Let's stop the required "costuming" in Parli

[Western Steve]

Hey all,

Can we all agree to descalate the need to dress up to compete in parli? I think there are two clear results: It is sexist and it is classist. There is NO benefit.

Sexism: Women are held to a different standard than men. They must wear clothes that are "appropriate" for their gender, and with standards that are NOT applied to men. If a woman (or a person identifying themselves as such) were to choose NOT to conform to the standards, they would be more severly punished than a male (or person choosing to identify as male).

Classism: It costs money. I would rather have my students spend their money on tuition and legal pads than Armani and Karan.

No Benefit:
1.) It is uncomfortable and hard to debate hard for a full day
2.) It is arbitrary--some like funky, some like chic, why is that a voter?
3.) Look, people KNOW they have to dress up for a job interview, why the repeated practice?
4.) Makes more stuff to take on trips.
5.) Can't judges vote on the arguments?
6.) I repeat--people KNOW they need to dress up, why make them wear out, despoil, stain, cause for repeated dry cleaning of the few good clothes they have. Can't they save them back for people who don't know any better than to judge people on their appearance?

This is an academic activity, not a performatory or theatric event. We don't ask students to dress up for their classes, how is a debate tournament different, except that it is more mentally challenging, a longer day, and more uncomfortable than a day of class.

End the sexism and classism now!

[ML]

Hey Steve,

In many respects, I agree with you. And as a critic I have NEVER dropped, demoting points for, or made any real substantive comment regarding a debaters appearance that weighed into my decision. As a somewhat regular traveler on the national IE circuit (which I would admit is a bit more theatrical and performative than debate) I am frequently appalled by some of the ballots my students get, telling them to match their stockings with their shoes, wear a wider tie, not be so "frumpy-looking" and wear a skirt at all times. I think that's a little extreme. Apparently in Texas, even the most progressive, left-leaning and liberal DOF's require their female students to wear long skirt suits and heels. It's a ridiculous standard that just takes it too far.

However.....

This is, and has always been a semi-formal activity. We come to the table prepared to present our best selves to judges and each other. I see nothing wrong encouraging students to respect the activity as much as possible by wearing nice clothing that is not distracting or uncomfortable. While I would never presume to pass judgement on a competitor through a ballot, I always tell my students that when you look your best, you feel your best, and most students would still define that as being in clothing that tends toward the more formal side. Armani is overdoing about tenfold, but what's wrong with expecting guys and girls to be in clean, relatively pressed khakis, a sweater or button down shirt, and for the guys, a tie? (Or hell, for girls even, let's not be exclusionary) Also, as someone who works in an office in the "real world" (well for the state of Oregon, I'm not sure how grounded in reality that is) and has to dress up to meet a certain modicum of office decorum, I can't say I regret having to learn what dressing up is all about through my competitive forensics career. And finally, I have always believed that if I'm going to tell my kids to dress up, I better follow suit (no pun intended) and so you will note I take care to be at least as well dressed as the most casual of my students. If I take the effort to look nice for others, I'd appreciate (though certainly would not demand) the same from others I encounter.

I'm not sure what negative experiences you've had with judges dropping or penalizing your students for not dressing up to their arbitrary unspoken standards, but I feel for you. I'm just not sure that calling for a de-formalization of the activity across the board is really the way to go about creating positive change. I know I will continue to encourage my students to look the best they can (and I really leave that standard up to them, as long as their hair is out of their eyes so people can see them and they're dressed warm enough to not get frostbite) regardless of what the standard becomes. Judges who penalize for appearance deserve to be taken out of the pool, stricken, or at least confronted about their reasoning. Because most critics I know would never take that into accounting for a decision.

Loving my costume, (Halloween IS my favorite holliday..)
ML

[SkiBum]

Just a few things noticed from last weekend at CC:

1. The #2 seed coming out of prelims wore nothing nicer than jeans and a sweatshirt all weekend--way to go Regis...

2. The #4 speaker (I think Kyle was 4) was dressed equally as nicely as the team from Regis.

So maybe, just maybe there is room to abandon the suits. But, to borrow a phrase from Stannard: be carefull, you're pissing on the spirit of parliamentary debate. :)

J

[truthisjust]

I agree that we need to get rid of dress standards. However, sometimes in these discussions I tend to see a push to tell people who want to dress up that they are doing something wrong. I think it goes both ways. Just let people wear what they want and what they are comfortable with.

