Munk Debate on Gender (2013) ft. Camille Paglia, Caitlin Moran, Maureen Dowd, and Hanna Rosin
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 24 сен 2019
- Since the beginning of human civilization, men have been the dominant sex. But now, for the first time, a host of indicators suggest that women are not only achieving equality with men but are fast emerging as the more successful sex of the species. Whether in education, employment, personal health or child rearing, statistics point to a rise in the status and power of women at home, in the workplace, and in traditional male bastions such as politics. But are men, and the age-old power structures associated with “maleness,” permanently in decline? Or do men still retain significant control over the workplace, the family and society at large, including women? In sum, where are the sexes headed in the 21st century?
To find out, the Munk Debates will move the motion: be it resolved men are obsolete...
-----
This debate is the property of The Munk Debates. It has been posted here for the benefit of the public.
In case anyone was wondering which side won, it was the PRO side, by a 28% turnover.
www.munkdebates.com/The-Debates/Gender-in-the-21st-Century
you emotional windbags purposefully vote pro man before and pro feminazi after.... just to boost your bullshit numbers lol. its so obvious...
cant wait for the artificial wombs and sex robots to come out. you'll truly be useless and discarded unless you have the intellectual and logical capabilities of men. enjoy your cats, dildos, and lesbian communes :)
You're a no-account piece of trash. Cancer is more honorable than you are because cancer obeys God.
@@SocraticMethodGuy Exactly, this is a huge issue I have seen with Monk debate stuff
@@SocraticMethodGuy The prostitutes you manage to acquire through the current system are the ones who can't wait for sex robots to come out. P.s. we love our dildos, at least they don't let us "down" ever, if you know what I mean 😉
@@mypuritanicalopinion3332 and just like cancer, so does you :)
Camille is like a glimmer of sanity in a sea of pretense and delusion.
This is one of the worst Munk debates I’ve ever seen. Normally they’re a class act but they majorly misfired on this one. The socioeconomic decline of men is no laughing matter but they treat it like a joke. Here we have the vulgar spectacle of privileged upper-class women sneering at the pathologies of working-class men and their families. I’m not easily offended, but there is something disturbing about this schadenfreude toward one-half of our species. At the same time, socioeconomic advancement for women is an ongoing achievement and shouldn’t be represented by these snarky women yukking it up about enslaving men for their semen and/or harvesting the semen outright. In short, where there should have been sympathy for men, there was antipathy, and where there should have been celebration for women, there was triumphalism.
Well said.
Hear hear
Yes, yes - YES
PERFECTLY SAID MY GUY
Like we’re responsible for all previous men in history. Lots of us got mangled in the major social changes. For myself, progressive and heavily influenced by feminism in my early days (so much so that it was totally natural to leave university in the late 1980s with the belief that “hey, no problem in a family situation, I’ll be home with the kids etc…). But being pro equality didn’t seem to work both ways. Now in my late 50s and it’s been a painful realization of how “Stockholm syndromed” I was. Like brainwashed with all the complaints about men from women, yet learning too late that women can lie, cheat and steal, can exercise their own type of violence etc…
Wish this was cut so it was only Camille Paglia’s parts. She’s the only one with anything of merit to say, instead of just hateful rhetoric.
Hannah Rosin : wtf wtf wtf. Honestly, I did not expect a “comedic stand-up” after a title like “the end of men” and other such things. This is sexism also, ladies, these stupid remarks you said about men. What a shame, I love an honest solidly-grounded debate.
-Thanks to Camille Paglia for preserving some of the faith in humanity I need to hear any third wave feminist talk about neverending victimization.
Can you imagine a man saying that a woman is "Just another mouth to feed?" He would be booed off the stage.
But it is true
Women.say they dont need men. Then they proceed to list.all the ways men are.required, commanded, to provide for women. Absolute delusional cognative dissonance.
But what do you expect from the feminine mind?
Matt It’s time men to withhold their labor and their love. Feminist hate must be resisted.
Or can you imagine a man say “women’s genes ceased evolving”?
Rosin is disgusting!
Well, straight men keep taking it. That's why I am slightly happy when I see men refuse to have meetings in private with women or taking them on an mentor them over the Me too movement. Well if you demonize men don't expect shit from them. If you insult and accuse them of things either actively or passively by not standing up for them, then deal with the consequences.
