CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:27
Arguments:24
Total Votes:31
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Are women taking feminism too far? (24)

Debate Creator

HereIStand(20) pic



Are women taking feminism too far?

This debate will be about if feminism is helping to be counterproductive in the efforts to try and eliminate things like discrimination or are women taking charge and being proud in general?

Add New Argument
1 point

I don't mean any of this offensively.

-

When ever an oppressed people begin to regain (or simply gain) their rights, the =y almost NEVER stop at equality.

Christians were oppressed, then were accepted and treated as equals. However, they then oppressed all non-Christians for centuries.

After slavery was abolished and civil rights movement successful, African Americans didn't stop at equality. They had to sign Affirmative Action, essentially Inequality against whites.

Now I think woman want to be treated the same as men, but they want all the societal benefits of being a woman.

EX. A woman hits a man. No big deal. A man hits a woman. Holy shit.

The guy has to ask the girl out, pay for the meals on dates, propose, etc.

Sexual harassment claims, divorce settlements, etc. The man is supposed to open the door for the woman.

I'm not saying this should change, but there are rational limits to equality.

Side: yes
zombee(1026) Disputed
1 point

How can you say a group that has not yet achieved equality is pushing too far? Even in countries where women are treated the best, feminism is still fighting to secure basic things like equal pay and reproductive rights.

Everything you listed as being a 'societal benefit' to women is a result of sexism. They all perpetuate old stereotypes of weakness and traditions of chivalry. While these customs offer superficial benefits to women, they still leave men the job of making the big decisions. If both genders were given equal responsibility when it came to taking initiative and making important decisions, what do you think would happen to dating? If women were not automatically considered better parents, what would happen in custody cases?

The exception is maybe when it comes to violence. Men are just as deserving of freedom from violence, but a man hitting a woman usually stands to cause more damage to her.

There may be limits to equality but we haven't reached them yet.

Side: No
Apollo(1608) Disputed
3 points

How can you say a group that has not yet achieved equality is pushing too far?

Feminism is an American movement that is present somewhat in Europe. What rights do men have in the United States that woman don't? The only one I can think of is perhaps serving in combat roles in the military. All other forms of "inequality" are woman trying to overcome social barriers, which, as I said, would mean removing all these social benefits they receive as well. You can't pick and choose what equality is.

Everything you listed as being a 'societal benefit' to women is a result of sexism.

Yes...towards men.

They all perpetuate old stereotypes of weakness and traditions of chivalry.

If you want to open the door for us and pay for meals and propose, play video games and watch football etc., fine. But don't call it inequality.

While these customs offer superficial benefits to women, they still leave men the job of making the big decisions.

Such as? I don't see how holding the door for someone makes them more powerful than someone else.

but a man hitting a woman usually stands to cause more damage to her.

Why? I don't see why men aren't affected by domestic violence. Are you implying that woman are weaker? Because that would make them NOT EQUAL to men. If you want them to be equal, the punishment should be the same.

Side: No
BenWalters(1513) Disputed
1 point

Feminism ≠ equality

And do you think feminism is the way to solve those age old traditions? It takes time for people to come to power, those looking at equality currently won't be in a position of power for about 30 years, when you will be able to see power. And unfortunately, in those sorts of jobs, men can't take a year off to have a baby, which many women do. That's where the main loss for women is, in terms of getting to a position of power, I'd guess. And yes they are, but that's feminism, not equality, and I consider it incorrect.

If a man punches another man, and breaks his nose, it's not that surprising, and he doesn't have to be a bad guy. But if a guy hits a girl and breaks her nose, causing the same amount of damage, is it just as bad? Is it better? Worse? It's always worse, an example of feminist ideas.

Side: In some ways
1 point

I do think they are taking it too far. They have stigmatized men in general which is largely unfair and highly biased as they promote women's rights above all else (i.e. woman > men). Men are in positions of power for a reason.

Side: yes
zombee(1026) Disputed
1 point

Men are in positions of power for a reason.

And what reason is that?

Side: No
hhioh(454) Disputed
2 points

By that statement I mean that there isn't some kind of 'man conspiracy' going on and everybody is out to put down woman. Often you'll find that men deal better with positions of power (though not always) as they are able to dominate a situation more effectively. I am not pro-man though, I feel that both genders are of equal importance but feminists have to realize that recognizing that different genders do different things better is not sexism, it is realistic.

Side: yes
1 point

No, they are not taking it too far, as gender discrimination still exists.

Side: No
1 point

The world is starting to face a problem where men are taking a back seat. Women are out graduating men and subsequently out earning them. Men in return are surrendering (the ever rising Peter Pan syndrome) or in some cases fighting back in a physical way (dare I say in lower income areas). Lower income areas funnily enough, generally have stronger women (emotionally and socially) while men are more troublesome - this I base on my personal research in South Africa).

To an extent I feel we're making the mistake of thinking that men and women are the same. We're equal in worth but not in many other ways. For example, it is better if a guy breaks another guy's nose instead of a woman's. Guys are better suited to fighting. We take punches better and pound for pound we are stronger. We're less flexible but stronger. That's why we shop with girls, we're better at carrying bags (joke...ish).

Girls are quicker to pick up language and boys math. It doesn't mean that boys should be engineers and girls language teachers, remember, this was true before we had formal language and math. It indicates that there are fundamental differences between that male and the female of the human animal. One might argue that it's the hunter gatherer thing but personally I like to think that we were different even before we hunted and gathered.

