The Instigator
Cobalt14
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
WhyAbhorReality
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Microagressions and safe spaces

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 1 vote the winner is...
Cobalt14
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/31/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 722 times Debate No: 101608
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

Cobalt14

Con

I am looking for someone who would like to debate that microagressions are a real issue and one that requires "safe spaces" in places like collage campuses. This person should be prepared to argue what qualifies as a microagression, how and why they are a real issue, and what the consequences of a microagressive statement might be.The first round of the debate will be used to explain our side of the debate, the second round will be used for a rebuttal, and the third round should be used to reply to the rebuttal as well as pose questions for the voting audience of this debate to ponder before taking a stance. Use your first spot to claim that you will participate.
WhyAbhorReality

Pro

I'm eager for debates and already taken on 2 difficult arguments so why not another!

My argument is in favor of a wider acceptance and understanding of the definition of microaggression and their negative effects on society, culture and individual peoples lives.

Due to the unclear definition of who and what qualifies as someone who has a "safe space", my argument will be based around discrediting their existence, and demonstrating that we all have our own variation on "safe spaces" whether we realize that or not.

Finally, I will also be arguing in favor of Political Correctness, something I never thought I would do, although I fully acknowledge how this can and is taken too far in some circles, and will offer arguments to why it goes too far, how some of the fault can be blamed on not acknowledging their concerns, and that the extreme ideology of a few does not define political correctness or negate the important role it has.

I don't know if I should wish you luck or me! =P
Debate Round No. 1
Cobalt14

Con

First off, the general definition of a microagression is "the casual degradation of any marginalized group". This leads to many questions and claims about free speech and what we have the right to do.

Claims:
1. Microaggressions and political correctness is far overdone if a real issue at all.
2. Not only do we as citizens and people within a democracy have the right to share out opinions, but also the duty to share them as differing views will strengthen the goals of a society and a nation.
3. Calling something a microagression and claiming that it shouldn't be said is a violation of the 1st amendment because it limits the freedom of speech of others.

If something as small as saying "God bless" can be offensive, and therefore a microagression, our society has become too "politically correct" and doesn't value freedom of speech.

Please see the following videos for explanation of my argument.

https://www.youtube.com...
https://www.youtube.com...
WhyAbhorReality

Pro

I believe you have offered enough evidence to argue why they are important on your own.

"the casual degradation of any marginalized group". This leads to many questions and claims about free speech and what we have the right to do.
See [2. and 3] from the Claims.

If your idea of free speech involves "the casual degradation of any marginalized group" by using microaggressions, you are therefore limiting that group from having their right to the 1st amendment.

Also if the people that are speaking about their concerns about microaggressions or the ones who are afflicted from their use are people that you do not like, agree with, or allow their voice to be heard then you are doing so from your own "safe space".
Different people are offended by different things and that keeps changing so the problem should be with the constitution as it can't accommodate for vast political divides and cultures. PC exists to allow people the right to express their beliefs and not be attacked for doing so
Debate Round No. 2
Cobalt14

Con

Where you are wrong is your claim that my free speech can somehow limit yours. I am arguing that everyone should have the right to share his or her opinion, and that everyone who hears it has the right to decide how seriously it should be taken. I believe that society should rid itself of the idea of a "microaggresion". If something says anything, it could potentially offend someone. It is up to the offended person whether or not to accept this statement.

Your last paragraph does not make sense; the constitution doesn"t have to "accommodate" for anyone; everyone has freedom of speech.

I am in no way supporting bullying. I am saying that everyone has the freedom to say what he or she think, and likewise, everyone has the freedom to accept what others say or decide that it is irrelevant or untrue. However, if we as a society are going to limit what people can say because there is a chance that it offended someone, we are limiting their freedom of speech, and doing them a disservice.
WhyAbhorReality

Pro

http://www.apa.org...
We can see in that story people are often unaware of the damage their words have on people, and while it doesn't mean you can no longer say it, they are trying to raise awareness of why you probably shouldn't if you were aware of the harm it causes.
Microaggression definition first came about through the study of racism and the slurs people use without noticing in some cultures. You may think it is ok, but to someone not accustomed to your culture you could be found very insulting. You are free to continue. The awareness is so hopefully you wouldn't want to.
It can also backfire on liberals also. Many liberals are in "safe spaces" that allow them to think change can happen without problem and don't care to understand why it has problems, they are more female based and amass a cult following PC male crowd.
This is what South Park parodied as "P*ssy Crushing".
Remember "P*ssy" is now PC, Donald Trump and the left said so.
Debate Round No. 3
Cobalt14

Con

In conclusion, the concept of a penalty for a "microagression" is absurd. This term is used to describe lines or sayings that overly sensitive individuals find offensive. I am in no way saying that people should slander each other, but I believe that each person has the right to the freedom of speech. in opposition to my opponent, I do not believe that the term microagression to describe something is a mode of bringing awareness to an issue, but rather a way to limit people from saying things that certain groups may not want to hear. I believe that political correctness is overdone, and that the terms "microagression" and "safe space" should not exist. My arguments are in favor of free speech for all as well as the idea that each person has not only the ability but the right to choose whether a statement is worth their time. Everyone should have the right to share their opinion and everyone also has the right to determine how valid the opinions of others are to them.
WhyAbhorReality

Pro

I think the definition of microaggressions accounts for a number of words or expressions that people may use in their everyday lives which hurt people inadvertently, this was found with scientific studies and a new word definition was coined for it, showing it is a real issue.
The term "safe space" is applicable to anybody who doesn't associate themselves with any other group of person, which can account for anybody. This term I believe is useless. However using one as an excuse to prevent someones right to free speech is not a good thing I can agree. This isn't something everybody does though, and are only the actions of a few that get highlighted in the media, which is also morally questionable.
I think microaggressions also can count for a lot more, such as the effects on an individuals lives. More than enough study has shown the psychological trauma victims of bullying at any age, more specifically at a young age to be more than enough proof for people to know not to.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
I need a safe space from Pro's aggressive comment!
Posted by WhyAbhorReality 1 year ago
WhyAbhorReality
I can see now why this site is not very popular. Good luck fixing your fucked up society with ignorance and intolerance.
Posted by WhyAbhorReality 1 year ago
WhyAbhorReality
1000 words is very limiting, would you be willing to go into another debate if this is tied?
Posted by Cobalt14 1 year ago
Cobalt14
WhyAbhorReality

I think you understand and probably agree with my point of view. I believe that political correctness has been taken to far, and that we as a society need to be less worried about offending others with every little thing that is ever said. I would support the idea that political correctness has gone way to far (or maybe that the concept of it in itself is extreme and unnecessary). However, if I am wrong and you see "microagresssions", political correctness, and safe spaces as necessary, please let us all know and consider taking this debate.
Posted by WhyAbhorReality 1 year ago
WhyAbhorReality
I will argue for the importance of acknowledging the issues of microaggression, and that young people in particular should be protected from them on college campuses and in schools. However, "safe spaces" and political correctness can be taken too far, so if we are talking about an eric cartman definition of "safe space" then I can't argue that.
Posted by Phenenas 1 year ago
Phenenas
What the hell is a microaggression?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
Cobalt14WhyAbhorRealityTied
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:30