The Instigator
Muslimdebater
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
SJM
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Single-sex education is better than co-ed.

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 1 vote the winner is...
SJM
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/7/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 441 times Debate No: 93455
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (14)
Votes (1)

 

Muslimdebater

Pro

Co-ed is harmful. Specially nowadays. Combining the two sexes while the children are going through puberty is a great risk. Majority of them get affected by their hormones and easily get distracted by the opposite sex and the education leaves behind. It decrease their moral value about the opposite sex and they are introduced to sex at a rather young age
SJM

Con

Rebuttal

My opponent claims that it's a great risk to combine two sexes in a school when going through puberty but neglects that there can be homo relationship as well a hetero. Therefore that point about them being introduced to sex at a young age could be going on in both schools. And I don't know where my opponent gets that people who are introduced to sex entails leaving education behind since my friend was valedictorian and had sex with a girl. This also leads to my next point which is why does my opponent assume that having sex is a bad thing and how does it entail leading to a decrease in moral value. I don't believe that majority of people decrease the moral value of the opposite sex because they had sex. In fact, I think they increase the moral value, but since we both don't have evidence it cancels out. Plus just because someone gets introduced to sex at a young age doesn't mean they are constantly having it.

Argument

There are undoubtedly certain attributes to one sex that"s more prominently seen than in the other, and to add more attributes to the everyday life will make the both sexes knowledgeable. For example women tend to be more nurturing towards children, men could learn things from them and women can learn things from men. Plus if we are trying to live, we need to have kids, therefore it would better if people were used to women, thus better at talking to them.
Debate Round No. 1
Muslimdebater

Pro

Students who are intimidated by the opposite sex may find it difficult to participate in class at co-ed schools, while others (admit it!) simply find the opposite sex to be a distraction from their academic work.

For many heterosexual students, dating is one of the biggest issues at stake when considering co-ed schools, single sex schools and the impact their choice will have on the social life of campus. Co-ed schools offer the obvious benefit that the dating pool on campus is all-encompassing.

However, as previously mentioned, some students find it more difficult to focus on academics at co-ed schools. After all, it"s hard to listen to your professor"s lecture when you"re constantly looking at that cute classmate across the aisle!
Single sex schools may be a major turn-off for heterosexual students who believe that their dating options will be severely limited. Most single sex schools take this concern into consideration, however.
Moreover
co-education is bad because if a boy and a girl gets a relation, it
would cause a bad future for them. One more thing is that girls can easily cheat the boys who are very lonely and boys can also cheat the girls who are lonely. This can be related with money.

And it does introduce both the genders to certain things too early. For example if girls are talking to each other and they call each other 'slut' Just like that, guys might pick that habit up.. And they won't even realise how bad that is.
SJM

Con

Yes but some people may not be intimidated by the opposite sex, but rather their own sex. In fact they may be intimidated by attributes that are genderless, therefore not having to do with gender. Therefore your proposal doesn"t solve the intimidation issue. My rebuttal is to the point that single sex schools have less distractions due to the other sex not being there. This would be right under these circumstances, there were not any gay people, only different sexes can be friends, people only like to impress with dumb things, and that people only like to impress the opposite sex. My opponent tries to exclude gay people out of the equation, when there are gays in single sex schools which to the same things pro provides above. Also people who are friends do dumb things like this all the time because they want to impress them, and even people who aren"t their friends. What my opponent is essentially saying is that there can only be distractions if two different sexes are in the class. In fact people may be more inclined to do dumb things in single sex schools since they would do dumber things to make their friends laugh rather than try to act smart which is what most people like nowadays. Therefore in double sex schools, people will try to less to embarrass themselves than as if they were just hanging out with their friends because they are trying to make the other sex like them.

"For many heterosexual students, dating is one of the biggest issues at stake when considering co-ed schools, single sex schools and the impact their choice will have on the social life of campus. Co-ed schools offer the obvious benefit that the dating pool on campus is all-encompassing."

This helped my case.

"However, as previously mentioned, some students find it more difficult to focus on academics at co-ed schools. After all, it"s hard to listen to your professor"s lecture when you"re constantly looking at that cute classmate across the aisle!"

Refer to my distraction point.

"Single sex schools may be a major turn-off for heterosexual students who believe that their dating options will be severely limited. Most single sex schools take this concern into consideration, however."

How do schools take this into consideration, not only that, how do they fix it? It"s not enough to only consider it.

Moreover
"co-education is bad because if a boy and a girl gets a relation, it
would cause a bad future for them. One more thing is that girls can easily cheat the boys who are very lonely and boys can also cheat the girls who are lonely. This can be related with money."

