BeIR/webis-touche2020 huggingface dataset:
Barbie is a Feminist Icon Take 2

Everyone has a hobby and you seem like you enjoy it :) 1. Boys do not suffer the same psychological vulnerability as girls. Boys do have psychological flaws, but not the same as girls. The action figures boys play with are not in the same category as girls toys, as they have different aspects, preferences and marketing ability. For example, boys toys are more interactive with other toys or by themselves, rather than girls toys which interact with the user, e.g. brushing a dolls hair in relation to a girl, while shooting a plastic rocket dart out of a boys action figure in relation to a boy. These are just examples and can be disregarded if you want them to be. Yes I agree that the media is definitely worse, but it is not logical to say that barbie and other similar toys are not contributing factors. Also the media says buy barbie, and what to buy with barbie, therefore it can be interperated as just as bad. 2. No, what i'm saying is that Barbie does not give all of the options of what a girls potential is readily. I agree with the rest of you point though :) 3. At the age of which many girls would play with barbies they are extremely impressionable (im studying to be a clinical psychologist, child development was one of the sections which we recently did). As you said, kids do pick up on emotions, but not just emotions, but also reactions and physiological changes. Yes they learn a lot but they are extremely impressionable. The more you know :)! But many children may not see that web series but still a nice gesture :) This debate is going well :) Goodluck Mockery
Barbie is a Feminist Icon Take 2

Yeah, I collect dolls. I love them. I don't know why. I just do. Okay, I'm going to rebut. I doubt that's a word but I oh well. 1. Okay, I see what saying. Yes, looking at Barbie a little girl might get the idea that she's suppose to look like Barbie. But if you say that, what about the toys made for boys? Most action figures are made to be muscular and handsome. How come that doesn't harm boys? Honestly, I think Barbie doesn't effect a girl's perception of beauty as much as we think. If anything, the media is worse. The media is constantly telling us what to buy and what to wear. Barbie only says be yourself. 2. I see what you're saying but it seems to be that you think being a housewife or an air hostess isn't empowering. Yeah, they're not the most exciting jobs but if a person loves to do it, then it empowers them. The good thing about Barbie is shows girls that they can be adventurous or not and still enjoy their job. 3. Kids are a lot smarter than we think Jimmy. They realize things. They learn by watching people as well as playing. I've been around kids (I'm studying to be a pre-school teacher) and kids pick up on emotions. An example: I once burned my hand and one of the boys I was watching came over to kiss my boo-boo. He wanted me to feel better, he felt empathy. Kids learn a lot in the first few years and they continue to learn as they go on. The concept of love shouldn't be to hard for them to grasp. As for the movies....I kinda agree with you on that. They kinda are one-sided. However, Barbie now stars in a web series called Life in the Dreamhouse. Not only does she show how kind she is but she also builds herself a car, rides a plane and even built a car for Ken. It's done a great job showing girls how you can be girly and strong too! Your turn Jimmy!
Barbie is a Feminist Icon Take 2

Wow, i didn't know you had collected barbies and everything! I guess that puts me on the back foot yet I am up for a challenge. I will now rebut your argument Yes Barbie has the potential to promote girls to be anything, yet when we walk into a K-mart (Australian version of WalMart) and look for a barbie, we only see the original, girly girl barbie, not the astronaut or the racing car driver. Sure there are many versions and costumes of barbie out there, but are they the ones little girls play with most? Or are the stereotypical ones the ones which children most play with? These other outfits (as far as i know and have researched) are quite rare and more difficult to obtain. I will now answer your rebuttals to my arguments: 1. Yes there are many people who have eating disorders that do not blame barbies (I did not just say eating disorders but self esteem issues and self confidence are other examples to that ), but barbie has the potential to be a contributing factor as she is part of western culture that influences girls. The large breasts, slim body and pretty face of a doll are all ways a girl may feel insecure about herself, because she does not look like the toy she reveres. I am not saying there is anything wrong with being thin, far from it, I am saying that because of her look, and the potential she has to psychologically harm kids, makes her not able to be a feminist icon. Yes barbie is not real and children need to understand that, but do they is the question. The same goes for (I am using an extreme here so disregard it if you may) teenage boys watching pornography, it warps there thoughts and makes them think this is what sex/love/intimacy is like. 2. I am not sure you're following my arguments correctly, I am saying that many children who play with her, all they see is a stereotype. Not an empowering woman who does what she wants. Often her roles include very stereotypically feminine things as well, such as air hostess and job roles a woman would stereotypically play. 3. Usually a child would not know such a deep meaning behind the two dolls because children would not usually have such a cognitive thought behind it. They would just see two dolls, one a guy, one a girl. The end. A point I would like to bring up is the Barbie movies. In these movies Barbie is usually portrayed as a ballerina and increasingly feminine roles, rather than the race car driver or other more gender exclusive roles. My point being that Barbie is not a feminist icon because these movies still contribute to the factor that she only does girly things. Your turn :)
Barbie is a Feminist Icon Take 2

