CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Broadly defined feminism is just the belief of sexual equality, politically, socially, and economically. Even though I am a man, I would consider myself a feminist. I believe that women should have the opportunities to be successful and happy as men do. Many men today claim that feminism is now unnecessary and they create this false stereotype of "feminazis." There are women who harbor resentment against men, and in turn are sexist, and this is wrong. But people who just dismiss modern feminists as "feminazis" are really just closet sexists. They are most likely threatened of having their power taken away on a subconscious level. Women are not equal socially, politically, and economically today by any means. Only 17% of congress is female. In Sweden for example 47% of their parliament is female. This means there is an aspect of American society that is preventing women from being successful in politics. My best guess is that women who are powerful and independent are dismissed as "bitches. Women are also not equal socially. As an example if a man has many sexual partners he garners much respect, but if a woman has many sexual partners she is a considered a whore. Finally women are not equal economically. Women still only make about 77 cents for every dollar men make for the same work. A recent study found that customers prefer white-male employees over equally performing women and minority employees. http://journals.aomonline.org/inpress/main.asp?action=preview&art;_id=610&p;_id=1&p;_short=AMJ
This false stereotype that there are hordes of feminazi feminists out there who are lesbians and hate men etc. is sexist and untrue. It is hard to determine whether the media is responsible for this image or if it is just a reflection of society's opinions, but it does play a role. People need to stop trying to place people into neat black and white categories and actually analyze the world around them. Women still have much ground to make up to truly become equal members of society, so while feminism may be harmful to men in that it is balancing power, anyone with compassion and empathy should support the modern feminist movement.
Politically - All this means is that women are less interested in politics than men are in America. What do you want to do about this? Shove politics down their throats? Hell, whenever i just talk to any random girl about politics they really don't understand anything that i'm talking about.
Socially - Sounds like average thought. If you want to police thought in order to progress women, than that is feminazism. If you just want to bitch about it... hell, it's just whining.
Economically - That number is false for this reason: it's comparing ALL men with ALL women. More men are employed than women, so of course they make more money.
And, I am not sexist. In fact, I believe through higher authority women should be treated the same as men. But, I do not believe that individuals should be forced by the government to think one way or another about men and women. This is a free country, is it not?
There is no reason why women would be inherently less interested in politics than men just in America. That means there is something in our social structure that is either discouraging women from pursuing politics or preventing them.
"Hell, whenever i just talk to any random girl about politics they really don't understand anything that i'm talking about." Yeah you're totally not sexist.
Did I ever once mention that I want to police thoughts to change society? No I didn't, quit with the red herrings. Yeah I guess every group that has ever tried to gain equal rights in society was just whining. Black people just whined about being slaves, women just whined about wanting to vote, and gays just whine about wanting to get married. Once again dismissing asking for equal rights as whining just shows how you are a closet sexist. Maybe you don't even know it. But you can't dismiss someones legitimate grievances for equality as whining because it just makes you look like a jackass.
That number is true for this reason. Is it comparing the median salary for full-time year round workers. It doesn't matter if there are 1,000 times as many men as women working full-time year round. Median is an estimation of center. Maybe next time you could check before you make an accusation.
Again I never said anything about the government, get out of here with your free country crap.
There is nothing in society that keeps women from having equal interest in pursuing public office, except for their greater desire to be the ones to give birth and care for their families.
And, as for your "societal structure" thing, what exactly do you think should be done to encourage more women politicians? If the government doesn't have to do anything, I think that means that nothing needs to happen. Government is the only thing that can actually force anyone to do anything. If the government is treating women equally to men, what exactly is the problem? Are you just upset that for SOME REASON women aren't as interested in politics as men are? It's not sexist to understand that sexes prefer different things. Women like the show Sex and the City way more than men do. Men like video games way more than women do. When men get into politics, they get into both the social and economic structure of it, while usually I only see women getting interested in the social structure of it. (this mainly comes from everyone easily knowing the effects that society puts on them, so it's easier to come up with an opinion on the subject).
Blacks were forced into slavery and women in the old days had no right to vote. In these days, there really isn't much to bitch about for women. The fact that they haven't excelled in anything is their fault. I will say that the American system may be flawed in that people have learned to blame everyone but themselves for THEIR OWN PROBLEMS.
I think that society just needs to encourage women to achieve their goals because I think many women do not become politicians, engineers, lawyers etc. because they are afraid they will not succeed due to their sex which does have some truth.
It has nothing to do with preference. Like I said in Sweden 47% of their parliament is female. There is no reason why Swedish women would prefer politics so much more than American women.
"In these days, there really isn't much to bitch about for women."
