A split verdict, with a slight edge to the accusation: 43 % believe the most radical feminists harm their cause, 36 % dispute it, and 21 % take no side.
The gender divide is the round's most telling: men largely support the idea, while women split into strictly equal parts between yes and no. Those most directly concerned are the least categorical.
Age produces inverted, clear-cut positions: the 55-64s fully endorse the idea, the 45-54s reject it just as fully, the 18-24s lean towards refusal, and the over-65s divide between agreement and no opinion.
The debate produced a single contribution, and it comes from the minority camp, but it is among the best received of this archive period. It proceeds by historical comparison: women demanding the vote before 1944 were seen as radical, so were the abolitionists of slavery, and so were the revolutionaries of the eighteenth century.
Its conclusion fits in one sentence: radicalism shifts over time, and it is not necessarily negative, since it is what allows society to move. The argument defends no particular action; it disputes the very act of judging a movement by what looks excessive in the moment.
The round therefore sets a mostly critical vote against a debate that, lacking contradiction, offers only the objection to read. Those who carried the accusation at the ballot did not speak up to support it.