The Instigator
lovelife
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mirza
Con (against)
Winning
35 Points

Mirza is sexist and uses his religion as a shield

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 7 votes the winner is...
Mirza
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/19/2010 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,105 times Debate No: 13719
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (29)
Votes (7)

 

lovelife

Pro

Definitions-
Mirza- A member of the website debate.org
http://www.debate.org...

Sexist- Portraying one sex better than another, favoring one sex having more freedom than another, basing a persons worth or abilty on their gender rather than on their skill, or assigning gender roles according to sexes
http://www.google.com...

Religion-
A belief system usually consisting of one or more god, and/or an afterlife, with given rules on how one should live their life, in this case Islam.
http://www.merriam-webster.com...

Shield-
Something that absorbs attacks (or blame), so that the person yeilding the shield will not be harmed
http://www.google.com...

In this case, Mirza, attributes gender roles to each sex.
He also believes that women shouldd care for children and not work outside of the house because they are weaker and less capable, but more able to emotionally care for children. He believes that men should work because they are more physically capable.
When asserting such claims he forgets that not all women are emotional, or physically weak, and not all men are physically strong, or emotionally depraved.
He also forgets that not all work is physical, and not all of caring for children is emotional. You have to be physically strong, with high stamina in order to care for children properly, especially if you have multiple children.

He is using his religion as a shield in the sense that he quotes his holy book[s] to address why he feels a certain way about issues such as gender roles. By saying "It is my religion to think this way." he is deflecting any attack of sexism from himself and on his religion instead.

Mirza, and Islam are both sexist.

I await my opponent's argument and look forward to an interesting debate with him.
Mirza

Con

Thank you.

I accept the definition that sexism is equivalent to favoring one gender over another, and assigning unjustified roles to the genders, meaning that one gender is better off with the roles than the other gender.

-- Arguments and rebuttals --

First and foremost, I am neither sexist nor do I use my religion as a shield for my alleged sexism. Why would I use my religion as my shield? My religion is the most misunderstood in the world, and is attacked horribly in the media and from various people who have managed to write numerous deceitful books in order to wreck the good image of Islam. If I were to use anything as a shield for my "sexism," that would never be Islam. It only makes it worse for myself to use Islam as my "shield" for sexism because I will be confronted with far more opposition than if I merely used something else as my "shield." If I were an atheist, people would take it less seriously. I can use many other things as shields for my alleged sexism than Islam, because the religion is neither sexist, nor is it wise to use such a targeted religion to protect yourself from attacks.

As a matter of fact, whenever someone offends my religion, he offends me. I respect disagreement, but calling my religion sexist is the same as calling me sexist. I take it the same way, and maybe even more seriously, because my religion cannot change, but I can. Therefore, there is absolutely no wisdom behind using Islam as a shield for my supposed sexism. I choose to adhere to this religion because I find truth in it, and not because I find wisdom in hiding behind it, because there are no benefits from that.

Moving on, I do not deny that I believe in different roles of the genders. I believe that they are as equal as possible in terms of their qualities. The female is superior to the male in some aspects, and vice versa. How can this be a sexist claim? It is nonsense. Telling someone that he is sexist because he differentiates equally between the sexes, even though is is fully compatible with modern scientific research, is terrible. You will realize that psychologists, psychiatrists, doctors, etcetera, they all treat their patients differently, hereby by differentiating between the genders. For instance, what kind of an idiotic health care system would give birth control to men for free? Is this logical? No, it is horrendous. Such a system gives what fits to you, and birth control pills are not for men whatsoever (nor for male transsexuals, thank you very much). Therefore, there is nothing wrong with treating the genders differently, but justly. Women should not be treated better nor worse than men, and vice versa. Different treatment of genders is not sexism.

Sexism is, in fact, treating one gender "better" than the other, or being in possession of the view that one gender is superior to the other in general terms. I have never made such a claim. In fact, I have defended and will defend the good values of women. I think that women are to be respected and obeyed as parents more than men, they should be treated more kindly than men, and so forth. However, on the other side I think that men should be more respected when it comes to some other things, such as working. I believe that males should do hard physical work, not females. I think that a male who sits at home and washes clothes, while his wife is outside in a cold, rainy weather and doing hard work, is something outrageous, except if necessary. The man has more physical strength, and therefore he is entitled to hard work. The mother is more gentle and emotional, and she is more capable of raising the children and do work which does not ruin her. This way, both the male and the female are treated equally and justly. What is wrong with this? Nothing.

