The Instigator
kuhndog
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
Teemo
Pro (for)
Winning
13 Points

Should The School Dress code be strictly enforced

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
Teemo
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/17/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,193 times Debate No: 54641
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

kuhndog

Con

I don't think it should because why does it affect other people if I want to wear a tank top that has spaghetti straps it is my body and if I want to show cleavage I should be aloud to it teaches girls that it is up to them to not distract guys guys don't have as many rules in the dress code as girls and if you do break the dress code they make you feel like you are a slut its not like if you are wearing a tanktop that isn't revealing he will be thinking "oh look at that sexy shoulder it is so distracting" and if he does he will be distracted by anything a girl is wearing or not wearing."
Teemo

Pro

I accept.

Dress codes prevent provocative and dangerous clothing from being worn. Furthermore, they prevent inappropriate clothing that could largely influence other students. This interfere's with studies, and overall focus in class rooms. With strict dress codes, we also prepare students for future employment. The job that student's will most likely have will involve a required attire, for example an pant suit. Student's are already prepared for such due to the dress code.

Dress codes also prevent sexual assault. When provocative clothing is worn, it increases the risk of rape. With the dress codes, the risk is lowered.
Debate Round No. 1
kuhndog

Con

Why should it be up to the girl to not distract they guy if it is hot and a girl is wearing a tanktop and shorts because it is hot and that distracts the guy she is the one who is punished she has to put on more clothes and then she has to burn up and if a guy rapes someone he most likely has some sort of mental problem he probably picked her because he could overpower her it doesn't matter what she is wearing in some cases it might be because of what she is wearing but not most.
Teemo

Pro

Exactly my point, school uniforms prevent such from happening. Yes, it is the girl's fault and she should put more clothes on, however with strict dress codes, this will not happen. No "hot girls" will be permitted to wear provocative clothing, improving studies of other students. Also, the person wearing the specific clothing will not be bullied with this dress code. Usually, in various school women are called horrible things due to cleavage. These words include the one that started with an s that you mentioned in the first round. With strict rules, women and men have a smaller risk of sexual assault, learn better, and slightly lowers bullying. However, not having one provides no actual benefit.
Debate Round No. 2
kuhndog

Con

forcing people to dress alike, takes away their individuality. All people need a sense of expression and many people do it through their clothing. If all teens and children were forced to dress alike, they would not be able to develop properly Getting a uniform is an expensive, additional outfit for them to wear. They do have to have other clothes to wear other than their school uniform so spending money on clothes is inevitable. Buying a pair of jeans for $20 and a shirt for $15 is much cheaper than having to purchase dress slacks, blazers, skirts, socks, and shoes all together ranging $150-$200. But if during the years most crucial for development you are told you can't wear something you find comfortable and you like because it distracts guys not because you but because of something you can't control sure you can control what you wear but you can't choose how big your boobs are or what the weather is going to be one girl can wear a shirt and it be to revealing but another girl can wear that exact same shirt and it no be revealing at all.
Teemo

Pro

Now that my opponent has finally made a proper argument that makes a bit of sense at the least, I will now being with my more serious argument.

REFUTATIONS

"forcing people to dress alike, takes away their individuality. All people need a sense of expression and many people do it through their clothing."

Are you kidding me? There is practically no one who expresses their individually solely on clothing. That is a stupid thing to do, since some people don't even have the money to buy clothing. Furthermore, there are thousands of other ways to express you individuality rather then clothing that people use much more. Also, saying it takes away their chance to express themselves is correct, yet invalid. If I said killing people is my way of expressing my individuality, does that give me the right to kill? Of course not! The same goes for this case. Just because it is one way, does not make it the only. Furthermore, not everyone dresses alike. A dress code is a code with boundaries on what to wear. There is a difference between uniforms and dress codes.

" If all teens and children were forced to dress alike, they would not be able to develop properly"

You are hilarious kid. How is it that if they dress alike they won't developpe properly? You have no proof supporting this. However, being sexually assaulted due to the clothes you wear will definetly prevent you from developping properly.

