LO's Speech Honorable speaker, the goal of the feminist movement is to achieve equality for women who are suffering and give equal rights to women on the ground. This goal is harmed when privileged women who are out of touch with the lived experience of the vast amount of people who are affected by sexist forces in society co-opt the feminist narrative to their own personal and commercial goals and imbue masses of young impressionable women with an incorrect inresearched and actively harmful view of feminism. We are proud to oppose. Firstly, let's talk about why these women are poor advocates for feminism. Key feminist icons that were talking about in this round are people like Taylor Swift, people like Beyonce, are people like Meryl Streep or people like Ronda Rousey. These are celebrities who like they said are idolized and have Cults of Personality. Let's look at the lives of these women relative to the lives of women who are oppressed in society. Taylor Swift came from an extremely wealthy family who was very influential in the country music scene and it's been a celebrity since she was a small child, same with Beyonce. They have not worked small for the low-wage jobs where they have been discriminated against, they have not suffered abuse or unemployment to my knowledge taking the same extent that women do, and particularly in the case of Taylor Swift, they are white majority members of society. THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE INTERSECTIONAL EXPERIENCES of many feminists and many women in society. They lack the experiences of majority of people on the ground. Secondly, THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND FEMINISM THEORY. They cannot just wake up one morning and say this is what I think feminism is and be as powerful and advocate for a movement as someone like Judith Butler who have spent their entire life studying the effects of social forces on women contemplating the ways in which societal pressures exerted themselves on women and coming up solutions for that. Yet these are the people who act as the advocates for this kind of society. Secondly, these women are constrained by serious commercial forces. These women cannot take more radical feminist approaches because they will massively disenfranchised their base of business. I point you to the example of Meryl Streep who was a feminist icon for many many years and was cast as the lead in the film suffragette, but in the wake of increased backlash to radical feminism, she declared herself a humanist and retrenched on her feminist identity, sending the message to millions of women that to be a feminist is to support women superiority instead of equality. This is a very harmful narrative that was motivated by commercial incentives for Meryl Streep to be an employable actress that had negative effects on the feminist rhetoric. These are poor advocates. Second point, THE MEDIA GIVES THESE ADVOCATES AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT OF CONTROL TO SHAPE THE FEMINISM NARRATIVE IN SOCIETY. Why is this? Because they are famous and they're air time cells. There is a demand for feminist content on websites on the news, people care about feminism. It's good to be watched. Who is more likely? Everybody laughed when they said hey, what's Judith Butler wearing? This means that Judith Butler is not interviewed on CNN, but Beyonce is, on their feminist segment. This is why the woman of the year is Kin Kardashian instead of people who actively advocate for change for women on the ground. There is only so much space and air time for feminist ideas and thoughts, and when celebrities co-opted due to their massive cult of personality and their idolization status, they crowd out voices that are better educated that take into account the effects of other women. Let's talk about why they are bad advocates and give examples of times where specific celebrity idols have been harmful if it back half. POI: [...] The phenomenon of Idols leaving the feminist movement is recent and begin largely with Beyonce in the early 2000s, perhaps 2005. Feminism as a concept has existed for decades and centuries far back to the suffragette movement in the early 1800. Its unreasonable to say that radicals feminism was not able to or feminism broadly was unable to enact social change before these women exist, right, there's a alternative and I'll get to that. Let's talk about specific examples of bad outcomes for feminism as the result of idols. Firstly, intersectional feminism is harmed perhaps the most. Intersectional feminism recognizes that not all women are equally disenfranchised, intersectional feminism recognizes that women have different racial and ethnic minority groups suffered greater oppression as a result of the intersection between different minority characteristics. Taylor Swift has ACTIVELY HARMED THE RHETORIC OF INTERSECTIONAL FEMINISM. A specific example of this is when she had a confrontation with Nicki Minaj as a result of the nomination for two music videos for the MTV Music Awards, Taylor Swift's award got nominated Nicki Minaj just did not. Nicki Minaj tweeted and said if I had a different type of body perhaps I would've been nominated. This is a critique on the discrimination of MTV against black women and black womans body's norm and saying they were too sexual to be popular. Taylor Swift replied to this tweet and said, I thought that you were supposed to support women, right? She attacked Nicki Minaj on the basis that she was not supporting women. This is a completely flew in the face of intersectional feminism and cemented the view that all women should support all women and denied the reasonable claim of Nicki Minaj and other women of color that they are disenfranchised even above the fact that they are women intersectional feminism is poorly misunderstood by Taylor Swift who was a privileged white woman who has never suffered because of her ethnicity. The fact that Taylor Swift gets to send this message to her millions of swifties of which I am one it's extremely harmful because they take this to be feminism. That's where they get their information from. Next, Transphobia. Ronda Rousey is an extremely huge feminist icon and has made transphobic comments to trans fighters in the female circuit. These comments have largely been co-opted by her followers who now think that to be feminist excludes trans people. Trans people are another example of people who have specific disenfranchisement within society and there are some people whose personal views on trans people colored by perhaps their athletic ability really affect the way that the feminism approaches trans people in a way that is harmful. Okay next. Let's talk about THE ALTERNATIVE. There was a very strong and robust feminist movement before, n direct refutation to side first government. They talk about academics not being sufficient. Their claim is that you don't get reach but there was reach. There were enormous demonstrations by the feminist movement in the United States and abroad that you enact changes and policies. FEMINISM IS NOT A WORD THAT WAS INVENTED 10 YEARS AGO. It was a very robust critical theory that was taught in universities. There are enormous institutions that teach it specifically as a degree and major universities across the world. Educated discourse for the last 50 or 60 years has centered around feminism. There have been feminist authors. There has been Judith Butler. There have been so many people that publish articles in the economist frequently. There is a great deal of reach. However, these authors are crowded out and their reach is replaced instead with people who are less qualified and actively harmful to the feminist movement. Our alternative is where feminism is preached by experts and not people who don't understand it and co-opted for their own personal and economic gain. It is extremely harmful to those who need the help of assignment statement and we are very proud to oppose.
