The Instigator
brian_eggleston
Pro (for)
Losing
9 Points
The Contender
Hurstman
Con (against)
Winning
27 Points

Prosthetic breasts and vaginas should be banned from sale

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
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 6 votes the winner is...
Hurstman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/7/2010 Category: Science
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 8,155 times Debate No: 11988
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (11)
Votes (6)

 

brian_eggleston

Pro

As we now all know, Lady Gaga is, in reality, a man in drag. [1]

Mr. Gaga has been using a phoney vagina and replica breasts to deceive the record-buying public into believing he is a woman.

But although this deception must be roundly condemned, the real danger of allowing men to buy false knockers and chuffs is that sex pests can use them to get into the ladies' showers at the local swimming baths in order to perv on all the teen lovelies soaping each other up in there.

Would you like your sister, daughter, wife or girlfriend to be eyed-up while she is having a shower by a nonce wearing artificial breasts and a fake vagina?

I don't think so, and for that reason I urge you to vote Pro.

Thank you.

[1] http://www.debate.org...
Hurstman

Con

Thanks for starting this debate, I hope it proves interesting. Also, to everyone voting on this debate, please vote on who does the better debating, uses logic and reasoning, not just your opinion. Thank you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
My opponent provides no evidence besides a forum discussion, discussing OPINIONS on why Lady Gaga is a man. Even if proven that Lady Gaga is a man, using it as a cover-up to deceive the record-buying company, the probability of that occurring enough to actually give reason to ban production of hence items is slim to nothing. Currently, still pending credible evidence in this debate, there is only one person using that as a tactic in the music business. So this argument should be disregarded for many reasons. Probability, since it is unlikely to happen enough to matter. Magnitude, since that happening isn't enough to give reason we should ban such things.

My opponent's second and last argument was about how men will buy these items t sneak into public bathrooms or showers to spy on girls. This is illogical for so many reasons. 1) This is sexist, claiming that men would do this, without evidence to back it up. 2) Without evidence, how do we know it will happen a lot, if proven to happen at all. Drop this argument due to lack of evidence, logic or analysis.

To conclude my attack on his arguments, he has provided no credible evidence, no logic or analysis. His arguments are improbable, impact-less, and give you no reason to affirm the resolution.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
I strongly negate that "Prosthetic breasts and vagina's should be banned from sale", due to the inherent lack of analysis on my opponents side. It is assumed that such items are only used for peeping at women in public places, but in fact, these things were originated for other purposes.

1) Prosthetic breasts and vagina's were originally made to cover up body flaws

Prosthetic legs were made for people who lost a leg, be it in war, accidents, or birth defect. Prosthetic vagina's or breasts were made for that reason as well. Take victims of breast cancer, who lost a breast due to, well cancer. Should they be denied the availability to make themselves happy, to compensate for there loss? An estimated 42,016 women have suffered from breast cancer.[1] By affirming this topic, you are pissing that many people off. Seeing as the Pro doesn't give any statistical data to support the notion that these items will be used in a way to peep at woman, then we assume I make 42,016 more people happy than the Pro.

2) People have the right to look and be who they want to be

Is it right to tell someone they cannot wear a hat in public? Is it right to tell someone they cannot wear shoes? Or even if they can't wear a prosthetic leg. That's up to the voters to decide, but in my opinion, no. The majority of people with those items are using them for personal purposes, not for malicious intentions.

The biggest reason you will vote Con today is that by affirming the resolution, you allow an unproven hypothetical scenario stop people from either A) Expressing themselves or B) Covering up flaws in there body.

Look at the Pros case this way: "Cars should be banned from sale because they have been known to be the transportation of criminals, abductors, and other malicious individuals.

I urge you to negate. Thank you.

1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
Debate Round No. 1
brian_eggleston

Pro

I should like to thank Hurstman for his eloquent and comprehensive response to my challenge.

In reply, I would like to contribute the following:

It is impossible for me to prove absolutely that Mr. Gaga isn't a man because he has consistently refused to subject himself to a full, public gynecological examination of his genitalia.

Of course, we have to ask ourselves why this is. What has he got to hide? No doubt, in a few years when his fans have reached the age of puberty and he is all washed up as a pop star, it will come out (I mean the truth, not his penis).

In the meantime, dirty old men are donning prosthetic breasts and vaginas and are going into swimming baths to spy on our womenfolk with impunity.

They know they can get away with it because no swimming baths manager would go up to a butch-looking woman in the showers and say:

"Excuse me madam, but I can't help noticing you have hairy legs and I suspect you may be a man. I'm afraid I'm going to have to have a good grope of your jubblies and a proper poke around inside your minge in order to satisfy myself that you are, as you purport, of the female gender."

That's why so few crimes of this nature have been brought to justice.

That said, I do agree that women who have had mastectomies or have suffered injuries to their beef curtains should be allowed prosthetic replacements, but these should be prescribed by doctors rather than be offered for sale by unscrupulous traders of female sexual appendages.

In the final analysis, prevention is better than cure and the protection of innocent women and girls must remain paramount and for that reason I reaffirm prosthetic breasts and vaginas should be banned from sale.