They know what they're doing when they put Camille Paglia on the thumbnail. I wouldn't have clicked on this video had I not seen her. Such a strong, solid, and factual voice among the pandemonium of less enlightened voices. I can't get enough of her public appearances!
I’m here to listen to Camille Paglia.
Camille P - a guiding voice in the crazy crowd - you rock!
Yes hello only here for Ms. Paglia thanks bye
Her partner was really good too
Camille's closing statement is genius.
She's outstanding a true public intellectual
@@adamlibre2908Indeed, but almost everyone would stand out positively around feminists
In case there was any doubt that feminism was never about equality, it was always about female domination
Camille is a feminist that still cares about equality rather than domination though.
@@wimvaughdan7032 She was a feminist when it was still important, has since stated that "feminism is moribund"
@@wimvaughdan7032although, if what Karen straughan is right, "she says she's a feminist only to piss off feminists"😂
30 minutes in and it's all weak comedy night. I'm so confued why "debate" is in the name...
Doesn't help that something went horribly wrong in editing or rendering and video flashes at you red screen every few minutes. I enjoyed previous debates but this one right here is the weakest on so many grounds.
Wow. I thought women were the empathetic sex. Guess I misheard. This is just pathetic.
It's not even a debate. Hardly anything of substance is being discussed, there's no sense of focus whatsoever, the ladies are just all over the place in this hollow display of smug, resentful sophistry. Pa-the-tic.
This wasn't a debate, it was a gossip shop for misandists.
I would LOVE to see that filthy feminist produce her book without men.
At least 99% of all (worthwhile) inventions were devised by men.
Thank you, Camille Paglia for being the voice of reason and common sense.
Those other women gibberish is extremely toxic to society.
I think it’s safe to say they’re not people of faith, godless.
Imagine if Dr. Peterson had been invited! Everyone on the panel apart from Camille Paglia is a terrible debater.
dude, really, this peterson simping is just pathetic. Clean your room and get out of the closet. ggs.
Imagine Ben Shapiro has been invited...
Maureen dowd is awol in this debate.
Peterson isn't a good debater, either, though.
So men are being phased out and it's all very amusing but I'd like to see any of these women actually BUILD the venue that they are speaking in, since they don't need men that should be easy.
This exact point was raised by the second speaker.
I thought about this but I think in a few years we may see that men are creating their own reality, which sadly may be flooded by these likes and their enablers. I may be wrong.
Paglia is the intellectual master as always. The only one with a panoramic lens of every issue. Dowd seems concerned only with drawing laughs by being clever and snarky. She added nothing.
I cringe listening to some of this.
- I was a man-hater: I had no brothers, my father beat my mother, TV and movies always showed one dimensional men: either woman-hating brutes or the brute as lone-wolf hero (boys also absorbed this). So, it wasn’t hard to fear men & believe I hated them. Then one day I realized that my closest, dearest friends were primarily men and I took inventory of how wonderful they are & why I preferred male friends (they’re more adventurous, more straightforward, broader interests & hobbies, etcétera).
Anyhow, I was wrong to be in the camp of blaming & hating men. That men/boys are pretty constantly hearing these narratives dismissing & diminishing them is so wrong, so crushing, so superficial - in fact it’s harmful and dangerous.
- Just as it is for any group to be lumped together and disdainfully dismissed as “the bad”: immigrants, queers, etcétera.
Oof, had it in the first half but did not stick the landing
camilia is the only one of the women i can stand
Agree. I had to turn the others off.
@bla blahblah Absolutement! Well said.👍
Even though, Paglia is, by DEFINITION, also a feminist. ☹️
🐟 26. FEMINISM:
Feminism is the penultimate evil at present because feminism is based on the misguided assumption that women are equal to (or even SUPERIOR to) men.
Equality is non-existent in this transactional sphere. Equality exists ONLY in abstract concepts such as mathematics, and arguably, on the sub-atomic level. Even identical twins are not exactly identical in every possible criterion.
Although a female can exhibit superior traits, skills, etcetera, to some men, a woman can never have AUTHORITY over a man. Therefore, the assertion that women are subordinate to men is based purely on this notion of authority, not on any particular attribute, such as intelligence, wisdom, beauty, physical strength, or artistic talent.
Truth be told, no true man would ever descend to the level of accepting counsel from any of his subordinates. A man should fully obey his appointed MASTERS (such as his father, grandfather, uncle, employer, or spiritual teacher), and never emasculate himself by submitting to the dictates of a mere female, or any other lesser.