[scooter]

Here, here to what Jason notes. One can not attack those of us who like to "dress up" as we should not attack those who chose not to. (Beyond the notion that the very definition of "dress up" is debatable-- as I believe Mr. Steck noted in the past: Complain about a tie? Try a full military uniform!)

Read as: Wear your jeans. Just don't be dissin' my Calvins.

S

[scooter]

"exism: Women are held to a different standard than men. They must wear clothes that are "appropriate" for their gender, and with standards that are NOT applied to men. If a woman (or a person identifying themselves as such) were to choose NOT to conform to the standards, they would be more severly punished than a male (or person choosing to identify as male).

Actually, the exact opposite has happened on a number of recent occasions. Doesn't defeat the argument. Just mkaes one realize that sex-based dress expectioations do affect men and women/yn

S

[ML]

"2. The #4 speaker (I think Kyle was 4) was dressed equally as nicely as the team from Regis."

Actually, it was one of our guys, Paul Bingham. He was wearing khakis, a navy button down, and a Mickey Mouse tie the last day of prelims. He was also playing frisbee on the lawn earlier in the day, and got more than a little grass-stained. Didn't seem to affect his speaks very much. And, I might add, the elements of formal wear didn't seem to hamper his game much either. I wouldn't want to deprive him of that fun, as long as he promises to let the frisbee drop if it means walking around with half of CC's lawn smeared on his white pants. But that might just be asking a little too much.

ML

[NoGraveButTheSea]

This is a good discussion.
My perspective is of the "My suit makes me feel smart and increases my confidence" school. However I would like to be able to go w/o a tie and do the sport coat button shirt thing (especially on saturdays).

I agree with both sides of this issue and see the rightness of both perspectives. however I choose to be "costumed" if for nothing else than I look GOOOOD.
Will

[scooter]

and it was good.

Don't assume that "less formal customing" can not work to one's advantage also. I recall a debate ages ago concerning the resolution: "THBT We are all born naked and the rest is just drag." Of course, several people took on "drag" attire for that one, which resulted in a whole bunch of drag queens and kings floating about the royal court and so it ended up looking a bit cliche. But one UOP debater instead opted to focus on the naked part and debate wearing his boxers (with a quit striking matching navy sportcoat, powder blue shirt, and rep tie, might I add) and it actually worked for his advantage.

S

[WWUPhil]

Will,
I know it is your feeling about the suit... but does a skirt, shaved legs, stockings, and an alluring top... or even a "nice" evening dress making a person feel smarter and more indignant? But hey not to mention that labels tend to only make that possible for single digit sizes and those with enough money to afford it... I know my thriftshop sport coat made me feel elite.

Steck(indirectly via Scooter),
and we should compare ourselves to that form of facism? (uniforms comment)

[Western Amy]

Well, Phil, as soemone who is not a single-digit size and who never spent money on "label" clothes, I <em>did</em> feel more ready to debate when dressed up. I don't judge people on the basis of their clothes, i have never marked down anyone's points for dressing casually, and i have adopted a laissez-faire policy regarding how my students dress. However, I don't feel that it is necessary to put down students who <em>do</em> like to dress up in order to make your point.

[NoGraveButTheSea]

Phil,
I understand your argument and here is what I can say.
Is there a gender based social norm difference based on "professional" attire? Absolutely. Is the standard that women are held to way more complicated and stringent then that of men? Yes. Is that notion Fucked? Absolutely. However because I am not a Woman I will not speak to how they should or should not feel or act on these truths. I will let them speak to it and I will support them.
I choose to dress well (or what I think is well) at tournaments for my own reasons If the norms became casual I would still wear a suit.
Just because I believe and act a certain way does not mean that others should.
Personal/Philisophical hegemony=bad.
Not that I am accusing you of that Phil I know and respect you better than that.
Will

[scooter]

Hear, hear to Amy! Plus: Dressing up in what I chose to is simply not facist. Asking a student to wear to tie.. can we really say that is facist? My not fitting into that single digit designer skirt... now __that__ sizing technique might be facist...

S

[WWUPhil]

Scooter,
You style is amazing and I love you for it. Saying that a tie shouldn't be considered uncomfortable for some because it isn't as bad as a required military uniform is not that far off-base of what some want to require.