I just listed three areas in which they do have legitimate complaints.
"I will say that the American system may be flawed in that people have learned to blame everyone but themselves for THEIR OWN PROBLEMS."
It's really easy to say that when you a white male who didn't grow up in poverty. You have no idea what it is like.
Prove that I am a sexist, please. In no way did i say that men are better than women. If you think that biological facts are sexist, than blame nature, not me.
How should society encourage women? Remember, if the government gets involved, that's bad. If you want, you can start your own awareness seminar for women needing encouragement, hell, many people do that. Actually, they do it a lot. It's amazing how much political correctness has caused TV characters to try and make women seem so much different. But, as long as government doesn't get involved, I'm fine with it.
I also find it amazing that you just assume that i'm a white male who never grew up in poverty. You're also really bad at guessing, by the way.
Saying you are sexist was more of an educated guess than a statement of fact. The things that led me to believe you might be a closet sexist were saying all the girls you talk to don't know anything about politics, dismissing sexual inequality saying women have "nothing to bitch about," and saying that women can only blame themselves for not "having excelled at anything." I don't really care to debate about whether or not you are sexist, but you asked why.
"Remember, if the government gets involved, that's bad."
For the love of Darwin will you stop talking about the government. You are the only one who keeps bringing it up.
Political correctness can be important. If girls grow up and the only female role models they see on television are stupid and beautiful and they get by based upon their looks, then they will think that is the only possible vehicle for their success. Whereas if they see successful female lawyers, engineers, and scientists they will think of that as a goal. You underestimate the effect that these influences can have on children and consequently society as a whole.
That doesn't say I'm sexist. A sexist would have to imply that his/her gender is better than the other gender. I do not think that men are better than women and I don't think that women should be treated unequally by the higher authority (gun, god, government).
As for your statement on political correctness, how should political correctness be enacted? By volunteering? That's the system that we already have... so, America is doing alright when it comes to that.
1. ah, you used the secondary definition instead of the primary definition, which is:
"prejudice or discrimination based on sex"
The problem with how you portray the secondary definition is that can be interpreted in an infinite amount of ways. Did I say that ALL women don't know shit about politics? No, I said that most of the girls I'VE talked to don't know shit about politics. Stereotyping becomes a problem when you base your DECISIONS on the stereotype. If you want a male doctor instead of a female doctor just because you stereotype females to be bad at medical work, than you are a sexist. Me accepting Biology and Psychology is not sexist. I do not discriminate and I give EVERYONE a chance to prove themselves. So no, I am not a sexist. Even by your secondary definition.
2. How nice. I think waiting rooms should have better magazines.
"Politically - All this means is that women are less interested in politics than men are in America. What do you want to do about this? Shove politics down their throats? Hell, whenever i just talk to any random girl about politics they really don't understand anything that i'm talking about."
Do you have any statistics or facts to back that statement up?
"Economically - That number is false for this reason: it's comparing ALL men with ALL women. More men are employed than women, so of course they make more money."
ledhead's statistic said that women get paid less for the SAME job. What does that have to do with how many men or women work?
Also, as to socially, it's not whining to want attitudes and minds to change. Of course the government shouldn't be forcing minds to change. But they should change, nonetheless.
1. I do, Ledhead even showed it. Way less women are in our Congress than in Sweden. So obviously, women are less interested in, at least, gaining political power in America.
2. Actually, he said the statistic was based on a median, so that means there are about a thousand other factors that go into that than just "employers are sexist".
3. And that's nice and all, but to be honest, I like Spike TV and Internet jokes about women... so although I don't believe that women should be treated unequally, I definitely don't want a politically correct structure where making fun of someone who's different from you is looked down upon. I hate it when people mess with my humor. But w/e, if no government will get involved, I don't have to worry about PC police taking over. People prefer comedy over hurt feelings any day.
1. Less women in congress doesn't necessarily mean less interested. Ledhead mentioned that as well, and I agree. Women may run less often because of sexism in our culture, or they are elected less often for the same reason.
I don't care about people making jokes, as long as they are truly not serious about it. But attitudes that prevent women from either running or being elected into congress, and that cause discrimination in other ways, are wrong.
So if women are less interested in politics, that's automatically sexism? Once again, blame everyone but the individual. A nation can not progress with an attitude like that.
Less interest is only one possibility. It may also be that less women have SUCCESS, but not less interest, in politics. I said there were 2 possibilities. Secondly, my point was that if less women are interested in politics(which, by the way, you haven't proven), that could be a result of a sexist culture that discourages them from pursuing politics(as ledhead suggested).