1. Believe it or not, there are a lot of people who have eating disorders and do not blame Barbie. Yes, it's true Barbie has never gained weight but she doesn't need to. There is nothing wrong with being thin. Not to mention a child need to understand that Barbie isn't real. You are not suppose to try to look like her because she isn't real. (http://www.livescience.com...) 2. I'm not sure I follow. Being a doll collector, I have seen Barbie and she is constantly trying new things. Yes, it remains that she enjoys fashion but that isn't a bad thing. Fashion is great. Everyone has a fashion sense. That and what is wrong with a woman wants to stay home? We should empower women not just to try their hardest but to also choose if they want to stay home and be a housewife. My mother has been a housewife for years and she loves it. 3.Yay, I get to use a YouTube video for this one! Woot! Now this problem is kinda two fold. Again, being a doll collector I want there to be a homosexual doll but the problem lies with closemindness. Sadly, there are still people who are against homosexual people so the chances of us getting a gay doll are extremely slim right now. That's more to play the small percent of people who are close minded and stupid. And the reason Barbie has Ken is because she loves Ken and Ken loves her. Their relationship has been going on for ages and it's still going. Barbie never leaves Ken because something bigger or better comes along. She loves Ken because he loves her and always wants to make her happy. Observe with this video here: http://www.youtube.com... Your turn!
Barbie is a Feminist Icon Take 2

Thank you for re doing this Debate. I do not feel enough was said by con on the last one. I will start by some points and in the next round i will start a rebuttal. 1. Barbie hurts a girls self-esteem. This may be (meaning the most likely cause) because of Barbies body shape and look. This may effect the girls own feelings and in turn hurt them. As feminism about diminishing the patriarchy and empowering women, i believe that making little girls feel uncomfortable about themselves because of a toy is part of it. Not to mention that the psychological effect that i am talking about is the opposite of empowering. 2. Barbie is almost always associated with being the stereotypical woman. Ads such as barbies dream house convey that barbie is nothing more than a superficial housewife. The main variety of Barbie which is sold is the one which is purely a girl who likes to try on dresses and do nothing more than be essentially a house wife. Again this is the opposite to feminism. 3. Where would barbie be without Ken? Ken her husband/boyfriend. Why doesn't barbie have a "girlfriend" so to speak? Because parents would think that is encouraging homosexuality and therefore none would sell. This again is reinforcing the Patriarchy as it does not empower the little girls but more diminishes them to who the may think they are inside. Hope this debate goes well! :)
Barbie is a Feminist Icon Take 2

JimmyRusltler said he was interested in debating this topic with me. So, it's time for take 2. I'm going to just start out making my opening argument. Barbie is a feminist icon because she teaches girls they can be anything. They can be the president, a doctor, a teacher, a race car driver, whatever. She teaches them that their gender does not have to limit them. This is one of the things that make her a feminist icon. I wait for Jimmy's respond.
Should Internet Bills Be Reduced

Just to get "stalked by the government? " If you don't want to pay your wifi bill just because of a conspiracy theory, Fine by me. However, 1: the government does not provide internet, Other nongovernment services do, And 2: You aren't being forced to pay for a car, Or any of those things. You are choosing to pay for them, And even if they are required to live(a car isnt) Internet is NOT required to live. Once again, The companies have the right to charge what they want for their product.
Top 10 mistakes the human race keeps making

