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

Third Wave Feminism Isn't Needed

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
jarleon has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/22/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 581 times Debate No: 114162
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)




First wave feminism primarily focused on allowing women to vote, which was a necessary issue to solve

Second wave feminism allowed women to wear/say what they want, as well as work as what they want, advocated against domestic violence, and influenced the legalization of gay marriage. All of these things I agree were necessary

Nowadays that women have equal rights, there is no need for feminism anymore


"Nowadays that women have equal rights, there is no need for feminism anymore"

Women have equal rights, do they? How about in the Middle East where women are forced to stay concealed and quiet? In Mauritania, women are not paid equally for equal work. Egypt does not have laws banning non-discrimination nor does it have laws mandating pay equality. Granted, these are not countries modern third and fourth wave feminism seem to be concerned with; however, the state of many countries does give support that a third wave was/is needed, even if the effective wave did not do what it should have. While the third wave as we have it isn't needed, a third wave was and is needed.
Debate Round No. 1


I agree that feminism is needed in some countries. But fighting for equal rights is actually second wave feminism, and it is very much needed in third world african and asian countries.

Third wave feminism in the United States if you do any research has to do with fat acceptance, abortion (which is already legal) and extending the gender spectrum, and no feminists I have met or researched are devoted to helping women in Mauritania or other such countries.

Fat acceptance and body positivity are two different things. Body positivity is when a person is proud of their bodies, and dont want to change regardless of the health risks obesity can cause. Fat acceptance is when obese people complain about how they arent welcome into society and teach children being fat is a good thing. Being fat is not a good thing. It's unhealthy.

My stance on abortion is that people should have the choice. If you dont want to get an abortion, dont get one. If you do, get one. I really couldnt care less. However, abortion is already legalized, and any further protests are unneccesary.

There are two genders. Male and Female. There are rare exceptions of which people are born in the wrong body and transition to the other gender, or are born with neither, or male and female genitals. These again are RARE exceptions. There is no such thing as any other gender. Any other gender is simply a way of making yourself feel special, and get the attention you so desperately crave.


"I agree that feminism is needed in some countries." I'd like to say, "I rest my case." This line right here is a blatant admission that feminism's role has yet to be completed. However, for the sake of intellectual honesty, I'll continue onwards with your intent, not your written word because, honestly, it'd be rude to say you've forfeited when I know full well you did not mean this in this way.

"But fighting for equal rights is actually second wave feminism," While it is true second-wave feminism in the US (and probably Canada) fought for equal rights, it's unreasonable to say that every feminist that did this in the world was a second-wave feminist. So far, no wave of feminism has really concerned itself beyond the level of its own nation's borders in terms of action, albeit some feminists may have claimed it within their ideals... but ideals don't equate to practice. (Just look at Communism of an example of political ideology not matching the actual effects.)

"Third wave feminism in the United States if you do any research" I used to be a third-waver, so please do not assume I am ignorant. If you paid attention to my last argument, I acknowledged blatantly that the actual third-wave has a turned a blind eye towards actual problems in the world. You telling me this once again, using my own example of Mauritania at that, is just downright insulting. Your argument is that third wave is not needed. I turned the argument back on you and said "It is needed, just not in the form we actually have it in."

"Fat acceptance and body positivity are two different things." I don't care about off-topic tangents. This has nothing to do as a response to anything I replied with and only served as filler and a way of distracting from the fact you were unsure of how to respond to somebody who was highly critical of third-wave feminism's shortcomings.

"My stance on abortion is that people should have the choice." Just as off-topic and tangential as your rant on fat acceptance.

"There are two genders. Male and Female." Even more off-topic and tangential than the previous two "points". That said, while I largely agree with you, I do think you ignore certain anthropological aspects to the 3+ gender argument... but 99% of the time, your enby assessment is pretty much spot on. But this would be a whole different debate if you cared enough to host it and if I cared enough to respond. As a debate, it doesn't really belong here.

In short, your Round 2 argument is as follows: 1) Agree with the content of my Round 1 argument, 2) Act as though I am ignorant of third-wave feminism, and 3) Rant about things third-wave feminism does which my Round 1 argument has already acknowledged as being a waste. In Round 1, I agreed that the Third Wave Feminism we have isn't needed, but that a third wave, in a different more egalitarian form, most certainly is. Do you contest what I said? If so, tell me why. If not, concede. It is unfair to your opponent to drag things on in such a way.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Flannery 3 years ago
Minddagger, agreed.

32doni32nido32 With who? Me, jarleon, or Minddagger?

TAY-K, why? Because they have different ideas than you? Seems kinda harsh and unreasonable to me.
Posted by TAY-K 3 years ago
feminists should shoot themselves with a pistol
Posted by 32doni32nido32 3 years ago
100% agree
Posted by Minddagger 3 years ago
well it isnt needed in places like swedan and the USA
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.