The Instigator
TheChristian
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points
The Contender
brontoraptor
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Modern Feminism (3rd/4th Wave) is Unnecessary as well as Unfair to Men.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
TheChristian
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/17/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 11 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 553 times Debate No: 92837
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (8)
Votes (2)

 

TheChristian

Pro

Hello. This was brought on by seeing an article...

http://www.independent.co.uk...

The rules are simple

R1. Acceptance
R2. Arguments
R3. Rebuttals for R2. arguments.
R4. Conclusions

I am not going to exclude more than two things.

One being reproductive "rights" and the other being rape rates. Sexual harassment/groping is fair game.

I will be using sources from http://www.debate.org... as well as other sources.

Voting is open voting, select winner.

Thank you. Enjoy the debate
brontoraptor

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
TheChristian

Pro

Hello. Thank you for accepting and I wish you luck.

Transportation Segregation

I firstly would like to say that women are now advocating for their own transport "for protection from men". Replace women with "whites" and men with "blacks" and we have the sentiment of segregated America. In the interest of women they criminalize men.

http://www.independent.co.uk...

Written by a feminist.

Wage Gap

So, feminists LOVE the wage gap. They will go on and on about it. I found a website that lists the reasons for the wage gap, and a majority of it is either occupational or industrial. the breakdown is as follows

-6.5% is educational. With women getting more education, the wage gap went down.

41.1% is undetermined. This means it could be, well, anything. This may look bad on my argument, but wait.

27.4% is occupational choice. Translation? 27.4% of the wage gap is ALL YOUR FAULT.

29.1% is industry.

10.5 is labor experience.

3.5% is union status. Translation? They don't negotiate pay.

2.4% is race or ethnicity. This is not the fault of you being a woman, the fault of your skin color. This is unfair, but not the fault of two X chromosomes. Over half of the wage gap is the fault of the women.

https://www.americanprogress.org...

Domestic Abuse

Domestic abuse is more often than not caused by women against men.

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

Social experiments demonstrate the issues with fighting back or the man being attacked and not being helped, while the woman is helped instantly.

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

Video with statistics and facts on domestic abuse by a renowned psychologist.

To summarize the point of these videos, in domestic violence, men under report their abuse. This is due to social pressures against hurting a woman. This proves the point that if a man is abused by his wife/girlfriend, he is statistically less likely to report said abuse. Allow me to quote the psychiatrist who made one of these videos.

"I want to share my reasons for not breaking up with my wife though she repeatedly physically attacked me throughout our marriage. We had a 5 year old daughter, to whom she was inattentive. I thought I could be the attentive parent. My wife was jealous that our daughter "liked" me better than her. One day, my wife attacked me with a 2x4 while I was sleeping. I left the house so she could cool off, but when I got back, my wife had called the police and accused me of beating her. She even had the bruises to prove it, even though I had only held her back and run away as soon as possible. She filed for divorce and won sole custody of our child. I was a Psychologist, but because of my "violent nature", the court never allowed me to ever see my daughter privately again. She is now 23 and hates and fears me because she believes her mother's story about me. Getting back to my original point, I stayed to protect my daughter's emotional development, and because I knew that if we ever got divorced, I would never be allowed to have a close relationship with my daughter"- Stefan Molyneux, respected psychiatrist.

(Note- the last two paragraphs are from my other debate, linked in R1)

Penal System

Women can commit the same crimes as a man, and receive lighter sentences.
http://www.ifeminists.com...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

https://creativedestruction.wordpress.com...

Two of those are news reports and one is from a feminist site.

Women in Politics

Women are underrepresented in politics. This is not the result of misogyny, but because fewer think about going into politics. And fewer of those actually DO.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
brontoraptor

Con

Women's rights in Saudi Arabia are limited in comparison to many of its neighbors. The World Economic Forum 2013 Global Gender Gap Report ranked Saudi Arabia 127th out of 136 countries for gender parity.

All women, regardless of age, are required to have a male guardian. Saudi Arabia is a country that fully prohibits women from driving. Saudi women constitute 13% of the country's native workforce as of 2015.


