The Instigator
9spaceking
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points
The Contender
butterflyprincess3
Con (against)
Losing
10 Points

School Uniforms Should not be Required

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 4 votes the winner is...
9spaceking
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/18/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,412 times Debate No: 52858
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

9spaceking

Pro

I will be pro, you will be con. (You will argue that school uniforms should be required)
Round one is for acceptance only.

My opening statement: School uniforms shouldn't be required because they create a sense of anti-individuality, going against the Freedom of Expression, being forced to choose clothing can help prepare children for the adult world, and requiring school uniforms causes rebellion among the general student population.
butterflyprincess3

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
9spaceking

Pro

In the adult world students have to make their own choices and school uniforms exclude that "training excercise" of having to choose what clothes to wear. [1]

School uniforms send out a sense of anti-individuality that goes against our personal liberty and freedom of expression. A nation should not go against its beliefs. It would not really matter if this was not in the constitution in the first place, but seriously--the constitution is the basic belief of America, and breaking it is a big blunder! [2]

Although school uniforms can bring a sense of unity among students, the unity is too robot-like! As shown in source [3], a parent openly states "I believe we should...advance independent, creative thinkers -- not standardized, uniformed thinkers." Frudden said. "To do anything less is to do our children and our society a disservice."

As shown from source [1], parents are unsatisfied with the school uniform prices, indicating that school uniforms don't exactly save parents money. They would not complain if the school uniforms actually saved money!

People usually judge other people based on the clothes they wear, I agree, but a person's clothes really have nothing to do what goes on. If someone isn't very smart or physically capable they will still get bullied regardless of the fact that they look the same as everyone else. In other words, bullies can still persist, teasing other students concerning their mental ability instead of physical. Furthermore, not everyone bases people on their clothing. Sure, nobody's like the Beauty from "Beauty and the Beast", but everyone can see some desirable traits underneath the ugly face! (No offense, Mr. Beast)

Onto you, con!

ALL SOURCES IN MLA CITATION
[1]Brosnan, Peter, and Alexis Brindley. "What Not to Wear: A School's Dress Code Limits Clothing Styles and Colors." Current Events, a Weekly Reader Publication 28 Mar. 2011: 7. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.Web. 10 Feb.2014."

[2]Fetzer, Kent J. "School Uniforms Stifle Freedom of Expression." Salt Lake Tribune [Detroit] 18 Apr. 2002: F2. Opposing Viewpoints in Context.Web. 10 Feb.2014."

[3]Dolan, Maura. "CALIFORNIA; Court Rejects School's Shirts; Judges Say Requiring Students to Wear the School's Motto Is a Free-Speech Violation." Los Angeles Times [Los Angeles] 15 Feb. 2014: AA3. Elibrary. Web. 21 Feb. 2014."
butterflyprincess3

Con

School uniforms should be required because they encourage discipline, help students resist peer pressure to buy new clothes, and diminish economic and social barriers between students.

First of all, school uniforms encourage discipline by making students focus on studying and homework rather than new clothes. In the morning, instead of worrying on different outfits, students can do school related activities like organizing their backpack, double-checking their homework, or studying. Students spend a lot of time thinking about clothing, but now, since they have uniforms, they no longer have to go through tedious shopping or hours of decisions of what to wear.

School uniforms also help students resist the urge to buy designer clothing. When everyone is wearing the same uniform, the only time new clothes are nexus are weekends, holidays, and summer break, which is a lot less clothes than the entire school year. Clothes can often be used to define social statuses, but if there are no different clothes, people will have to rely on personality rather than the outfit they are wearing.

In schools, some students are poor while others are rich. Poor students may have scholarships in order to afford school and have ragged clothes, while rich students may be supported by very wealthy parents and have expensive, fancy clothes. These completely different types of clothes make a huge difference in their popularity at school. Instead of comparing each others clothes, students can compare each others personality and intelligence, which makes a much larger difference.

Although you argue that school uniforms destroy individuality, there really isn't really a way to express yourself using clothes. Clothing is only something you wear and, in no way, can be used to define yourself. You also insist
that school uniforms create robot-like unity and decrease independence and creativity, but this is not accurate at all. Uniforms cannot affect the way you think, except for in productivity and usefulness. I also do not understand how wearing the same uniform creates "robots", because "robots" are defined as 'a machine resembling a human being and able to replicate certain human movements and functions automatically', but simply looking the same does not force them to somehow act the same. And since you also agree that uniforms do not affect how someone acts; this proves that uniforms will not harm how someone acts.

Your turn, pro!

Debate Round No. 2
9spaceking

Pro

Wow! This "noob" is good! She might even be the first to beat me in this topic!
Now, for my rebuttal....
"...hours of decisions of what to wear." That is a total exaggeration. No one takes hours to decide what to wear. And if they do, their parents will teach them to be faster, training their children for later jobs that do not require a uniform. School uniforms remove the training needed. If a person wears school uniforms all the way until work, and they don't know what to wear, they WILL spend hours of decision on what to wear. :P

"....Clothes can often be used to define social statuses...." Not really. While famous brands such as North Face can make you seem richer than others, nobody wears rags to school or sparkling jewelry. Normally it is hard to tell how rich a person is based on their clothes if you do not know the brand.