Amy,
Step off. I didn't not say a person can't choose to wear what makes them feel better. Can you show me where I said will is dumb... or Will dresses bad, or will should change his clothes? I didn't... know why... cause i like Will. I respect that it makes Will feel that way but that doesn't work for everybody. We are discussing the issue of required dress right? I am saying that Will's particular argument sounded like a justification for all of us dressing up. If it is your reason for doing so, I respect that. I want everyone to chose their attire... except Shipley could use some help.

Will,
Come on. I can't seek to represent an argument because I am not a woman. Are you so freaking sure. I am not saying how anyone should feel. I think that I have heard some legitimate concerns and opinions on both sides. Do I not have to deal with size issues. It is pretty fucking easy for me to boycott the Gap... nothing fits me from there. :) I am not ripping you or anyone else who has expressed here... It is the people not here who punish/judge people in a prejudiced and discriminating way that is based on elitism, sexism, and classism... I think you and Amy suffer from some internalization of those things. :) So you are being defensive. But I love you all for it. You are right that we both recognize those issues, I was just trying to make the point to everyone.

[NoGraveButTheSea]

Phil,
Point taken and respected. You are right in that I tend to internalize a bit too much. I know you and know that you would not rip me unless I had it coming. Your analysis on this issue as all other analysis you share w/ me is very valued. I need all the help I can get. So in short Thanks again.
Will
P.S.
I'm on record LCC sweeps The Smelt this weekend WOO-HOO.
Good luck in Berzerkely

[WWUPhil]

I hope you guys kick some ass at the smelt. Sorry we are missing it this time.

On internalizing... I thought I should elaborate... I was joking with you, and you know that, but there is an issue worth dealing with that I was secretly getting at.

When we wear clothes that make us feel sexy, that is good. We need that. but sometimes it is because we buy into the beauty myth. We feel like we need to have cool clothes and style to be hot. We could go further down the rabbit hole, but I would be reitterating others views/args and might get in trouble.

The second issue is in the elitism that we feel when we dress dapperly. Problem is, this means we buy into the belief that well-dressed people is smarter than the others. Life lessons and knowledge can be found in the dirtiest and smelliest of vagabonds. If you don't believe me, ask Liz. So I feel smart in a sport jacket, because I believe the myth... that supports classism and elitism.

Just trying to get it thought about, not criticizing anyone at all. Consider that I may be this category too.

[pattybar]

This is a tricky area for me, as the standards vary by region..

I suspect that we have a few "drop her because she is wearing pants" kinds of judges up here -- although they may be smart enough not to put it on the ballot.

On the other hand, since my traveling team consists of 4 women and 1 guy -- and since I do think the parli/i.e. standards of dress are both unnecessary and sexist -- I doubt I'll even bring the issue to my team's attention. I think if a woman looks good in a sweater and slacks, then great -- let her be as comfortable as a guy.

On the performance aspect, I agree that competitors need 'game clothing' that makes them feel different than they do in practice. I also think they need rituals and supersition to set the mental mood --- and am tempted to follow Abby Bartlet's example with the scissors should they make it to deep elimination rounds... Jason had better wear the back-up tie :) ....

Patty

[scooter]

we have a few "drop her because she is wearing pants" kinds of judges up here

That is just beyond not right. Even Ms. Manners would be chucking her cookies at that one.

S

[kikimal13]

I agree that the dressing up thing can turn sexist. Once I was wearing a nice suit (non-designer; non-single digit) that had a skirt. I got really into flowing and uncrossed my legs and just pressed my knees together so I could lean forward and write faster. I got picked up on a 2-1 decision but the staying judge, a woman, wrote only one thing on our ballot..."Lady debaters need to cross their legs".

Kiki

[pattybar]

Kiki,

That is really sad... although I distinctly recall, as a judge, knowing a competitor was wearing bright orange panties -- it was obvious nobody taught her to sit in a short skirt.

There are a good number of judges out there who think that all female competitors should be wearing skirts.... and the sad part is that many of them are women themselves --- and dressing casually to judge.

This is not limited to speech/debate. Women are generally more interested in how other women look than are men.... At the first faculty social event, I was told that two of the three members of the most recent hiring committee didn't notice that a candidate was 8 months pregnant when she was interviewed and hired. The only member that noticed was a woman....

Patty

[ML]

I was a fairy last night by the way. Apparently, the Mother of all Fairies, judging by my wingspan....