Furthermore, I am not saying "all" for any gender. I am generalizing because there is nothing wrong with that in this context. However, when it comes to something like hard physical work, there is no doubt that males - in general - are far more capable of doing it than females are. This is not about "all" but "most." Women, however, are better when it comes to emotions; they are better at expressing love and kindness than males. It is very important for children to be raised under a loving and caring environment, which is why I strongly advocate that parents spend the time necessary to raise their children properly. In order to have a well-functioning system for this, at least one parent should spend the time with children. In Finland, for instance, this is one of the reasons why the children are doing very well with education. After the mother gives birth, she spends quite a lot of time raising the child and disciplining him properly, but the father works.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com...

As can clearly be seen, both sexes have equal advantages and disadvantages. There is no doubt that treating them differently, but justly, is necessary. Just because I do it "morally" does not mean that I do it wrongly. Do you call a doctor sexist for refusing to treat a male who claims to have menstrual pain, while he does treat a woman who makes the same claim? Is this sexist? Not the least. It is natural to differentiate between the sexes, and I do that. However, I have never valued one more than the other in general terms. I believe - and so does science - that women are better at handling things through emotions (such as dealing with children), while men are better at handling hard physical work. While not "all" of each gender are this way, it does not matter; it is about general terms. That is how a moral system works. If you say that that the old woman has such and such a right, and the young woman has such and such a right, then we will have many problems. What is young? What is old? Is young being 55? Is old being 60? It would wreck a moral system. Therefore, it is better to speak in general terms.

However, I am not saying that women should not work. I never said this. I think that a woman should be very respected for being a teacher, doctor, etc. It helps a society and that is a good thing. But I think that the primary role of the woman should be to do work related to the home and the children, while the man should earn money and spend it on his wife and their children. That is to help reducing the risks of:

1. Divorce
2. Disputes over parental roles

What do couples nowadays fight over? They fight over whose income is spent most, who has raised children in such a bad way, who had responsibility for work, who had responsibility over the house, who should take care of the children, who should work, and so forth. This has lots of negative impacts on our societies. We see divorce rates exploding, mistreatment of spouses, and so forth. Is this what a society needs? No. When the couples have a moral system to follow, they will not fight over things which can be avoided. For instance, if both spouses follow the Islamic marital system, they will hardly fight over who is responsible for income, who is responsible for raising children, and so forth. Why? Because if they follow the system, there will be no disputes over such things.

Moreover, I never said that "It is my religion to think this way." I agree with my religion, which is why I follow it. Lastly, Islam is not sexist, nor has it ever been sexist. It is a religion which treats both genders justly, and always favors each in specific ways. Thank you.

[Qur'an 16:97] "Whoever works righteousness, man or woman, and has Faith, verily, to him will We give a new Life, a life that is good and pure and We will bestow on such their reward according to the best of their actions."

[Qur'an 31:14] "And We have enjoined on man (to be good) to his parents: in travail upon travail did his mother bear him, and in years twain was his weaning..."
Debate Round No. 1
lovelife

Pro

Opening
I would like to thank my opponent for his swift reply. I would also like to apologize for the character limits. I will provide my most basic argument, and a link to my more detailed rebuttal, in with my sources.
==========================================================================

Arguments
========================

My full list of arguments can be seen [1]
However my opponent has requested that I post my arguments on here, instead of just link to the blog.

My main stances can be outlined in the definitions I used last round, mostly including sexism.
Sexism, is anything from disallowing rights to someone on the basis of their sex, rather than on their capability.

My opponent argues against that saying that it would be ridiculous for a man to retrieve medical attention for female reproductive issues, such as birth control and menstrual pain. I will concede that in some cases, almost always medical, that taking one's sex into consideration is necessary. However, in social situations it should not be accepted that way. Women are not lesser than men, and men are not lesser than women.
Scientifically speaking they do have some differences, however a blanket rule cannot be made on that alone.

With the first source there are not huge differences. Both genders need to be aware of the risks. That said, men should also be aware that they are in fact at risk for breast cancer [5], if left untreated over 1,000 men in the U.S alone will die of breast cancer. Just because something is most often associated with one gender does not mean that exceptions should be ignored. No one should live in ignorance, not on how to socially treat other humans, and not about how to medically treat them. Everyone should be aware that every person is different and blanket statements should be used very rarely. Its not fair to deny that women may need treated for prostate cancer [8].

Now wouldn't you agree that you are more likely to find a woman that is unable to just stay at home, care for kids, cannot cook, etc, and a man that would rather stay at home and take control of that, then you will find a man with breast cancer?