" Getting a uniform is an expensive, additional outfit for them to wear. They do have to have other clothes to wear other than their school uniform so spending money on clothes is inevitable. Buying a pair of jeans for $20 and a shirt for $15 is much cheaper than having to purchase dress slacks, blazers, skirts, socks, and shoes all together ranging $150-$200. "

As already mentioned, school uniforms and dress codes are 2 different things. Also, let us assume that this argument was valid even though it is irrelevant. It is actually much cheaper to have a uniform. With a uniform, we only need 1, and it cost about 150-200 $. However, buying clothing all year for a variety of occurance will cost way more than that! Think about it, you have to pay 20$ for a shirt. Now think about this, how many shirts do you have? The amount of money that those shirts costed is much much more than 200$

" But if during the years most crucial for development you are told you can't wear something you find comfortable and you like because it distracts guys not because you but because of something you can't control sure you can control what you wear but you can't choose how big your boobs are or what the weather is going to be one girl can wear a shirt and it be to revealing but another girl can wear that exact same shirt and it no be revealing at all."

With the dress code, you still wear comfortable clothing, however it is appropriate. You still wear the clothes you like, just the ones appropriate for the school, and that won't provoque people. I don't even understand your last sentance, so I shall do my best to paraphrase.

"You can control what you wear, however you are incapable of choosing how big your boobs are. A girl can wear a T-shirt that won't be revealing, however if another girl with big boobs wears it, it is revealing."

This is the best I could come up with. I tell you now, no such clothing would present such an issue, unless the girl was wearing a size shorter than she really is, or if she isn't wearing it properly. So, it is her fault for doing such.

---------------------------


My opponent presented no valid reason to which why there shouldn't be strict clothing rules. She confused school uniforms with dress codes, and also dropped most of my arguments including bullying. All her sentances make practically no sense whatsoever. It took me quite some time to paraphrase. I explained however that with strict rules, we better learing, prevent sexual assault, and even lower bullying.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by debate_power 2 years ago
debate_power
Yes. Precisely. A liberal attitude is flawed in so many ways, as it ignores the fact that not everything is permissible by society. I'm conservative for the very reason that there is no such thing as true freedom, that the entire idea is a sham, and it's becoming incredibly evident now that somebody has been completely fooled here. Rules exist to protect people; if you take rules away, then you have supreme selfishness, for individuality without regard to others is merely greed and selfishness disguised. You need to have the best of both worlds, and to me that's what being conservative and order-centered is about. Liberalism is the opposite, to me, of idealism and realism both.

I find it exceedingly pitiful how this liberal has the audacity to start a debate even though they clearly don't have any good points. I'd stay out of debating if I were them, but that's just my two cents.
Posted by InfraFred 2 years ago
InfraFred
I heard full-stops were important too.
Posted by Carthage 2 years ago
Carthage
Con's arguments ore messed up on so many levels.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Cutiepuffle 2 years ago
Cutiepuffle
kuhndogTeemoTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Overall, the Pro side had better arguments and grammar.
Vote Placed by Lt.Harris 2 years ago
Lt.Harris
kuhndogTeemoTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con just really dropped the ball with debating on this one.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
bladerunner060
kuhndogTeemoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither Con nor Pro did particularly spectacularly in this debate. Both relied on unsupported assumptions and tried to argue just by saying things were so. In the end, I'm giving arguments to Pro just because Con had the presumptive BoP and I don't think either side made a sufficient case, which means the BoP wasn't fulfilled by Con, which gives the win to Pro. Nothing else seemed to warrant scoring. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Vote Placed by DerKing 2 years ago
DerKing
kuhndogTeemoTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Reading the first two rounds it seems like Pro was going to win. But after reading the third round, Pro's conduct ("are you kidding me" and "you are hilarious kid" are unacceptable in a debate, it makes you unprofessional and shows that you believe that you are above your opponent) and spelling (although first two rounds were good, lots of errors in third round) went out the window. Again, looking at the first two rounds, it appeared that Pro was going to win, but after the last argument where Pro attempted, and failed, to refute all of Con's arguments made the more convincing arguments a draw. And neither of you used sources.