In the West, men look at women as a sexual object

Alright. Thank you again, Julia5678, for introducing this topic. My opponent is arguing that men look at women as sex objects in western societies and I am arguing against that claim. Either showing (1) that men everywhere have this tendency to view women as sex objects, or (2) that men, in general, no matter what their cultural background do not view women as sex objects is sufficient to undermine her claim. That means that I have a fair amount of flexibility in terms of what I need to show and that she has assumed a fairly large burden of proof. As we read her text, we need to ask ourselves if her claims are gender-specific or gender-essential or whether they are culture-bound. If the former is true, then she would have to forfeit the debate. Let me explain. If she makes and demonstrates a claim that would hold true universally of a particular gender, then it would not matter whether we are talking about western societies or non-western societies. The point is that it hold true as a gender trait or characteristic regardless of culture. Let's say, hypothetically speaking, that women blink their eyes more than men. It just happens to be the case and it is gender-based. Well, then, no one could legitimately argue that western societies, qua culture, produce women that blink their eyes more than men. Naturally, it would be asserting a logical tautology but it wouldn't mean anything significant. In other words, it just so happens that women blink more and therefore that western societies feature women who blink more. "So what?" you might ask. Exactly. So what? Let's see what my opponent has to offer in terms of evidence for her claim. She provides many statistics on rape. Some of these statistics are about women and some include male-on-male rape. Confusingly, she even cites global rape statistics. Citing global rape statistics undermines her claim since she is arguing a culture-bound, non-gender-essential case (see my clarification above). Additionally, there is another problem. How is she going to link rape statistics to her claim? After all, her claim is about allowing women to dress immodestly and about turning men into creatures who look at women as sex objects. Can she pull off a link between her claim and her evidence? Interestingly, her link between the evidence and claim is particularly weak. She writes, "Basically, men get sexually excited when they look at women passionately." Wait a minute. Isn't she arguing for a causal link between scantily clad women and men who objectify those same women? What happened here? Why the change in focus? Here, she is making the claim that only man who look "passionately" [her words] at women "get sexually excited" [her words again]. So, which is it? Is it true that men have a choice in how they look at women? Can they look at a woman "passionately" or not "passionately"? Or does the dress or garments worn by the woman compel a man to get sexually excited and to act on that impulse? The reader must take note of what an assortment of claims and assumptions have to be made in the mind of my opponent for her claims to be validated. If men have a choice, then her argument is undermined. Is it really that simple? Yes, it is. She has objectified men by assuming that they must act as though they are causally determined machines. Men must not only look "passionately" at a women to feel this sexual excitement but they must act on it. What a sad degrading of men is in this strange world-view! What a lack of responsibility for actions that she is promoting! I honestly believe that if she were to reflect on the consequences of her argument, she would logically have to retract this extraordinary claim and give men back some choice and some accountability for their actions (for or against) women. But my opponent does not merely objectify men as choice-less machines who must act on their impulses. She believes that this objectification justifies instituting a government policy which would mandate the sort of clothing that all woman wears outside. That is truly amazing! Regarding assaults on women, one might guess from my opponent's statistics that rape is peculiar to western society. Not in the least! In fact, there is a wave of Muslim-based rapes going on right now: "In Turkey,"42 percent"of women are victims of physical or sexual abuse. In Morocco, the share is"82 percent. In Egypt,"99.3 percent"of women have experienced sexual harassment." [1] Yet according to her logic, Islamic men cannot rape there because women are fully clothed. Well, if that's the case, then we need to look elsewhere than how the women are clothed. We need to look at the choice of men. Some choose to act on their impulses (no matter how women are dressed) and some choose to act differently. It would be a scary thought to make men responsible for their actions. But isn't that what a free society is all about? Crime data from Norway contradicts my opponent's claim. Men in with Islamic and non-Islamic culture have different rates of rape. It is higher for Islamic men than non-Islamic. [2] Well, how can that be? The same, unveiled women are walking the streets but Islamic men act on their impulses and rape the women. [3] In my opponent's world-view, it is impossible than Islamic men rape at a higher rate than their non-Islamic counterparts since she argued that men are stimulated by visual contact with females. Therefore, we should see Islamic and non-Islamic males raping women because they are stimulated by visual contact with unveiled women! I did watch the video that you cited in your 2nd Round regarding the men cat-calling at the woman. Should we live in a free society where men can be held accountable for how they treat women or should we live in an un-free society where men are treated like choice-less machines who have no responsibility for their actions and can rape any woman, if they feel she is not dressed appropriately? Let me ask you, Julia5678, what society do you choose? What sort of society are you living in now? Are you taking American freedom for granted? In conclusion, I believe that I have demonstrated proposition #2 (cited above) which refutes your basic argument. Men do not treat women as sex objects unless they specifically choose to do so. They are not forced or compelled to look at women this way, no matter what women are wearing in public. Thanks again for the opportunity to exchange cultural and religious views. I look forward to discussing this issue further with you. [1] http://www.frontpagemag.com... [2] [3] Ibid