The Instigator
Ariesx
Pro (for)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
Rosalie
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

On balance, Feminism is not needed in the US anymore.

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 4 votes the winner is...
Rosalie
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/20/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,134 times Debate No: 86948
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (30)
Votes (4)

 

Ariesx

Pro

Round 1-Acceptance, Round 2-Cases, Round 3-Rebuttals, Round 4-Defense
I will obviously be supporting the reality of Feminism not being needed in the US anymore, while my opponent(Rosalie) provides arguments on why it is needed today.
Rosalie

Con

I'd like to thank my opponent for challenging me to this great debate!

No terms were given, so I shall define "Feminism".

Feminism- Feminism is a range of movements and ideologies that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve equal political, economic, cultural, personal, and social rights for women. This includes seeking to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment. A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women. [http://www.bing.com...]

Goodluck! J

Debate Round No. 1
Ariesx

Pro

Before starting, I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate. I will be arguing that On Balance, Feminism is not needed in the US anymore. I will provide examples on how the USA has surpassed the everybody in women rights, and how there are numerous examples of equality today.
Note(100 years ago, people would not dare say women always beat men in arguments. Now, it is a general fact.)
Terms:
Balance- condition in which different elements are equal or in the correct proportions(In this case, America does have discrimination, but I will be arguing that the equality outweighs the inequality.)
Needed-1.require (something) because it is essential or very important:
Powered by Oxford Dictionaries
Feminism- Feminism is a range of movements and ideologies that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve equal political, economic, cultural, personal, and social rights for women. This includes seeking to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment. A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women.
Source-My opponent
We will examine each quality that is essential to equality for women in this debate.
Political Equality-First of all, women have a say in America. http://www.archives.gov...
It clearly states that the United States of America cannot discriminate against a voter because of their sex.
Now, I shall note how many female Governors there have been. A governor is a huge position of power in the United States of America. This should not be taken lightly.
Female Governors:
Gina Raimondo-Rhode Island
Kate Brown-Oregon
Maggie Hasson-New Hampshire
Mary Fallin-Oklahoma
Nikki Haley-South Carolina
Susana Martinez-New Mexico
Nellie Tayloe Ross-Wyoming
Miriam A. Ferguson-Texas
Lurleen Wallace-Alabama
Ella T. Grasso-Coonecticut
Dixy Lee Ray-Washington
Vesta M. Roy-New Hampshire
Martha Layne Collins-Kentucky
Madeleine M. Kunin-Vermont
Kay A. Orr-Nebraska
Rose Perica Mofford-Arizonaasas
Joan Finney-Kansas
Ann Richards-Texas
Barbara Roberts-Oregon
Christine Todd Whitman-New Jersey
Jane Dee Hull-Arizona
Nancy P- Hollister-Ohio
Jane Swift-Massachusetts
Judy Martz-Montana
Ruth Ann Minner-Delaware
Linda Lingle-Hawaii
Olene Walker-Utah
Jennifer Graholm-Michigan
Janet Napolitano-Arizona
Kathleen Sebelius-Kansas
Kathleen Blanco-Lousiana
M. Jodi REll-Connecticut
Christine Gregoire-Washington
Sarah Palin-Alaska
Beverly Purdue-North Carolina
Jan Brewer-Arizona
https://en.wikipedia.org...
Before, I move on to the next argument, I want to stress that this is a very significant point. A governor is a very powerful position that many sexists 100 years ago would probably never think a woman would never hold. The idea that this has happened means that women have achieved political equality. Women are able to hold political offices, and benefit the rights of women as a result. Not only is this important in the local level, but also in the senate. There are 20 female senators which also serves a very powerful instrument for women rights.

Economic Equality- I have heard the same tired argument from feminists claiming that women get paid less than men. I hope in this debate, I can at least clarify once and fore all that this is a myth.
1. Men are far more likely to choose careers that are more dangerous, so they naturally pay more. In the top ten most dangerous jobs(from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics), they are all male dominated jobs. As a result males will get paid more.
2. Males are for more likely to work in higher paying jobs-According to the White House Report, 7% of female professionals were employed in high paying computer fields, while 38% of males have gotten professional jobs.
Females are also most likely to be in low-paying education and health care jobs.
3.Men work longer hours than women-Men work 6 hours per week, or 15percent longer than the average fulltime working women.
4. Men are more likely to pursue high-stress and higher-paid areas.
5. "Women business owners make less than half of what male business owners make, which, since they have no boss, means it's independent of discrimination. The reason for the disparity, according to a Rochester Institute of Technology study, is that money is the primary motivator for 76% of men versus only 29% of women. Women place a higher premium on shorter work weeks, proximity to home, fulfillment, autonomy, and safety, according to Nemko"
http://www.cbsnews.com...
I believe that I have gave solid cases on political equality and economic equality, but there is still cultural and social equality. The arguments that I will be making the next portion of this case is purely analytical. It would be laughable to leave a source, because I am expecting anyone with a life would know of this.

