Sexism should be banned in the media
Debate Rounds (3)
To be fair I will not rebuttal my opponents points in the first argument.
My opponent will argue that sexism should be banned in the media, I will argue the contrary.
This idea is a direct attack on our civil liberates as members of a free society, to take away our free speech is an appealing idea and is a first steep towards a totalitarian dictator ship, something no rational human benign could want.
Also I'd like to know who decides what is deemed as 'sexist' and whats not, whom do we allow the authority and such immense power in this media fueled day and age to control the way the media operates; a very dangerous idea indeed.
My last point would to be to ask what the punishment would be if sexism in the media became a crime, any fine or prison time is still to much for the simple notion of expressing 'free speech'.
However this is just not the case, in America the first mentioning of the harms from objectification of women came about in the 60's (1), also in 60's came the came the American feminist movement and women gained a greater amount of rights as a result (2), but my opponent would argue that it should have had an opposite effect which it clearly did not.
Now to the present day where we have seen a skyrocket in the objectification of women in the media, as the media has boomed we see more images, and 96% of them are female of sexually objectified bodies (1), however equality for women is at an all time high and in most aspects of life is on par with their male counterpart. From education to earnings, American women today enjoy unprecedented levels of opportunity. Women now have a huge edge over men when it comes to higher education. They are earning the majority of associate, bachelor's, master's and doctorate degrees. For every 100 degrees men got in 2013, women got 140 (3).
Thus if the objectification of women in the media plays such a great role as my opponent states it does then the objectification of women is actually 'good' for women's equality.
Remaining on the issue of objectification my opponent is trying to give the impression that this is only a problem for women; untrue. In London 2013 two women have raised $3.5 million for a controversial, girls-only app that objectifies men (4).
You call for sexism in the media to be banned but then say there should be no punishment for offenders who break the ban, so then it would become an ineffective rule and a waste of everybody's time.
By suggesting this only applies to women which by your previous two arguments you clearly are leading to that view; means you want to place the 'rights' specifically your rights as i'd say most women would not agree with you, over the of rights everybody has to free speech. This idea is a step back for a progressive society.
You than go on to say "Anything that the media put out has an effect on everyone the same way as if you play violent video games the same way as if you watch a horror movie you start thinking about spooky things, the same way as the media objectify women we start to think the same way" now it appears my opponent is leading to the suggestion we ban some video games and movies, when will this tyranny end? By this logic we must also ban the news every time they report crime; inconceivable.
Lets look at the sexual objectification of women in Islamic communities, there is none; however coincidentally there is also no equality for women.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by RavenDebater 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Overall a Pro win. Con did not adequately refute the arguments made in the round, nor did not clarify how banning sexism would actually solve this problem. By constantly denying intentions, Con became a moving target. However Pro was clear and concise in his argumentation and won conduct. Pro actually used evidence while Con's arguments were based off of speculation. Con's argument could have been much improved if they proved how the negative portrayal of woman is having a negative affect on equality
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.