Week 2

Hey guys! Ezekiel here. I just want to start off by saying that I realized in this class we won't be acutely learning about debate, but also worldwide phenomenons that trigger the common people's interest. For example, we have already talked about educational purposes such as SAT/STAR Testing, and this week will be on "gender-neutralization." At first I thought this class would be just on Jury purposes, such as dealing with the law in court, and this would be our training to be somewhat relevant to a lawyer. Now I have realized taking this class has been an excellent choice for me, and I hope that applies to many of you as well.

For my first debate, I really don't know what to think of it. I guess it was decent for my first time, but I know there are a lot of different tactics and styles involved in being the victor(s) of an argument. I noticed that first timers were pretty nervous at first, and some including me probably would've peed my pants (.Good thing I'm used to performing or going up in front of an audience for music-related events). The presentation on your part shouldn't be all that scary, especially if you already know what you're talking about, otherwise, good luck. If I was more prepared, I knew I should have mentioned other life-related issues to relate to the debate to make it seem more agreeable.

The next thing I want to mention is my talking speed. Five minutes at first seemed like the shortest time, and I thought I would probably run out of time, and decided to talk a bit faster. If you guys don't remember, I finished quite early and had no idea what to do. I should have gone more in depth on the pro's of eliminating SAT/STAR Tests, but again I thought I would be short on time.

Lastly, I would like to point out the counter-arguments. To me, proving someone wrong is by a landslide more satisfying than have a really strong point myself. If I catch a statement off-guard and has holes in its armor, what my mind evaluates in how to respond is never what my mouth says. Therefore, even though a lot of us may have had good retaliations, we never seem to speak the words we wanted to say. Even watching others present to me, I felt nervous for them for some reason, and that would probably be one of the factors relating to my rebuttals.

If you guys have not yet seen this upcoming Friday's debate, you should visit here: http://www.npr.org/2011/06/27/137342682/the-end-of-gender I would also like to mention a very interesting comment related to this topic:

Polly Yobek (pollyolga) wrote:

"The comment asking for an "age neutral" society underscores the fallacy of a "gender neutral" society. Pretending something isn't there doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Let's take the "age neutral" argument. In our "age neutral" soceity, let the elderly stand on the bus and subway - they don't need to sit any more than anyone else. We should eliminate Medicare and all other programs that cater to the elderly. "Age neutral" would require no nursing homes and no retirement age. Likewise, if our society is "gender neutral," we should not have gynecologists. We should stop women from carrying babies because a pregnancy makes a woman fundamentally different from a man. Both arguments are ridiculous. Those who argue for gender neutrality can fool themselves into thinking they are progressive, but really they are exhibiting stupidity. Men and women are biologically different. Some of us may not feel that we completely fit our gender. I, for one, have always felt more masculine than feminine and have never really felt like a woman. But I was born a woman and am biologically a woman. I have accepted that fact rather than force society to make my situation seem normal." Have a nice day! :D