Cultural and Social Equality:
We expect that equality is realistic, and can happen. We saw this with the Civil Rights Movement, but there are still movements like Black Lives Matter. Why can't the common man just stop holding grudges against other races and the opposite gender of himself? Most people(Fox News) assume that racism is a thing of the past, while others think that there needs to be a radical movement(Internet) to cement equality into everyone's minds. I offer an alternative answer(not solution) to this problem which involves empirical evidence that most people have seen with there own eyes.
We have all seen the kid that wears glasses. Some of us have seen that kid bullied in public schools, or others have seen him geek out in front of your own eyes. Either way, people have a general assumption about people that wear glasses. You must be either smart, weird, bullied, or innocent. I am assuming that people usually have this assumption. When one is an adult, they will probably think more on the lines of smart. Either way, these are assumptions about what kind of personality people with glasses have. Now, just imagine if that kid was an athletic superstar who was destined to go to the NFL. This could be probable, but highly unlikely. I will equate this to feminism. People have general assumptions about what each individual is just by taking one look. We have all done it, and it is nothing to be ashamed of. But, feminists think it is wrong, because no-one should have the assumption that a female is inferior. They should have the assumption that they are equal to us males. Well, here is the problem with that.
You are never going to change someone's subconscious thinking.
But, you can change what someone thinks consciously. That is why the war on women rights has been won. Social rules apply to people. At colleges where Political Correctness is reality, no one will dare say anything racist, because they know of the humiliating consequences of saying something like that. But, a PC person could just as easily look at a Chinese guy, and ask for help on his homework. The PC person did not ask anyone else, because in his experience Chinese people are usually really smart. Feminism has been successful in creating a world where is socially unacceptable to call a gender inferior. In a professional life, nobody would say do not hire her because that gender is inferior. Females are never going to hear that in there professional lives. The backlash is also very humiliating if someone ever says(discount Donald Trump) anything that hints at saying females are inferior. If a politician accidently says that, his carrier is done for. It is because of the circumstances, Americans are in that prohibits us from saying mean racist and sexist things. Here are the three reasons why this is the case.
1. Consequences of saying something like this is humiliating.
2. Females usually dominate the Teacher field making children have sub-conscious thoughts of female intelligence.
3. There are movies and TV shows dedicated to making one feel guilty about judging women.
But, you cannot stop what humans think sub-consciously.
http://www.theguardian.com...
A good source for this is actually a study conducted about what happens in the subconscious part of your mind.
"Researchers engineered a situation in which female participants heard a male experimenter make a sexist remark; some were then given the opportunity to call him out on it. Eric Horowitz explains the scenario:In each experiment, female participants first rated their beliefs about the importance of confronting prejudice and then engaged in a "Deserted Island" task with a confederate. The task involved selecting from an existing set of people those who would be most helpful on a deserted island. The confederate " chose all males until his final selection, when he justified his choice of a female with a sexist remark ("She"s pretty hot. I think we need more women on the island to keep the men satisfied.")Those who had the chance to challenge this remark, but didn't do so, rated the experimenter as less sexist " and challenging sexism as less important " than the others. Which would seem to be a case of cognitive dissonance in action: when you're confronted by prejudice and you don't object to it, your own attitudes shift in a more prejudiced direction, to maintain consistency between your behaviour and your beliefs."
This gives you clear evidence of how my viewpoint is empirically proven. If Con is still dissatisfied, I will give more clear evidence and examples in the next round.
That is why I affirm that Feminism is not needed anymore. Feminism has already solved the economic and political problems in America. I have proven that there is nothing to do when it comes to social and cultural equality. We have already created social rules that regulate what we say and our conscious thinking. We do not however control subconscious thinking.

Thank you again to my opponent for accepting this debate.
Rosalie

Con

Thank you again for challenging me to this topic!

I would like to say the resolution is not just limited to the United States. The resolution reads “On balance, Feminism is not needed in the US anymore.”The resolution is not just on the U.S, but other countries as well, it’s not restricted to the U.S. due to the wording.

I will be arguing that:

1. Women are still oppressed in the U.S—thus, we still need feminism.

2. Oppression of Women in other countries, and why feminism is important.

Oppression of Women in the U.S

A lot of people believe that oppression no longer exist in the U.S anymore.

Here are my reasons:

C.1

[1] Sex, Domestic Violence and Rape:

“In terms of the global sex trade, an estimated 50,000 women are trafficked into the US each year. The USA is both a destination country for trafficking, as well as a source country. This means that American women ARE kidnapped, or otherwise coerced into the sex trafficking industry. Women are often lured into the sex trade under false pretenses; being hired as waitresses or maids and then forced into prostitution. This is not just a problem for developing countries. It is here, on our own soil….

“In the US, 23 women a week are killed by intimates. This has held steady for more than a decade. 74% of women murdered from instances of domestic violence were murdered after the woman left the relationship, filed for divorce or got a restraining order. Our government has failed to protect women from abusive partners, and band-aid solutions like restraining orders are proven to be, ultimately, ineffective.”

The goal of the government is to protect their citizens, and keep them safe at all measures. But, they don’t seem to care much when it comes to the safety of the Women. It merely seems as if the government merely believes that Women should be taking care of themselves.


