Sexism is still an issue in modern society.

Thank-you very much to Pro for providing some objections, I look forward to working these through with you.As this is now the first round of rebuttals I will respond to Pro's opening argument in point-by-point fashion, followed by his objections to my argument, and then summarise what was discussed.The opening argument Pro puts forth to substantiate that sexism is a problem for society, is the following unsourced statement:"Contrary to popular belief, females are not the only victims of sexism. For example, divorce laws often favor women over men, stereotyping and assuming that women can care for a child better than a man can. "1: Pro has not shown how, if divorce laws did favour women, it should be a terrible problem for society.2: Pro has not substantiated that divorce laws would be sexist, if they favour women.3: As i have already argued and sourced (1), it is common for women to retain the child after a break up because it is they who were the primary care givers during the relationship. I will also add, the younger the child is the stronger the bond with the mother due to feeding, especially breast feeding. (2)4: In the vast majority of cases then it is not descrimination and prejudice based on sex which leaves the child with the mother, but thought for the best interests of the child, founded on information and reason.He follows up with:"According to CBS, "women still earn an average of 77 cents for every dollar earned by a man. For African-American and Hispanic women it's even lower: 64 and 54 cents, respectively." This cannot be ignored for this is absolutely hideous. "1: He declares that this gap is caused by sexism but makes no effort to show that it is.2: He declares that the gap is "hideous" but makes no effort to describe why it is.3: I have already argued strongly against wage gaps being indicative of sexism in my opening argument. Men have the capacity to be physically and mentally more productive. Their higher peak IQ affords them the top jobs, which often pay 10 fold the salary of a mere 'good' job, raising the average mens salary in completely non-linear fashion. I also argued that women are guaranteed to suffer impaired ability, atleast a couple of days each month, lowering their objective worth in the workplace.4: It follows then that prejudice is not necessarily the causal factor behind any wage gap.5: His inclusion of African-American and Hispanic women would be indicative of racism, not sexism, so is invalid.His next opening argument for "sexism" being a culture-wide problem is: "When people say, 'Ladies first', they are stereotyping. They assume that women are weak and unable to wait."1: He doesn't source any data to show what people assume.2: He doesn't show how big strong men holding a door open for visibly smaller, less strong women, would be a problem for society3: He doesn't even show that holding a door open for a lady is sexism, as by his own definition sexism is "descrimination or devaluation". I failed to see how being thoughtful of the needs of women equates to either.Finnaly, the coupe de grace:"Sexism is not only reserved for males and females; transgenders are also subject to it."1: Transgender is not a sex. Sex is strictly biological. Transgender refers to someone whose gender identity differs from their sex. (3)2: The treatment of transgender folk, even if they were a sex, can be shown to be caused by a host of other factors such as religious beliefs.Now his rebuttal...... He does not contend my analogy, designed to show that sexual preference for certain jobs is based on reason and the well-being of everybody, rather than sexism. It also showed that the casting of such preference as "sexism", and "hideous", is in-fact destructive to society.He only takes issue with my accessory example of tribal culture, but he doesn't respond to it. He only makes unsourced statements about the accomplishments of women; "it was women that created agriculture". If it was, thats great.... but it has no bearing on the discussion which is that sexism exists and is problematic for our society."they helped heal wounded soldiers in warfare; they cared for their families in war and peace."Exactly my point! They are better at caring for their families and healing wounded soldiers than men. Men are better at fighting and protecting the land than women. There is no sexism but a kind of symbiotic relationship." I was referring to issues regarding economic opportunity and such issues. My opponent has not argued anything connected to these, which is unfortunate. "Well, I have argued in detail about these "issues". If a lady wants to go and compete with men for top jobs she is more than welcome, but any disparity in the average pay between men and women, or their respective employment rates in high-power positions has not been shown by Con to be a product of sexism. Men and women are employed and paid relative to their value. Men, having higher peak IQ, being stronger, and being incapable of suddenly having to disappear for months through pregnancy typically enjoy the higest paying jobs. They are employed and paid on merit rather than sexual prejudice or descrimination.In response to information I provided concerning IQ:"What does this have to do with sexism? How is this argument relevant to the topic?"Because, as already stated, employment rates and average wages are respective of things other than sex, such as the capacity of the person to complete a job to the highest possible standard. That capacity is most often determined by IQ or strength. It might be men that get these jobs but it is not a product of prejudice or descrimination, but of merit and objective worth.Summary1: Pro has yet to provide any example of sexism even existing. That is, descrimination or devaluation based on a persons sex. I am sure examples exist but he is yet to touch on any. The examples he has given are explained by men having more merit or worth, rather than descrimination or devaluation against women, merely because they are women -sexism.2: Pro has not provided any argument which shows sexism to be a problem for the society at-large.3: Pro has failed to offer any rebuttal to my argument showing that enforced "equal opportunities" and pay would be destructive to society.4: I must confess, I don't even know what "MLA FORMAT SOURCING" is, but I would like to remind voters that points for sources should be on the basis of reliability and relevence rather than formatting. I have not only provided more relevant and reliable sources (Pro's only sources are media publications), but also much greater quantity, providing multiple reliable sources for the most important statements. (1) (2) http://www.divorcenet.com...(3) http://www.oxforddictionaries.com..., https://www.glaad.org...