*

In Afghanistan the overwhelming number of women are illiterate. More than half of all brides are under 16, and one woman dies in childbirth every half hour. Domestic violence is so common that 87 per cent of women admit to experiencing it. But more than one million widows are on the streets, often forced into prostitution. Afghanistan is the only country in which the female suicide rate is higher than that of males.

In Nepal, early marriage and childbirth exhaust the country's malnourished women, and one in 24 will die in pregnancy or childbirth. Daughters who aren't married off may be sold to traffickers before they reach their teens. Widows face extreme abuse and discrimination if they're labelled bokshi, (meaning witches). A low level civil war between government and Maoist rebels has forced rural women into guerrilla groups.

In Mali, one of the world's poorest countries, few women escape the torture of genital mutilation, many are forced into early marriages, and one in 10 dies in pregnancy or childbirth.


The point? In most of the world, women are oppressed beyond what would be deemed human in the Western world.

With the rise of Liberal supported masses of immigrants from non-Liberal cultures which inhumanely treat females, who are bringing their ideals to the West and infiltrating the governments and campaign contribution construct, the feminist movement must be stronger than ever, lest women lose their place of having any value, even in the West.
Debate Round No. 2
TheChristian

Pro

Firstly, this debate is about feminism in the West. I thought that was obvious. I apologize.

Saudi Arabia

The literacy rate for women is 91%. They receive education. In fact, over HALF of university grads are women. The average age of first marriage is 25. In fact, many conservative women adamantly oppose their own liberation. Translation? They don't WANT rights. In fact, there is a high percentage of women in parliament in S.A. They are in a position to improve their lives yet do not. Feminism in those countries is first or second wave, not third and fourth.

Source- Same as my opponent's

Afghanistan

My opponent did not just cite the source, he also C/P'd the ENTIRE article. Early emperors advocated for women's rights. Also, there was an Afghan queen, whereas we have yet to have a female president. In 1921, King Amanullah made many laws abolishing forced marriage, child marriage, bride price, and put restrictions on polygamy. The only problem is that there was difficulty enforcing laws. This is an illegal conduct, and is opposed by the formal government. After the Taliban was deposed, women have been given a plethora of rights. In fact, they are better off than in S.A! So these instances are illegal, and not allowed by the government.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Mali

Women in Mali are legally equal to males. Actions against them are unlawful. 10.5% of the parliament of Mali are women. Once again, they are in a position to improve their lives. Yet they don't. Males and females are also offered equal health care. Poor equipment is the cause for the deaths. Marriage is only legal for women at 18, and for men at 21.

https://en.wikipedia.org...

Your arguments are both flawed and incorrect. Even Wikipedia knows more than your source, which is biased towards feminism.

The point is, my opponent's source (http://www.feministezine.com...) is heavily biased and while is partially correct, the actions against women in these countries is illegal and the fault of those perpetrating them and not the fault of the government or lack of feminism.
brontoraptor

Con

Overplayed anti feminist prank:


*

Firstly, this debate is about feminism in the West. I thought that was obvious. I apologize.

I understand, but...it took thousands of years for women to be seen as human beings. That can be erased in a heartbeat.

Feminism in the West can go overboard. Some feminists are just plain nuts, but...it's the art of the deal, if you will. You reach for the most, hoping simply to achieve the best possible by doing so. Overzealous feminists may simply be a bulwark towards the majority view worldwide from overcoming the West by its abrasive attitude.

Imagine if feminism was submissive. In the face of a reality that muted females for thousands of years, they must protect the fortress at all costs. Why?

Women face issues that men in general do not.

1)Rape

2)Being overwhelmed by physical onslot.

*

As I generally agree with you, in Western principle, I can see that some fires risk being put out much more than other fires.

Female rights is an unstable fire that could more easily be snuffed out than rebuilt. Women of planet Earth must have a safe haven or sanctuary to plausably be able to escape to somewhere on Earth. Where would nonwesterners get this education if it was not heavy in the West? Examples?

The American Academy of Pediatrics recently put forward a proposal on female genital mutilation. They wanted for American doctors to be given permission to perform a ceremonial pinprick or “nick” on girls born into communities that practice female genital mutilation.

