The Instigator
Con (against)
1 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
5 Points

Is feminism needed in today's 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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/30/2017 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 992 times Debate No: 102821
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




In today's modern society, feminism is not needed. There is no factual evidence that women have it harder than men. There may be minor minor bits that could be seen as unfair but that goes both ways for men and women. You can't get society perfect down to the minute, it's just not possible and it requires too much time.



Feminism- the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes (1)

Observation: In this context, my opponent implies should, not the strict sense of the word "need".


I concede my opponent"s arguments

My case:

I do concede my opponent"s arguments, but only because they do not matter in this debate. Feminism is needed for maintaining this equality. Without having this equality, atrocities become more probable.

Feminism helps us maintain the status quo I conceded. Without people having this feminism ideology, equality decreases.
Essentially, people who think there needs to be no equality, start to be more lenient, if not just advocating for inequality.

Thus, vote for keeping the feminism ideology if you want to maintain the theory that we should treat men and women equally.


Debate Round No. 1


While yes, feminism is a battle for equality of the sexes, nowadays it's all about female supremacy. It's been hijacked by radical "feminazis" who are still pushing for women's rights today which is pointless as it is as equal as we're going to get. That being said, my opponent states that feminism is needed to main the status quo. If that is true which I'm not denying, meninism is also required to maintain the same standards ultimately cancelling the two out. Why have feminism, a push for equality, when we're already equal. If feminism was a rally for maintaining equality for both sexes, then it would be necessary but in modern days, it's very unnecessary.


1) My opponent confuses the essence of feminism with other people's interpretation. This is why I mentioned the definition of feminism. Feminism's definition doesn't change, because some people decide to confuse feminism with fighting against men. Therefore, disregard my opponent's claim about feminazis.

2) My opponent says by my logic we would also need meninism. If meninism stands for the equality of both sexes, then yes. Both mindsets of equality needs to be prevalent among people. These two do not cancel each other, they go hand and hand. In fact, they are required for each other. Even though i'm sure meninism is a parody, theoretically if it stood for equality, then it's good. Remember, feminism says "equality of the sexes".

3) "feminism was a rally for maintaining equality for both sexes", my opponent is ignoring the definition. Feminism isn't necessarily a push for equality as in change, but it solely entails maintaining this equality of both sexes.
Debate Round No. 2


My opponent claims that feminism is a movement trying to anchor equal rights when it's most entirely not. The definition I pulled about feminism was that "Feminism is a range of political movements, ideologies, and social movements that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve political, economic, personal, and social rights for women.". This nonsense is still taking place today which is why the debate has the question, is feminism needed in modern society. In modern society, a push for female rights (Or in this case, female supremacy) is utterly pointless. While yes, the idea might have been solid in the 80's, it's not needed in modern society. It has evolved into something much worse that you can't ignore. In many cases, the intention might've been good (Hitler trying to "save" his country by establishing a common enemy) the outcome was very bad and leads to a toppled society whether that be men fighting back and gaining more rights or women taking supremacy.


My opponent doesn't mention maintenance of equality in his last speech. Thus, my argument about having people still maintain the feminism ideology in order to maintain the equality of the status quo is extended. Cold conceded.

Con gives a definition. prefer my definition because my opponent does not have a citation for where it comes from and they didn't mention it R2.

Next, he completely ignores my comment about how the feminist movement is not necessarily a push, but maintaining equality which is entailed by the definition. Extend the arg.

Saying feminism is about female supremacy contradicts the definition. Feminism in essence is equality of both sexes.

My opponent then keeps on bringing up how feminists have misplayed the essence of feminism, I agree. However, we cannot confuse the essence of something with how people interpret it. For example, if someone were christian and decided to shoot up a clinic, we cannot say this is Christianity. Shooting up clinics is not doctrine
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by hotsauce2910 3 years ago

one side is talking about normal feminism, the other is talking about third wave feminism
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by jc1996 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:15 
Reasons for voting decision: While Con tries to deepen the argument that feminism isn't needed in the modern era, Pro made a conviction to justify the claims because feminism is needed in order to promote gender equality and fair distribution of rights. His definition clarified the context of the argument, while Con ignored the definition in both Rounds 2 and 3. With that being said, Pro won the debate.

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