Beautiful women should actively go after career rather than going after a man
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
I’m not convinced with speedraces argument. Let’s try this again. Assume this is a heterosexual woman.
Actively go after: put effort into achieving
“Beautiful” concerns physical beauty
- Health Care Insurance
- Disability Insurance
- Life Insurance
- Retirement / Pension Plans
- Flexible Compensation
- Paid Leave
certainly. Wired has agreed that beauty exists.
If society can consider some women beautiful, why aren't they beautiful?
If I can consider a woman beautiful, it is up to con to now disprove that this woman is beautiful
The title proposes one or the other. This is due to exerting effort which requires time and ... well... effort. Because if I take effort to do one thing, and the human mind is horrible at multitasking (backed by research), that means it's a bit exclusive and I need to decide which one to prioritize.
If the debate was, should I take a walk, or should I sit down, it is clear that the two require different level of physical exertion and effort depending on my current physical state, and are mutually exclusive.
The fact that it is subjective means that "beautiful woman" can exist.
this could still be a theoretical idea that con has not negated, that beautiful woman should go after career rather than men, if they existed.