The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Same-sex only public events hinder gender equality. Debate.

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/4/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 718 times Debate No: 38486
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




I am as of yet undecided, though I lean more towards the notion that same-sex only public events hinder gender equality.

My initial thoughts are:
- They only mirror and reinforce the gender divisions that impede gender equality.
- It is difficult to justify same-sex public events, they should theorectically be open to all.
- They exclude women/men who support gender equality issues.
- Collaboration between genders in key to large-scale gender equality.

P.S. I am of the opinion that there is a distinction to be made between public/private events.


Thank you for posting this debate. Before seeing this I have never really thought about this as being an issue. My thoughts are that the assumption you have put in place may be wrong.

My thoughts are
-Both genders may have them if the so choose.
-If they truly hindered gender equality then they would be deemed unconstitutional
- There may be reasoning as to why the events are gender specific
Debate Round No. 1


Thank you for answering too. I was of the same mind as you, I only encountered this issue recently whilst on campus at my university. Still I'm not sure how I feel, I was just curious to see what other people may think about the topic.

So, on your first point: I agree both genders should be able to have same-sex events if they choose. But my only issue with this is: I'm not sure if it is 'constitutional' (I'm English, but I'll still the term) to exclude any person from a public event on the basis of their gender, race, sexuality, etc. If we were discussing private events then I agree with your point.

I have already touched on the constitutional factor. But, to address your second point, I think the best way to achieve large-scale gender equality would be to include both genders in debates. To build bridges, rather than block them off. For example, how would a sexist person ever see differently if they are excluded from public events on gender issues from the first off?

I also agree with you that there may be very legitimate reasons why an event is gender specific. The case may be that the debate is on sexual abuse or a discussion group for victims of rape and sexual assault. I totally agree, having the offending gender present at these events would not be conducive to gender equality, or personal well-being. Though my point is, these types of discussion groups would always take place in private settings, e.g. a clinic, or a care centre. So I'm sticking to public events, say lectures on a university campus. All should be able to have access to these public events. I can't see why someone who has a right to fight for gender equality also has to be excluded from public events due to their gender.

Thank you.


I will continue to use your example of a lecture on a college campus. I have a few questions. First, how can a lecture be gender specific and public, the terms are contradicting, in order for something to be "public" shouldn't everyone be able to go? Also, if the issue is that important couldn't you talk to the president or dean of the college.
Debate Round No. 2


This is my point exactly, how can a lecture be gender specific and public? If it is public, then yes everyone should be able to go. Also, yes I should take it to college dean. I see we both agree.


So we both agree that there can be no such thing as a public, gender specific event so the point of this argument fell in on itself by establishing that.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.