Feminist ideology commonly manifests as the desire for women to perform the societal role of the OPPOSITE gender, that is to say, partaking in intrinsically male activities, such as studying at educational institutions, working for a wage, or building business enterprises (or even more preposterously, usurping the position of a national leader or the member of the Holy Priesthood!).
Feminism also advocates for preferential treatment of females in institutions which may have traditionally favoured men and/or boys, even when “the tables have been COMPLETELY turned-around the other way”, so to speak. In a nutshell, feminists suffer from the psychological disorder termed “penis envy”, and fundamentally yearn to become males in every conceivable way (sometimes even biologically, despite the incontrovertible fact that transitioning from one gender to the other being a physiological impossibility).
This aspiration of a person wishing to seize the position of another person, deemed to be of higher value, is a common phenomenon in MALES as well, such as working-class men who consider themselves to be rulers/kings or priests. Every so-called “priest” and every national leader on earth, with virtually no exceptions, is either a worker, a businessman, or even more risibly, a mere female, who is literally stealing the occupation of an authentic guru or a king.
Feminists are victims of the SLAVISH mentality which the instigators of that evil, pernicious ideology (Karl Marx and the so-called "Globalist Elite") have always wanted them to be.
It is extremely unfortunate that the vast majority of women are unable to see the obvious truth that feminist ideology wants the destruction of women (as well as all society), as can clearly be seen at present.
At least it is clearly seen by any decent, holy and intelligent person.
Due to feminist indoctrination and lack of proper discipline, as a consequence of an increasingly profane and secular world, modern women have become EXTREMELY debased. The typical woman nowadays is afflicted with bitterness, uncontrolled jealousy, gross immodesty, greed, arrogance, misery, and loneliness due to a false sense of “independence”, with hardly a single noble quality.
In those gynocentric societies which are dominated by feminism, men are urged to avoid any unnecessary contact with the opposite gender. Those (heterosexual) males who disregard this sage advice will invariably regret their choices, either after experiencing false allegations against them, the destruction of their families through divorce, or after constant rejection by snobby women. However, let it be made clear: the greatest enemy of males is NOT women but those uxorious "white-knight" "men" who do the bidding of feminist ideologues, since they have far greater power than females, despite being truly pathetic-excuses-for-men.
wom•an n.
pl. wom•en
She who gives “woe” to “man” - therefore “wo(e)man”.
"Though I have searched repeatedly, I have not found what I was looking for. Only one out of a thousand men is virtuous, but not one woman!"
Ecclesiastes 7:28.
“Holy Bible” (New Living Translation).
"We must not allow ourselves to be deflected by the feminists who are anxious to force us to regard the two sexes as completely equal in position and worth."
Sigismund Schlomo Freud,
Austrian Neurologist.
Camille Paglia is so far sbove the others intellectually. Its a bit of a shame, as neither the other panalists nor the audience can really keep up.
Camille Paglia is brilliant.
Hanna says that women out earning men at a young age is important.
Too right, that's the age where women look for a breadwinner, 90% of single women openly say they want someone of higher status.
Thanks feminism.
You have actually ended most future relationships.
I hope she knows of a way of female only reproduction in the next couple generations.. Hard to reproduce when you create unattainable standards as the base
Indeed...hence the Incel situation. Although I should probably point out that this wasn't Betty Friedans original vision. It is female empowerment warped through unbridled capitalism, a culture of individualism, and media driven propaganda. In order for a relationship to work, both participants need to agree to it and it needs to be validated/reinforced by the external community. In the age of Facebook and Twitter, community is dying out...expectations skyrocket and the agreement never happens.
My advice to men is to wait it out. Seek help where you can, but don't expect the world to turn a generous and loving eye toward you and your struggles. That's not the world we live in.
Being the daughter of a taxi driver, Hanna Rosin's contempt for working class men is quite Freudian.
Poor Camille, so much to say and only 6 minutes... this is not her format, she needs three hours to just talk... gotta love her though
Thank you for proving that feminism was never about equality, but domination, like we men, didn't notice that trend for the past four generations, while you feminist screeched about everything wrong with us.
I think Paglia serves as a good representation of a feminist that doesn’t perpetuate a misandrist paradigm
@@darbymcdermott3398 I agree. She also wouldn't misrepresent it as a movement that has any mandate toward making things better for men. In fact, I have seen her express her low regard for male feminists, and encourage men to push back against it. I think most feminism-critical men would be fine with feminism if it were represented as what it actually is today, instead of the "motte and bailey" (esque) trojan horse that has allowed it to gain such a foothold in the western legal system (and culture at large).
