Difference between revisions of "Men are Obsolete (Munk debate)"
| (28 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | This highly offensive notion was the title and subject of a |
+ | This highly offensive notion was the title and subject of a Munk Debate in 2013.<ref>http://ideas.time.com/2014/01/02/men-are-obsolete/</ref> |
While the question was ''about'' men the organisers saw fit not to include any men in the debate. Apparently they ascribe to the notion that only women are entitled to discuss gender issues. |
While the question was ''about'' men the organisers saw fit not to include any men in the debate. Apparently they ascribe to the notion that only women are entitled to discuss gender issues. |
||
| + | The ''affirmative'' team was comprised of [[Hanna Rosin]] and [[Maureen Dowd]] with the negative team being comprised of [[Caitlin Moran]] and [[Camille Paglia]]. Monk debates poll the audience. If more than 50% vote in favour of the motion (for the pro side) then the motion is carried. In this case, the motion was carried and Monk declared that men are obsolete.<ref>https://munkdebates.com/debates/gender-in-the-21st-century</ref> Some commentators suggested that a number of men in the audience voted affirmatively to keep their female partners happy. |
||
| ⚫ | |||
| ⚫ | |||
| − | An individual who is obsolete has no responsibilities or work to do. It follows that men are not obsolete. Society continues to rely on wide range of, often dirty and distasteful, jobs that are overwhelmingly performed by men. Those who write blog posts and articles critical of men often do so on computer systems and networks and on infrastructure overwhelmingly designed, built and maintained by men. |
||
| − | |||
| − | Men who form the opinion that they are obsolete aren't going to curl up and die. They will go on living - and they will go on living for themselves. Anyone who regards themselves as obsolete can live for themselves - free of obligations to others. |
||
== See Also == |
== See Also == |
||
* [[The End of Men]] |
* [[The End of Men]] |
||
| + | |||
| + | == External Links == |
||
| + | |||
| + | *[https://munkdebates.com/debates/gender-in-the-21st-century Men are Obsolete at the Monk Debates] |
||
| + | *[http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/government-tyranny/he-who-pays-the-piper-calls-the-tune-or-does-he/ He who pays the piper] |
||
| + | *[https://omny.fm/shows/the-munk-debates-podcast/be-it-resolved-men-are-obsolete Audio of the Monk Debate] |
||
== References == |
== References == |
||
| + | [[Category: Events]] |
||
| − | <references> |
||
| + | [[Category: Featured Articles]] |
||
| + | [[Category: Misandry]] |
||
Latest revision as of 05:57, 1 February 2023
This highly offensive notion was the title and subject of a Munk Debate in 2013.[1]
While the question was about men the organisers saw fit not to include any men in the debate. Apparently they ascribe to the notion that only women are entitled to discuss gender issues.
The affirmative team was comprised of Hanna Rosin and Maureen Dowd with the negative team being comprised of Caitlin Moran and Camille Paglia. Monk debates poll the audience. If more than 50% vote in favour of the motion (for the pro side) then the motion is carried. In this case, the motion was carried and Monk declared that men are obsolete.[2] Some commentators suggested that a number of men in the audience voted affirmatively to keep their female partners happy.
The above Munk debate was followed by an article of the same name in TIME by Rosin.[3]