[4]

Even the government underestimates the crisis American women are in. Last year the Justice Department reported that there were 182,000 sexual assaults committed against women in 2008, which would mean that the rate had decreased by 70 percent since 1993. But a study by the National Crime Victims Research and Treatment Center showed that the Justice Department's methodology was flawed. Instead of behaviorally based questions, such as "Has anyone ever forced you to have sex?", women were asked if they had been subject to "rape, attempted or other type of sexual attack." Victims often don't label their experience as "rape," especially when someone they know attacked them. The center says the actual number of U.S. women raped in 2008 was more than 1 million.

The distressing statistics don't stop with violence: Women hold 17 percent of the seats in Congress; abortion is legal, but more than 85 percent of counties in the United States have no provider; women work outside the home, but they make about 76 cents to a man's dollar and make up the majority of Americans living in poverty.

C.2

In the Workplace

Many people want to argue that the “Wage Gap” simply doesn’t exist. In fact, it still does. Many people want to argue that the reasoning has to do with degrees, and positions. It has been proven on multiple occasions that Men and Women who have the same degree, and work the same job, Women still earn less.

“Women still earn 72 cents for every man a dollar earns. In 2008, women occupied only 15% of board positions of Fortune 500 companies.

The proportion of women in government was lower in 2007 than 1997. In Scandinavian countries, there are policies that enforce equality in representation of government. Not in the US, with a paltry 17% of female government officials–Iraq has a higher representation of women in government than we do. So does Namibia, Rwanda, and Afghanistan. Until there is equality in representation on a government level, there is no equality for women on the civic level.”

[2]

“Did you know that in 2014, women working full time in the United States typically were paid just 79 percent of what men were paid, a gap of 21 percent? The gap has narrowed since the 1970s (Figure 1), due largely to women’s progress in education and workforce participation and to men’s wages rising at a slower rate. But progress has stalled in recent years, and the pay gap does not appear likely to go away on its own.”

This is merely discrimination, paying Women less because she is simply a woman. There is no denying the fact. This is oppression, and we should continue to fight for equality, especially when it comes to pay.




Quick facts:

Thanks to the pay gap, women struggle to pay off student loan debt even more than men do.

The pay gap has barely budged in a decade. At the current rate, the gap won’t close for more than 100 years.

Women in every state experience the pay gap, but in some states it’s worse than others

C. 3

Why we need Feminism in other Countries.


A) Because FGM still exists;


[3] FGM involves removing bits of the genitals and stitching them back together.

Female genital mutilation causes severe pain. It makes peeing very painful and sex impossible. Many want to say that the procedure is due to religion, which may be true in some cases, but not all.

“despite FGM being mainly associated with Ethiopian minority Judaism and Sunni Muslims. The answer often lies in ancient attitudes to female sexuality. In some parts of the world, a high value is placed on a bride’s virginity. FGM destroys the victim’s ability to derive pleasure from sex while also making it highly-painful, ensuring that virginity remains intact. And did I mention this happens to girls as young as five months? That’s right: in 2013 there are still some people who honestly can’t see what’s wrong with mutilating a baby.”

  1. Child Brides

[3] “Although it affects more girls worldwide, child marriage is bad news for both genders. In Rajasthan in India, children as young as six get married in lavish ceremonies, eventually moving in together at 14. As anyone who’s ever been a teenager knows, fourteen is not an age at which you can typically expect emotional maturity. Unsurprisingly, stuff like domestic abuse is more prevalent in these early marriages. But India has nothing on places like South Sudan or Yemen. While Indian child brides are usually around the same age as their husband, their foreign counterparts often wind up getting married to someone decades older. Girls who refuse to marry are frequently beaten, imprisoned or even murdered.”

Again, another act of oppression, and inequality. Women are deprived from making choices themselves, thus they are oppressed by Men. FGM and Child brides are not choices made by Women, but simply by the elders, and Men in their societies. Depriving one of such a choice is a act of discrimination.

Theese are just a *few* reasons as to why we still need feminism. The list goes on and on. But theese are the more important issues.


Sources:

[1] https://heymanda.wordpress.com...

[2] http://www.aauw.org...

[3] http://listverse.com...

[4] http://www.washingtonpost.com...

Debate Round No. 2
Ariesx

Pro

Okay, I really do not get the logic behind involving other countries in this debate. The resolution states "On balance, Feminism is not needed in the US anymore." I specifically stated US, because I do realize that feminism is needed in other areas around the world. To say that it isn't is being na"ve and ignorant. You did not explain why the resolution includes other countries, and gave no examples of how the wording includes other countries.

Defense:
[1] Sex, Domestic Violence and Rape:
Numbers that my opponent used: 50,000 women are trafficked into the US each year. This is a global sex trade, and involves other countries that we do not know about, and probably places where feminism is needed. 23 women a week are killed by intimates.
The source you list first of all list for this evidence is a blog made in 2010. The year is 2016 which means 6 years have gone by since this has happened. The Washington Post article you also sourced was an opinion article with no evidence to back it up.
Between 14,500 and 17,500 people are trafficked into the U.S. each year.
https://www.dosomething.org...
This proves that your source is outdated, and therefore unreliable to argue with.
Con also gone to say that there have been 182,000 sexual assaults committed against women in 2008. Con than says the actual number is 1 million which is a really broad study, and as my opponent has noted. There are different ways to say different things that can mean different things to another.
There are 125.9 million women in America.
https://en.wikipedia.org...
182,000 women = 0.146% of the women in America.
1 million women=0.8%
This debate is about balance. I think these numbers speak for it selves.
If 182,000 women are being raped, than that means that 124,818,000 women are not being raped.
If 1 million women are being raped, than that means that 124 million women are not being raped.
You can clearly see that there is a unstable balance with more women not being raped winning the scales. This resolution specifically states "On balance". I think that 0.8% does not weigh the scales at all.