@@DayVeeBoi I imagine she would acknowledge that it isn’t a monoculture, and that there is a version of feminism (not the modern 3rd wave type) that benefits everybody. Personally I think feminism has benefited society greatly so far, but that the culture has also produced some loud mouth psychos with way too much clout. Everything should be about being as fair as we can be on a personal level, not about some grand ideological war between feminism and the patriarchy.
Every woman in this forum who explains why males are marginal, hires a man to exterminate a mouse. SHEESH
@Alchemica Blackwood You know there is plenty more than that. I'm assuming your question is sarcasm.
@@akarpowicz it isn't, just another woman wanting to argue.
@Alchemica Blackwood A male physician invented vibrators, so a man allowed for women to live frigid, reclusive, cat-laden lives, and then most other men upkeep society so spinsters can do so in comfort. Ingrates!
Don't waste time watching guys!!!
It isn't a debate, it's a lecture.
After watching the whole thing it's a waste of time. Not 1 actual point affecting men was raised in any other fashion than jokes, the rest is political talk in support of feminism.
Usual voting methods of feminists too, make you think they're on your side then flip the switch
You obviously didn't listen to Paglia at all
55:25 Paglia "I do believe [devaluing men] will produce political consequences..."
Indeed...I think, post 2016, were seeing that play out all around the world.
Also at least Rosin does acknowledge that this is a problem that needs to be discussed. The media keeps sweeping this topic under the carpet, or labeling anyone who advocates it as "reactionary".
This was in 2013,then trump happend i laughed the whole "debate"😂😂😂
🤣
If men are obsolete, then why aren't women going their own way instead of trying to force men into their overall idea of inclusion?
I am a man. I live with my wife. We divide tasks and responsibilities equally, sometimes taking up the slack if the other person is particularly busy. I come from a family where both my parents had life long careers and independent interests. They struggled and fought but ultimately supported each other and are still together today. It is depressing to hear that many people feel they can never achieve fairness in their relationships. What comes across from speakers like Hanna Roisin is that relationships between men and women are, in essence, a lifelong battle, a competitive experiment to see who cames out on top. It's feels dismissive of many fuctioning relationships. Making a partnership with another human is difficult. We all know this. Hanna Roisin seems almost gleeful that men and boys are falling behind. Very weird perspective for someone who is mother to a son.
this is their least structured debate.
Seems like half of it is women reading their work.
I can't stand waiting out the parts between Camille's speech.
God is that really the question “are men obsolete?”
What an inhuman phrase to be accepted as common and giggled about in such a civilized place as Toronto at the Munk centre no less.
I can’t imagine how we are here
Dear All,
There are days without immigrants, and days without "people of color" where they stop participating and we are supposed to miss their contribution to our lives and society. Since men, the patriarchy, get such a bad rap from Feminists, I would like to see A Day Without Men. All men stay home and watch TV, putz around in the yard.
There will be no tree trimming, no road work, nothing will be repaired, or built, or sprayed. No tough jars opened, nothing pulled off a tall shelf for a short lady, nothing heavy moved for her. No tools will be sold. No time spent with kids at all. No listening to the wife, partner, girlfriend talk about her day.
*None of that stuff women ordered online will be delivered because all the delivery drivers took a day off.*
Then maybe those women will stop yapping about men for a little while.
But the type of men who *ought* to strike for a day won't do it because they like to get things done.
Sincerely,
A Woman
I lived in LA thru a day without a Mexican. Traffic was light, lines in the stores were nonexistent. A day without a man would be equally 'inconveniencing'. Men have built a society that is sustainable. A week...the men would return to a feminist-less society.
@ LOL, I did say "maybe"
@@Blakkfoot You are correct. I suggest a month without men.
@@akarpowicz A month of Me time would be amazing for the first quarter or half of it... Then I'd have to fight the urge to be productive.
Genius.
Atte: A gay Man of color
karen Straughan should have been on the panel. That would have actually added something. The reliance on humor is old.
55:20 Camille Paglia’s words were never truer.
It's painful to watch women trying to be funny. Camille was the only genuine and funny one of the four of them.
Why is Maureen even here? The other three try to engage and discuss then Maureen steps up and the whole thing dips into this weak comedy routine with no clear point.
