The Instigator
Lirana
Con (against)
The Contender
Amphia
Pro (for)

Feminism

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
Lirana has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/4/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 491 times Debate No: 110168
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

Lirana

Con

Is Feminism really for equality? I mean, I know the concept that 'females are seen as the weaker sex' or that 'females and males should be treated the same way'. That is the thing, we are not the same, our brains work differently, we are born differently, our personalities are different, our conduct is different, our styles are different, there are many things that are different. Now, what I want to know is, how are men superior? I mean, sure they (some males) have more (physical) power than females because that's just the way it is, it does NOT automatically make females weaker than them. If there are areas where men specialize in, then there are areas where females specialize in as well, rather than running after their position, why not see what females already have and work further to improve them?
Amphia

Pro

I feel like this is more of a discussion than a debate which I really like, debating feminism isn't as fun as talking about it.

I can't really tell what side you're on but I think you should know is that feminists are not advocating for women to be the same as men. They are advocating for equality. Also, I think when it comes to being treated the same way, I don't see the problem with that. I think you should treat people differently based on their personality, not gender. If a woman doesn't like sports, then don't always talk about sports with her. Don't not talk about sports because she is a woman, do it because she doesn't like sports. If a woman does like sports, talk about it with her. Don't assume she hates sports because of her gender. Same thing vice versa.

Obviously men are not superior, though people believe this. However, I think the real problem is that stereotypes and "gender roles" are what's holding us back. I can explain in the next round if you're interested.

"If there are areas where men specialize in, then there are areas where females specialize in as well, rather than running after their position, why not see what females already have and work further to improve them?"

The problem with this is that it assumes that females are naturally good at one thing while males are naturally good at other things. Generally, more women are stay-at-home moms than men. This doesn't mean we are necessarily better parents or that men are better at working, it's just the way society has framed it. And I see what you mean about physical work. Men are generally stronger and bigger than women but what feminists are saying is that if a woman is strong enough to do physical work, let her. And if a man doesn't want to do it or he can't, don't call him a wimp or bully him.

However, also remember that women are not running after traditionally male roles just so they can be men. They are doing it because they actually want to. A woman running for public office isn't necessarily doing it because she wants to be "like a man". She wants to see change in her region.

Feminists aren't trying to turn women into men. They are just advocating for equal opportunities and want to erase stereotypes and gender roles because they shouldn't really exist.
Debate Round No. 1
Lirana

Con

That seems about right, it's more of a discussion since I want to clear some things (and rumors) that have been floating around. You see that seems to be the thing, feminist claim they stand for equality yet there have been so many movements against men and supporting females, for example the claim that men are stronger, it's not just a stereotype (you said you would explain if I was interested, I am) while they ARE physically strong, they are not some sort of a super human being. There are men with meeker personalities (even if they are told to 'man up') I get where you're coming from but the whole declaration that men simply CANNOT be domestically abused because they are male and simply more powerful than women brings up many questions about feminist equality.
I mean, take a look at the new 'terms' that have come into existence, "Man-spreading" and "Mansplaining", they're not even proper words, its just putting man with the word spreading and combining explaining. These terms stand for 'spreading legs in public' and 'explaining something to a woman in a condensing and/or patronizing manner' respectively, however these terms hold no logic and are specifically aimed at males, like I said before in the previous round, we, male and females, have been made differently, its nature. So why are men blamed for the way they sit? its a confirmed biological fact that they need to open their legs because of their genitalia, they just can't sit with them closed, its just the way it is, so holding men responsible for the way they were created is not equality simply because 'if women sit with their legs closed then men should too or else it would be offensive because males take too much space in comparison to females so they can be arrested FOR NOT SITTING WITH THEIR LEGS CLOSED' (sorry about that).
The term 'Mansplaining', I mean where is the term for women who speak in a condensing or patronizing tone towards men? On second thoughts, why have they created this word in the first place? This word just...doesn't make sense, does this word imply that men think they're better than women? Who was such a genius psychologist to know what every man on the earth thinks? Does it imply that men use 'condensing or patronizing' tone towards women just because they're female or because of other reasons?
"(of a man) explain (something) to someone, typically a woman, in a manner regarded as condescending or patronizing." fresh from google, it doesn't say anywhere that the man is being condensing towards the woman BECAUSE she is a female, it only says that he explains it TO a woman in a condensing tone, is it simply called man-plaining because its the man that's being condensing, so if equality is so important to feminists why are they coming up with terms specifically for men? Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't it come in the sexist category?
Back towards the point, feminists have said that males cannot be domestically abused because "Women are equal to and just as capable as men. Except when it comes to abuse. No woman is physically capable of harming a man ever". How can they say that if they claim women are just as capable as men, if they are just as capable then why are they not 'just as capable to abuse', if men in their eyes are the abusers? Like I said before, not every man is strong, there are some who have softer personalities, or who are more sensitive because even if they 'man up', they cannot shut down their emotions. So if there can be a male who can be a drunkard who abuses his children and/or his partner, then why can't there be a drunkard female who abuses her children and/or her partner? If not drunkard, and there is a male who can harm his partner then why can't there be a female who harms her partner as well? Also note that ("Women are equal to and just as capable as men. Except when it comes to abuse. No woman is physically capable of harming a man ever") It only says that PHYSICALLY harm is 'incapable for females to commit', even when going along with those words, is verbal or psychological (mental abuse) not a thing?
There have been cases where male domestic abuse help centers have been closed due to pressure, where are they supposed to go for help? if feminism supports equality then why are male shelters being shut down? Would a center specially made to help the female victims listen to a males cries of help or would they just call the authorities to get him arrested? Like a case of a "father with two children, a one-year-old girl and a nine-year-old boy and he was fleeing a violent, alcoholic wife."
Another thing I would like to ask that if feminists claim that females are just as capable in ability as men then why do they back away from the flaws? If females can be just as good as men then females can just as bad as men. Likewise, why does no one work on the fact that their claim, that females are 'good', then (according to being equal) that men are just as 'good'?
Amphia

