The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Girls should not be allowed to play in boys' sports leagues or on boys' teams.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/6/2014 Category: Sports
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,207 times Debate No: 62735
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)




Girls should not be allowed to play in boys' sports leagues or on a team in these leagues.

Debate Layout
Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Opening argument, no rebuttal by Con (as Pro has no opportunity for rebuttal)
Round 3: Rebuttals, no new points by either side
Round 4: Defense of sides, and closing arguments

By "boys' league" I mean a juvenile sports league that is aimed towards boys.
Boys' leagues are viable material for this debate.

To whoever accepts this debate, I wish you good luck and a clean, fair, and interesting debate. Thank you.


I accept.
Please define juvenile (what age to what age)

Please define whether you mean all sports leagues or just specific traditional boys only sports (American football)

And just to clarify you mean a league in which there are no intramural rules, correct? As in every one would be on the same playing field and no advantages would be made for girls?
Debate Round No. 1


In this situation, I will define juvenile as between 12 and 18. For most purposes, it would be below 18 years of age, but below a certain age sports leagues are not competitive to a point where gender doesn't matter to participants in any way. I will also define league as all sports leagues, boys or girls. There are often clearly defined leagues for boys and girls, and I do not want this to turn into a semantics argument saying that "technically you CAN play in these leagues." If it is a co-ed league, then this is fine, but for this debate just accept boys' league as a league that boys play in customarily. For clarification, I do mean a league where there would be no gender-related advantages.

Hopefully these definitions are clear. I will now start my argument. Remember, Con, no rebuttals to my case in your argument this round.

I support gender equality in the world as a whole, but gender equality in juvenile sports leagues is unnecessary and detrimental to all participants in this league. I have multiple points that support my argument.

1. Allowing girls to play on the same team or even in the same league as boys can be awkward and generally uncomfortable to both sides. I have had close experience with this myself. My brother played in a boys' basketball league for multiple years, and came back again in around eighth grade. One of his games was against an all girls team. The whole game was not enjoyable to him, as it feels wrong to play against girls. Basketball is an extremely physical sport, yet he was hesitant to push girls around as this is frowned upon in society. As some may know, a critical part of basketball is boxing out. This is when a defender tries to block their opponent from getting a rebound. This is also very physical, but it is not easy to do without being rough with your opponents. Again, my brother was reluctant to be as aggressive with a girls team as he normally would have been.

2. Girls often have equal opportunity to play in the same sport. Again, with the same example, there was a girls league available for this team. I don't know why the team decided to play in a boys' league, but they clearly could have avoided this whole situation. If there is no league in the area, then the girls can choose to start their own league or join one farther away.

3. It would be unfair the other way around. If there were boys in a girls' league, would this be fair to anyone? Boys are biologically more capable than girls, and as a result they are stronger, more skilled, and better at sports in general. If a girl can join a boys' league, what would stop a boy from doing the same thing? Unless you want this to happen, and you want sports to be unfair and less enjoyable, then this should not be allowed.

I believe I have laid out my case well, and I am anxious to see Con's response to this argument. Again, thank you for accepting, and I wish you a fair debate.


For the sake of easy reading, I will structure my points the same as yours.

Girls typically have a height advantage until boys reach puberty: Puberty occurs in girls on average 2-4 years earlier than it occurs in boys. This means that girls often have a height advantage over boys from the ages of 12-16. Should tall girls be limited to just playing with each other, even if they would provide suitable competition for boys? My answer is no. If they complete the tryout and make the team, there should be no problem with them competing with other boys, as long as they are on the same athletic level.

Girls leagues showcase lower athletic ability on average, so girls who outmatch their opponents should be able to move to a mens" league: It is true that some girls completely outmatch their female opponents. This became evident recently when Mo"Ne Davis, the little league pitcher from Philadelphia dominated in the little league world series. This was a tournament for boys, yet she showed the world that she was just as good, if not better then them. It isn"t fair to relegate someone of her athletic ability to a "girls only" league. She showed she could compete with the best little league baseball players in the world, so why should we force her to play lesser competition.

Girls should be allowed to play on boys teams if there are no girls teams available: The best example I can give of this is American Football. Traditionally, there aren"t many womens football leagues, and almost no girls football leagues. Girls are often very capable of being on a football team. The most suitable position for a girl on a football team is kicker. Many middle school, high school, and even college teams have women on their teams because there is no womens football league. One example of this is Katie Hnida, who was the first female to score in a division 1-a bowl game. I have also included a list of womens football players in my sources. These women do exceptionally well and should not be disallowed from playing a sport they love.

Debate Round No. 2


mdc32 forfeited this round.


Due to my opponent forfeiting his last round, I will counter the points he has previously made.

Point 1: Please show me some actual evidence instead of anecdotal evidence. I would argue that learning how to cooperate with other genders may be an uncomfortable, but necessary step in development. Too many things are segregated these days and people forget how to work with the other gender. Playing with and against girls can be good experience for them and just because it may be uncomfortable doesn’t mean it isn’t right.

Point 2: They also often don’t have equal opportunity. What should be done when a girl shows interest in football but has nowhere to play? Girls should be allowed to play with boys ESPECIALLY when there is not a girls team, which often happens. Nobody should be left out of something they enjoy.

Point 3: I believe that there should not be any double standards, and IF there is no boys team of a sport, they should be allowed to participate. Between 4 and 7 percent of college cheerleaders in the U.S. are male(silverchips). They are allowed to participate since there is no alternative for them. This should be the same in other sports that don’t have a mens team. A point to remember is that it is rare when there is a womens version of a sport but not a mens.