The second link shows that women tend to be better at identifying emotions, so it shows that women should be valued over men in the workforce. Almost all jobs include dealing with people, and women on average are more likely to know how to talk to others, and how to identify their emotions to become better.

According to these sources it would stand to reason that women should work while men stay with children. Since men tend to be less emotional, they wont make decisions based on how much it hurts the child, but rather how much it will help them long term.
I however would not advocate that because I believe both parents are equally as important, in the work force, and raising the children.

I have never once seen anyone fight over whose income was spent the most, nor have I ever seen any one fight about who raised the children a certain way. The only thing I can present is about what has happened in -my- life. The closest thing to those arguments were if we had money to buy a laptop and a new wii, if we had enough money to pay the cell phone bill and the rent, if someone needed to get a second job and if so who, but none of those were real fights, just disputes. Also when someone takes offence because one of the children picked up on a habit a parent had, or even I have, such as being dramatic, screaming, not listening, blaming, or other disrespectful actions.

=======================================================================

Now I would also like to point out that in Islam women do not have equal rights, if any at all, and are thought of as lesser than men. [2] [3] [4]
I would also say that the Koran does call for respect towards one's mother, but that has no bearing on sexism, other than to prove itself further sexist.
""A man asked the Prophet: 'Whom should I honor most?' The Prophet replied: 'Your mother'. 'And who comes next?' asked the man. The Prophet replied: 'Your mother'. 'And who comes next?' asked the man. The Prophet replied: 'Your mother!'. 'And who comes next?' asked the man. The Prophet replied: 'Your father'" (Bukhari and Muslim). "
Now, wouldn't it stand to reason that both parents should be equally good, and equally honored/respected? Isn't it a bit sexist to say that your mother should be more honored than your father?

It is sexist if it favors one gender over another for no real reason. Sure she carried the child for nine months, but he might have been doing more for the child, like making room, buying baby specific things, putting in extra time at work to make enough money to support the extra mouth, or even teach the child more. Shouldn't an equal system be set up in which both husband and wife are equal to each other, with equal rights, equal say, equal treatment; both mother and father are equal parents, equally respected, and equally obeyed.
How is this system wrong?
How is my opponent's system not sexist?

=====================================

Now I would also like to note how things are done in Finland. My opponent made it appear as if Finland followed his system, but its really more socialist than that. A woman found out she was pregnant and both soon-to-be parents joined a group to learn more about how to care for the child, pick a place to give birth, and was assigned a midwife.
The mother took maternity leave for 21 weeks, including five that were before the birth, the father took three weeks off right after the birth.
'The family's second child, Iiris, was born when Freja was 2 years and four months old. The birth and benefits for the child were as before, with the exception that instead of the maternity pack the Tuuralas opted for the maternity grant and a higher rate of child allowance was paid for the second child.'
When one of the children are sick and unable to attend day care the husband looks after them, and the mother remains at work. [6]
Is that an immoral system now?

============================================

Again the blog doesn't really need to be addressed, it just has more of my points and more in depth, I only included it because I worked very hard on it, however I do believe I addressed all of the main points without it.

Sources
================
[1] http://www.blogger.com...
[2] http://sheikyermami.com...
[3] http://members.shaw.ca...
[4] http://infidelsarecool.com...
[5] http://ww5.komen.org...
[6] http://finland.fi...
[7] http://www.answering-islam.org...
[8] http://www.womenagainstprostatecancer.org...
=============================================
Closing
============================================

I thank my opponent for this debate once again, and I look forward to the next round :)
Mirza

Con

Thank you.

The link to the rest of the arguments does not work. Nonetheless, my opponent said, "Sexism, is anything from disallowing rights to someone on the basis of their sex, rather than on their capability." I can go along with this, and we will analyze how it works with my view on the sexes and their roles. Now, since my opponent said that some cases, taking one's sex into consideration is necessary. However, when I say this, I am sexist, my religion is sexist, I am an idiot, and so forth. How is my view different to that of my opponent's? You do take the right from men to have birth control pills, but naturally, there is nothing wrong with that. Similarly, when I say that men are stronger than women, there is nothing wrong with that. When I - based on this fact - say that "if" in "general terms," we had to pick between male workers and female workers, no matter what a job is about, then it is mostly correct to pick male workers, because they are stronger. Many jobs, and actually "most" jobs in many parts of the world, require fair strength, which men are superior to women in, without doubt.