C2.
In the Workplace
"Many people want to argue that the "Wage Gap" simply doesn"t exist. In fact, it still does. Many people want to argue that the reasoning has to do with degrees, and positions. It has been proven on multiple occasions that Men and Women who have the same degree, and work the same job, Women still earn less."
Okay, you still have done nothing to dispute the facts that I listed in the last argument.
You have not disputed:
Males are far more likely to chose dangerous careers
Males are far more likely to work in higher paying jobs
Men work longer hours than women
Men are likely to pursue high-stress and higher paid areas
WOMEN BUSINESS OWNERS make LESS THAN HALF of what male business owners make.

Than my opponent moves on to how Iraq has better representation of women which is clearly false. First of all, Iraq is a broken government with terrorist groups such as Al-Quada in it. America has 320 million people, and as I have said men go for higher paying jobs which Con has not disputed. A good representation of this is that only 2 women Hilary Clinton and Carly Fiorina were running in a presidential race dominated by men. Carly Fiorina dropped out leaving Hilary the only one.

"Thanks to the pay gap, women struggle to pay off student loan debt even more than men do.

The pay gap has barely budged in a decade. At the current rate, the gap won"t close for more than 100 years.

Women in every state experience the pay gap, but in some states it"s worse than others"
In order for me to believe this, first of all give statistics on what jobs females apply for.
All you have proven is that females apply for jobs with less pay. I have actually proven that Males do apply for more dangerous, and higher paying jobs. You also said 15% of women are in Fortune 500 companies which means that 85% of males make up Fortune 500 companies. That is going to make a significant impact on that 70 cent argument.

Con also tries to talk about other countries which this resolution does not talk about. I agree feminism is needed in other areas, but not in America.
Rosalie

Con

My opponent doesn’t understand why I involved other countries. Again, the resolution leaves room for other countries. If he were to say “ not needed *strictly* in the U.S, then I would have argued merely the U.S.


Defending my case

C. 1 Sex and violence:

My opponent claims that sex trafficking involves other countries that we don’t know about. But yet, they are still brining Women here into the U.S. The U.S should be stricter and cautious on whom they let pass our borders. He then claims that my source was outdated, thus meaning it doesn’t matter. In order for my opponent to have accurately rebutted my case, he must have shown that human trafficking no longer exists, which he didn’t prove. In fact, human trafficking does exist.

California and Las Vegas are the most popular states in the U.S for human trafficking.

[1] The United States is one of the top three destination points for trafficked victims and California, New York, Texas and Nevada are the top destination states within the country.

The most recent statistic that has been provided is in 2013.

[2] The FBI’s Innocence Lost National Initiative strives to eradicate the commercial sexual exploitation of children in the U.S. The website states that as of June 2013, 2,700 children have been rescued since the initiative began in June 2003. That is an average of 270 children rescued a year through this FBI effort. The Innocence Lost program runs Operation Cross Country’s (OCC) three-day nationwide efforts to rescue minors in prostitution and goes after those who are exploiting them. The OCC website states the 3,600 children have been rescued since 2003 through Innocence Lost efforts. It is not clear why these numbers differ.

Though they were rescued, this merely shows that human trafficking is still an issue. My opponent has failed to prove that it’s not an issue.

No matter if you’re a male, or female, human trafficking is a violation of one’s rights.

C2.

First off, my opponent states “Okay, you still have done nothing to dispute the facts that I listed in the last argument.
You have not disputed….”


For some odd reason, my opponent thinks that I should have rebutted his case in Round 2? That was not the way you had set up the debate format. Round 2 called for each of our own cases, not for me to rebut yours. You stated that Round 3 is for rebuttals, which is what I’m doing now. I feel as though my opponent is doing this because he doesn’t know how to refute my arguments…so he feels the need to write fluff.

So, my opponent states:


“You have not disputed:”


“Males are far more likely to chose dangerous careers”

Where is the evidence?


“Males are far more likely to work in higher paying jobs”

Not true because I successfully argued that men and women who have the same exact job, and same degree, women still earn less, making your accusation false.


“Men work longer hours than women”

Not true. If it is true, you don’t provide any evidence.

A study in 2013 reported that women and men work equal amount of hours.

[3] Here in the U.S., men and women work a nearly equal number of hours, about 50 per week. But once again, women take much more of the household burden. They average 33 hours a week at jobs, and more than 17 hours working around the house.

So once again, my opponent makes an accusation without evidence.

“Men are likely to pursue high-stress and higher paid areas”

Once again, my opponent provides no proof for his claim.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Once again, my opponent keeps arguing that I didn’t refute his case in R2, which was not the original format.

In round 2, you stated that we were to make a case, which I did. So I don’t understand how you’re saying I should have refuted your arguments.