Pro

I totally agree with the thing about domestic abuse. While domestic abuse victims are more commonly women, it can happen to men too. People often feel this sort of things is impossible and this relates back to the stereotypes I was talking about that are holding us back. People say that since men are the stronger sex, they could never be overpowered by a woman. However, these views are not views shared by feminists. These are views shared by people with patriarchal thinking. Feminists have been advocating for total equality and there are many movements that focus on domestic abuse against men. There is one in England that I heard of, i think 40% of men there suffer from domestic violence. They did an experiment where they had a guy abuse his girlfriend in public and people stepped in immediately. But when they had a woman abuse her boyfriend in public, people just laughed. It was disgusting.

I think man-spreading and man-splaining are complex issues, so I apologize if what I say makes little sense...

Man-spreading:

Dictionary defines manspread as this:

Word Origin
verb (used without object), Informal.
1.
(of a man) to sit with one's legs far apart, taking up too much space on a seat shared with other people:

Some people say that man-spreading is simply because of biology but to be honest, I don't think that matters because I think it is rude, regardless if a man or woman does it. I know from experience how annoying it is when someone takes up more than the space necessary. Yes, spreading their legs might make them more comfortable but it can't be that uncomfortable. In restaurant, men sit in chairs with their legs closed. In school too. They don't seem to be terribly uncomfortable. They don't usually spread their legs. In public transport, people (men and women) just need to be more considerate of space.

If you search up man-spreading, you'll see pictures of men taking up 2, even 3 seats which is a little extreme if you ask me. Taking up 1.5 seats or 2 might be a little less anointing/justifiable, but 3?? The reason it is called man-spreading is because generally women don't it. Women are taught to cross their legs and studies have shown that women generally take up less space than men (for a variety of reasons). Also, Mic did a study and found that women who man-spread were glared/stared at and even filmed while no one noticed when a man did it. I think since women don't manspread nearly as often as men, it is called manspreading. The whole manspreading police, I am not too sure about that. I think if you sit next to someone who is taking too much space, you should tell them. We don't need "police" haha.

http://www.independent.co.uk...

Mansplaining:

Merriem-Webster defines it as the following:

Mansplaining is, at its core, a very specific thing. It's what occurs when a man talks condescendingly to someone (especially a woman) about something he has incomplete knowledge of, with the mistaken assumption that he knows more about it than the person he's talking to does.