Well this is making the assumption that they will have a bad relationship. WHat if it leads to a good one? There are of course good relationships that have lasted since that grade being referred to. Also by my opponent"s logic, no one should get into relationships because they have the capability of it turning out bad. And why assume that a bad relationship isn"t good? For example, there is a saying that the most damaged are the wisest, why? Partly because they learn from their mistakes.

"And it does introduce both the genders to certain things too early. For example if girls are talking to each other and they call each other 'slut' Just like that, guys might pick that habit up.. And they won't even realise how bad that is."

If people are in a same sex school, they can too call the same sex sluts which would also result in the same thing, therefore my opponent"s argument is meaningless.

"A strong reason for co-education is that separating children for a number of years means they will not be mixing and learning about each other." - Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, Professor of Developmental Psychopathology at the University of Cambridge and Fellow at Trinity College, Cambridge.

"In academic terms it should be noted that both boys and girls at the Cathedral School attain the same distinction in terms of examination results: the percentage of A*/A grades at GCSE here is equally high for both genders, indicating that neither gender is disadvantaged by the other, in fact the reverse is true, both are enhanced by the presence of the other."

Source- http://www.cathedral-school.co.uk......
Debate Round No. 2
Muslimdebater

Pro

So, my opponent basically took all of my arguments, cut it down into pieces and just denied all of it and gave meaningless "logic" to support his denial.

My opponent constantly talks about gays and how gays also study together and I want to tell my opponent, "if you want to debate about gays, you can do it in another debate. This debate isnt about gays."

Moreover, And there is huge difference in acting dumb with your friends and trying to impress someone you like. (I dont even need to explain this one)

And opponent agrees with my point when he says "Therefore in double sex schools, people will try to less to embarrass themselves than as if they were just hanging out with their friends because they are trying to make the other sex like them."

THEY ARE TRYING TO MAKE THE OTHER SEX LIKE THEM. exactly what I'm trying to say.

"How do schools take this into consideration, not only that, how do they fix it? It"s not enough to only consider it."

Well, schools are initially made for teaching not for match making.

And,

I said that they could be in a bad relationship. Because they are young and half of them are not even serious and the relationship just won't work. If it does though, happy life to that couple! But since I'm not talking about them....

"If people are in a same sex school, they can too call the same sex sluts which would also result in the same thing, therefore my opponent"s argument is meaningless"

It's still better for a girl to insult a girl rather than a guy insulting a girl :/ it takes away their dignity.

Thanks I've successfully proven all my opponent argument as illogical.
SJM

Con

"My opponent constantly talks about gays and how gays also study together and I want to tell my opponent, "if you want to debate about gays, you can do it in another debate. This debate isnt about gays."

What? Gays are included in this because they are apart of the people that make up the student body. If you are including people with heterosexual attractions then why exclude homosexual attractions when they fall under the category of attraction.

"Moreover, And there is huge difference in acting dumb with your friends and trying to impress someone you like. (I dont even need to explain this one)"

My opponent claims that there is a huge difference but doesn"t explain what that difference is, essentially saying that saying this is enough. Therefore my opponent actually didn"t provide a rebuttal. Also acting dumb with your friends is a distraction, just like trying to impress someone.

"THEY ARE TRYING TO MAKE THE OTHER SEX LIKE THEM. exactly what I'm trying to say."

No, you totally read it wrong, maybe this will help. ""Therefore in double sex schools, people will try to less to embarrass themselves because they are trying to make the other sex like them, than as if they were just hanging out with their friends."

"Well, schools are initially made for teaching not for match making."

Just because they were made for it doesn"t mean they will actually do it.

"I said that they could be in a bad relationship. Because they are young and half of them are not even serious and the relationship just won't work. If it does though, happy life to that couple!"

My opponent says because they are young, they must not take the relationship seriously, which I disagree with. I consider myself young and take my relationship very seriously. My opponent does not provide support for her assertion, and also begs the question by saying relationships just won"t work. Since there isn"t 100% correlation, this would be similar to adults, thus my opponent would by her logic, make it wrong for adults to have a relationship, since they have the possibility of having a bad relationship. And yet ignores my statement about how a bad relationship could be good.

"It's still better for a girl to insult a girl rather than a guy insulting a girl :/ it takes away their dignity."