My case on the Wage Gap

My opponent states that--


“In order for me to believe this, first of all give statistics on what jobs females apply for.
All you have proven is that females apply for jobs with less pay. I have actually proven that Males do apply for more dangerous, and higher paying jobs. You also said 15% of women are in Fortune 500 companies which means that 85% of males make up Fortune 500 companies. That is going to make a significant impact on that 70 cent argument.”

Ig you had read my sources provided on the wage gap (which im pretty sure you didn’t because once again you made a false accusation) you would have noticed:

““Women still earn 72 cents for every man a dollar earns. In 2008, women occupied only 15% of board positions of Fortune 500 companies.”

This goes for every type of job. It’s not just “dangerous, or high-stress jobs” but for every job. Whether it be an accountant, office worker etc..

My opponent’s case:

I merely already refuted everything he has argued in R2 with my case, including my rebuttals. The only thing that I did not refute was:

“Now, I shall note how many female Governors there have been. A governor is a huge position of power in the United States of America.”

This is merely fluff writing. Sure, when work high jobs, just as men do, but as stated they are still treated unequally, and do not have the same rights as men, such as equality in pay.

Sources;

[1] http://www.weaveinc.org...


[2] http://www.americanthinker.com...

[3]http://kfor.com...

Debate Round No. 3
Ariesx

Pro

"My opponent doesn't understand why I involved other countries. Again, the resolution leaves room for other countries. If he were to say not needed *strictly* in the U.S, then I would have argued merely the U.S."
I specifically said the US. Did I leave it broad, and say Feminism in the world. You really provide no examples, and just base your reasoning off of your opinion without facts on the resolution.

C. 1: Sex and Violence
"In order for my opponent to have accurately rebutted my case, he must have shown that human trafficking no longer exists, which he didn't prove. In fact, human trafficking does exist." Well, you should have accurately read the case. I specifically stated "The source you list first of all list for this evidence is a blog made in 2010. The year is 2016 which means 6 years have gone by since this has happened. The Washington Post article you also sourced was an opinion article with no evidence to back it up.
Between 14,500 and 17,500 people are trafficked into the U.S. each year.
https://www.dosomething.org...;
Con's source is from 2010. My source is from 2014. Here are the sources that prove that 50,000 is a false number in the current times.
7 California Against Slavery. "What is Human Trafficking?." Safer California Foundation. Accessed February 25, 2014, http://www.caseact.org....

8 U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. "Human Trafficking in Texas." Texas Advisory Committee . Accessed February 25, 2014, http://www.usccr.gov....

9 Bales, Kevin. "The Number." The CNN Freedom Project Ending Modern Day Slavery. Accessed February 25, 2014, http://thecnnfreedomproject.blogs.cnn.com....
Obviously, the number has declined drastically.

California and Las Vegas are the most popular states in the U.S for human trafficking.

"The United States is one of the top three destination points for trafficked victims and California, New York, Texas and Nevada are the top destination states within the country."
First of all, this statistic also applies to children. The resolution only applies to women. Con puts statistics about children that do not apply to this resolution. If this were policy debate, I would put a topicality violation.
Human trafficking has nothing to with feminism. If I may remind a radical feminist of what feminism actually means.
Feminism-Feminism is a range of movements and ideologies that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve equal political, economic, cultural, personal, and social rights for women. This includes seeking to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment. A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women.
It only states women. It does not state children.
Woman-an adult human female. Oxford Dictionaries
If Con tries to prove that 80% of these children are females, than Con still proves nothing. Female is specifically an adult female, not a child. These are just a few arguments about bringing up children in this debate. These arguments should be deemed irrelevant. I feel like my opponent does not know what she is talking about, and confuses human trafficking with all sorts of topics.

C2.
"Males are far more likely to chose dangerous careers""

"Where is the evidence?"
I don't get why you are failing at reading my case. I already stated "Men are far more likely to choose careers that are more dangerous, so they naturally pay more. In the top ten most dangerous jobs(from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics)".

"Males are far more likely to work in higher paying jobs"

"Not true because I successfully argued that men and women who have the same exact job, and same degree, women still earn less, making your accusation false."
You should recall the evidence in your case where you state this, because I do not see anywhere in your case where you argued this "successfully".
."Males are for more likely to work in higher paying jobs-According to the White House Report, 7% of female professionals were employed in high paying computer fields, while 38% of males have gotten professional jobs."
Here is the evidence I stated in my case.

"Men work longer hours than women"

"Not true. If it is true, you doesn't provide any evidence.

A study in 2013 reported that women and men work equal amount of hours.

[3] Here in the U.S., men and women work a nearly equal number of hours, about 50 per week. But once again, women take much more of the household burden. They average 33 hours a week at jobs, and more than 17 hours working around the house."
First of all, Con does not provided a citation on where this evidence comes from. I tried copying and pasting this into google, and I honestly got nothing. The study should have pulled up in seconds. It did not. I provide clear evidence that states the opposite, and has facts.
Men work longer hours than women-Men work 6 hours per week, or 15percent longer than the average fulltime working women.
http://www.cbsnews.com...
I have provided a lot of evidence for all of my claims. All claims on the fact that I did not provide evidence are false. You should have noticed that all of those claims go directly back to round 2.