I posted a link to the video for a REASON. Naturally you didn't watch it. Wow. What a surprise. US only. 1: War I agree with this one. = Obviously. 2: Genocide is caused by mental illness. No one sane would kill anyone. = So you would call the god of the bible especially, Christ, And all religious fanatics insane, Yes I agree. Now what would you think about this country entering war at WW2? On the opposing side many would consider this country the "insane" bad guys. 3: Religious conflicts are caused by people coming up with reasons to something they can't understand. Just like conspiracy theorists say about celebrities. They say they are lizards. They just feel like they will never reach that point and need a second explanation. = Religion is created because it explains the unexplained. And from that you get power. And then most religions, Though not all it trickles down to fear and then that fear leads to control. 4: Poverty exists no matter what. Poverty by people not wanting to work is the stupid side of it. = No. Poverty does not have to exist. But with Donald Toilet Dust Trump, Easily the worst president of all time, Duh, In the big white barn, Yep poverty will always exist. 5: Racism does not exist in the US. Racism is completely gone. = Racism most certainly exists. Its on the news all the time. Where have you been? 6: I agree = gotta stop the production of guns and weapons of mass destruction at all costs. That's one of the things that will lead to worldwide peace. 7: We have decreased our costs on the environment by a lot. = Not with Donald Fuzzy Bunny Trump in the big white barn. 8: Trump is not a dictator. He is very knowledgeable. He secures our lively hoods, It helps people, Helps the economy. Obama even said that the only way Trump will restore the lost GDP is by a "magic wand". Guess what. He got it done. = Donald Rabid Rabbi Trump is as close to a dictator as this country has ever seen. You don't know this. . . Two tests were given to 15, 000 + (I don't remember the exact amount) and one was listed with their names o it. Trump won by 76% to 24%. Then the test was worded differently but the questions were basically the same and no names were listed. Obama won by 83%. . Now think about that. 9: No sexism in the US. If you remove sick days, Position and hours worked WOMEN MAKE MORE MONEY. = Again, You really don't pay attention to the news, Sexism most certainly exists. Duh. 10: I agree = Polution should rank higher. Much higher.
Top 10 mistakes the human race keeps making

US only. 1: War I agree with this one. 2: Genocide is caused by mental illness. No one sane would kill anyone. 3: Religious conflicts are caused by people coming up with reasons to something they can't understand. Just like conspiracy theorists say about celebrities. They say they are lizards. They just feel like they will never reach that point and need a second explanation. 4: Poverty exists no matter what. Poverty by people not wanting to work is the stupid side of it. 5: Racism does not exist in the US. Racism is completely gone. 6: I agree 7: We have decreased our costs on the environment by a lot. 8: Trump is not a dictator. He is very knowledgeable. He secures our lively hoods, It helps people, Helps the economy. Obama even said that the only way Trump will restore the lost GDP is by a "magic wand". Guess what. He got it done. 9: No sexism in the US. If you remove sick days, Position and hours worked WOMEN MAKE MORE MONEY. 10: I agree
Top 10 mistakes the human race keeps making

https://www. Youtube. Com/watch? V=vVMuXJplVxs - Top 10 mistakes the human race keeps making 10. Pollution 9. Gender Inequality 8. Dictatorships (Yep folks Donald Toilet Dust Trump IS a dictator! ) 7. Abusing Earth"s Resources 6. Making More Weapons 5. Racism 4. Poverty 3. Religious Conflicts (mentions christianity, Judaism, Islam belief in the same god = well duh and double duh) 2. Genocide 1. War Its time to stop people. Its time---to---stop! dsjpk5 is disqualified from the voting procedures as he tries to pretend he's god and thus change the voting structure of who wins and loses here on DDO.
Resolved: Assault weapons should be banned for civilian ownership.

In conclusion, the massacres at Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook, and the 142 school shootings since Sandy Hook, illustrate that military style assault rifles and easily concealed handguns equipped with large capacity ammunition magazines are now the weapons of choice for mass shooters. These semiautomatic weapons are far more powerful and lethal than standard issue law enforcement service weapons. There had been more mass shootings of four or more people in the US than days in the year. The common denominator in almost every one is an assault rifle and high capacity ammunition magazine. The prevalence of mass shootings has people rightly wondering if they are safe sending their children to school or going to malls. An assault weapon ban would not end all gun violence in this country and it might not significantly reduce the average 90 Americans killed by guns each day. But it would help reduce the daily mass shootings. It might also help us begin living without the fear of being massacred in a public place. In conclusion, the banning of assault weapons and high capacity clips would do a lot to decrease gun violence in the United States. I do agree that some assault rifles should be allowed for civilian ownership but only for use for target shooting and/or hunting. But these would be pistols specifically made for target shooting, and hunting rifles. It is for the reasons that I have described above, and the reasons I will outline, that I as side pro believe that this resolution "BIRT assault rifles should be banned," must and will stand and I would firmly encourage a vote in support of the resolution.
Resolved: Assault weapons should be banned for civilian ownership.