However, I never said that women should not work. I think that their mental capabilities of raising children are far better than those of males, while males have physical capabilities which make it more easy for them to do hard work. In fact, I have no problem with both a male and a female working. Please notice this and remember it. I have no issue with that. In fact, I think that women should always seek knowledge and work as doctors, social helpers, teachers, etc. I encourage that. What I am saying is that "if" either the male or the female should work, then it should be the male. We should not mistake the entire world with the West. In Africa, Arab nations, etc., people do a lot of physical work.

Moving on, regarding women identifying emotions, I would say that it is true to an extent. However, even though that might be entirely true, then it does not negate the fact that men do far better with each other than with women, generally speaking. In fact, there is no doubt that many women report sexual harassment at the workplace, and most statistics show that the males are the criminals here. Is letting a woman have a job, risking to be harassed, better than to let man work, so as to reduce such risks by a great deal?

http://www.sexualharassmentlawfirms.com...

The statistics are clear. Do you prefer letting women be at risk at their workplace? I hope not. As a matter of fact, Islam does not stand for mixing of the sexes at workplace, except with limits. This helps reducing harassment among the two sexes. Again, there is no sexism. Moreover, my opponent aid that she never saw anyone fight about who raised the children a certain way. Clearly she has not experienced many cultures, and I can guarantee that people fight over this. It is not the main purpose of a fight between spouses, but it does get brought up. If a child becomes a criminal, the father might tell the mother, "That is what happens when his mother is with her friends and never stays home to take care of kids." This happens. In Islam, such fights are abhorrent, and should be prevented by all means, and the Islamic marital system helps with that.

Furthermore, I have very limited character space, and am unable to refute all the claims against Islam. The links are horribly biased, and I will respond with external refutations:

http://www.answering-christianity.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Dr. Zakir Naik / Women's Rights in Islam: YouTube.com --> watch?v=82TtOgKx2Qo

As for the honoring of one's mother, there is absolutely nothing sexist about it. Women like being complimented, and they like being honored. When a child honors his/her mother and makes her happy, it is one of the best gifts that a child can offer. Islam tells us to honor the mother, and that Paradise lies beneath her feet. It is such a beautiful call for honor over one's mother that calling such a good belief "sexist" is simply horribly. Is this what the world has come to? This is such a shame. In Islam, both parents should be obeyed, respected, and honored. But honoring one's mother is a first priority because that is one of the best gifts you can give her. The father can be satisfied if his son goes to the downtown with him, because males are not as emotionally-driven as females are. Again, there is nothing sexist about it. It is not about obeying your mother more, but about honoring her. A mother deals with difficulties for nine months, gives a painful birth, gives all her love to her child, and if her child does not honor her, it is as horrible as if he had killed her. It is a painful thought for mothers that her child neglects her. The father, however, has far better capabilities of dealing with that. There are good reasons why "a mother is a mother."

"How is this system wrong?"

I did not say that it is wrong, and thanks to my opponent for promoting the Islamic system. It is about the father earning money, and the father meeting the needs of the mother and their offspring.

"How is my opponent's system not sexist?"

Because "honoring" your mother more than your father is not sexist. You love them equally, respect them equally, treat them equally, etc., but honor your mother more. Again, my opponent uses the strategy of telling "this may happen" or "the father may..." It is simply nonsensical. It is about what is going on right now in "general terms," and what has been going on since mankind took the first step on this planet. Mothers, in general, deserve to be honored more than the fathers, but do not mistake honoring with treating.

As for the case in Finland, my opponent asks, "Is that an immoral system now?" No, it is not necessarily immoral. There is nothing wrong if the father and the mother both work, but the father comes earlier and takes care of the children. I have made it very clear. To conclude, there is nothing sexist in what Islam stands for. Having a good marriage is one of the most important things in life, and whoever follows the Islamic marital system properly will reduce the risk of marital calamities, and increase the chances of having a successful marriage.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
lovelife

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for this debate so far.

I do not know why the link didn't work, but moving on.
Okay there is a difference between how one's body works, and telling people what they are capable of just because of their sex. My main point was that if there is a chance of something, it should be considered, like breast cancer in males, it exists, it should be looked for just as much. That is comparable to gender roles, they are not always accurate so the best system would be to make sure before marriage that the positions that they cover are compatible. Whether the woman stays home, or works, whether the man stays home or works, whether they have sex often or not opposing sex drives is another issue that could and does lead to many problems in relationships), and many other factors without one being in control of the other, and without anyone being forced into a role that doesn't fit them.

