Instigator / Con
4
1500
rating
1
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#6533

Are teenagers naturally moody or does society create and exaggerate that image?

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

avni
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
3
Time for argument
One day
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
7
1500
rating
1
debates
100.0%
won
Description

Teenagers are often labelled as “moody,” but this stereotype is largely created and exaggerated by society, not based on natural behavior. Society expects teens to act dramatic, emotional, or rebellious, so every normal reaction becomes proof of the stereotype. When adults are stressed or tired, it’s seen as understandable—but when teens feel the same way, they are instantly called “moody.” This double standard shapes how people view teenage emotions. In reality, teens simply experience the same feelings as everyone else—they are just learning how to express them. Media, movies, and social platforms also exaggerate teen moodiness, making it seem like an automatic part of growing up. But that image is socially constructed, not natural. Teenagers are not born moody; they are shaped by how society chooses to portray them. Therefore, the idea of “moody teenagers” is less about biology and more about social expectation, misunderstanding, and stereotypes.

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

( Okay, so maybe teenagers are “moody,” )

- With this line alone, Con fumbled the debate with a clear concession.

Additionally, Pro's arguments had better persuasive writing, and he/she intelligently used figurative writing to strengthen arguments.

For future debates, I'd advise both opponents to use sources.
Even with a clear concession, con would have some more points if he implemented sources.

Ultimately, the verdict is not even close...