School's clothing policy
Debate Rounds (5)
The point of a school is to learn. That being said, students should be allowed some freedoms, but they must not impede on the school's ability to function first and foremost as a learning environment.
Contention 1: Dress Code Benefits Schools
Without the distraction of obscene and otherwise inappropriate clothing, students are free to learn at their full potential.
A researcher studying a high school in Texas made the following comment: "It is possible, based on our findings, that the benefits of a standardized dress code implemented and maintained over time may very well have a positive effect on student achievement." (Document 1)
Contention 2: Student Dress can Impede a Student's Ability to Learn
This is more of a logical contention without any studies to back it up, but the logic is clear, easy to follow, and can't be disputed.
Consider a scenario in which a female wears a very provocative outfit to school due to lack of dress code. This would attract the attention of teenage boys, effectively distracting them. Would this not deteriorate their ability to focus 100% on the material being covered?
The way to prevent this situation is to enforce a dress code so that student's cannot dress in a way that distracts other students.
In conclusion, I have effectively proved that only benefits can come from a dress code. As there are not negative effects, why not enforce it if it has the potential to benefit students? For this reason, and all the others discussed in this case, I urge an affirmative vote.
Document 1: http://www.shsu.edu...
2. Let's talk about that bullying issue it's because of the clothes it's just regular insults to make a guy thinks he's so better than someone. Like hmm for instance I just recently gotten bullied by this kid, calling me gay, because of the way I walk. I'm like really I wish i could hit right ther right now but school says it's forbidden to fight i mean come on really. You can't really hit anything here that's not school property.
3. skirts I know that there happens to be some guys that tend take a peak or whatever so fascinating, I would just let the girl give those guys a hard slap. If they come crying to me I'll just laugh at their face and say, " that's what you get when u flirt at a girl in a wrong harsh way"
In your first contention, you argue that there should not be a dress code because students, specifically males, want to wear tank tops because it is hot out. You also link this to dehydration, and because of this students would be absent. Your main reason for this is students don't like to drink out of water fountains. There is a very simple fix to this, bring a water bottle. The learning environment does not need to be compromised simply because students are hot. And, if you don't buy that, according to your logic, this can be fixed by bringing a water bottle.
In your second contention you seem to be arguing that dress code leads to students being bullied about their clothes. You also bring up an example that you were called gay. However, in that same sentence you say that the student that called you gay did so because of the way you walk. This does not prove that dress code causes bullying, but even if it did, dress code does not force you to wear clothes that get you bullied. Dress code just sets regulations as to what can be worn, such as pants length, or whether spaghetti straps can be worn. Students are still free to express themselves, simply within certain constraints.
Finally, in your third contention you address my second contention, where I argue that attire can be a distraction. You're only refutation is that girls could hit guys if this happened. This does not solve the problem of dress code, it just creates additional problems by allowing physical violence, therefore this cannot be considered an acceptable solution to a lack of dress code.
I would now like to address the fact that you never attacked my first contention, therefore I have to assume that you accept it. As such, you are conceding the fact that dress codes can positively benefit schools. Likewise, as I have addressed and refuted all of your contentions, the debate is in my favor.
As for your second argument, you clearly stated in your Round 2 speech that "I just recently gotten bullied by this kid, calling me gay, because of the way I walk." Thus, the fact that you were wearing skinny jeans is irrelevant. It is unfortunate that he made fun of you, but it was not because of the way you dressed, you implicitly stated that it was because of the way you were walking.
Moving on to your final rebuttal, you provide no proof that self-defense is justified in the case of "harsh flirting". Secondly, as you are supporting the ability to "defend" yourself in this situation, you are supporting MY claim. I said that the was girls dress can sometimes distract guys and lead to a disruption of the learning environment. By saying that the girls should just hit them, you are furthering the distraction, and lessening the ability to learn. So unless you can justify the need for self-defense in the case of "harsh flirting" and also prove that it does not lead to a disruption of the learning environment, you cannot make the claim that my statement is false.
