There's nothing wrong with being a bit sexist sometimes.

With that said, let us proceed. Okay, I'm gonna make this rebuttal swift. First, let us define sexism: . http://www.askoxford.com... sexism • noun prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex. Onto my case: Basically, my opponent is advocating that there's nothing wrong being kinda sexist towards the opposite sex. To justify this, by claiming that there is nothing wrong with it provided it is done humorously rather than offensively. First, the resolution does not exclude purposely offensive sexism, but even neglecting that, my opponent cannot ignore the fact that people are often insulted even when the opposing individual's intention is not to insult. For instance, Joe walks into his home, sits at the table, and tells his wife Betty to get him some grape juice since activities such as that are what she is good at doing (in a humorous tone no doubt). Betty is immediately offended calls Joe a stupid sexist son of a b-tch, since he apparently thinks that the only thing she can do is get grape juice; she took Joe's remark as an insult to her intelligence. Now, although it was made quite clear that joe didn't mean to suggest any of what Betty pointed out, the fact of the matter was that there came about a negative effect through Joe being even slightly sexist, and in a humorous light no doubt). Ladies and gentleman, this anecdote just serves to illustrate teh idea that people DO get offended regardless of intentions (which as my opponent suggest, should be intended humorously). The best way to avoid this wrong (this negative effect) is simply to avoid even using that kind of humor in the first place. Now lets look at a better way for Joe to handle the situation with his wife. Joe walks into his home, sits at the table, and asks his wife Betty to get him some grape juice since he has been working all day and is thirstier than a whale. Betty laughs noting the humorous metaphor (as there is no way he could be as thirsty as a whale) and gets the grape juice for her husband. See there? There is still humor present and without a confrontation. How did Joe avoid pissing off his wife? He avoided suggesting anything about her as a persor; he made a remark which would unlikely piss her off; in the context of this debate, he avoided making any remark which is even bordenline sexist. I'll agree that men and women should not be afraid to highlight ACTUAL gender distinctions (physical features) (though I won't agree to the EVILS of PREJUDICE or DISCRIMANTION), but when it comes to mental distinctions, it's a whole different ball game that typically relies on inane stereotypes. What many seem to neglect is that tehre are in fact masculine women and feminine men. In fact, individuals typically have traits from both sides, hence less point at justifying sexism. What my opponent wishes to uphold is prejudice and discrimnation on the basis of gender. And as we've seen in our society, this should creates plenty of uproars (feminists movements as well as many legal battles concerning sexism even to degree which my opponent advocates). Under my opponent's philosophy, you may as well advocate that there is nothing wrong with being a bit RACIST as long as it is done humorously. That's right. So if you go up to a Mexican individual with the intent of providing humor through saying something along the lines of "What do you get when you breed a black and a mexican? A theif who's too lazy to steal! ", it's A-Okay according to my opponent's philosophy. In short, just like there's something wrong with being a kind of racist, there is something wrong with being kind of sexist (a fallacy? Nope! ).