Xengar true. She hardly added
That's what happens when you try to populate a debate about male "obsolescence" with feminists. Dafuq did I just watch??
17:35 this is what u came for
I'm legit in love with camile
It depends on how you define "dominant" and in what context "dominant". I think a more important question is, "Do societies (not just women) believe that men are important and necessary?" Then make a list of all of the things that men contribute to societies. And then take those things off the list and consider two further questions: "Can societies continue WITHOUT those things?" OR "Can women take on the entire workload necessary of those things?" I think it would be a wonderful experiment for men worldwide to go on strike and REFUSE to do those things for a certain time frame. This would FORCE women to do them whether they wanted to or not. THAT would be the only way to truly gauge the importance and necessity of men to societies. Whether or not men are necessary for women alone is of no relevance whatsoever. It is especially important to understand that many of the activities performed almost universally by men do not fall under a category of mandatory or official or semi-official. They fall under the category of "voluntary agreement." This is an important FACT which is consistently forgotten in any modern similar discussions. One glaring example would be the FACT that the process which may result in the birth of another human being (another citizen whose future may be as an integral cog in the wheel that keeps things turning) is probably 99.9% of the time initiated by MEN, NOT by women. Women, in fact, have largely forfeited the right to occupy this important role simply by REFUSING to perform it. There is a very HUGE EXPECTATION of men to occupy this role. To the extent that many women indicate that it is unrealistic and absurd to even suggest that women initiate this process. Unfortunately as the unwarranted attacks on "masculinity" escalate, the defiance of men to those attacks ALSO escalates. Men are warriors. It is not realistic to expect men to simply accept false charges and not retaliate. Historically men have been very keen to find something their enemies desire greatly and make THAT the thing that they purposefully destroy knowing the psychological effect that will have on them. It is quickly becoming open season on the "voluntary agreements" formerly made by men with their respective societies. "All deals are off!" WILL be the Battle Cry of the Future. It is no longer a matter of IF. It is now simply a matter of WHEN.
Are you run by your emotions? Are you tried of thinking for yourself? Want to have someone to blame all your problems for?
Then surrender to the religion of identity politics
Camille Paglia knows what's up.
You know what would have made this a good debate? Male debaters.. But then, having someone like Jordan Peterson on would have ruined the whole snarky vibe they had going on...
he's a terrible debater.
@MrWhiskeycricket You'll have to be more specific about what you find "terrible," because his debates are very fair and thought-provoking, as far as I've seen.
@@icorrectly HA! did you watch the debate with him, Stephen Fry and Eric Dyson and whatername? Both Peterson AND Dyson were terrible debaters, while the other woman was forgettable altogether. Dyson leaned grotesquely in on the ad hominem and Peterson took the bait! Peterson lets his emotions control him - he's not logical or good with words, at all. He's a terrible writer, too. Stephen Fry was the only person on the stage who seemed to actually understand what a debate IS, and he had a sense of eloquence that left his supposed teammate looking like an agro teen on the playground.
@MrWhiskeycricket That's a bad debate to use for your example, as Peterson and Fry were the best debaters of the 4, even though they acknowledged that the flow of debate didn't really dive into the topic of political correctness as it was supposed to (no small thanks to their opposition; mostly Dyson). The fact that you would try to spin Jordan calling out Dyson's radical race rhetoric as a negative is incredible, especially when he did it calmly and tactfully. If you disagree with any of their stances, then that would be of interest, but if we're talking about bad optics (and poor positions), then Dyson and the forgettable chick take home the prize.
@@icorrectly Peterson had no good arguments, and was completely unconvincing. Along with Dyson AND the woman, his teammates in stupidity, they weren't even debating the TOPIC. The topic was political correctness - a form of speech, rhetoric and language policing. Rather than debating THAT, they went into the tangent of right and left political positions, while Fry, who is on the left, kept to the specific topic.
The comment about Hillary Clinton taking over the White House, though.
😁
The future is female,not in 1,000 years.
Men need to start talking about gender in a way that is outside the feminist idealogy. Because clearly having 4 feminist academics on stage telling us what parts of masculinity should stay and which should go is clearly not working.
does anyone have a transcript of camille's full original statement had she not been cut off due to time limits.
I honestly did not expect this debate to be so stupid. Camille Paglia excluded.
Imagine the reaction these women would have if a man was half as vitriolic as they are. The goal of modern feminism is to divide. At least these feminists admit it freely.
