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

The purpose of hypersexualization is to increase the gender power divide.

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: 5/24/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,935 times Debate No: 23810
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)




Be It Resolved That: Hypersexualization in Western nations is socially constructed for the sole purpose of disempowering women while empowering men.

In Western nations such as Canada and the U.S., human rights are becoming more equitable for heterosexual men and women. However, there may be a misconception that progression in "human rights" increases "free will." Do men and women have free will in behaviours and attitudes involved in consensual sexual experiences? Forces of power shape discourses surrounding sexuality and human rights in a way that creates internalized oppression. "Internalized Oppression" directs sexual attitudes and behaviours. For example a women that begins to engage with multiple sexual partners may become more submissive to men, and develop a lower self-esteem (as a result of general societal attitudes; promiscuity decreases a women's worth). Though one may be legally allowed whether male or female to have various consensual sexual partners and experiences at specific ages, factors beyond free will direct men and women to certain behaviours and attitudes in relation to sexual experience.

Definition of Terms:

"Internalized Oppression" - The process by which an oppressed person comes to believe, accept, or live out the inaccurate stereotypes and misinformation about their group.

"hypersexualize" - To make extremely sexual; to accentuate the sexuality of  [quotations ]

"directs" - In this case the word directs will be used as causative in nature of attitudes and behaviours surrounding sexuality.

"discourses" - conversations that take a clear side on issues that directly shape societal values, attitudes, and policies.


1) Hypersexualization of women in the media (imagery and behaviour; Maxim, Cosmo, Jersey Shore, Britney Spears, etc.) lead women to feel that it is socially acceptable and encouraged to dress and behave in a hypersexual nature causing misinformation of the empowerment of women. Women falsely are led to believe that it empowers them through media messages, but it has the reverse effect. It results in stigmatization of sexualized women which disempowers women, while visual sexual stimulation becomes more accessible to men. This can be related to the past construction of a "hippie generation" and ideas of "free love" that eased the access of sex for men. The construction of hypersexualization does not benefit women. Women that adopt a hypersexual image for themselves in appearance and behaviour are more susceptible to sexual assault. Women may believe that they are empowered but the discourses surrounding hypersexualization of women stigmatize hypersexual women in society.

2) Societal discourses deem it legal yet socially "unacceptable" for women to be promiscuous, yet legal and socially "acceptable" for men to be promiscuous. The following are general attitudes held by Western society. A man is considered more of a man if he can get sleep with many women whereas women are considered slutty and frowned upon. Women discuss promiscuous women with a negative connotation and men discuss promiscuous men with a positive connotation. The most notable implication of these attitudes and beliefs is an increase in the gender power divide.

3) Due to the construction of "raunch culture," "hook-up culture," and "bar culture," men are not required to put as much thought or effort into winning the affections of women to engage in sexual intercourse. This in turn results women being undervalued by men due to ease of sexual access. The nature of women has also historically changed from being sexually outspoken and blunt to a general trend for women to be more sexually submissive to men evident in the aforementioned "sexual cultures."

Boil down and central themes: The majority of power in society resides in men consequently empowering men while disempowering women - In media ex: "voyeurism", and many positions of power, men are still in the majority. They directly impact the social attitudes of men and women in what is considered socially acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. Though women and men are permitted to partake in a variety of sexual experiences prior to marriage by law, promiscuity (before marriage without commitment to a partner; hook-up culture) still holds strong socially unacceptable attitudes for women and socially acceptable attitudes for men. For males in regard to promiscuity the terms "bro"/"player" are connoted positively, whereas for women the terms "easy" or "slutty" are applied negatively. In turn women often feel worse about themselves, and men often better about themselves for promiscuous behaviour. As a result men are encouraged to continue this behaviour by men as an affirmation of their masculinity. Women continue this behavior due to media influences of highly sexualized women and discourses promoting a hook-up culture for men and women (more overt in university cultures). Women become misinformed in believing that being able to partake in sexual experience equal to men empowers them. Men continue to engage increasingly in promiscuous behaviour due to the availability of women willing to engage in sexual intercourse/experiences and it's social acceptability for men. This power struggle leads to men feeling empowered in the ease in the conquest of women sexually and women dis-empowered by the stigmatization of sexualized women.

If you accept this resolution to debate, please respond in the following order:

Round 1: Construction of Arguments

Round 2: Refutation of Arguments

Round 3: Reconstruction of arguments and boil down with conclusions


The gender divide is little to non existent in reality. Though it is true that men and women are not treated equally in certain aspects, these can favor either of the sexes depending on the situation. Society seems to have a preconceived notion that women are not treated worse than men, though one should question whether or not this is true. In some cases, it may be true that a man makes slightly more money than a woman in a job, but the wage gap is constantly narrowing. ( It is also shown women make more on average, and there are many jobs where women make more than men. Would people consider this sexist? No, their first thought would be that women are just better at these jobs. It is true that most rich people are men, but this has been proven to be because men are much more ruthless in a business environment ( Women are also treated much better socially. They are allowed to show their emotions while men are not allowed to, or else risk being seen as 'gay' or 'effeminate'. Women are allowed to be weak or strong, but men must be strong. Men pay for things in relationships, and must provide for their families. This isn't to say women can't provide for themselves, but it would be fine socially for a woman to stay at home, but not for a man. I digress. Many would describe a female stripper as being 'objectified by men,' yet are male strippers ever described as being objectified by women? No, because the women that go to male strip clubs are 'confident and not held down by men'. When one sees a Victoria's Secret fashion show, many assume that these women are being wrongly objectified by men. Has it come to mind that most designers for things such as this are in fact female? I doubt that a female designer who spends their time creating women's underwear's goal would be to increase the gender power divide. Feminists usually ignore the fact that their are things similar to Victoria's Secret, but with male models, not a soul would claim that hypersexualization in this case would give females power over men (see: video). It is ultimately the choice of the model as to whether or not they want to show off their body. It is not as if they are being forcibly objectified. A sex slave is being forcibly objectified, as they are being treated as dirt and are not allowed to make choices. At any point can a model quit their job. They are also paid very well, which means that women models gain power the more they model. Not just financially, but also socially. People start recognizing them. Women idolize them and men worship them. Many a man would do unspeakable things just to be in the presence of one such a female. How is a woman who gains this unwavering power over all men a victim? If anything, it doesn't objectify women, but instead makes men put them on a pedestal, worshiping them. Does this not make women more powerful? I ask you to look within yourself and see if a man has ever watched porn and then immediately treated you as an object. You do not give males enough credit, as their values are barely touched by anything external. We are much too stubborn. If the idea that women becoming more sexualized means that women have less power over society was true, then why has female power and influence in society heightened alongside female sexuality? Centuries ago, women were not even allowed to show their ankles in public, but they also had no rights. Your logic states that the sexualization of females directly correlates with a lack of female power. If this was the case, wouldn't females have had more power back when they had to remain clothed right to their ankles as opposed to now, when wearing a bikini in public is okay? No, it is the other way around. Women have more rights and power now than any other point in history. If your logic checked out, wouldn't the complete opposite of female hypersexualization (burkas) grant more power to females? No, it grants them far less rights and power than literally any other place in the world. Women in North America are not forced to be more or less sexual than they want to be. Sexuality in women and power of women have risen hand in hand, and remain that way to this very day. Your move.
Debate Round No. 1


peacemymind forfeited this round.


So I have reviewed your post, and I have come to the conclusion that the following are your main points:

-Women who have multiple sexual partners become submissive to men and gain low self esteem.

This is untrue. There is not a single scientific study that shows this. In fact, in many situations, because it is the female that is 'letting' the male have sex with her, it is more the man's job to please the woman than vice versa. This gives the female power and would actually raise her self esteem. Also, surveys have shown that women tend to be the dominatrix more than men in bed.

-Women think it is acceptable to be permiscuous and dress sexually as it is seen in the media, thinking it 'empowers' them.

It does empower them greatly socially. They do gain a power over men, this is undeniable. Men only see a female 'easy' when she dresses like this but has very low self esteem (trust me, I'm a guy and I have talked about this with many other guys). It is women who do the slut shaming.

-Permiscuous women become stigmatized therefore become disempowered.

Only by other females. Most men actually think a girl outspoken sexually is cool and modern. There are bad men that manipulate women though, as there are women who manipulate men.

-Sexual women makes visual stimulization easy for men to find.

This is true. As it is for sexual men making it easier for women to do the same. It is easy to notice that sexual men are much easier to find than sexual women (men go without shirts around the house, at beaches, etc.).

-Sexual women have a higher chance of being sexually assaulted.

This is true, but this does not in essence lengthen any gender power gap. It does put them in degrading situations, for which there are many pre-emptive solutions (

-Sexual men are considered studs, sexual women are devalued.

This is actually fact. Men must work to get sex, women do not. Women can just say that they want sex (no matter their looks) and get it. Men cannot, therefore, the sexes are 'rewarded' by doing that which is more difficult for each sex (for a man, getting a woman to have sex with him. For a woman, having the willpower to abstain from constant sex). If an army (males) can conquer any country, (defeating their resistance, similar to meeting a woman's standards for a man) that's a pretty good army, but if a country can be defeated by any army (a woman having impossibly low standards and having sex with any man) is a pretty terribly country.

-Easy for men to pick up women, therefore they are devalued in the eyes of men.

Not really. Men care much more about how a woman carries herself than how many men she has slept with. If she has slept with many men and is proud of it, that is all right. If she has slept with many men but is ashamed, she is seen as easy.

-Women used to be sexually outspoken and blunt, but now are submissive.

What? Not really. This is the most outspoken women have ever been sexually. See my rebuttal to your first point about women being 'submissive'.
Debate Round No. 2


peacemymind forfeited this round.


As my opponent did not point out any flaws in my argument, I have no holes to amend.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Kevin6 4 years ago
Anyone going to vote on this?
Posted by peacemymind 4 years ago
Sorry about that. I forgot to include "with the intention of." I rephrased it to "constructed (socially constructed) to (with the intention of)" disempowering women while empowering men. Let me know if that clarifies things.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 4 years ago
Core of this debate is the direction of causation.
No votes have been placed for this debate.