Debate Round No. 3


Sorry for forfeiting last round. Family matters came up over the weekend that I had not anticipated, and I didn’t have a chance to submit my round of the debate. Thankfully, this shouldn’t have affected the order and outcome of the debate (other than conduct possibly). If anyone wants to see my round, here is the link. As Con posted his rebuttals last round anyway, I don’t know if this will matter.

EDIT: This is a short round, as I do not have much spare time on my hands, what with family issues and all. I believe that I have fulfilled the BoP, however.
This round, I’ll defend my arguments first, then possibly post some new ones at the end of the round.
Point 1
You want some real evidence to back up my claim that co-ed teams are uncomfortable and awkward. However, there is not really any way to provide any proof of this. Anecdotal evidence may be the most reliable source here; anyway, most people have likely encountered this in one way or another.

Point 2
Nobody should be left out of a sport they really enjoy. I agree with this. There is one major problem, though - if they’ve never experienced the sport themselves, they can’t really enjoy it. It is rare for a sport to be cut off for girls at a certain age. Normally, there is either a team available from a young age all the way to high school and past, or there is no team at any age. “What should be done when a girl shows interest in football but has nowhere to play?" If a girl is really interested, this means that she has played on a football team in the past. Seeing as football is a sport that is nearly always aimed towards boys, she had probably played on a boys' team. If we had disallowed this from the start, there would be no problem in the first place.

Point 3
Not to get cocky, but I think you have just slipped up. You say that there should be no double standards, and that boys should be allowed to play in a girls’ league/team if there is no male counterpart. Following this logic, girls should only be able to do the same if they have no opportunity to play in their own league. This completely knocks out your first and second points from Round 2. If girls have a height advantage, but they have their own league, it doesn’t matter. If girls’ leagues are less athletic, but they have their own league, it doesn’t matter. Now, you only have one major point backing you up, and as a result, I have only one to disprove.

I now have the opportunity to state my own points.

4. Title IX gives both boys and girls equal opportunity in sports.

I never thought I would be using Title IX to argue something against genders being equivalent in every way, as this is practically the only common use. However, I do believe it supports my cause to some extent. Title IX, as is commonly known and accepted, provides boys and girls in federally funded organizations equal opportunity in sports. I can not interpret what the law strictly states, because it is mainly judicial jargon, yet there is enough information found to show that this is exactly what it means. From your arguments, one has enough information to conclude that girls should ONLY be able to play in a boys’ league or one a boys' team if they have no way to play with other girls. Because of Title IX, boys and girls do legally have equal opportunity to play in sports. There is clearly no reason for girls to play with boys in sports, so I believe I have fulfilled the BoP.

Thanks for an engaging debate, jakulanko. Once again, I apologize for the inconveniences caused by my unintentional forfeit. I would urge the voters to ignore this as it didn’t disrupt the debate at all, yet I can understand your thoughts if this affects the outcome of the debate.



Thank you for this debate Pro, once again I will structure my closing arguments the same as yours for easy reading.

Point 1:
Once again, I won't debate that girls are generally stronger than boys, but the height difference can make up for it in some sports which uitilize height.

Point 2: This is true, but not always feasible depending on the circumstances of the league. It is often easier to just add a player, rather than going through the process of advancing to a different age tier. And to be specific, I am talking about a single player rather than an entire team.

Point 3: This argument is flawed because you are assuming a girl must have played in an organized league to have been exposed to it. Little girls who have any male role model in their life will likely be exposed to the sport. Some of these girls grow an attachment to this sport, either by watching it on T.V. or by playing with other kids(not organized) and come to love the sport. If they wonder, 'why am I not allowed to play this simply because of my gender?' It will bring up some difficult questions for the parents, and anyone else involved.

Closing argument: This entire argument is based more upon the exception, rather than the rule. Girls, on exception should be allowed to play with boys. This exception could be a multitude of things, ranging from out playing other girls, no league for girls, or any other reason in which a girl is being limited by her gender. Generally, it is not necessary for girls and boys to mix, but they should still have that option given that exception. The best way to go about this, in my opinion, is on a case by case basis.

Thank you very much Pro for a great debate.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by sensfan 3 years ago
I don't understand how it would be discouraging.
Posted by Marcus2489 3 years ago
It might be discouraging for the girls if the the boys are better or the other way round.
Posted by sensfan 3 years ago
Girls should only be allowed to play on boys teams if there is no girls team.
Posted by Boesball 3 years ago
Agree with pro
Posted by mdc32 3 years ago
Burncastle - My point exactly. If a girl wants to join a boys' team, what's to say a boy can't do the same to a girl's league? If there are enough girls in the community, then they are allowed to start their own team and join a league around them. I see no reason why boys should have to play with girls in their league, while girls can choose if they want to play with boys or not.
Posted by Burncastle 3 years ago
This is rather complicated subject. While I do believe that women should be ALLOWED in men's teams, I also think that they should go through the exact same training and selection camp (which would eliminate most women). On the other, if we allow women in men's team, then it becomes difficult to prevent men from entering women's team. If we allow men to join women's teams, then we have eliminated the entire concept of gender separation in sport. Is this a good thing? I don't know. I think tournaments are going to be incredibly unbalanced because teams are still going to end up mostly split between men and women (for biological reasons, men are generally stronger than women) but men's teams are now going to face off against women's teams

Btw, I think women CAN legally play in the NHL.
No votes have been placed for this debate.