Thank you for your interesting questions. My answers can be found below. 1) To answer this situation I would like to first pose a situation for a mass shooting. A shooter is in a school with an assault rifle as described above. The shooter is concealing the weapon as they walk into the halls when classes are switching so many students are in the hall. The hall is approximately 1.5-2 meters wide and 20 meters long. In a crowded hall there would be approximately 25 students every 20 meters and approximately 3 students wide, so about 75 students in one hall. If you can rapidly shoot at 180-240 shots per minute and you are in a confined area, you can easily kill or severely injure 20 students by just firing straight down the hall. Coupled with the low accuracy would actually injure and kill more students as you would not fire straight you would fire on an angle. Remember that these shooters are stressed and believe they have less time than they actually do, so they would not take the time to perfectly aim because after 5 shots all the students would have run away 2) My apologies for any miscommunication on the definition. I proposed to include calibres greater than 9mm not only 9mm and above. This was just to include assault shotguns. 3) I do recognize that putting a cap of 10 rounds on magazine capacity would ben these pistols. 4) I would like to actually point out that you defined an assault rifle as "semi-automatic firearm with a barrel shroud and pistol grip that has the capability to accept a detachable magazine." This means that handguns which usually have all of these features are considered an assault rifles. 5) A human being can only carry a certain number of magazines on his person. Increasing the capacity of these magazines simply increases the number of bullets that can be carried. Also the number of bullets in a magazine means that there is less of a need to reload as you would have to reload after 10 shots instead of say 20. Those few seconds of reload can mean life or death for another human being as there is either a deadly bullet in the gun chamber or there is not. I look forward to your closing arguments and would very much like to see where you get with my answers. Thank you.
Resolved: Assault weapons should be banned for civilian ownership.

As per the pre-agreed upon structure, I will now move on to my period of cross-examination, asking a minimum of one question and a maximum of five. I will ask three questions. The next round will be responses to my opponents cross-examination questions, and accepting his answers to my questions. 1) In your speech you stated that "pistol grips do not allow "hip-firing" as some would have you believe, unless the weapon is fully-automatic." You also stated that "Hip-firing is highly inaccurate compared to aiming down sights and would probably result in fewer deaths even in a mass-shooting situation because ammunition would be expended so quickly." Considering that mass-shootings often take place in crowded areas with compact bodies and many spread out but compact crowds, how ammunition being expended quickly would result in fewer deaths in a mass-shooting situation? 2) Continuing my previous line of questioning I would like to ask, how would inaccuracy be a good thing in mass shooting situations? 3) In your speech you stated "Assault weapons are factually no more deadly than any other semi-automatic rifle". Presented with the statistic that 72% of mass shootings used an assault weapon and over 50% used extended magazines [1], do you still consider the argument that assault weapons are still less widely used than other weapons true? Thank you for receiving my corss examination, and I look forward to your answers, and your cross examination questions Resources used this round: [1] http://www.motherjones.com...
Resolved: Assault weapons should be banned for civilian ownership.

As per pre-agreed upon structure, we will now move on to a period of cross-examination, with each side asking a minimum of one question and a maximum of five. The next round will be responses to cross-examination questions. 1) You mentioned that an assault rifle can fire at a rate of 3-4 shots per second. To the best of my knowledge, the only way this is even remotely possible is with a hair trigger, which is extremely rare on assault rifles. Also, this speed reduces accuracy greatly. The maximum effective firing speed of a semi-automatic rifle is about 45-60 shots per minute, which amounts to about one shot per second at a maximum. My question is, how would, in a mass-shooting situation where only the shooter is armed, firing 180-240 shots per minute be more effective at killing a great number of people than taking time to fire one shot into each person, given that police will take a few minutes to arrive and one would exhaust numerous magazines in that time? 2) You proposed redefining an assault weapon as any semiautomatic weapon with a caliber greater than 9mm and a magazine capacity greater than ten rounds. Are you aware that this would effectively be banning almost every .45 pistol on the market, while not affecting common "assault weapons" such as the AR-15 at all, since that rifle usually has a caliber of .223, which is about 5.7mm? (About 40% smaller than a 9mm bullet, which is almost exclusively used in pistols and submachine guns) 3) Do you recognize that putting a cap of 10 rounds on magazine capacity would ban just about every 9mm and .22 pistol on the market, which are the most popular cartridges for women's self defense? 4) Are you aware that less than 2% of total gun crimes and only about 25% of mass shootings involve any kind of "assault weapon," essentially making the issue a non-problem compared to handguns murders? 5) Since magazines, regardless of capacity, can be switched out in only a few seconds, what would be the purpose of restricting ammunition capacity given that a killer could simply carry a few more magazines? I thank my opponent for his well-thought and timely response, and eagerly await his cross-examination questions. http://reason.com... http://www.washingtonexaminer.com... http://www.washingtonexaminer.com... http://assaultweapontruth.com...
Resolved: Assault weapons should be banned for civilian ownership.

Thank you to whomever accepts my debate challenge, and I look forward to a fun and challenging debate! For clarification, "Assault weapons" will be defined as a semi-automatic firearm with a barrel shroud and pistol grip that has the capability to accept a detachable magazine. First round will be acceptance. Second will be contentions. Third will be a period of cross-examination with a maximum of five questions and a minimum of one. Fourth round will be responses to cross-examination. Fifth will be closing remarks. All sources must be cited.