Something I've learned about competing, is that dressing "professionally" is sometimes just as if not more comfortable than wearing "dressier" (ie out on the town kind of clothing) My current tournament wardrobe is defined by what I could easily sleep in if I had to. And I don't think anyone would accuse me of not looking professional. They may accuse me of being a little maverick, since I have a penchant for velvet and am seen most often wearing a pair of ancient but well-cared for Doc Martens, but that brings up an issue separate from comfort: conformity. We all look the same when we're dressed up. I'm not sure how I feel about that. Hungry, perhaps.

Another thing, why the heck can't guys wear skirts?

Still recovering from Liz's Happy Hallow-cleavage,
ML

[kikimal13]

Liz sounds like a really fun girl with all this talk about cleavage.....anyway....

Guys should be allowed to wear skirts, girls should be allowed to wear pants....who cares as long as we get a good debate.

[scooter]

Some interesting points ML. I would assert that there are indeed some elements of uniqueness even in dressing "up" whatever that means. Tie choices, colors, shoes, patterns, fabric choices, shirt types, cufflinks, necklaces, earrings, bags (brief, hand, purse, file), stockings, socks, other types of hosiery, shoe color, types of eyeware, length of trouser leg, length of cuff, length of skirt, length of suit, length of dress, fabric of suit, double breasted or single, number of buttons, types of buttons, sportcoat or ensemble, overcoat, coat, length of coat, overcoat fabric, color of overcoat, color of coat, fabric of coat, umbrella, type of umbrella, fabric of "accessories" beyond jewelry (e.g, of hair etc.) of course, hair and I won't even begin the undergarments discussion.

Read as: Its not that nonconformity can not exist, we have ample ground in the variety of variables that create our attire, yes, even within dressing "up." The question becomes the element of variation from the "acceptable" norm.

As far as men wearing skirts, 80s designer Tony Lambert created an entire line of skirts for men, causing Ralph Lauren to note that the only place a man should wear a skirt is coming out of the shower. Personally, I found and continue to find such responses to be innane and outright stupid. Indeed, I know of one person who is considered by some "biologically male" (A term which said person, I argue rightly, is shunting to individuals by creating a false presumption of gender) who looks exceptionally fashionable while wearing a skirt (as noted by many).

Beyond that we get into notions of sexuality, etc, which is a whole different discussion,

S

[pattybar]

Hey all,

The problem with discussions of clothing comes when we see that we all want the same thing... we want students to perform well, to have credibility and not to be distracting in their choice of clothing.

But, we can't decide where those boundaries are ---For example, I recently judged a student who was wearing strappy, open toed high-heel sandals to debate. Now, a competitor is in a quandry with that choice of footwear with me because, for some STRANGE reason, I find naked toes to be a bit ishy and for that reason a distraction and hose with those kinds of shoes is worse... all I can think of are those poor little toes just dying to be free..... Now, many of the rest of you may not share my toe issue and thus good competition shoes for you are bad competition shoes in my department...

Patty

[smiley30girl]

Hey all,
This is a really interesting convo...all this year I've been doing an ADS on the gendered nature of dressing standards. One of my VA's is a blown-up AFA ballot that says, "All right Audrey, you're kicking a lot of butt here, but there are a few things you can improve upon. #1- No pants suits, they're not as professional."

I was beyond shocked....and if you're interested, go to www.womeninpants.com. It's a website with all my source cites from my speech....

Audrey :)

[PancreasMatt]

i cant wait till mee and alex get to do the fullerton policy tournament- im gonna wear my big red commie shirt, and probably a burlap sack. i think policy is a little bit further along than us in the way that they've broken away from these repressive standards of what clothes should be worn and what not. i just wanna debate in my nelson mandela t-shirt.

matt c.

[Cocky Monkey]

I always believed that part of Debating was a bit of Bob Barker--part of it is the show. Style is as much a part of argumentation as it's a part of how you look.

I tried to accentuate my speaking style in front of some judges because they responded to a smoother, car salesman style. Some judges wanted me to be funny--some of them expected it of me. Style in argumentation gets some judges to respond favorably to it, to lean toward your side, to give your arguments more credibility or weight.

This same part of CERTAIN judges simply respond to the way people look. They look for who "seems" to be the better debator, (obviously I harbor some contempt for these judges). It's just another part of judge adaptation that rewards those who can act or pretend to be what the judge wants--pretend to be something other than yourself.

