The Instigator
Redpages
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JohnMaynardKeynes
Pro (for)
Winning
43 Points

Should women have more leadership roles in society?

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 8 votes the winner is...
JohnMaynardKeynes
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/23/2014 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,097 times Debate No: 55311
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (1)
Votes (8)

 

Redpages

Con

Currently, more men attain higher positions in the working field. This is because businesses believe they have leadership qualities, and better working abilities. What is your take on this topic?
JohnMaynardKeynes

Pro

I accept this debate and, as Pro, will be making the case that women should have more leadership roles in society.

First, I'll begin by rebutting Con's arguments, which are in fact incoherent. He says that men are more likely to attain leadership roles businesses deem them superior in this area.

However, he hasn't sourced this claim, nor has he suggested that this is so, nor has he proven that this ought to be so.

In fact, suggesting that we ought to promote an unequal society bears an enormous burden of proof, so I hope Con will address this extensively in his arguments, as he bears the burden of doing so.

I will now make my case for why women should be in more positions of leadership in society.

Contention 1: Egalitarianism

"People should get the same, or be treated the same, or be treated as equals, in some respect. An alternative view expands on this last-mentioned option: People should be treated as equals, should treat one another as equals, should relate as equals, or enjoy an equality of social status of some sort. Egalitarian doctrines tend to rest on a background idea that all human persons are equal in fundamental worth or moral status." [1. http://tinyurl.com...].

This is basically the principle that all people, regardless of race, socieoconomic status, gender, etc. are of equal moral worth and that no one life ought to be valued over another life or treated differently from another.

Therefore, if a man is capable of reaching higher management positions, why shoudn't a woman? Why should we use gender as a means of discrimination?

This is actually a longstanding American principle enshrined in the founding documents. Let's look at the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amemdment [2. http://tinyurl.com...]

"The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibits states from denying any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. In other words, the laws of a state must treat an individual in the same manner as others in similar conditions and circumstances." [2. http://tinyurl.com...]


Contention 2: Women are perfectly capable

There is no reason that women aren't perfectly capable of doing the same work as a man, in spite of decades of discrimination -- the fact that they only earn 77 cents for ever dollar a man earns on average [3. http://tinyurl.com...], that they didn't achieve the right to vote until 1920 [4. http://tinyurl.com...], and that they were seen as property at one point.

In spite of all this, they have achieved immense progress. For instance, the majority of bachelors-degree-seeking students are women [5. http://tinyurl.com...]
and the same is true for graduate school [5. http://tinyurl.com...].

At the same time, about 4 in 10 households are headed by a female breadwinner [6. http://tinyurl.com...].

Conclusion
There is absolutely no reason that women shouldn't have more leadership roles in society, and I challenge my opponent to prove, either empirically or normatively, that this shouldn't be the case.

Debate Round No. 1
Redpages

Con

Redpages forfeited this round.
JohnMaynardKeynes

Pro

My opponent has forfeited, in the process dropping all of my arguments and not providing his own.

Please vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
<3 this debate
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 3 years ago
lannan13
RedpagesJohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 3 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
RedpagesJohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pretty obvious the winner as Con made zero arguments. It could have been fun as Con could have played the semantic game by saying more puts women in the majority which would mean inequality. Anyway, very nice arguments Pro.
Vote Placed by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
RedpagesJohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made virtually no arguments.
Vote Placed by creedhunt 3 years ago
creedhunt
RedpagesJohnMaynardKeynesTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made arguments, he had sources, and he didn't forfeit.
Vote Placed by SeventhProfessor 3 years ago
SeventhProfessor
RedpagesJohnMaynardKeynesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Not only did Con not source his arguments, he just said more men achieve leadership positions. Not really an argument at all + FF
Vote Placed by Zarroette 3 years ago
Zarroette
RedpagesJohnMaynardKeynesTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were far too brief and unsubstantiated. Pro's were well referenced and quite solid (thus arguments and references go to him). There really wasn't a debate here. Conduct to Pro for Con's forfeit.
Vote Placed by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
RedpagesJohnMaynardKeynesTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: FF, Only one to make arguments & use sources
Vote Placed by YYW 3 years ago
YYW
RedpagesJohnMaynardKeynesTied
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: FF