The fact that less women are elected to congress(a fact that could very well point to women being less successful, not less interested) and that the random girls you know don't know anything about politics does NOT show that women have no interest in it.
But, this doesn't prove that our Nation is sexist, either.
What, in order for sexism NOT to exist, more women HAVE to be in power? To suggest that a woman HAS to be something is in itself, sexist. Nobody HAS to do anything.
So if anything, less women in politics ONLY means less women in politics.
No, it doesn't prove that our nation is sexist, but it is a possibility. And you were implying that it the reason less American women are in politics is DEFINITELY that they are disinterested, and "backed it up" with the fact that you've met girls who aren't interested in politics. I admit that less women in politics may or may not be the result of sexism, but you have tried to hold this entire time to the idea that there is no way our society is sexist.
I never said that society is or isn't sexist. Society speaks for itself. After all, society IS made up of 50% of women. I was saying that our system (government) is not sexist and the idea that somehow society is constricting women is just a null argument.
You can't just call something a null argument and use that alone in a debate. If you go through the steps to prove that an argument is invalid then fine, but then you don't really need to explicitly state that it is invalid if you just proved it. So that was basically just a glorified way of saying "You are wrong because."
How do you answer to the fact that every single minority group in the United States in underrepresented in Congress. Just so you don't get confused because apparently math or logic is not your strong suit, that means that the percentage of people in the group is less than the percentage of that group in Congress. Atheists, gays, women, blacks, hispanics etc. etc. Does this mean that straight Christian upper-class males are the only people who care about politics and EVERYONE else just doesn't, or might it possibly mean that there is something about the socio-political climate in this country that prevents or discourages others from even trying. You tell me which is more likely.
First of all you didn't respond to my question, but to respond to yours, no that is not what I am saying. If an individual doesn't do something that isn't enough of a sample size to draw any conclusions. But let's just think about this logically. For example, gays are a huge underrepresented minority. They make up approximately 10% of the population, but there have only been 6 LGBT members of congress (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Members_of_the_111th_United_States_Congress#Sexual_orientation). Either there is something implicit about being gay that makes a person not want to go into politics, or something about the culture of this country is getting in the way. You have a very romanticized, immature view of success that people who succeed did it because they worked hard and people who don't didn't because they didn't work hard. Though I doubt you will take this to heart I highly recommend you read the book Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell. In it he analyzing the success of many individuals and turns the common view of success on its head.
Okay, here's the thing. 6 gays in congress, and you wish to say it's somehow society's fault. We're too homophobic or we're bullies, so that's why gays aren't in politics. Here's the thing about being gay... not everyone's open about it, but of course that will let you follow up with "they're afraid of dem bully rednecks". okay then. it may be possible that since gays only take up about 10% of the population, that they have less control over who gets voted in or who runs in the first place. Forget that being gay isn't something everyone has to know (especially when running for congress, relationships don't stand out), and maybe everyone in America is just some homophobe. No one has proof of any kind, and if I did a study at an alpha level of .05 I may or may not be able to reject the null hypothesis, none of that will matter. The only thing we ARE able to prove is that only 6 gays are in Congress.
But this thing with women is much different. women take up 50% of our population. This means they influence 50% of our decisions. 50% of things done here in America are by women, which means that women are responsible for 50% of the things that happen here. If you really wish to bring up women being underrepresented, half of the blame can easily go to them.
First of all congratulations on taking a high school statistics class, but using basic statistics terms completely out of place is not only an attempt at being pedantic, but it is not impressive.
I don't know why you are even discussing blame. Neither I nor any of the feminist movement is trying to place blame upon anyone. It is completely and totally irrelevant what percentage of the fault lies with whom.
This is the reality of the situation. Minorities are underrepresented in Congress. If you don't think is a problem that needs to be change then we have nothing to debate that's your opinion. If you do think that having upper-class Protestant old white men make decisions for an entire diverse country is a problem then we need to figure out a way to change that. Before you make strawmen let me say I am not suggesting effecting this change through legislation, let me state what I think we should do. I think as a society, we need to take responsibility for the way we portray people especially in the media so that everyone is encouraged equally and given the same opportunities to succeed in their goals.
In general demanding to many rights is demanding special treatment, But extremist have a purpose they make sure things aren't over looked. Although sometimes they go to far. I guess a good example is PETA who I just generally don't like for being zealots. PETA makes sure incidents of animal cruelty aren't over looked but, they don't want people to have pets who for the most part are domesticated animals that will die on their own. The only thing I can see extremist good for really is bringing things to the attention of the public. Not extremist in the since of suicide bombers that crap needs to stop.