"This is merely fluff writing."
This is the response from all the governors listed in round 2. This attack has no strength behind it, and is very close to a cop out.

Dropped Arguments:
I am sorry, but I have to specifically break this resolution down in order to prove why my opponent's arguments are weak.
On balance, Feminism is not needed in the US anymore.
Balance- condition in which different elements are equal or in the correct proportions:
Feminism-Definition my opponent has given
needed-1.require (something) because very important
US=United States of America
Oxford Dictionaries
The debate has to do with BALANCE and NEED.
These arguments my opponent has dropped.
Con has dropped the arguments where I argue that all the statistics are less than 1% of the 125 million women that live in America. That is not balance. If 51% of American women were raped, than Con would clearly win this debate. She does not acknowledge this at all. Here are the actual statistics:
182,000 women = 0.146% of the women in America.
1 million women=0.8%
This debate is about balance. I think these numbers speak for it selves.
If 182,000 women are being raped, than that means that 124,818,000 women are not being raped.
If 1 million women are being raped, than that means that 124 million women are not being raped.
These are simple facts that my opponent cannot deny is true. The majority of women are not being subjected to human trafficking. My female opponent is not subjected to this trafficking. This is why Pro clearly wins this debate.



Rosalie

Con

Reguarding the resolution--My opponent should have been more specific with the resolution, instead of admitting to his fault, he is coming up with reasons to go around the truth, which is (he didn’t clarify). It is pretty obvious that I have won this debate.

I won this debate for 2 main reasons.

For one main reason, Pro agreed that there *is* a wage gap, but it’s because men chose riskier jobs. Well, there are women who work risky jobs too, so I’m not going to buy his case. It simply doesn’t make sense.

My opponent did not do a very good job at organizing his rebuttals, so I will do my best to do it myself.

Again, my opponent seems to be writing more “fluff” and this isn’t a cop out, the judges would agree with me.

In regards to my Human Trafficking argument:


First of all, this statistic also applies to children. The resolution only applies to women. Con puts statistics about children that do not apply to this resolution. If this were policy debate, I would put a topicality violation.”

I’m not entirely sure why this matters? A child is born a male, or a female, and there are many children that are *female* that get tossed into human trafficking.

Just because you’re a child and a female, doesn’t mean you have an less of a right as a female does.


“Human trafficking has nothing to with feminism. If I may remind a radical feminist of what feminism actually means.”

Human trafficking violates ones rights. [1] Sex trafficking violates women’s right to life, liberty and security of person. The fundamental individual right to life, liberty and security of person is reflected in Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) and Article 6 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR).

A person who is involved in human trafficking does not have a say in what they can, and can’t do. They are simply controlled by the people who own them.


“If Con tries to prove that 80% of these children are females, than Con still proves nothing. Female is specifically an adult female, not a child. These are just a few arguments about bringing up children in this debate. These arguments should be deemed irrelevant. I feel like my opponent does not know what she is talking about, and confuses human trafficking with all sorts of topics.”

I’m sorry, but this is utterly a useless statement. You’re Women if you have a vagina. A female child, has a vagina. It’s that simple.


C2.

“I don't get why you are failing at reading my case. I already stated "Men are far more likely to choose careers that are more dangerous, so they naturally pay more. In the top ten most dangerous jobs(from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics)".”

You told me where the statistic came from, but you didn’t actually show viable evidence, thus I can’t believe this to be true.


"Males are for more likely to work in higher paying jobs-According to the White House Report, 7% of female professionals were employed in high paying computer fields, while 38% of males have gotten professional jobs."
Here is the evidence I stated in my case.”

I am not entirely sure what this has to do with the debate. I didn’t argue this, nor is anyone complaining about Women not working in the white house.



[3]MY CASE: Here in the U.S., men and women work a nearly equal number of hours, about 50 per week. But once again, women take much more of the household burden. They average 33 hours a week at jobs, and more than 17 hours working around the house."

Pro states:


“First of all, Con does not provided a citation on where this evidence comes from.”

I actually did in the round it was stated in. It was source #3. (http://kfor.com...)

This is pretty obvious who won this debate, Con.


For the following reasons:

*My opponent should have been more specific with the resolution, instead of admitting to his fault, he is coming up with reasons to go around the truth, which is (he didn’t clarify). It is pretty obvious that I have won this debate. Thus, he dropped my FGM argument, and Child Bride argument.

For another reason, Pro agreed that there *is* a wage gap, but it’s because men chose riskier jobs. Well, there are women who work risky jobs too, so I’m not going to buy his case. It simply doesn’t make sense.

Therfor, vote Con.

Sources:

[1] http://www.endvawnow.org...

Debate Round No. 4
30 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 9 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Assassin801x// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: Vote provided in comments.

[*Reason for removal*] No RFD is visible in the comments.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 9 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: TuracoPersa// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Pro (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Con made a lot of arguments that I found irrelevant. Unfortunately, Pro spent a lot of time rebutting those irrelevant arguments, even though he/she didn't need to. The result was a fairly sloppy and poorly organized debate. However, I found that Pro made several relevant arguments that went unaddressed by Con. The only place where there was any real competition was on the workplace (C2). The statistics here are complicated and it is difficult to work out who is right. I would have liked to see a more careful analysis on specific points of contention, such as the 72-cents-to-a-dollar point.

