The Instigator
Beondel
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points
The Contender
GameOfThrones69
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Women and Men have the same physical opportunities

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 2 votes the winner is...
Beondel
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/3/2015 Category: Sports
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 571 times Debate No: 72875
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Beondel

Con

This argument is in response to your comment on "Should female athletes be able to compete against men" in which you said: "Physical strength depends entirely on your lifestyle (e.G. Diet, exercise, etc.) and not due to what sex you are."

By this I assume you mean that regardless of your sex, you have the same abilities and opportunities as the other sex; correct me if I am wrong.

I challenge this notion on the grounds of biology, evolution, and common sense.

The round layout will be as follows:

Round 1: acceptance

Round 2: speech from both sides (no rebuttals, only new points)

Round 3: crossfire (rebuttals, new points/arguments if needed)

Round 4: crossfire (rebuttals, new points/arguments if needed)

Round 5: conclusive statements, summary of argument (no new points)

I am interested in what brings you to this conclusion of sexual equivalence, please accept so that we can partake in a mutual exploration of truth.
GameOfThrones69

Pro

Is a male baby born stronger than a female? No.
Sure, it may be easier for men to have more muscles, but it is ultimately down to your lifestyle.
Debate Round No. 1
Beondel

Con

In this round, we will both make our opening statements; this round will not be for rebuttals

I contend that men and women are biologically different, and that men are stronger. By this I do not mean to say that all men are stronger than all women, but that on average, men are stronger. This, I believe, is due to biology. As stated above, I will defend this in three ways: biology, evolution, and common sense (meaning looking at today's society for answers).

1. Biology

Skeletons of males and females are different. Your statement was that men and women have the same physical abilities. Because women have (skeletal structure) shorter legs and a broader waist, it would seem that women would in general be slower than men. This means that if a man and a woman train the same amount, the average man will beat the average woman in a standard speed race (100-200m).

Women have a smaller lung capacity than men do. This means that men can more efficiently allocate oxygen to their muscles, making for a more athletically able body, assuming muscle types across both genders to both be similar in aerobic/anaerobic state.

Women's bodies contain 20% less red blood cells than men do. Since red blood cells are responsible for carying oxygen around the body to supply different parts of the body with "fuel", women tire much more easily than men do.

The male body contains approximately 50% more muscle mass (give or take) which translates directly to raw strength.

2. Evolution

This argument will attempt to persuade Pro and the audience that men have evolved to be stronger without providing evidence to that effect, but rather, to show that it is reasonable to think that men are stronger, again, on average. I assume that Pro believes in natural selection. If not, please say so and I will remove this point from the debate.

During all stages of human prehistory and history until the modern era, women have stayed at home caring for children, while men have been tasked with working. This is how gender roles have played out, and for obvious reasons. Women conceive and bare children. They stay at home while pregnant (this is talking in a prehistorical landscape) and have to nurture and breastfeed after birth. Since such a large amount of time is spent with the child, it stands to reason that if one parent had to work and the other had to tend to children, then the mother would be the one attending to the children. Over time, this led to the more desireable males (the ones who were more likely to produce) being the stronger males, while the more desireable females be the most furtive and/or "good with kids". Since women were not being naturally selected for their strength, it is a trait which did not develop as it did in men.

3. Common Sense

It is common sense to say that men are stronger than women. I will attempt to show this to Pro and to the audience using three examples from contemporary culture.

a) NFL
There are no women in the NFL, arguably one of the most grueling training courses and competitions in all of sports. To be clear: women are allowed to try out, join, and play in the NFL.

b) Olympics
Mens' competition numbers when it comes to physical strength consistently beats that of womens'.

c) Personal Experience (not hard logic, just simple anecdotes)
I have seen many men and women; I have seen wimpy men and strong women. However, when thinking about all of the bodies I have seen I can be sure that the men I have seen by far can outperform the women have seen when it comes to physical performance.
GameOfThrones69

Pro

GameOfThrones69 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Beondel

Con

I extend my points in the hope that Pro decides to argue.
GameOfThrones69

Pro

GameOfThrones69 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Beondel

Con

I am sorry for the uneventul debate. I was looking forward to this one.
GameOfThrones69

Pro

GameOfThrones69 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Beondel

Con

My points stand. I urge a vote for Con.
GameOfThrones69

Pro

GameOfThrones69 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
BeondelGameOfThrones69Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Con. Pro forfeited the majority of the debate, which is rarely acceptable conduct in any debate setting. Thus, Con gains conduct for not forfeiting. | S&G - Neither side made any major spelling or grammatical errors. Tied. | Arguments - Pro failed to provide any case to affirm the resolution in any way whatsoever, and their forfeiture rendered Pro unable to respond to Con's arguments. Con took on the BoP and made an adequate negative case based on biology and evolution. Thus, arguments to Con. | Sources - Tie. Neither side made use of any sources. | 4 points to Con. | As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
BeondelGameOfThrones69Tied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Con. Forfeiting rounds in a debate is rarely acceptable conduct in any debate setting. Since Pro forfeited multiple rounds in this debate, she forfeits conduct points. Thus, Con wins conduct. S&G - Tie. Both had adequate spelling and grammar throughout the debate. Arguments - Con. Pro failed to present any case affirming her position within this debate. In fact, Pro did nothing more than present two sentences. One was a self-answered question and the other was an unsubstantiated claim that lacked any and all supporting evidence. This is a failure on Pro's part to maintain the BOP. On the flip side, Con was able to present some strong arguments negating the resolution and was left standing unchallenged for the remainder of the debate. For these reasons, Con wins arguments. Sources - Tie. Neither utilized sources in this debate. My only advice for Con is to start utilizing supporting evidence for some of your claims via citing sources such as images of the skeletal differences.