I made it 36 seconds in past the introduction. I wanted to hear Camille, but I couldn't cope with the drivel leaking out of their mouths.
Brava, Camille Paglia! 👏
Feminist gossip and wishful thinking, not a debate. ...
Hanna Rosin's opinion: Yeah, men are failing... and I don't care
She seems like a great person.
I also like how she says that school shows that women are better than men and doesn't acknowledge that the current school system is TERRIBLE.
She has a son.
@@lancewalker2595 And she still doesn't care. That makes her a terrible person.
If not for Camille P. I wouldn’t be abble to watch the whole debate. I feel so sad for the future but i hope that one day we (men) Get tired of the way that society treat us and do something about it.
Feel sorry for her son !
What is most upsetting about the "debate" is that the pro side actually won! What does that say? For me, it means there is no hope for rationality to reassert itself in this insane world!
nobody is stopping women from politics or anything...women make choices as do men.hillary ran because her husband made her famous...women are different than men period.
All of them, with the exception of Paglia, were shallow thinkers. And Maureen Dowd has a really annoying voice. She was dumped by Michael Douglas for Catherine Zeta-Jones, which might explain her distaste for men.
Camille is the only intellectual powerhouse here. The other side concedes the debate a few minutes in to be honest.
So that's how women do what they call debating, interesting...
Can someone please timestamp the portion referred to by The Free Press about Camille Paglia?
Didn't expect it to be a stand-up comedy...
Before the debate starts, I am noticing that being open minded is equated with feminine in the poll while close mindedness is equated with masculine. That is a yikes for me before even a single word has been uttered by any of the women taking part in the debate. Also noticing that the question is regarding both sexes yet only women are on the panel. Another red flag before the start.
edit: Not going to edit for everything, just for what Hanna starts out with. Comparing young men and women is a false comparison since women start out higher, but don't grow their careers out to the same extent as men. This is why she takes young people for the comparison and not people who are middle aged.
It is also easier for a woman to get a job than it is for a man since people prefer to be greeted by women at the front desk instead of men and there are many programs in STEM fields which actively promote the hiring of women.
Schools are also specifically aimed at the learning experience of women with the promotion of feelings above fact. This is why you now have maths teachers arguing that 2 + 2 = 5 instead of 4.
When it comes to the breadwinner you'll also notice that a lot of those women are single, that no man wants to marry them, and that these women are the main causes for divorce (filed by those same women). There is a biological reality underpinning that, not everything is a social construct as women are beginning to learn in physical sports.
Bragging that women now hold top positions won't help you, because they got those positions specifically because they are women, not through merit. That is not something to be prideful over since it didn't require you to build anything. She even points this out by saying one of the women in her list got her job because a man got fired.
If men have lost their monopoly on violence and aggression I want women to be front-line warriors. There was also never a monopoly on violence. The only difference is that men commit physical violence while women go after people through social and emotional means. A different type of violence, but still violence.
I don't understand her equating male body hair with patriarchy. Since Asians have less body hair were they always a matriarchy? Better call Xi to let him know. And also any man competing in sports like swimming and cycling at the top level since apparently they aren't dominating those sports.
Mmh, her son gets in trouble at school all the time, who would have thought with such an eloquent and intelligent role model? And of course she closes that off with the future of her son and the words "Ah, forget it" because she really isn't a egocentric narcissist or anything...
Men are checking out and as a result the western world is crumbling yet women will blame men regardless because introspection is difficult and requires one to keep their ego in check.
I can already tell that this debate will simply be mudslinging at men with little thought put behind it. It is misandry plain and simple because a man making the same arguments about women would be labelled a misogynist.
The debate question is as bold as it gets. And although it concerns 50% of the global population, the panelists seem to possess limited knowledge about these ‘men’ creatures that they keep referring to. Even Camille, who seems to be the most sober-minded of the bunch, transparently shows that she gets her knowledge about men solely from academic articles and sports radio shows.
On the other hand, some statements from the PRO speakers verge on female supremacism. “The y chromosome is inferior”, “men won’t become obsolete until we learn how to clone sperm”. These sound like statements straight out of a feminist version of Mein Kampf.
I wanted to hear what the authorities of the feminist movement have to say. “Maybe they have some valid points?”, I thought. I mean Munk debate is a platform that has a track record of giving voice to some of the most exceptional and accomplished thinkers of our times! Well, not always, apparently...