Actually I would prefer women choose, choose to be at risk in a workplace, choose to work from home, or choose not to work if she is luckier than most and has that option.
No I have never seen parents fight over who raised the kids a certain way, most parents are intelligent enough to know that both are responsible for a child's upbringing, as well as any other people that were involved (aunts uncles, teachers, grandparents, even friends' parents in some cases)

"Women like to be complimented" I do not; not to the point of lies. I like the good to be acknowledged, as well as the bad, for me as well as other men and women.

If what you say about Islam is true then the mother should be respected because she gave birth, the father should be respected because he provides for the mother and the child. The same goes for honoring them.

Islam imposes gender roles, even though it is not true in all cases, or even most cases that I have seen.
Imposing gender roles is sexist, from my definitions in round one.
My opponent has not refuted it, but only explained the system more.
My opponent supports this.
My opponent and Islam are sexist.

And I would once again like to thank my opponent for this debate.
Mirza

Con

Thank you.

I think that my opponent misunderstands me, and I think that the readers might to the same, therefore I will explain my case once more. Islam does not say that women should not work. In fact, it is a honorable thing when a woman works. If a woman wears proper Islamic clothing, avoids mixing with non-blood relative men, and works in a field which will not disturb her so much that she will not be able to do work at home, then she is welcome to work. It is necessary that women work in many cases, such as nurses, doctors, teachers, psychologists, female advisory groups, etcetera. There is nothing wrong with that. Similarly, a male should also observe proper Islamic clothing, avoid mixing with non-blood relative women, and work enough to be able to sustain his family and feed them. I certainly hope that nobody says that there is anything sexist in this.

Moving on, my opponent said that women should choose to work if they want to. I agree with this and Islam agrees with this. A male and a female can agree on the marital rulings before marriage, except if it is about permitting what is prohibited, and prohibiting what is obligatory, such as paying zakat or praying. If a woman does not want her future husband to marry other wives, then she has the right to make a claim. If she wants to work, she can make a claim, and so forth. Islam sets perfect guidelines for all people, and gives a high priority to marriage. See, marriage is a very important thing. I know that by Western standards, it might not be very important nowadays, but Islam has always valued and will always value marriage. When a person gets married, his sexual feelings can be "spent" on a person permitted for him/her, he can freely uncover before someone who is permitted for him, and so forth. When a person is not married, he/she might fall into temptation and engage in premarital sex, so-called parties with intoxicants, or something else which is strictly prohibited in Islam for many reasons.

Moreover, my opponent implied that a woman is "luckier than most" if she has the option not to work. Then what is wrong with Islam telling a man to work and giving a woman the "option" to work? By Western standards, it is easy for a male to work and meet the needs of his family, even if his wife does not work. In fact, the Western World suffers a lot due to horrible parenting. It does indeed. Discipline was valued a lot, but now it is almost history. In older times, children were taught respect and they were disciplined by at least one parent throughout their childhood. It was usually the mother who was the "teacher." She taught the children discipline, respect, self-righteousness, and many other key factors in a morally valued behavior. Islam promotes this and lets a woman stay home and actually have a job in a different way than Westerners look at it. A job as a mother who raises her children, who welcomes her husband after his hard day at work, and teaches the children about all important qualities which they need to possess in order to achieve moral success in life.

Abortion statistics: http://www.guttmacher.org... and http://www.abortionno.org...

The second link states, "64.4% of all abortions are performed on never-married women." Is this what you call discipline? Is this a proper way of life? Murdering unborn human beings is what a society needs? Then someone has the courage to insult the beautiful religion of Islam because it lets a mother have the job - by her option - to stay home and let her daughters and sons be faithful and chaste human beings, who do not have to murder their unborn children because they never got taught not to have sex before finding the proper person. Is this what Islam should advocate? A religion which values life and safety should perhaps let children wear the clothes of prostitutes at the age of 10? It is painful to see a prepubescent girl wear clothes which resemble a woman who sells her body every night to strangers, and walks like a model she saw on television, who barely has enough flesh between her bones and her skin. Is this discipline? Is this what Islam and I should advocate? No. That will never happen. Islam permits men working, Islam permits women working, but Islam will never tell a woman to be obliged to work, because a woman should have every right to stay home and raise her children to become happy human beings, and not once who want to resemble a dead Marilyn Monroe or someone who brings shame to human skin, such as Marilyn Manson.