Thank you.
Hurstman

Con

Thanks for the response! It was funny and logical!
--------------------------------------
"It is impossible for me to prove absolutely that Mr. Gaga isn't a man because he has consistently refused to subject himself to a full, public gynecological examination of his genitalia."

With good reason. If you were accused of being a woman would you want to be examined? even if you have nothing to hide, it's a matter of respect.
----------------------------
"Of course, we have to ask ourselves why this is. What has he got to hide? No doubt, in a few years when his fans have reached the age of puberty and he is all washed up as a pop star, it will come out (I mean the truth, not his penis)."

It's a matter of respect. If I was accused of being a woman, I would not consent to examination. Does that make me a woman? This argument doesn't logically follow.
------------------------------------------
"In the meantime, dirty old men are donning prosthetic breasts and vaginas and are going into swimming baths to spy on our womenfolk with impunity."

Once again, my opponent has provided ABSOLUTELY no evidence to back this claim. Extend that it is sexist and illogical due to lack of evidence.
-------------------------
"They know they can get away with it because no swimming baths manager would go up to a butch-looking woman in the showers and say:

"Excuse me madam, but I can't help noticing you have hairy legs and I suspect you may be a man. I'm afraid I'm going to have to have a good grope of your jubblies and a proper poke around inside your minge in order to satisfy myself that you are, as you purport, of the female gender."

That's why so few crimes of this nature have been brought to justice."

This is funny, but illogical. No evidence that this has or will happen. It's improbable, hypothetical, and lame. Also, my opponent claims that "so few crimes of this nature have been brought to justice", but the reason for this is because there are no crimes of those natures being commited!
----------------------------------------------------
"That said, I do agree that women who have had mastectomies or have suffered injuries to their beef curtains should be allowed prosthetic replacements, but these should be prescribed by doctors rather than be offered for sale by unscrupulous traders of female sexual appendages."

Interesting how my opponent now trys to capture my benefits of negating. He obviously agrees to my harms. But his compromise won't work because it the items are banned (as resolution says they should be), then they will be banned from sale by the doctors or pharmacies as well. My opponent would not be affirming the resolution if he decided to sell it privately.
---------------------
Note that my opponent drops my second argument, so extend that since he concedes.

"2) People have the right to look and be who they want to be

Is it right to tell someone they cannot wear a hat in public? Is it right to tell someone they cannot wear shoes? Or even if they can't wear a prosthetic leg. That's up to the voters to decide, but in my opinion, no. The majority of people with those items are using them for personal purposes, not for malicious intentions."

So in conclusion, negating is the only way to go to 1) Allow people free expression and 2) Cover up body flaws. His whole argument is improbable and lacks evidence. Please vote who did the better debating, not who you personally agree with. I urge you to negate. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Railsguardian 6 years ago
Railsguardian
Ah Lady gaga.......

Good times ... good times ...
Posted by Cody_Franklin 6 years ago
Cody_Franklin
"Conduct- Con. My opponent made funny comments, but I would say he did not take it serious."

Once you have experience on this website, you'll understand why you shouldn't get the conduct point for that. I guess you just don't understand the intention of the debate. :(
Posted by rougeagent21 6 years ago
rougeagent21
lol!
Posted by Hurstman 6 years ago
Hurstman
Conduct- Con. My opponent made funny comments, but I would say he did not take it serious.
S&G- Con. I would vote me because some of the things my opponent said were funny but wrong grammer.
Convincing Argument- Con, I backed up my arguments with evidence, and my opponent failed to sufficiently refute my key points
Sources- Con, my opponent lacks a lot of evidence
Posted by Kinesis 6 years ago
Kinesis
Man. Brain, you come up with the most hillarious and random debates, which would all be trollish if they weren't done so awesomely, and you often get real, honest opponents who take the subject seriously. Meanwhile, everyone else who DOES make serious debates gets trolled half the time.
WTF!?
Posted by Hurstman 6 years ago
Hurstman
Thanks. So yeah...I'm still working on our debate.
Posted by RaeTulo 6 years ago
RaeTulo
You, definately.
Your opponent has no impact and no warrant.
Posted by Hurstman 6 years ago
Hurstman
Tell my opponent that. Hey, who would you vote so far
Posted by RaeTulo 6 years ago
RaeTulo
LOL.
Lady Gaga is not a man.
She has a real vagina;; just an enlarged clitoris.
That's all.
Posted by Hurstman 6 years ago
Hurstman
? Explain what you mean please
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by RaeTulo 6 years ago
RaeTulo
brian_egglestonHurstmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Alex 6 years ago
Alex
brian_egglestonHurstmanTied
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:50 
Vote Placed by rougeagent21 6 years ago
rougeagent21
brian_egglestonHurstmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:32 
Vote Placed by JRSolvency 6 years ago
JRSolvency
brian_egglestonHurstmanTied
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 LLAMA 6 years ago
LLAMA
brian_egglestonHurstmanTied
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:16 
Vote Placed by Hurstman 6 years ago
Hurstman
brian_egglestonHurstmanTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07