If men have become obsolete, they have done so only in the eyes of few women. Women, perhaps, whose lives men have been absent from at critical moments. Women, who perhaps did not receive the attention, care, or love from men when they needed it most. “Whatever, I didn’t even need it. It’s obsolete anyway”. That’s the kind of immature, contemptuous response butthurt teenagers give to mask the pain of an unmet need.
Maybe instead of spreading contempt, you should be kind, and have an open heart? Maybe thinking that you have it all figured out only gives you a false sense of security? Or perhaps not. After all, when you speak - people clap. And when has a man ever made you feel so right?
-Lukas Kikunas
Paglia grew up with a working class family, and she still has a huge, extended Italian family.
3/4 of this is unwatchable
After opening comments it is so obvious who will win .
Who should have won anyway...
Is that Charlie XCX?
It's just a weird question. Who could literally think men are obsolete? Who built that venue, is running the A/V, and funds this program?
I feel only slightly shortchanged.Camille Paglia didn’t say “ok” every few seconds. (If you know, you know).
This feminist society would last till first hurricane.
Long my point exactly - and St Camille
She may want to check in on how many Canadian provinces are headed by women now 🤣
The debaters on both sides of this argument have sad, miserable views of humanity. RIP middle ground.
What's that on Rosin's upper arm?
The "resolution" is ambiguous at best, making this vote pointless.
It's a shame the question is posed in such an extreme, absolute set of words, into a phrase 'the end of men'. The conversation itself surpassed the shallowness of this question; It's simply shameful to me that the question which sparked such a profound conversation was a shallow one which was gracefully surpassed by the debaters.
Why feminism confuses me
Men are better at something: Must be patriarchy
Women are better at something: Women are just better
So toward anyside of the argument I have a question: How does one know if a difference is due to systematic preferences and not another cuase
It's time to play the music
It's time to light the lights
t's time to meet the Muppets on the Muppet Show tonight.
Camille seems a bit overly theatrical in the way she speaks here. Perhaps it is fitting for a formal situation such as a debate, but I can't help but feel that the charisma and emotion of her natural voice would make her points more compelling.
Bro, I listen to sports radio too, even if I am not at all interested in sports lol.
Just because its fun to hear men bantering about sports.
Camille's words on this issue were so eloquent and erudite. I thought she left the rest of the ladies in the dust.
Hanna Rosin begins her talk with, "How do we know men are finished?...We do have to prove that 'men', as we've historically come to define them,...are obsolete. It's the end of men because they've been failing in the workplace..."
So, the debate was about a certain socially constructed definition of 'men', and on the whole, all four participants in this 'debate' agreed more or less with that premise, with Camille Paglia assuming a guard-rail posture against argumentation that took the deconstruction of 'masculinity' too far; as Paglia says in her opening remarks, "When an educated culture routinely denigrates masculinity and manhood, then women will be perpetually stuck with boys, who have no incentive to mature or to honor their commitments. And without strong men as models to either embrace or for dissident lesbians to resist, women will never attain a centered and profound sense of themselves as women..."
In that spirit, Maureen Dowd's contribution was a follow up to Hanna Rosin's diagnosis: "Men are so last-century; they seem to have stopped evolving, sulking like Achilles in his tent."
Finally, Caitlin Moran humorously took the issue to a broader ethical plane: "Be polite. All harm and wrong in the world occurs when people forget to be polite. Ladies, remember how annoyed we were when men said that women were obsolete? How all those millennia of men treating women as second-class citizens seemed impolite?... Thumbs up for everyone on this little blue-green planet trying to get through the day. In a world of infinite trouble, the idea of equality isn't some fabulous luxury that we can gift ourselves when we're feeling morally flush... Absolute human equality is a necessity like water... In the 21st century humanity's greatest resource isn't oil or titanium or gold; it's brains. Anytime we make a choice as a society to offline a section of society, we waste these billions of tons of brains; a million ways for the world to be better... We need with urgency to stop turning things in terms of problems of men and problems of women and start seeing all problems for what they are: the problems of humanity. Women cannot win if men are losing and vice versa."
Patriarchy is inevitable. No society could survive "emancipation" of its women.
Yes, since what is meant by “emancipation” is communist “liberation”, and no society has survived communism.
Yes, since it means c0mmun1st “liberation”, and no c0mmun1st society has nor can survive, and will destroy millions every time. (Do my comments even show up? Who knows, yt has a busted user interface)
Excuse my language but, the ginger haired woman In her opening statement. WHAT THE FUCK IS SHE TALKING ABOUT????
