args

School uniforms

REBUTTALS: " It is unlikely that all schools can be outfitted with fair trade clothing, since the US alone have 50 million children at school age . " The debate is weather school uniforms are beneficial or not to children in school. I am not saying that all schools should have them, so this argument is invalid. I am arguing how uniforms can be good, not how every school should have them. "You clearly state that the uniform would be worn at school while other clothes are worn outside of school. Since clothing needs to be washed at LEAST every two days, regardless how long you wear it on a particular day, due to the smell of sweat, the uniforms will in no way reduce the number of clothing pieces the pupils wear." But children would buy less clothes, they will still have clothes but less. This will be due to the fact they no longer have to wear a different pair of clothes each day. "For similar reasons, you need more than one set of uniform. You cannot wear one set of uniform for an entire week without washing. So you need more than one set of uniform, at least doubling the cost you claim. you claim that the clothing need not get dirty, but we are discussing children here. Many will be careless." First of all, you need to put a capital letter at the beginning of a sentence. If they are careless they won't wash it. And even if they do, this will be good for them. It will teach them responsibility, and if they don't want to use a washer, they can hand wash it themselves. This will give them more work, which teaches them many lessons. "By the numbers, even if only 10% of all children needed a sponsor, this would mean 5 million children, and by the cost we have established, this would equal 150$ x 2 (two sets) x 5 000 000 = 1.5 BILLION DOLLARS. This money would easily be better invested in books and computers. I also doubt there will be enough sponsors for that demand." Even if there weren't, they would at least help a family a bit. This would at least help them get the uniforms for less. "As established above, school uniforms are ADDITIONAL clothing. So they will also mean an additional poisoning the environment. Clothes in the numbers listed above are only produced on pre-order, so this is additional toxic waste." As mentioned above, this is not a debate saying all schools should have uniforms, it is a debate to explain why it would be beneficial. Also, if people bought less clothes, uniforms would take over of the carbon foot print created by normal clothes, which wouldn't add too much. And other things would add on either way. "But there's MORE clothes to wash, as shown above." It would be less, since you would buy less clothes, as I have been mentioning this entire debate. "That doesn't make them harmless. Even completely bio-degradable detergents cause problems" With no uniforms, children would have more clothes to wash, making them use these detergents even more. "But by your own account you argued there was no need to go against child labour, if it didn't make much of a difference. You're making up arguments opportunistically, to fit your very need. This is a contradiction. Also, I highly doubt that bullying would be effected in the least, as bullying because of clothing is just an expression of moral defects in the bullies. What you claim would be the equivalent of saying that giving a man in the rain a torn umbrella was better than nothing - yet he will be completely soaked, as the umbrella doesn't actually help getting the man out of the rain. Bullying must be counteracted with awareness programs, not by forcing children to wear clothes they did not chose for themselves - which is in itself a kind of suppression. How can suppressing your freedom protect you from your freedom being suppressed by bullies? In the end, bullies who didn't want the school uniforms will pick on the same children AGAIN because they have to wear these uniforms BECAUSE of their complaints about bullying. This will seriously not solve the problem." Uniforms only make you follow the rules in school. It teaches discipline, and only removes the freedom of clothing. This isn't even a freedom! Clothes are things you wear, and nothing more, so people shouldn't complain about not being able to wear something, if they all do the same thing. Your 2nd last sentence made no sense. Children would not end up wearing uniforms because someone complained about bullying! I am just saying that it would weaken bullying, and you have no effective way to counteract this. "Read "The Wave", an accurate account of an experiment on fascism conducted in a school some decades ago. Uniforms bring groups closer together and in conflict with other groups. That is why football teams have uniforms and mascots. This is to make them try harder to defeat the "others". Uniforms exist for discernment, or DISCRIMINATION as a synonym. It creates borders, dividing groups and creating group identities set against each other." It does not create borders, it is but a way to keep a school in discipline. And as you said they bring people together. It is better to have 1 friend and various enemies than to have no friends at all. "If parents were able to protect their children, there would be no bullying because of clothing right now, either. Parents cannot achieve this, nor can teachers." Parents don't always protect, but uniforms give them a smaller worry to have to. I have said this the entire debate. And you are unable to counteract it. "This is a circular argument. You DEFINE school uniforms as "appropriate" and other clothing as "inappropriate". Then you go on to explain that appropriate clothing is better, hence uniforms are better. Most schools have regulations against "revealing" clothing, and children break these rules. What makes you believe that a rule to wear school uniforms would fare any better? " Not wearing uniforms have a greater consequence. So since they would wear their uniforms, they would be too worried to dress inappropriately. "How about parents - you gave responsibility to them with your "walking home" argument above - simply teach their children not to be so picky about their clothes? Ultimately, your "argument" is a disguised repetition of your - self-admittedly weak - bullying argument. Children need to pick clothes carefully because of the fear of bullying. It wouldn't be long before bullying took another form, for instance freckles or spots. Then the same amount of time would be needed to cover those up before class, resulting in the same problem of sleep-deprivation. Bullying exists and is undesirable, so pupils subjected to it will always try to find ways to counteract it. These protective measures will always consume time. So if bullying is not ended, there will not be additional time for sleep. Here's a simple solution to the sleep problem, though: pick clothes the evening before, have them ready when you wake up. No hasty decisions needed in the morning while you are not yet fully functional due to sleep-deprivation." Some people have a lot to do the evening before, which doesn't give them time to. So in the morning they do. With uniforms you wouldn't have this problem of having to choose. Summarize: Uniforms would be beneficial for students and their learning patterns. This would be also help them with responsibility. Furthermore, it would weaken bullying. Children would have less clothes, saving them money, and all parents would be able to afford them. My opponent was unable to effectively render any of my arguments invalid. Furthermore, he tries to always bring everything back to the "bullying" aspect, and while he does so, he completely ignores the argument he is supposed to be rebutting. Also, he put a lower case letter various times at the beginning of his sentences. Because of such, I urge you to vote for pro.