Female circumcision is a custom in many African and Asian countries whereby the genitals of a girl child are cut. There are roughly four procedures. First there is the ritual pinprick. This is what Pediatrics refers to as the “nick” option. To give you an idea of what that means, visualize a preteen girl held down by adults. Her clitoris is tweaked so that the circumcizer can hold it between her forefinger and her thumb. Then she takes a needle and pierces it using enough force for it to go into the peak of the clitoris. As soon as it bleeds, the parents and others attending the ceremony cheer, the girl is comforted and the celebrations follow.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali interview

(Video reference)


For many secular Muslims and former Muslims, the hijab is not a symbol of freedom. It is a symbol of the fact that women in Islam are second class citizens and that this status is encoded in both sacred text and tradition, enforced by culture and law. The hijab lies at one end of with the burka, a portable fabric wall that prevents women from engaging fully with the world, and vice versa. It is a reminder that for millennia women have been chattel.


The hijab and oppression of a sex-

(Video reference)


*

Yes, but are these realities in the USA? You bet.

Female genital mutilation is on the Rise in the U.S.-

More than half a million women and girls in the U.S. are estimated to be affected or at risk of FGM, according to the Population Reference Bureau (PRB), a nonprofit organization that released statistics on FGM earlier this year. The number of those at risk has more than doubled in roughly the past decade, according to the PRB.

Officials from various organizations say the main reasons include population growth, and the fact that more families are immigrating to America, and bringing their practices with them.


Muslims have sued in U.S. courts so Muslim women be able to wear burkas to work. The burka is the Islamic covering that covers the woman from head to toe, even covering the face other than the eyes.


So what's the big deal?

Imagine someone commits a crime wearing a burka. The cops ask you what the person who commited the crime looked like. You don't know because you couldn't see them. Imagine an incident happens at work, but no co-employees know what she even looks like despite working with her 5 years. Imagine being a woman who came to America desperately yearning for freedom, but your family and husband make you cover up, and you silently hate it. The government and law enforcment must make it a priority to seperate church and state. In this instance, the law has given the woman her first individual identity through the law. That law would be empowered by Western feminism.

Do I promote overzealous progressive feminism? No. But it may be an irritating bulwark to something worse.
Debate Round No. 3
TheChristian

Pro

Well this concludes the debate. Now I am going to criticize my opponent's argument. No offence, I'd do it to my own mother to win an argument.

My opponent argued on a platform of Islamophobia as well as using totally biased sources and ignored his own sources when it benefited his cause. He also willingly argues only Islamic countries to avoid the issue. He poses no arguments about 3rd and 4th wave feminism and concedes to my arguments.

At the risk of violating my own rules, my opponent also argues against the first amendment and poses "what ifs" to win an argument he conceded to.

Feminism in the West is an overzealous belief that will not stop until women get their turn at oppressing men. The wage gap is mostly their own doing, and they are given leniency on the penal system and socially. Rape was labeled untouchable and he violated this rule.

Conclusion of the Conclusion

My opponent argued Islamophobia and irrelevances and used biased sources that admit to how good women have it in the West, as well as not refute a single bit of my argument. His argument is null and void.

Vote Pro
brontoraptor

Con

Pro:

"My opponent argued on a platform of Islamophobia."

Nope. I'm not Islamophobic. My family are all Muslims. I'm a truth lover.

Pro:

"used biased sources"

Such as ABC News, Wikipedia, Wikipedia, and Wikipedia again Huffington Post...2 are sources that Pro himself used.

*

Pro:

"He also willingly argues only Islamic countries to avoid the issue."

Nepal is 81% Hindu. 9% are Buddhists.


*

Pro:

"Rape was labeled untouchable and he violated this rule."

Note: Pro just used rape in this debate.

Pro's definition of rules was unclear and ambiguous even according to someone in the comments section.

And I quote:

"I am not going to exclude more than two things."

"One being reproductive "rights" and the other being rape rates. Sexual harassment/groping is fair game."

*

Pro:

"there was an Afghan queen."

Who was not voted for.