I don't understand why Munk invites one intellectual (Camille) and a bunch of journalists who aren't trained to keep up with her. Terrible debate as a result.
Hanna Rosin was like we're not really saying men are obsolete but you should vote YES and agree that men are obsolete. Terrible debate; terrible title. That said, I think Camille Paglia is the obvious winner.
It's always a delight to hear Paglia. Of course, a society simply cannot run without men (or women). That's ludicrous. Also, to the lady talking about India, yes those gangrapes have happened here in my country and there is no excuse for it. But women have rights and justice is rendered. It's absolutely not true that we have no recourse in the law. In fact, we here in India are fighting for total gender neutral laws now.
This debate is from 2013. It could be helpful to make this clearer.
Correct. I only uploaded it on RUclips because it was never on here before.
Truthspeak thanks. I only point it out because I’m sure the results wouldn’t be the same today.
Tom Bourne... 2013 ? But there are cultural references to Adele and Miley Cyrus.
Not sure how this was a debate
the crowd is being fooled by being presented a debate wich both sides are kind of saying the same thing, but they are left to choose, or so, if the people wake up, the same misunderstanding and miscommunication that they are suffering from
OK, I can respect "some" feminism but don't expect me to come one.
The Grenfell Tower disaster showed me something here - Where the fire brigade was ordered to concentrate on putting the fire out and Residents told to hold tight in their apartments. Questions were rightly asked about the orders, it's not a big jump to understand that a female fire chief does not have the innate instinct to go in and protect lives. I say that whether she was thinking rightly or wrongly about her firefighters and health and safety. Being risk-averse is not a consideration for men they think about the objective first and the danger second. Our female police commissioner also show signs of pandering to criminals when a sterner approach is quite clearly needed.
I am not saying these officers are not good or incapable of their jobs and I am sure they are there on merit and not virtuous reasons. But that there are times when you need as much testosterone as possible.
London fire chief resigns after Grenfell criticism. The London fire commissioner in charge of the highly criticised response to the Grenfell Tower fire has resigned after renewed calls from bereaved families and survivors of the disaster for her to quit.6 Dec 2019
13:15
Yep. The 'gender paygap' in favour of men appears only after the age of thirty when many women decide to leave the workforce to raise a child/children while their man, who in the vast majority of cases earned at least as much as her, provides the financial support.
There is an irony in that the generation of girls raised with full equality with men are the girls who have been taught to feel most aggrieved by perceived injustices like gender paygaps, despite unknowingly being of the gender that has one in their favour in compared with male peers of their age group.
(And in any case, this paygap does not mean those men are being discriminated against, no more than it means women are being discriminated against after thirty because so many of them decide to raise families.)
Whatever her real intentions might be, Hana does come across as having the remarkable ability to mask her venom as truth-telling and tough love. Other than Paglia, the other women kept vacillating between misandry and faux compassion (or shallow understanding of male struggles).
These women were petty, vindictive, acid tongued, and juvenile.
What an absurd premise anyway
Seriously though...I think we need to reframe the issue. I don't think it's a problem of men vs. women. I think it's a problem of alphas vs. betas. If we live in a culture which prioritizes unbridled competition, then OF COURSE vast swaths of men will be devalued both socially and professionally. Lower professional market value and less sexual market value (women are generally less interested in losers) will inevitably push beta men to the lower fringes of the socio-economic hierarchy. Naturally they will fall into the categories of unmotivated outcasts, dissidents, deviants or angry rebels. Men may be greater risk takers, but that quality is a double edged sword. It means you have a better chance of ending up a peerless winner or a devastating failure. As Paglia wrote "There is no female Mozart because there is no female Jack the Ripper.".
Trying to frame this in terms of "men vs. women" obfuscates the issue...In my view, if we're going to prioritize social support; it's the BETA MEN who need help first and foremost. Beyond that, it's the beta women who need help.
Rather an odd one, general discussion of their general views on gender things but not much on the ostensible topic of debate, beyond the largely unchallenged assertions in Hanna's opening statement. Seems a shame even if the conversation was civil and humorous.
Perhaps Mark Levin could feature Paglia on Life Liberty and Levin Sunday on fox?
The moderator is so annoying. Also blatantly favours the pro-side without properly appreciating what either Paglia or Moran have to say... he's one man I wouldn't mind becoming obsolete.