The reason why a man must work is because in older days, and also in modern days, many - perhaps even most - parts of the world are requiring good physique for physical work. Should women work as miner? Is this, in all honesty, suitable for women? There is enough evidence to prove that men, in general, are physically stronger than women, which is exactly why a man is obliged to work. There is no need to say that there are easy jobs. Yes, but that does not matter. What matters is that the gender which is stronger is to be obliged to work, and the other should have the option to work. It is never befitting that we speak in general terms and say that women must work and men should have the option to. Men can be very stubborn and unpredictable, and letting them have the "option" to work would not be a good idea.

Furthermore, just because my opponent does not like to be complimented does not mean that other women do not like it. I have no doubts about this. Most women are more than happy when someone honors them. When sons and daughters honor their mother, it is almost one of the best gifts they can give to her. Fathers can be equally loved, equally respected, equally obeyed, but mothers have every right to be more honored. Yes, some fathers do much more than some non-caring, lazy mothers, but keep in mind that "all" mothers have given a birth through hardship in one way or another, while it is definitely not the case that all men are doing more than mothers (for their children).

I thank my opponent for the debate. I hope that my case has been made clear. Please read this, too: http://quranicteachings.co.uk... Thank you all.
Debate Round No. 3
29 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by nhq 6 years ago
nhq
Con's argument could've been: "Women and Men have equal worth. Vote con." and he would've won by default.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
"facepalm.jpg"

Yeah....I eventually decided that to try and ague against sheer stupidity was a waste of time.
Posted by Korashk 6 years ago
Korashk
That is to say, you seem to think that those descriptors are all that the words fall under.
Posted by Korashk 6 years ago
Korashk
/// Sexism is the upholding of male supremacy just as racism is the upholding of white supremacy. ///

facepalm.jpg
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
I tryed to change the resolution, Mirza wouldn't accept it as anything else.
think if I had been allowed to change the resolution I could have made a better case.

I think what I wanted was something like "Islam, as well as Mirza, is sexist"

Well I'm glad some kind of change is going to happen there. Maybe it will stop being so segregated and women can leave the house without a man.
Lol and like mom said, if everyone there is so religious, why must women cover up? Why must they stay apart from each other?
Why is it referred to as a gay heaven?
And if the people there aren't religious, why the hell is it a theocracy?
Posted by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
Pro should not have posed the debate as a personal attack. That's a conduct violation. Perhaps the resolution could be "Islam is sexist and shouldn't be used to justify sexism."

Pro should have defined sexism at the outset. The sexes are not identical, so the question is what the differences actually are and what those differences justify. Without a definition of "sexism" it's difficult t argue. I'd try to make the definition along the lines of "sexism is denial of equal rights for voting, divorce, and property ownership." Without a definition, I think Con made the case adequately that the believed basis for distinguishing between the sexes under Islam was not based upon belief in the inferiority of women.

Pro make a better case against using religion alone to justify action. Actions ought to be justified independent of religion, since various religions advocate different things. So Pro wins that point, but the resolution is "and" not "or."

I heard on C-SPAN that a poll in Saudi Arabia showed that a high percentage of the population (70% I think) favored equal rights for women. The implication was that an extremist minority had the political power to prevent it from happening. It's only a matter of time.
Posted by governments_kill 6 years ago
governments_kill
This is so frustrating but I'll try. Sexism is the upholding of male supremacy just as racism is the upholding of white supremacy. Freedo and your argument against this definition actually upholds this definition. Saying that males are victimized by male supremacy is quite possible under this definition, especially under your specific examples. Femininity is always he butt end of the joke. Men are victimized because they choose to embrace femininity as opposed to masculinity but the feminine values such as caring and others are denigrated. If you can show me an example of a male being victimized culturally as a result of the patriarchy then you have proved your point until that, my point is still valid. Men are victimized by the patriarchy but the patriarchy is male supremacy.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
wrong.
Posted by lovelife 6 years ago
lovelife
Actually it is.
Posted by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
Sexism has nothing to do with generalization of personality, which is exactly what you just did
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by nhq 6 years ago
nhq
lovelifeMirzaTied
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 
Vote Placed by adealornodeal 6 years ago
adealornodeal
lovelifeMirzaTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Captain_Ronnie 6 years ago
Captain_Ronnie
lovelifeMirzaTied
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 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
lovelifeMirzaTied
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:04 
Vote Placed by m93samman 6 years ago
m93samman
lovelifeMirzaTied
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 
Vote Placed by darkkermit 6 years ago
darkkermit
lovelifeMirzaTied
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 
Vote Placed by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
lovelifeMirzaTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03