Modern day feminism is what I call Feminazism. Basically, they attack freedom of speech and thought. you can't even eye a girl in the work place because that's sexual harassment. Excuse me for noticing a hot chick.
If a company finds it necessary to fire someone for saying "nice tits" than let them, but if the government must get involved than they are being Thought Police.
Also with all this other stupid crap like somehow because the only lead characters in video games and movies are really hot chicks with nice bodies, that's all of a sudden offensive. Or how women in magazines are holding women all over the world to a higher standard. Listen, if you think you HAVE to look like a chick in a magazine, that makes you fucking stupid. Look at men, they don't give two fucks about dudes in magazines. Men aren't holding women to a higher standard, women are.
You took most of my arguments, Pyg. However, one that I've noted for years was how women can get into men's clubs and organizations, but what about men? Can they get in? I'm afraid I haven't any sources for this just something I've observed for a while. Men might be allowed in, but I just never noticed it. Also, what you were saying about men not caring about other men in magazines - I don't believe it. Back in the 80s, when Schwarzenegger was making Terminator and Commando and all his other action movies, his body was famous. It is said that he started the so-called 'bodybuilding craze'. Would any men have bothered had they not seen a picture of him on film or magazine?
I do, however, agree with you on the topic of films. Laura Croft, Ultra Violet, and all these other modern action movies have a woman as the main character. I've never seen them, only the covers when at the video store - but I have heard about them. A typical scenario (or so I am told) involves the heroine walking into a room, she is surrounded by a group of men. All of a sudden, she starts swinging around faster than the eye can see and, in a few seconds, the men are all on the ground unconscious and she didn't even break a sweat. Can that ever beat Rambo or Die Hard? Most of these movies were failures (comparitively) but they keep making more? Why? It would be sexist to make a man a hero when a woman could do the job. Wouldn't it also be sexist for a woman to take the job from the man.
P.S. Sorry for the lengthy argument, usually when I get going I can't calm myself down and it sounds like I'm having an argument with myself.
As in any society in the entire human history (as far as we can date) has been one of greed and power. The way minorities or even women's/gay & lesbian organizations were treated prior to the Civil Rights movements, those same people who were unconstitutionally abused are now doing the same thing, hence reverse racism & favortism. The moment you look at a woman, feminists immediately think "sexual abuse"
Knowing that, who is more at guilt, a person looking or the feminists who's first idea is that someone looking at her wants to have sex with her simply because she is a woman?
Feminism is not going to take the problem away, but rather backfire in the not-so-distant future. People can only take so much.
Crap like feminism is only possible in a civilized society, where men are just too nice and ALLOW women to get all these rights. And now, American males are so pussy-whipped that they won't even dare to take a stand. Home of the brave is long gone. Ass-kissing metrosexual fag time is in.
In general, I say give women same rights, but forget about different treatment in any law, regulation, office, or courtroom, which is what we have now. Hence I think the modern day feminism is hypocritical and destructive.
Feminism is an insult to men and women. They advocate equality for all but completely ignore, dismiss or flat out mock any issues men have and have led women to believe that being a housewife is the same as being oppressed. Some women choose this because it's what they want yet they are looked down on by feminists. They enable women's bad behaviour by portraying violence perpetrated by women against men as either comedy or "he must have done something to deserve it" as well as giving them a slap on the wrist when a teacher has an "affair" with a student (isn't it called rape if a male teacher would do it to a female student?). Because of feminism, the majority (not all, not generalizing here) of women are entitled princess bitches who just yell, cry and whine until they get what they want and men have been conditioned by society to just smile and nod. Women can vote, they can work anywhere...feminism is no longer needed. They have overstayed their welcome and it's time for feminism to go away so we can focus on serious issues like 99% workplace deaths being men, higher suicide rates belonging to men, majority of health issues belonging to men, the fact that we don't have any reproductive rights, corrupt family/divorce courts biased against men and more.
The feminists today are called third wave feminists.
From wiki
Third-wave feminism is a term identified with several diverse strains of feminist activity and study from 1990 to the present. The movement arose as a response to perceived possible failures and backlash against initiatives and movements created by second-wave feminism of c. 1960s through the 1970s. It also addressed issues that were not delved deeply into in the 1960s and 1970s, such as sexual harassment, largely due to the Anita Hill hearings in the Senate and violence against women. In 1992, the "Year of the Woman" saw four women enter the United States Senate to join the two already there. The following year another woman won a special election, bringing the number to seven. The 1990s also saw the first female United States Attorney General and Secretary of State, as well as the second woman on the Supreme Court, and the first First Lady to have an independent political, legal, corporate executive, activist, and public service career.