Since you're barely making any sense with my second opinion because I didn't say anything about me getting involved in a fight...
Opinion 4, about that "harsh flirting" its one of the main reasons why some of the dress codes are strict because of flirting I mean a lot of students don't really care about that its just what teenagers are so what's the point if she asks you to leave her alone... then leave her alone, otherwise when teacher gets reported of harsh flirting they get a punishment other than it's that simple.
Slapping a guy because he's flirting at her harshly then she asks him to stop she should have a right to slap the guy. besides it's really is her own decision to wear a skirt to school meaning that she was actually expectinbg for someone to flirt at her so what's point...
I never said you got involved in a fight. Look at my arguments, I talked about how the bullying problem stemmed from something other than attire, therefore it was not a valid argument against dress codes.
Before we continue with the distraction/flirting argument I want to add the definition of flirting to the debate.
Merriam-Webster defines flirt as: to show superficial or casual interest in liking.
I never said harsh-flirting was the problem. But even so that isn't consider flirting, it would fall under sexual harassment, which has absolutely nothing to do with the debate. I said that it is a distraction, and therefore undermines learning at schools. Since the goal of a school is for students to learn (you never refuted this), we have to accept that anything causing students to be distracted as a problem. To solve the problem, a dress code can be implemented.
Finally, a girl has no RIGHT to slap a guy just for looking. You claim that this is self-defense...it is simply not.
Self-Defense: The defense of oneself especially in the case of a violent crime.
"Flirting", as you so call it, is not a violent crime, and thus, there is no justification for physical violence. Allowing this to occur just creates an additional problem, which wouldn't even have to be debated if a dress code were enforced.
Your second opinion, I didn't only say "flirting" I said Harsh flirting.
Third of all bullying is not f****** necessary, Just because they think it's funny to insult someone its still not so cool.
In my constructive speech, I used two contentions. You dropped the first one, therefore you are agreeing with it. You rebutted my argument that "Student Dress can Impede a Student's Ability to Learn" by saying that if someone is "flirting harshly", the girl has a RIGHT to slap them. First of all this only proves MY point. You are providing an example of a distraction which is what my argument was. If a student is wearing something that distracts another student, it causes a direct problem on their ability to learn. If they are distracted, they aren't learning. You proved, and are CONCEDING that it causes a distraction. So you didn't effectively disprove either of my arguments.
Right there we have to reasons to vote affirmative. Now on to your case.
You first make the argument that the dress could shouldn't be strict because there is a need for tank tops. You then go on and extend this by saying that the whole dress code doesn't need to be replaced. At that point, you are affirming the resolution. As we are debating whether or not school's should enforce dress codes, you are affirming because you are not saying to remove the dress code, you are saying it just needs to be less strict. So your first contention helps my case.
Your second contention addresses the bullying issue, however, in all of your arguments you fail to provide any reason that this connects back to the resolution. In your constructive argument you say that you were bullied "because of the way you walk." That has nothing to do with attire, and therefore has nothing to do with dress code. After I pointed this out you go on and say "...you're barely making any sense with my second opinion because I didn't say anything about me getting involved in a fight..." I never said this. You can look through each of my arguments, and when I responded to your arguments I never once mentioned you getting in a fight, I did however acknowledge that your argument did not link to the resolution. You then extend in your last argument and say that bullying is not necessary, and you're right, it's not. But that has nothing to do with the debate because you failed to prove that attire influenced by a dress code caused this bullying. So, your second contention can just be discarded.
Since your first contention affirms the resolution, and your second doesn't relate to it. Another two reasons to vote affirmative.
In conclusion, you dropped one my contentions, and did not effectively argue the other. Your first contention helps to prove my case, and you failed to link your second contention back to the resolution. So, in every way you look at it, the affirmative side wins the debate.
Thanks for a good debate man! This was fun. By the way, here is a tip. Don't call your argumentative points "opinions". They are called contentions, this makes you look more professional, and opinions aren't really applicable in a debate. I have to say, you are a pretty good debater though!
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.