There is no misogyny. There are difference and diverse manners of treating females.

In this final round, I will deconstruct Pro's arguments and summarize my case for the existence of misogyny.Deconstruction of Pro's ArgumentsThroughout this debate, Pro has made two main arguments for the non-existence of Misogyny:1) The fact that people view and treat women differently, and the concept of Misogyny, are mutually exclusive."There is no 'misogyny'. There are only different and diverse manners in treating females, and from that we have such rich diversity all over the world." (Pro, Round 1)2) The subjectivity inherent in people's views of women means there's no objective "right" or "wrong" in those views."There is no 'objectively' correct or incorrect approach. There exists only subjectively 'right or wrong' or 'better or worse' approach determined by the subjective value judgment and conscience depending on the family." (Pro, Round 1)I will break each down and show why it does not disprove the existence of misogyny.1) The fact that people view and treat women differently, and the concept of Misogyny, are mutually exclusive.The definition of Misogyny is: Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women. (Con, Round 1) The words "Dislike", "Contempt" and "Prejudice" all describe someone's personal view of another. In the case of misogyny, they are used to describe one's view of women. Thus, misogyny describes one particular way people can view women. As you can see, this does not contradict the diversity of ways to view women, but is part of it. Misogynous beliefs are simply a subset of the diversity of beliefs Pro promotes and celebrates. The fact that people view and treat women differently does not disprove that people dislike, have contempt for or are prejudiced against women. On the contrary, the wider the diversity of beliefs is in the world, the more likely it is that misogynistic beliefs exists.2) The subjectivity inherent in people's views of women means there's no objective "right" or "wrong" in those views.As much time as Pro has spent on this argument, it is entirely irrelevant to this debate. This debate is not about whether misogyny is "right" or "wrong". The debate is whether misogyny, exists at all. Nowhere in the definition of misogyny does it say that the dislike of, contempt for or ingrained prejudice against women is wrong. That is a morality debate. Arguing over the morality of something has zero bearing on that thing's existence. In summary, Pro has failed to prove that misogyny cannot exist. Diversity of thought does not disprove misogyny's existence. The possibility that misogyny has no universal "right" or "wrong" does not disprove misogyny's existence. As burden of proof is on Pro, Pro's failure to prove the statement of debate means Pro has failed in the debate. That said, I will go ahead and summarize my arguments that misogyny does exist.Case for the Existence of Misogyny"There is not, has not, and will not be, any objective evidence that can be observed in order to confirm the existence of 'misogyny'." (Pro, Round 5)Throughout this debate, I have pointed out that Pro's arguments themselves are the objective evidence that proves the existence of misogyny. Revisiting the definition of misogyny:Dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against womenit is clear that misogyny does not describe acts, but instead a personal belief or view. Stoning can't be dislike. Honor-killing can't be prejudice. These words are reserved for personal beliefs, not actions. This is why Pro arguing that honour-killing or stoning are not misogyny is fallacious and makes no sense. The word "Misogyny", like the words "Dislike", "Contempt" and "Prejudice", can only describe one's personal feelings and beliefs. If someone has the beliefs described by misogyny, then misogyny exists.Pro shows clear dislike and contempt for women in his arguments: Pro calls women "trash" (Pro, Round 1) and believes raping women is "fun". (Pro, Round 4) Pro has also demonstrated a great deal of prejudice against women. In all of Pro's arguments, he voiced the viewpoints of the actors (the honour-killers, the rapists, the wife-beaters), but not the viewpoints of the female victims. Further, Pro claimed that there are "natural, chemical, physical, biological and physiological differences between males and females" (Pro, Round 2), and that "If it is a fact that two things are different, what logically follows is that two things should be treated differently, meaning subject to different rules." (Pro, Round 4) However, Pro assumes that these difference mean men should get to be the actors while women must be the victims. There's no evidence in Pro's arguments showing that the differences shouldn't make women dominant and men subservient, so Pro's assumptions are presumptive.Finally, Pro believes "Might makes right" (Pro, Round 5) to justify men raping women. However, Pro disagreed with every example I gave where a woman had the might: a man is stoned, shot or detained and tortured by a woman. Pro only believes might makes right when men have the might. (Con Round 4, Pro Round 5).Dislike of, contempt for and an ingrained prejudice against women. Pro's arguments in this debate have shown all of these. Whether these are morally right or wrong, although an important topic and one I feel strongly about, is irrelevant to the debate at hand. The objective fact is that misogyny exists, and it is one of the diversity of attitudes and beliefs that exist about women. No other discussion of misogyny can happen until we acknolowdege this fact.AfterwordI would like to say a final word to my opponent. I truly hope that you are just playing the part of the troll and don't actually believe some of the things you are saying. However, if you do subscribe to the beliefs you have written, then I strongly recommend you get professional help. The inability or lack or desire to consider the effects of your actions on others, the absence of shame or remorse and the violence portrayed in your arguments all point towards some psychopathic traits. There are many tests online (https://openpsychometrics.org... example) to help evaluate possible psychopathy, and I'm sure you would at least find it interesting to take one. Getting professional help would aid you in ensuring you do not do something that has disastrous consequences and lands you in prison. Unfortunately, as much as you dislike human laws, arguing they are oppressive will not keep you out of jail. I also feel sad for you for, as long as you hold these beliefs, you will never know what it's like to be loved by someone and to fully love them in return. Instead, all you will ever get is what you can force out of people by fear and dominance, which is just a superficial sliver of what true reciprocal love can be.Best wishes.