Sadly it seems to be a part of the game.

We don't have a math equation to figure out who won each round--a large part of this event is subjective.

Because of that for four years I wore a tie.

To a certain degree I whored myself out for ballots. I realize this. I did it willingly.

Some people in this activity have chosen to not wear ties/skirts/nice shoes/underwear because they don't care if they lost a round because of how they looked.

I heavily respect these people, quixotic as it may be--I wish I could've been as strong.

I could have been just monkey--not the cocky monkey I was for everyone else.

Here's to another debate regret.
(oh, and the hundreds of dollars I wasted)

-D Monkey

[ML]

Monkeys wearing ties are funny!! Have you not been in a greeting card store lately????? It's hysterical. Sheesh, everyone knows that. A priori voter, hands down. It's like if you were debating against a pair of bulldogs in funny hats with cigars and playing cards. I'm sorry, you just can't argue with that!!

Patty: I'm with you on the open toe/sandal business. Not only are they funny to look at, but tromping around in sandals during a Pacific NW January is pretty much begging for a nasty illness of some kind. Don't even get me started on the mud factor. Maybe it's the Minnesota in me, where cold can kill. And what happens if you drop an extemp tub?

Audrey: I really wish I could see your ADS at some point. I understand that the game of life is won by inches and that overall presentation is important in individual events, but the whole "women shouldn't wear pants" crap has got to go. Time to storm the AFA Bastille!

ML

[SkiBum]

"I whored myself out for ballots"

I'm going to quote you on that Dan.

[WWUPhil]

Honestly... that is not the only thing Dan whored himself out for... if you only knew. It is about time Dan embraced his whore-ness.

[Western Amy]

Come on Dan--You know you got bonus speaks for trading in that dirty white visor you used to wear for the snappy britiish golf hat.

:cool:

[pattybar]

I put other people's toes in the category of things I know they have, but I'd rather not see. Besides the obvious dangers, I'd still rather not see them.... perhaps it was my mother's influence when she said to me "pay attention or the escalator will eat your toes" -- produced a fear of open toed shoes and of escalators....

Also in the category of "I know you have one, but I don't want to see it" are bellybuttons. Given that you need to start wearing a winter coat here in October, disease isn't an issue, but if I can see your bellybutton, I'm less likely to vote for you.

Call me an intervener on the 'body parts paradigm, but that is who I am... live with it :) .

Patty

[DreinCali]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>but if I can see your bellybutton, I'm less likely to vote for you.[/quote]

Well, I think that's a shame. It's one thing to say, haha, isn't it silly that people wear (sandals/midriff-grazing shirts/pinwheel hats/platform shoes with goldfish inside). I've done that. It's another to say, I'm more likely to drop you, regardless of the debate at hand, if you wear X. Maybe I'm extra sensitive about these particular examples (strappy sandals and bellybuttons) because they typically apply to female debaters, and a bunch of extra reasons to drop any particular group kind of disturbs me. I always dressed up a bit for debate, but it was more of a psychological thing for me and I wouldn't want to hold ballot power of someone's head in that regard, especially since judges themselves are mostly a jeans and sweater crowd (except Scooter :) )

[ML]

Dre-

My emnity towards sandals extends to all gender/biological categories. Just ask Chris Gorman from Whitman. I cringe every time I see him walking around the wet grass in his suit, tie, and flip flops. Good God man, have you no circulation???? Can you not feel???

Of course, I've also picked him up more times than I can count, so at least for me, there's no correlation between the likelihood of me voting for you and your penchant for Birkenstocks. Just remember I told you so when you catch pnemonia. I guess I'm that rare breed of critic who can actually separate my own opinions regarding people's fashion sense from their debate sense. Bizarre.

Finally, to your comment regarding the Jean/Sweater "costume" adopted by most critics, Scooter is not the only one in that category. Like I said, if I'm expecting my students to dress nicely, the least I can do is extend them the same respect and courtesy.

Love,
ML

[Western Amy]

<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr> Like I said, if I'm expecting my students to dress nicely, the least I can do is extend them the same respect and courtesy. [/quote]
<img src=http://www.net-benefits.net/emoticons/hearhear.gif ALT=":hear"> <img src=http://www.net-benefits.net/emoticons/hearhear.gif ALT=":hear">

[DreinCali]

Unfortunately ML I have either never seen you or have passed you unknowingly, so your fashion sense is a mystery to me. And I share your confusion re: the combination of sandals and wet grass. I was only referring to the "I'm more likely to drop you" view. I think it's cool that you dress differently to judge.