"people will have to rely on personality rather than the outfit they are wearing. " People usually don't depend on what they wear to "rise in social statuses". No study has shown that people with "high social status" wear amazing designer clothing.
"poor...have ragged clothes..." So....what makes you think that they'll be able to afford the school uniform? Parents are shown to complain about prices in source [1] above.

" There really isn't really a way to express yourself using clothes. Clothing is only something you wear and, in no way, can be used to define yourself." Wrong. As an example said by source [4], "Some people who have a very conservative personality won't wear low cut clothes they will wear long sleeves and professional clothing." In addition, as said by source [5], "Clothing choices are rarely neutral, and our inner secrets can be read in our choices. " These two sources clearly show that clothing can express personality. While wearing a uniform, the only ways to express oneself is with measly bracelets and necklaces, both which are barely visible compared to normal clothing.

And I didn't say uniforms do not affect how people act. I said uniforms do not really affect how bullies harm kids and a person's normal clothing does not affect a bully's insults either.

I extend my argument concerning the fact that school uniform going against the US constitutional beliefs of freedom of expression, which she failed to refute.
Oh, and my opponent has yet to cite a single source.
Onto you, con!

[4] http://www.ask.com...

[5] http://www.psychologies.co.uk...
butterflyprincess3

Con

butterflyprincess3 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
9spaceking

Pro

My opponent has PMed me, saying she doesn't have time. I understand, but nevertheless she has lost the debate due to her forfeit.
Vote pro!
butterflyprincess3

Con

I apologize profusely for forfeiting. That was unacceptable behavior, although it's true I did not have enough time.

Rebuttal to your Rebuttal

"...hours of decisions of what to wear." This is not actually an exaggeration (1) because research shows that, on average, most women spend nearly one year trying to decide what to wear. If parents help children decide what to wear, then the parents will also be wasting their time, and uniforms will benefit both parents and children.


"...Clothes can often be used to define social statuses..." You agree that North Face can make you seem richer than others, and it is sometimes true that people wear different clothes to school (2). An experiment shows that people are more influenced by people who wear "cool" clothes.

"people will have to rely on personality rather than the outfit they are wearing." You may argue that wearing uniforms may destroy individuality, but on the other hand, uniforms may make people behave better because they no longer have to depend on clothes. "High social status", which is popularity, probably consists of people with cute clothes and "low social status" will be made up of people with less pretty clothes.

Poor people may be able to afford the school uniform because uniforms are a lot cheaper than normal clothes. (3) Uniforms cost nearly twice as less as normal clothes and, therefore, poor people can go to school just like others and not be worried about having bad clothes.

" I said uniforms do not really affect how bullies harm kids and a person's normal clothing does not affect a bully's insults either." Therefore, as you said so yourself, uniforms will not have a negative impact either. And according to my argument, uniforms will have a positive effect.

Uniforms do not go against the US constitutional beliefs of freedom of expression because most people actually like to wear them. Usually, most people like me will not have any problems wearing uniforms. Also, parents will like uniforms too, and the parents of the majority will overpower to minors and uniforms will be appreciated.

Good job, pro! I apologize once again for forfeiting.

Sources
(1) http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
(2) http://jrscience.wcp.muohio.edu...
(3) http://www.examiner.com...



Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by bhealey 2 years ago
bhealey
9spacekingbutterflyprincess3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:43 
Reasons for voting decision: I felt that Con had the better arguments
Vote Placed by Hello83433 2 years ago
Hello83433
9spacekingbutterflyprincess3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Sources to con with all of the links that were posted in her final argument. Conduct to Con for apologizing for her absence and giving a clear and acceptable reason on why she forfeited(wasn't her fault) Convincing arguments to con because of her use of Logos and ethos(logical and ethical appeal) and her use of sources.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 2 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
9spacekingbutterflyprincess3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Pro. Con forfeited Round 3. Arguments - Pro. Con attempts to show that having no uniforms somehow saves time when it comes to dressing in the morning. This is not proven for all cases with the mistake being that Con focused solely on females. Con also lost me when she said that, "there is no way to express yourself using clothes". The issue is that she then claims the exact opposite in her last round by saying kids with cooler clothes have more influence, does this not have to do with the expressions clothes give off?! She contradicts herself as I've just shown. Her last point in the final round was that parents will like the uniforms. This is a moot point considering Pro already verified with sources that the parents still complain. All in all, Pro made stronger arguments that upheld against rebuttals whereas Con's responses are both contradictory and some even invalid. Sources - Pro. Backed up all claims with sources, not just a select few claims like Con.
Vote Placed by thesupporter 2 years ago
thesupporter
9spacekingbutterflyprincess3Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: con forfeited 3rd round