[*Reason for removal*] The voter only addresses specific points on an issue that he apparently tied. The voter is required to point to specific arguments in order to make their decision clear, and this does not do much to clarify the decision. The remainder of the RFD is just too generalized to meet the standards.
************************************************************************
Posted by Rosalie 9 months ago
Rosalie
Agreed....
Posted by Ariesx 9 months ago
Ariesx
Spoke in third person, but you know what I am saying. Assassin801x's vote I think might have bias.
Posted by Ariesx 9 months ago
Ariesx
There are a lot of things I need to touch on. I will provide it in 40 minutes. My vote will detail everything, and why Ariesx rightfully wins this debate.
Posted by Mister_Man 9 months ago
Mister_Man
RFD - This was a tough one for me to vote on, as I agree 100% with every aspect of Ariesx's stance, but the way he presented some arguments just weren't substantial enough to prove feminism is not necessary.

He brought up the wage gap, but unfortunately didn't go into greater detail explaining what the "wage gap" really is. He explained some aspects of what causes it, and he got 99% of the way there, but he failed to really argue against Rosalie's point about the "same" jobs worked by men and women. And although I can find countless studies that completely annihilate any chance of there being a wage gap in the way Rosalie claims, in regards to this debate her claims went pretty much unchallenged.

Ariesx did bring up a good point that Rosalie's stats were outdated, and even if they were taken at face value, they represent less than one percent of the population. That's all good, but unfortunately it does not explain why feminism is unnecessary, it simply says "there's not a lot of bad sh*t happening." Although his point about human trafficking of children has nothing to do with feminism, Rosalie's point holds a slight advantage, as she suggests feminism can help lower these rates (regarding to women) even more.

The rest of the debate is relatively equal. I'm kind of upset that there weren't a whole lot of points brought up by either side though.

Conduct OBVIOUSLY to Ariesx, and I wish I could just give 30 conduct points to him... When the resolution states "...Feminism is not needed in the US" it is blatantly obvious that the topic is related to the US. To start talking about other countries "because the resolution didn't say ONLY the US," is just poor debate etiquette.

And finally, sources go slightly to Ariesx, mostly due to the fact that a lot of Rosalie's sources were blogs or articles on feminist websites - obviously biased, fueled with emotion and little to no facts/reasoning. Most just said "women make less than men" and left it at that.

Dece
Posted by Ragnar 9 months ago
Ragnar
--- Review (1 of 4) ---
Some of this will tie into my RFD, but this here is a discussion of different points and reactions as they were initially read, along with advice for the debaters to improve future arguments.

Interpreting the resolution:
"On balance, Feminism is not needed in the US anymore."
This implies it was at some time needed, but it not outright needed anymore. I do not believe Pro needs to prove that it was ever needed. As a feminist, I hope pro is correct; so should be able to weight arguments with only minimal bias.
R2 pro: Definitions... Next time please put this in R1, so they are agreed to upon entering the debate (not an issue this time, but it can become problematic).
Political Equality: Great source on the 19th Amendment, but it was followed by what felt like a Gish Gallop, a curtesy glance at the source provided says "Currently, six women are serving as governors of U.S. states." Meaning of the whole list, only six are relevant to the US today. (this is not to say those six have not advanced the argument, merely that the others were redundant).
Advice: In future it may be ideal to focus on the implications of how many female voters there are, since unified they could force through any candidate they want.