@@thekayceetubeeaside from the fact that this was almost 9 years ago, crucially, just because someone is a good debater does not mean they win every debate
![[DRIP] ‘CLIK CLAK’ PREVIEW](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bcxkcOSbpac/mqdefault.jpg)
![Thessaloniki WUDC 2016 - Round 6 [Room 2]](/img/n.gif)
motion : This house believes that the creation of feminist icons and their cults of personality are good for the feminist movement
actual winners:
1st-CG
2nd-OO
3rd-OG
4th-CO
is it real? how bo seo loses ??
Whatttt
@@saidullahansari5171 just because someone is a good debater doesnt mean they win every debate
Thanks pranav
LO's Speech
Honorable speaker, the goal of the feminist movement is to achieve equality for women who are suffering and give equal rights to women on the ground. This goal is harmed when privileged women who are out of touch with the lived experience of the vast amount of people who are affected by sexist forces in society co-opt the feminist narrative to their own personal and commercial goals and imbue masses of young impressionable women with an incorrect inresearched and actively harmful view of feminism. We are proud to oppose.
Firstly, let's talk about why these women are poor advocates for feminism.
Key feminist icons that were talking about in this round are people like Taylor Swift, people like Beyonce, are people like Meryl Streep or people like Ronda Rousey. These are celebrities who like they said are idolized and have Cults of Personality. Let's look at the lives of these women relative to the lives of women who are oppressed in society.
Taylor Swift came from an extremely wealthy family who was very influential in the country music scene and it's been a celebrity since she was a small child, same with Beyonce. They have not worked small for the low-wage jobs where they have been discriminated against, they have not suffered abuse or unemployment to my knowledge taking the same extent that women do, and particularly in the case of Taylor Swift, they are white majority members of society. THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND THE INTERSECTIONAL EXPERIENCES of many feminists and many women in society. They lack the experiences of majority of people on the ground.
Secondly, THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND FEMINISM THEORY. They cannot just wake up one morning and say this is what I think feminism is and be as powerful and advocate for a movement as someone like Judith Butler who have spent their entire life studying the effects of social forces on women contemplating the ways in which societal pressures exerted themselves on women and coming up solutions for that. Yet these are the people who act as the advocates for this kind of society.
Secondly, these women are constrained by serious commercial forces. These women cannot take more radical feminist approaches because they will massively disenfranchised their base of business.
I point you to the example of Meryl Streep who was a feminist icon for many many years and was cast as the lead in the film suffragette, but in the wake of increased backlash to radical feminism, she declared herself a humanist and retrenched on her feminist identity, sending the message to millions of women that to be a feminist is to support women superiority instead of equality. This is a very harmful narrative that was motivated by commercial incentives for Meryl Streep to be an employable actress that had negative effects on the feminist rhetoric. These are poor advocates.
Second point, THE MEDIA GIVES THESE ADVOCATES AN EXORBITANT AMOUNT OF CONTROL TO SHAPE THE FEMINISM NARRATIVE IN SOCIETY. Why is this? Because they are famous and they're air time cells.
There is a demand for feminist content on websites on the news, people care about feminism. It's good to be watched. Who is more likely? Everybody laughed when they said hey, what's Judith Butler wearing? This means that Judith Butler is not interviewed on CNN, but Beyonce is, on their feminist segment. This is why the woman of the year is Kin Kardashian instead of people who actively advocate for change for women on the ground. There is only so much space and air time for feminist ideas and thoughts, and when celebrities co-opted due to their massive cult of personality and their idolization status, they crowd out voices that are better educated that take into account the effects of other women. Let's talk about why they are bad advocates and give examples of times where specific celebrity idols have been harmful if it back half.
