The Instigator
Dinara.T
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Women make better politicians than men.

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 3 votes the winner is...
socialpinko
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/13/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,699 times Debate No: 26201
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

Dinara.T

Pro

Women make better politicians than men.
First, women have the feeling of motherhood, love towards the country and people, this feeling always gives them support in handling politics. They care about everyone and every time.
Second, women are better survivors than men. A woman can out-think a man, every time. Women are more honest and a lot more organized than men. They make way better decisions.
Third, women can do a better job then men because they will make their responsibilities with more professionalism and commitment.
socialpinko

Con

My refutation of Pro's case will be in two points. First, I will show that Pro's specific points lack justification or any reason to suppose they apply to woman more so than men. Second, I will show that Pro's argument makes an unwarranted conceptual leap out of a possible general trait.


C1. Evidence.


The first thing that comes to mind when reading Pro's argument is that he posts no sources to back up his claims. This debate isn't of a purely logical or analytical nature, it has to do with empirical claims about the real world which may or may not be verified. Since Pro can't simply justify his argument by appeal to logic, he should post sourced studies or statistics showing why his claims are true.


Specifically, Pro needs sourced evidence for his claims that women: "care about everyone and every time", "are better survivors than men", "can out-think a man, every time", "are more honest and a lot more organized than men", "make way better decisions", and that they "will make their responsibilities with more professionalism and commitment". In the absence of third party empirical evidence, Pro's arguments amount to little more than conjecture.


C2. Generalities and Concepts.


The next problem with this argument is that it confuses mere generalities with universalized concepts. The resolution does not say that women are on balance better politicians than men or that most of the time a woman will make a better politician than a man. The claim Pro is making is that women (conceptually) are better politicians than men. This means that even if Pro is able to conjure up evidence backing up an empirical claim regarding the general political superiority of women, it wouldn't be even to make the jump to the conceptual superiority of women politically then man.
Debate Round No. 1
Dinara.T

Pro

Honestly, it is my first debate, so it is a little bit difficult for me. I didn't know how to start the debate, as a result I wrote it in this way. By reading your answer, I realized my fault, so thank you for that))) I will try to continue our debate by using arguments.

First, as leading psychologists William James, William McDougall, and G. Stanley Hall claimed (1), "women have a special need and ability to protect and care for others". It means female worry and care about people, moreover, they are more responsible than men. So women-politicians can make decision that beneficial for others, help children and old people, also do things to improve the country.

Secondly, according to Debra Burrell, a psychological social worker and regional training director of the Mars-Venus Institute in New York, most women of women managers tend to have more of a desire to build than a desire to win and also women are more willing to explore compromise and seek other people's opinions. (2) Women able to listen others and create world with out war, that means they can make better politicians and do things for sake of people.

Third, as Carol Smith, the senior vice president and chief brand officer for the Elle Group, illustrates, female managers are more collaborative and democratic than male managers. Also, she claimed that women use a more positive approach by encouraging and urging others rather than a negative approach of scolding and reprimanding them. Also, women attend more to the individuals they work with, by mentoring them and taking their particular situations into account. (3)

Moreover, the Daily Beast reports on a new study that shows female politicians are among the most productive and persuasive ones in the country. This research in the American Journal of Political Science is the first to compare the performance of male and female politicians. It shows women do a better job at securing pork for their home districts and shaping policy.(4)

As an example, there are powerful women leaders all over the world serving effectively in their respective fields and most of them are politicians. Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor is the best example. She heads Europe's most vibrant economy and is widely viewed as the de facto leader of the EU. She reigns supreme as the pre-eminent leader of the European Union. Her hold over the economic future of the eurozone (current GDP $17.9 trillion) was made crystal clear this year. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, fourth in line to the succession of the U.S. Presidency. As the world ambassador of the largest single economy on earth, Clinton has advanced U.S. interests and policies overseas while pushing women"s issues, development and education to the top of the foreign policy agenda. (5) These evidences prove that women make better politicians than men.

(1) http://gem.greenwood.com...
(2) http://www.siliconindia.com...
(3) http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com...
(4) http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com...
(5) http://www.forbes.com...
socialpinko

Con

On Pro's first point of evidence, that women have maternal instinct, there are two problems. First, Pro fails to justify the jump from "women have a special need....to protect and care for others" to "women are more responsible than men". The resolution posits that women are better qualified as politicians than men, therefore Pro either has to state why maternal instincts make women better than men, or any reason why this point means superiority on the part of women. On the contrary, Pro fails to realize that masculine traits also contribute to positive governing traits such as the provision of resources and protection of territory[1]. Pro has yet to show superiority.


On Pro's second point of evidence, that women are "able to listen and create world with out war", clear counter examples can easily refute this. On the resolution passed which authorized armed force against Iraq, Heather Wilson (NM), Karen Thurman (FL), Ellen Tauscher (CA), Deborah Pryce (OH), Judith Biggert (IL), etc. etc. etc. all voted in favor. Condoleezza Rice approved of water boarding torture techniques[2]. Current Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has also voiced support of unmanned drone killings[3]. Obviously, support for war and war-related activities is not an exclusively male trait.


Pro's third contention only pertains to workplace management, not with governance. Also, Pro's fourth piece of evidence fails to actually prove qualitative superiority. The article Pro links to claims that "From 1984 to 2004, women politicians won about $50 million more a year for their districts than men did." However, seeing as the U.S. is currently harboring a large budget deficit, proving that one group of people is better at spending money than another fails to actually count as a superior political trait. Pro's fifth point also fails to establish superiority. Furthermore, the fact that most world leaders are men successfully counters this point. Why would this prove female superiority?


===Sources===


[1] http://psychologyofmen.org... ("(1) Provider: Secure and provide resources (2) Protector: Defend others and territory")
[2] http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
[3] http://www.reuters.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Dinara.T

Pro

Dinara.T forfeited this round.
socialpinko

Con

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 4 years ago
lannan13
Dinara.TsocialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
Dinara.TsocialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Dinara.TsocialpinkoTied
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: Obey.