I literally read this over and over to see if I"m missing something deeper. But I"ve came to the conclusion that there isn"t one, thus I"m astonished that someone would use this as an argument. My opponent puts forward an evident double standard. And also gives no valid support for why it would better for a girl to insult. As if girl on girl insults are immune to losing their dignity
Debate Round No. 3
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by David_Debates 7 months ago
David_Debates
Note: Disregard my portion on S&G. Con did not use enough grammatical mistakes to make her argument unreadable. Thus, this point was not given out.
Posted by whiteflame 7 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: David_Debates// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Con was the only one that used a source. Pro makes the argument of distraction (that it is harder to focus on school when you are looking at the cute girl down the aisle). Con refutes by saying that a) not all men get distracted by women, and b) they'd get distracted by members of the same sex (trying to impress their buds). Pro leaves this argument unsuported and not furthered in any way, giving it to Con. Pro also makes the argument that co-ed schools lead to learning things too early, such as, as he would call it, "calling them sluts." Con responds that this happens in same-sex schools as well. And no, I am not taking into account the vastly strange, vague, and generally illogical statement of "It's still better for a girl to insult a girl rather than a guy insulting a girl :/ it takes away their dignity." Grammar goes to Con, as a result of punctuation errors by Pro. Conduct for Pro arguing in the comments to sway votes. You didn't post any rules, so we'll go by general decency

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Sources are insufficiently explained. Even if only one side used a source, the voter has to explain how their sources were reliable (i.e. relevant to the debate). (2) S&G is insufficiently explained. Punctuation errors may make an argument difficult to read, but if that's the case, the voter has to explain how it impaired their ability to read Pro's arguments.
************************************************************************
Posted by David_Debates 7 months ago
David_Debates
Sorry about that last comment. I ran out of characters, I guess.
Posted by David_Debates 7 months ago
David_Debates
ust report my vote.
Posted by David_Debates 7 months ago
David_Debates
RFD:

Conduct (Con)
Posting arguments in the comments to attempt to sway voters is in violation of conduct. Once the debate is over, it's over. You got to choose how many rounds are in the debate, and you can't use the comments as another. This point goes to Con.

Spelling and Grammar (Con)
Grammar goes to Con, as a result of punctuation errors by Pro in round 1 (placing a period for where a comma should be), round 2 (double periods), and round 3 (caps lock). There are more that I do not mention, but this is enough to give this point to Con as well, as I found no major grammatical or spelling mistakes, at least, not even close to the amount Con used.

Arguments (Con)
Pro makes the argument of distraction (that it is harder to focus on school when you are looking at the cute girl down the aisle). Con refutes by saying that a) not all men get distracted by women, and b) they'd get distracted by members of the same sex (trying to impress their buds). Pro leaves this argument unsupported and not furthered in any way, giving it to Con. Pro also makes the argument that co-ed schools lead to learning things too early, such as, as he would call it, "calling them sluts." Con responds that this happens in same-sex schools as well. And no, I am not taking into account the generally illogical statement of "It's still better for a girl to insult a girl rather than a guy insulting a girl :/ it takes away their dignity." Con does a good job refuting it by pointing out its blatantly obvious double standards (women can insult others, but men can't).

Sources (Con)
Con used a source that furthered his argument on how co-ed schools help students learn more about the other gender. I find that the source is reliable (from a developmental psychologist) and is pertinent to the debate, as it goes to the issue at hand (which is better: co-ed or single sex). Pro used no sources to support his arguments. Thus, these 2 points go to Con.

Message me if you have questions. Don't j
Posted by whiteflame 7 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Phenenas// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to Con (Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Con's argument is pure conjecture; she asserts that mixing the sexes in school is bad without a hint of evidence or backing. In addition to providing two sources that support his side (which Pro fails to acknowledge), Con brings up some interesting points, such as homosexuality and the moral value of lust, but Pro refuses to even respond to them. The spelling and grammar aren't great on either side, so that would be a tie. While Pro got rather testy in the final round, I don't see that as a conduct violation. Overall, Con gave a better, more open-minded argument, so he deserves the win.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter is required to assess specific points made by both deabters, and in this case, he only states that some points made by Con were dropped by Pro. That is not an assessment of either side's points. While drops may inform a decision, they cannot be the sole basis for one. (2) Sources are insufficiently explained. Even though Con was the only one to provide sources, the voter has to establish that they were relevant to the debate.
************************************************************************
Posted by SJM 7 months ago
SJM
Which rules? Also are you not going to refute what I just said then?
Posted by Muslimdebater 7 months ago
Muslimdebater
It's not a shame. The rules are that we can write comments to gain votes. You are shameless: P
Posted by SJM 7 months ago
SJM
I never said you said that*
Posted by SJM 7 months ago
SJM
How rude to add arguments for the debate after it has ended. What a shame. I never you said that, I said that there are cases in which one does and does not and it is not limited to only the youth category.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by David_Debates 7 months ago
David_Debates
MuslimdebaterSJMTied
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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: See comments for RFD. They have been extended to meet the requirements messaged to me by BladeOfTruth. Hopefully they are satisfactory. If not, please message me, don't just report my vote.