She was also the wife of King Amanullah Khan and under his authority which is a false dichotomy by ommiting information by Pro.

She also "studied in Syria, learning Western and modern values there, which would influence her future actions and beliefs," according to Wikipedia, and showing an example of Western feminism affecting the mindset of those from other cultures.


*

Pro:

"I firstly would like to say that women are now advocating for their own transport "for protection from men."

And isn't being taken seriously in America because it has not been successful in other countries, and it is considered "discriminatory towards men."



*

Third and Fourth wave feminism are protected by freedom of speech. It is also protected by the seperation of church and state, like it or not.



*

Pro:

"Domestic abuse is more often than not caused by women against men."

Pro used Youtube as their only source on this point.

Nevertheless, In the debate about violence, men more often side with violence than women do.

-"Whether it is in acts of violence such as rape or murder, or violence such as rioting, gang murders or war, men play a role that far exceeds that of women. Women are more likely to be the victims, rather the perpetrators, of violent crime."


*

Pro:

"To summarize the point of these videos, in domestic violence, men under report their abuse."

Then how does anyone know they are under reporting something they never report?

*

Pro:

"One day, my wife attacked me with a 2x4 while I was sleeping."

Don't date or marry crazy females.

*

Pro:

"Women can commit the same crimes as a man, and receive lighter sentences."

Notice the word "can". Men also "can" receive lighter sentences than women.

*

Pro:

"Feminism in the West is an overzealous belief that will not stop until women get their turn at oppressing men."

Pro is stating an opinion and making a prediction, not stating a fact.

*

I finish by quoting Pro.

Pro:

"Well this concludes the debate. Now I am going to criticize my opponent's argument. No offence, I'd do it to my own mother to win an argument."
Debate Round No. 4
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: lannan13// Mod action: NOT Removed<

1 point to Pro (Conduct). Reasons for voting decision: I would have awarded arguments in this debate, but there is too many issues with this debate. I will end up awarding Pro the Conduct Point though. Con did C&P several of his arguments directly out of his source without a proper citation, nor actually stating that he was doing nor indicating that he was doing this. This wasn't the only source these arguments were from as I checked and there are several sources that use these same exact arguments and in the same wording. Pratically, this occured with Con's entire R2. With that I have to award the conduct point to Pro.

[*Reason for non-removal*] The voter is allowed discretion with regards to determining the result of perceived plagiarism in the debate. Awarding conduct is within that discretion.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 11 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Foodiesoul// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to (Arguments, Sources), 2 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: Pro used better spelling and grammar than Con, who often made many mistakes in grammar. Con made more solid and informative arguments than Pro and used more reliable sources than Pro. Both pro and con made very solid and reasonable arguments backed up by reliable sources. Great job to both Pro and Con for a very interesting and informative argument!

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter doesn't explain conduct. (2) S&G is insufficiently explained. Unless one of the debaters presents an argument that's difficult to understand as a result of how it is written, S&G may not be awarded. (3) Sources are insufficiently explained. The voter doesn't explain this decision, merely repeating it twice. The voter is required to do more than just state that one side had more sources, as this is an assessment of quality and not quantity. (4) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to assess specific arguments made by both debaters. Saying arguments were "solid" or "reasonable" can be applied to literally any debate.
************************************************************************
Posted by 42lifeuniverseverything 11 months ago
42lifeuniverseverything
RFD Continued:

Con is expected to respond. Con responds first with a response in round 4 again. So Con misses his window of opportunity to respond again. But I will take Con's response apart for Con's benefit. "Pro used Youtube as their only source on this point. Nevertheless, In the debate about violence, men more often side with violence than women do." First source content matters more. Second, men side with men over women in violence? Where is the evidence. The percentages. Con also says "Then how does anyone know they are under reporting something they never report?" This is a rhetorical question and as such does not qualify as response. Have an answer, don't just leave the voter in doubt. Like I am right now. For these reasons, Pro wins the domestic violence argument.

D) Penal System.

Pro argues women can receive lighter sentences, therefore feminism here is unnecessary. Con responds in round 4 again. Per the debate rules Con agreed to, response was required in Round 3 and not delivered. A dropped argument that Pro wins.