The old crime is inequality in human worth. The new crime is assuming equality in all aspects of life. We are different and alike like a nut and a bolt, two completely different pieces that serve the same, equally important purpose. Men and women should err on the side of tolerance and respect and try to figure out how our differences can be leveraged in a modern era to create a better, more useful society.

Side: equality is misunderstood
zombee(1026) Disputed
1 point

The world is starting to face a problem where men are taking a back seat. Women are out graduating men and subsequently out earning them. Men in return are surrendering (the ever rising Peter Pan syndrome) or in some cases fighting back in a physical way (dare I say in lower income areas). Lower income areas funnily enough, generally have stronger women (emotionally and socially) while men are more troublesome - this I base on my personal research in South Africa).

You phrase this as if childishness or violence is the natural and expected reaction to educated, high-earning women. You also make it seem as if educated, high-earning women are the problem, not the response to them. I hope that's a mistake. There may be an awkward adjustment period in store, but I completely believe men are capable of maturely dealing with women as equals in power and intelligence. To excuse or settle for anything less from them is insulting.

I see no evidence of men 'taking a back seat.' Pretty sure they are still sitting comfortably in the driver's chair, even in places where things have gotten much better for women.

For example, it is better if a guy breaks another guy's nose instead of a woman's.

Is it? Why? This is making the exact same mistake you mentioned below - assigning inequality in human worth. The only difference in this scenario is that, for some reason, it's the man who is worth less, because it's 'better' for him to be subjected to physical harm.

Girls are quicker to pick up language and boys math...

Nobody thinks all humans are identical in ability in circumstance. These differences in average test scores mean little to an individual and have no bearing on the necessity of feminism.

We are different and alike like a nut and a bolt, two completely different pieces that serve the same, equally important purpose.

This kind of language creates a huge chasm between men and women, as if we are separate species. We are all humans and our differences are dwarfed by our similarities. Try not to look at people through such a dichotomous lens.

Side: No
Oliver(42) Disputed
1 point

On Peter Pan syndrome:

It's not at all a natural situation, but to be brutally natural one would have to discard technology and language and resort to a world of physical domination. The 'nature' ship has sailed. That is if you don't subscribe to the idea that whatever happens on earth is natural.

Educated, high earning women is not a problem at all. It's after all what we were hoping for for such a long time. The subsequent social fallout is a problem. We need to readjust our view and accept that men need not always be the providers. Once that social issue is sorted out, things should be fine.

I've seen groups of people battling with social values that are weeks old. The idea of a 'male provider' is much older and one needs to keep in mind that this adjustment phase might cost society male role models. That should be prevented at all costs.

On the guy breaking another guy's nose:

Having your nose broken does not take from your human worth. The males in many animal species fight for both pleasure and dominance. In a very primal and natural way one can say 'it's a guy thing'. Men fight and they are happy to. If you like social projects, put all your prejudice aside and interview men at a fighting academy. Men deal with fighting better, they recover faster and they handle trauma better. They are, naturally, better fighters and more inclined to do so.

On girls and language:

It has bearing on the direction of feminism. It's a tip of an iceberg. It indicates that there are fundamental differences in the way information is perceived and processed. Possibly to the same end, but different in every other way. The fact that I used academic subjects in the example is irrelevant.

And on dichotomy:

We are two different species. The divide between men and women is massive and it's laughable to think we're going to squeeze both of us into the same mold. Men make for strange women and women are strange men. If we are the same, if there is no difference, why do we have feminism. Did the savage mind create inequality or did culture create it? And even so, where was the starting point. Was it because one looked down to see a protrusion and the other a cavity and so it started?

In the animal kingdom some females eat males, in the aviated species they look different - so much so that you can mistake them for two different species. How many nature documentaries open a new scene with 'in the male of the species' or 'in the female of the species'? Why are we so special to think we're exactly the same, bar for reproduction? It's absurd.

But equally absurd is to say we have different human worth. I state this explicitly in my previous argument and you conveniently forget to highlight and mention that. Don't cherry pick from arguments. Equal human worth is of paramount importance. It is the lack of equal human worth that brings the very legitimate rise of feminism.

If we are then the same, can you explain the point of homo and heterosexual relationships. I've spoken to many gay men and they are in gay relationships for more than just the male physique and genitals. The male human is different. The same goes for lesbian relationships and heterosexual relationships.

Side: equality is misunderstood
1 point

Also, do not make the mistake to assume your culture for the world and judge women accordingly. I've spoken to many women who love their position in societies that we might deem sexist.

Having said that, societies where women (or anyone for that matter) are burnt alive for having an opinion is never ok.

Side: equality is misunderstood

I don't think so. In the United States, there are still some women who are not receiving equal pay.

Side: equality is misunderstood
Awespec(1) Disputed
1 point

the .77 for a dollar and .66 for a dollar myths have been proven wrong so many times. You can't bring up an argument with no backing and pass it off as fact, something feminists do a lot. The fact is women are doing better in school than men are because the education system has been tweaked so far (in an attempt to help females) that it began to favor them. There are multiple studies citing how men and women learn different and how the current school systems wholly favors women, and while they're doing better they decide to go into subjects such that simply don't pay as much as the subjects men choose. There's no "invisible wall" stopping females from going into these subjects because they are already doing better than men in school. Taking a broad brush and taking into account EVERY job and EVERY profession choice to make up a number is not statistically relevant. In fact women between the ages of 20-about 35 make more then men in the SAME profession. So where's the outrage there?

Side: equality is misunderstood
-2 points