, after trying boorishly i have my regrets towards.
In society i see women as equal to men, or else why would there be a female species to begin with. Females are crucial to our society without which no men would be here. But let me point that men are as equal in IMPORTANCE. My argument was strictly who is PHYSICALLY STRONGER.
Posted by youssefkv 3 years ago
youssefkv
wrichcirw , although at first it started as sexist drivel which is my weakest argument/round, if you read the rest you can see my solid points regarding the GIRK2 Protein and let me remind you, not all women will, or unfortunately can, get pregnant so you can't simply overgeneralize by saying that "women" are stronger than men because of their pregnancy as the only reason they are pregnant is because of men so as a women is weakened by pregnancy in almost all cases a man needs to be there to provide for her, but going into this topic in more details is not really answering who is physically STRONGER. May i also remind you women are pregnant 9 months of their lives which calculates to less than 1% of their entire life, after which they are weakened for an excessive amount which i highly doubt they are as effective during.
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
Hm. I will say upfront that I'm offended by how PRO argued his stance. His round #1 was indeed just sexist drivel. This is not a personal assessment, but an assessment of PRO's argument.

Regarding CON's point about pregnancy, the way I looked at it was if you had one man and 50 women, you could procreate much more effectively than if you had 50 men and one woman. In that sense, indeed, a woman's slight musculoskeletal differences are more than offset by the advantages conveyed by pregnancy. I will vote CON for arguments on this point. I will also give CON conduct for keeping overt sexism out of the debate.
Posted by tmar19652 3 years ago
tmar19652
Actually, your argument implied it was a key factor.
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 3 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
Point to any part of PRO's argument addressing my case that the ability to conceive is the key factor.
Posted by tmar19652 3 years ago
tmar19652
No, I interpreted their argument to explain my vote.
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 3 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
tmar, you realise inserting your own argument into someone else's mouth is basically making up who won or lost, right?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by wrichcirw 3 years ago
wrichcirw
youssefkvStephen_HawkinsTied
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 Checkmark1 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: see comment
Vote Placed by tmar19652 3 years ago
tmar19652
youssefkvStephen_HawkinsTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made a better argument that women are physically inferior to men. Con's pregnancy point is mute because both a man and a woman are required to make a child, and the man is not weakened for 9 months in doing so.