POI: [...]
The phenomenon of Idols leaving the feminist movement is recent and begin largely with Beyonce in the early 2000s, perhaps 2005. Feminism as a concept has existed for decades and centuries far back to the suffragette movement in the early 1800. Its unreasonable to say that radicals feminism was not able to or feminism broadly was unable to enact social change before these women exist, right, there's a alternative and I'll get to that. Let's talk about specific examples of bad outcomes for feminism as the result of idols.
Firstly, intersectional feminism is harmed perhaps the most.
Intersectional feminism recognizes that not all women are equally disenfranchised, intersectional feminism recognizes that women have different racial and ethnic minority groups suffered greater oppression as a result of the intersection between different minority characteristics. Taylor Swift has ACTIVELY HARMED THE RHETORIC OF INTERSECTIONAL FEMINISM. A specific example of this is when she had a confrontation with Nicki Minaj as a result of the nomination for two music videos for the MTV Music Awards, Taylor Swift's award got nominated Nicki Minaj just did not. Nicki Minaj tweeted and said if I had a different type of body perhaps I would've been nominated. This is a critique on the discrimination of MTV against black women and black womans body's norm and saying they were too sexual to be popular. Taylor Swift replied to this tweet and said, I thought that you were supposed to support women, right? She attacked Nicki Minaj on the basis that she was not supporting women.
This is a completely flew in the face of intersectional feminism and cemented the view that all women should support all women and denied the reasonable claim of Nicki Minaj and other women of color that they are disenfranchised even above the fact that they are women intersectional feminism is poorly misunderstood by Taylor Swift who was a privileged white woman who has never suffered because of her ethnicity. The fact that Taylor Swift gets to send this message to her millions of swifties of which I am one it's extremely harmful because they take this to be feminism. That's where they get their information from.
Next, Transphobia. Ronda Rousey is an extremely huge feminist icon and has made transphobic comments to trans fighters in the female circuit. These comments have largely been co-opted by her followers who now think that to be feminist excludes trans people. Trans people are another example of people who have specific disenfranchisement within society and there are some people whose personal views on trans people colored by perhaps their athletic ability really affect the way that the feminism approaches trans people in a way that is harmful.
Okay next. Let's talk about THE ALTERNATIVE. There was a very strong and robust feminist movement before, n direct refutation to side first government. They talk about academics not being sufficient. Their claim is that you don't get reach but there was reach.
There were enormous demonstrations by the feminist movement in the United States and abroad that you enact changes and policies. FEMINISM IS NOT A WORD THAT WAS INVENTED 10 YEARS AGO. It was a very robust critical theory that was taught in universities. There are enormous institutions that teach it specifically as a degree and major universities across the world. Educated discourse for the last 50 or 60 years has centered around feminism. There have been feminist authors. There has been Judith Butler. There have been so many people that publish articles in the economist frequently. There is a great deal of reach. However, these authors are crowded out and their reach is replaced instead with people who are less qualified and actively harmful to the feminist movement. Our alternative is where feminism is preached by experts and not people who don't understand it and co-opted for their own personal and economic gain.
It is extremely harmful to those who need the help of assignment statement and we are very proud to oppose.
Hi bro, do you happen to have some other scripts? I am scripting the speeches
@@tanvirthamid8380 I do actually, tell me your email, discord or some social media that I can contact you
@@raphael32515 my replies are getting deleted
@@raphael32515 hello, it happens so that I am also scripting these speeches would you please share the scripts you have with me too?
@@kazikaavinawazaalok6732 whats your email
42:28 - Bo Seo
The way PM speaks hurts me so much
why PM sound like she’s gonna cry 😭
Who wouldn't :'(
@@muhammadhafizhhawari1613 true :”)
imagine seeing Bo at closing with fanele after. I'd cry too lol
DLO is nice nice nice speech
Debater not found?!
He probably said he didn't want to be filmed
@@mpumelelokhumalo7107 nah bro Fanele is the goat- bro signed consent in the finals what do u expect
OG- Yale B
Thanks pranav
OG - ?
OO - Hart
CG - MARA
CO - Harvard
+MrHayada Yale B!
YALE
Beep Beep bala bala bala at 9:40
Motion: THBT the creation of feminist icons and their cults of personality are good for the feminist movement
OG sounds shaky
Who advances?
Harvard (CO) and Hart (OO). They actually make it to the finals!
@@adamdawood1170 This was an in-round so had no direct bearing on who made it to the finals. The verdict was CG > OO > OG > CO
@@yashthirani6849huh? How did OG beat CO??
How is CO not top two??
You're lying
@@thekayceetubeeaside from the fact that this was almost 9 years ago, crucially, just because someone is a good debater does not mean they win every debate
Harvard speaker Bo Seo is king!
he got a forth this round...
CO wins
they got fourth here
@@hagios9 yes!
How?
That's not true