Economic Equality: The linking was pretty sloppy, at the end of this there was a link which if searched through had links which pointed in the direction of the links (CBS News claiming that NYtimes is the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics... If you want to claim a government agency says something, please point to them, not to someone who points to someone else who points to them). Otherwise, nicely done.
Posted by Ragnar 9 months ago
Ragnar
--- Review (2 of 4) ---
Cultural and Social Equality: "Most people(Fox News)" dude, Fox News is neither most people, nor a source you want to use when discussing racism (a lot of time taken off-topic with racism; but I do get it with your points of sub-conscious nature is unchangeable).
R2 con: "the resolution is not just limited to the United States." Arg.
Sex, Domestic Violence and Rape: A bit heavy on the quotation, but good point about if a government succeeds in protecting its people or not.
The Washington Post ... please be careful to make quotations obvious.
In the Workplace: " It has been proven on multiple occasions that Men and Women who have the same degree, and work the same job, Women still earn less." Well an effective pathos appeal, this really needs support from one of those sources which proved it.
"In Scandinavian countries, there are policies that enforce equality in representation of government. Not in the US, with a paltry 17% of female government officials"Iraq has a higher representation of women in government than we do. So does Namibia, Rwanda, and Afghanistan." Ok I now get the reason for including other countries, as the US by comparison is a powerful point.
Because FGM still exists: Horrible, but it only makes the US look better by comparison (taking away some of the ground gained on the representatives' point). Same with child brides (unless you were to point out the cases in the US).
Ultimately the third source was not sufficiently tied into the debate; the case from it of Criminalized Pregnancy would have been much better to use.
R2 favors pro.
R3 pro: An opening explaining why there is no reason to include other countries, only to then cite the sex trafficking into the US issue, which goes a long way to tie how interconnected the world is.
"a blog made in 2010. The year is 2016 which means 6 years have gone by" discussed earlier with past female governors (yes your points can be compared to each other for consistency).
Posted by Ragnar 9 months ago
Ragnar
--- Review (3 of 4) ---
"The Washington Post article" good dismissal (even if I already dropped the whole thing from consideration).
Dosomething.org, very dangerous source to pull in, but the precise citation from it does undermine the weight of the 50,000 claim.
"You can clearly see that there is a unstable balance with more women not being raped winning the scales." This is pretty weak, as it's calling attention to the yearly rate (which is then multiplied over the course of a life) of a life shattering problem. It may have been better to compare it to the rate men are victimized in the same way (feminism isn't about perfection, but equality).
"Okay, you still have done nothing to dispute the facts that I listed in the last argument." I really wish people would not do this, prior to the opponent being allowed to interact with said arguments. Doing this is a blatant (if minor and/or accidental) Straw Man fallacy.
"Iraq is a broken government with terrorist groups such as Al-Quada in it" This is making your opponents case for them, when such a broken country has better representation of women in government... Unless you are about to argue to women are the cause of such problems there.
"I agree feminism is needed in other areas, but not in America." Very smart, as a concession here does not affect the resolution in question (and hopefully gets things more on track).
R3 con: Complaints over the word "strictly" not being included in the resolution... Poor opening. However, on the other countries don't matter rebuttal "they are still brining Women here into the U.S." was a very strong point.
Extra credit goes for the beatdown over the debate setup pro complained about, the word "fluff" was a very nice touch.
The Wage Gap points kind of fizzled, since pro had argued choice being to blame.
This round's conclusion seemed to suggest female governors are paid less than their male counterparts, but there was no supporting evidence for this claim.
Posted by Ragnar 9 months ago
Ragnar
--- Review (4 of 4) ---
R4 Pro: Good job solidifying that yes a debate about the US is about the US, not the rest of the world.
Human traffing suffers, since "Obviously, the number has declined drastically." And it no long being an important issue, are pretty far apart. There's a few tactics that could have gained ground, but just denying the problem while giving large numbers, is not among them.

"First of all, this statistic also applies to children. The resolution only applies to women." My knee jerk reaction was admittedly to call BS, yet checking the definitions carefully, this ugly piece of semantics holds up.
"If I may remind a radical feminist of what feminism actually means." Following through a victory with an Ad Hominem, poor form.
As to the claimed evidence, I discussed earlier how claiming one source is another, when that one is doing the same thing... Please avoid this in future, by knowing the content of your own sources, or at least what the URL on them implies. As is I have to consider this point effectively dropped.
" If 51% of American women were raped, than Con would clearly win this debate. She does not acknowledge this at all. Here are the actual statistics:" This line of reasoning was a pretty bad blunder, odd to see it creep up again.

R4 Con: Nice review, I disagree with some of it, but appreciate the good form of it.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Mister_Man 9 months ago
Mister_Man
AriesxRosalieTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 9 months ago
Ragnar
AriesxRosalieTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: CONDUCT: Citation issues. S&G: Nearly to con for pro's repeated minor errors ("na"ve" for example, along with later randomly bolding all his text), but I only award the point when one side is bad enough to outright hinder the reading of their arguments. SOURCES: Con is also in the lead on this (still a lot of room for improvement), but the effort pro put into refuting some of them brings it to within non-scoring range. ARGUMENTS: Pro oddly refuted the child slavery issue (impressive), making the already questionable other nations line of reasoning a dud. Economics more or less tied. Political equality pro might as well have hand fed to con (pointing out the imbalance, then how broken places that still manage better representation are...). Rape, pro conceded the debate here "If 51% of American women were raped, than Con would clearly win this debate"; While stating .8% per year would be, which his numbers say applies to all women who live 65 or more years.
Vote Placed by Buddamoose 9 months ago
Buddamoose
AriesxRosalieTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: Con sufficiently met the burden of proving inequality in certain aspects. As long as there is inequality regarding things, then there will be at least some need to feminism. (More in RFD regarding other point awardings.) The biggest point for me was political and child trafficking. Con pro did not sufficiently rebut either point made by con. A) 17% of elected officials are women B) Child trafficking exists and disproportionately effects women. This sufficiently carried the debate for Con.
Vote Placed by Wylted 9 months ago
Wylted
AriesxRosalieTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The resolution is clearly about the U.S.. All arguments pertaining to other countries were ignored. Concerning the wage gap. Pro provided all the rebuttals for it in round one, and none of con's responses addressed pro's premises. Con did specifically mention the CEO position, which accounts for an extremely small portion of the workforce and even with it not being addressed, does not outweigh pro's evidence. Con's strongest evidence was in domestic abuse, trafficking and rape. At first pro tries to dismiss the evidence by stating the stats are old, but this is not good enough. He must show why these stats are no longer valid. this point is dropped until the next round, where he admits the stats are true but mitigates them by showing how few people they effect. Because of this, and despite the small number of women it effects, it shows some differences in equality in those areas. If any inequality exists, it justifies some feminism. Clear win to con, despite her screwing up repeatedly.