E) Women in Politics.

Pro argues that women do not want politics is much, hence the underrepresentation. Con responds in round 4 (violation of rules) that "Third and Fourth wave feminism are protected by freedom of speech. It is also protected by the seperation of church and state, like it or not." This argument is true, but irrelevant to political participation. Also, maybe it is protected, but that does not mean it is not unnecessary. Con is failing to focus on the resolution. Because the argument is dropped again, Pro wins it.

Ultimately, I feel it unnecessary to address Con's arguments, because they did not handle countries with 3rd or 4th wave feminism. A point Con conceded.

For all these reasons, I VOTE PRO.
Posted by 42lifeuniverseverything 11 months ago
42lifeuniverseverything
RFD:

I am going to knock out the easy points first, arguments examination comes last.

1. S&G.

Both had great S&G, but honestly "onslot" is not the correct spelling (onslaught is), and it is such a poor misrepresentation of the word that I cry foul. Because of this mistake by Con, Pro wins S&G.

2. Conduct.

Before the debate really started, rules were given by Pro. The introduction to these rules was poorly worded, yet the introduction did make sense to me. "I am not going to exclude more than two things." What is meant is besides these two rules, nothing else is excluded from the debate, even though more could be excluded (like transport, harassment, assault, etc.). So this makes sense, therefore these rules should be honored by Con. Alas they are not. Con specifically has one blatant rule violation. Pro avoided rape the whole debate, I double checked. But Con said in round 3 "Women face issues that men in general do not. 1)Rape" This is an unacceptable violation of the rules by Con, and gives Pro the conduct win.

3. Arguments.

Here is the meat of the debate. So many arguments were opened by Pro. These arguments will be followed throughout the debate.

A) Transportation Segregation.

This was an example of how feminism is ludicrous and discriminatory, at least the way Pro presented it. So Con is expected to respond. Strangely enough, Con drops this in round 3, Con's round to respond. So this argument is considered dropped and Pro wins it.

B) Wage Gap.

Pro argues that the wage gap is mostly feminists fault. This argument has sources so it holds. Con is expected to respond. The wage gap argument is completely dropped by Con and Pro wins it. Con is setting a bad precedent.

C) Domestic Abuse.

Pro does use YouTube. However is quoted source is credible, and as such his argument stands and makes sense. Women abuse men more or at least the evidence says so.

To be continued.
Posted by lannan13 11 months ago
lannan13
Reading the debate and will vote on it when I've finished.
Posted by TheChristian 11 months ago
TheChristian
Please note, my opponent violated debate rules multiple times. Keep this in mind while voting
Posted by Samcoder1 11 months ago
Samcoder1
One might argue that the under representation in politics IS due to sexism, in that we have a society that discourages girls from going into male dominated topics. Therefore Feminism is required to establish a balance. In contrast to the study Pro cited, the ONS in Britain showed that the pay gap is greatest among women over the age of 40 upwards, and I quote 'From 40 upwards, the gap is much wider. This is likely to be connected to women taking time out of the labour market to have children.' http://visual.ons.gov.uk...

The ONS is the gold standard for statistics. There is also evidence showing that mothers are happier when working part time and when not working than when working full time, hence they are less likely to go into tough jobs like politics.
Posted by Danielle 11 months ago
Danielle
I don't understand what you mean by "excluding 2 things." Do you mean you plan to argue those are not relevant to the debate? Cuz that would be problematic and unfair.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 42lifeuniverseverything 11 months ago
42lifeuniverseverything
TheChristianbrontoraptorTied
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:50 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in the comments. Don't know if I can fit it here.
Vote Placed by lannan13 11 months ago
lannan13
TheChristianbrontoraptorTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: I would have awarded arguments in this debate, but there is too many issues with this debate. I will end up awarding Pro the Conduct Point though. Con did C&P several of his arguments directly out of his source without a proper citation, nor actually stating that he was doing nor indicating that he was doing this. This wasn't the only source these arguments were from as I checked and there are several sources that use these same exact arguments and in the same wording. Pratically, this occured with Con's entire R2. With that I have to award the conduct point to Pro.