Empirically men have thought themselves to be smarter/better than women. Especially in the past, nowadays it is more implicit I think. Obviously not every man thinks "Wow, I am smarter than a woman." but we do many things unconsciously. We all have implicit bias, whether we know it or not. I have it. You have it. It isn't out fault, it is how we have been raised. This implicit bias makes us do things that we don't even think about. Like seeing a woman and explaining a topic to her, in a condescending tone, even if we don't know it very well. I understand that not all men see a women and think she is not knowledgeable, but it is called mansplaining because it is usually men that do it to women. A woman could do it to a man but it is not as common. A lot of people make the mistake that feminists are claiming that ALL men suck, we aren't. Feminists are saying we all do things like that and it is holding us back as a society. And we want to work on that.

Things like man-splaining and man-spreading have very gray areas. Is the man doing it because she is a woman? Is he sexist? Or is he just explaining something to someone (that he knows little about) and the person happens to be a woman? Is the guy sexist or is he just kind of rude? It's hard to tell. I know. I think we just need to stop behavior like this regardless of the person's reasons for doing it. It is rude behavior regardless of whether the man is sexist or doesn't realize he is being kind of annoying. These names only have "man" in them because it usually (not always but usually) men who do them.

I fell like you are grouping feminists in with a group of people who are radical and insane. Feminists have not said men cannot be abused. If they have, they are radical feminists (feminazis) who I don't count as feminists to be honest. Any person who claims women are better than men are just as bad as people who say men are better than women. Don't let a few crazies fool you cause they're just crazy.

"There have been cases where male domestic abuse help centers have been closed due to pressure, where are they supposed to go for help? if feminism supports equality then why are male shelters being shut down?" This is awful and I oppose this but again, I feel like you are blaming feminists for the inequality in our society when in actuality, they are trying to stop it. It is not feminists' fault that we have inequality, it is centuries of living in a pattern but when you try to break an old habit, it's hard. It's a slow process.

In society, females are seen as the weaker sex, thus are seen as harmless. In court cases, judges usually give custody to women because they are "better mothers' and men are incarcerated at higher rates than women because women couldn't possibly be harmless, right? This is ridiculous but that's society for you (funny because I am in society...). Feminists are trying to get rid of silly, old-school thinking like this.

"Another thing I would like to ask that if feminists claim that females are just as capable in ability as men then why do they back away from the flaws? If females can be just as good as men then females can just as bad as men. Likewise, why does no one work on the fact that their claim, that females are 'good', then (according to being equal) that men are just as 'good'?"

Anyone who says something like that is not a feminist. They are a misandrist (sexism against men). Feminism is about lifting each other up to equality. Not about bringing each other down. It's unfortunate that people with incorrect views are driving people away form feminism.

When I say I'm a feminist, people treat me different because they think I stand for a matriarchal society when in fact I stand for an egalitarian society.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Trixieko 3 years ago
Trixieko
From a biological view, men are the comprehensive and superior sex. Men have both 'X' and 'Y' genes. I think feminists fear the nearby future. It's very creepy but when the artificial womb is fully introduced, women are obsolete because of their lack of an 'Y' gene. Men can create both boy's and girls out of their own bone marrow/skin cells, women can only create girls because they lack the 'Y' gene in their DNA. So, men have the whole package DNA and can procreate themself in the nearby future. The default is woman (X), and when an embryo has an Y, he becomes a male. In biology every men is in fact a woman PLUS, but a women is not a man PLUS because of the Y-lack. Same reason as why the Y gene is more evoluted. It's very easy biology; when there is no Y-gene, all the men were women, but women will always stay women.
Posted by Amphia 3 years ago
Amphia
When feminism was created, it was about women. Men already had more rights, the point then was not to help men but women only. In fact, it was really just about white women though black women joined the bandwagon (to the disgust of a very racist America). Anyway, that is why it is called feminism to this day.
Posted by DeletedUser 3 years ago
DeletedUser
The problem with feminism is that many women encourage the belief that men are LESS equal than women. And that's the problem. As a man, I'm all for equality. But there are many women who take it wayyyy too far. For example, I heard of a women who had an abortion because the child was a boy. Of course this doesn't apply to all feminists, and I understand that, I'm just giving an example of radicalism. I feel like the term "feminism" itself just implies that women are better than men. I bet if they changed the term to something more neutral, that the subject would be more easily digested.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.