[WWUPhil]

<quote>Unfortunately ML I have either never seen you or have passed you unknowingly, so your fashion sense is a mystery to me. </quote>
We all are a little confused by ML's fashion sense. At least she understands that flip flops are colled on rainy days in the NW.

And if you all can't tell from my outfits, I don't require my debaters to wear any particular thing. I just have to make sure I match with a nalgene or liquor bottle.

[ML]

Dammit, Phil. You know I look cute as a button at all times. Don't go misleading people. Maybe you're just confused by what I wear since you usually are seeing me and everything else through whiskey-colored lenses.....

ML

[Western Amy]

ML--Don't you know anything? It's Bacardi and 7-Up. That's why the nalgene looks so "harmless"

PS: I love your velvet scarves!

[WWUPhil]

Did anyone notice I spelled cold "colled"? Man this Gin and gingerale is wearing off. Could you be sure to point out who ML is for me this weekend Amy? or will you be busy trying to find your teams extemp tubs?

[pattybar]

Dre,

Honestly, toes and belly buttons of either gender are not attractive to me... some dude in low slung pants and birks without sox sounds worse than some female in strappy sandals and a belly shirt....

I can't say I would never vote for a team who showed me both toes and belly button(s), but if I am a bit grossed out by the way you dress, I am not concentrating on the argument...so, I can't vote on an argument I miss. So debaters should feel free to dress as they wish as long as they have arguments to spare.

Patty

[BrendoFTC]

Look, we all know that the dress code in parli is bad; classist, sexist, blah blah blah. Here's what I say: you think we should all deconstruct the system of collar and tie oppression? Fine. You go first. And I'll keep my speaking points and credibility from all those judges out there who were socialized into a debate community that said "here are the acceptable norms of dress, judge accordingly". My partner and I have had an interesting trend of splitting records in prelims and breaking on speaks, then climbing the out-round ladder and if shiny shoes are the difference between notched up or knocked out, then I guess I'm a sellout. Besides, my team has a dress code enforced by our coaches. We dress or we don't go into round. It's how the sytem works and while I understand the crusading aspect of equality in outfits, I have to live on the pragmatic level of trying to impress DOFs with good finishes and I do it by playing along. That's it for me, good luck to you, ya' hobos.

[WWUPhil]

i dress up cause I have principles... thats right, winning. All of you lack devotion. I think John Lennon was speaking to this issue when he said, "at least i can believe in something." Winning baby. I won't rely on my own abilities to get the job done, I will combine them with a fine fashion sense. I am the master of all that is complacence with a system that I recognize as flawed, because that benefits me the most. Forget about the damage the policy does, as long as it helps me... and oh yeah, my coach makes me do it. At least I have principles. All of you who feel demeaned by this policy quit your whining and start winning by selling out. I did it purely by my choice, and you should too.

and there's the rub.

[scooter]

gee Phil, bummer. I did it just to show off my cool tie....

S

[NoGraveButTheSea]

Phils's Perspective is exactly the same as mine in his last post. Phil does this idea stem from Dugaw at all as far as your perspective goes? For me it is absolutely that way. Sir's argument for shirt/tie/sportcoat is this "yeah it's probably unneccesary and a bit stupid, but you do it anyway, you need all the help you can get, and of course the old THIS TEAM IS NOT A DEMOCRACY you don't want to dress then don't go."
For me it's a pick my battles issue and this battle is not one I pick (especially with my coach).

[WWUPhil]

It just occured to me that if one is okay with a judge helping them out for dressing a certain way, then they can't complain if I burn them on my ballot for dressing well.
I guess I will write that in philosophy this year at Nats and see how people feel.

"I will lower your speaker points and consider you a less effective speaker, thereby costing you the debate if you are dressed up."

Oh yeah and if you want to run a Kritik of your opponents for dressing up, I will vote on that because Kritiks are the best part of this activity.

[PancreasMatt]

well, i definitley dont agree with brendan on the whole "shiny shoes" thing. Hopefully judges dont base speaks on how someone dresses. And im one of the ones who doesn't like the whole dresscode thingy. just clarification.
matt c.

[BrendoFTC]

Allright, let's make this clear. I don't like the dress code. I think it is classist and sexist and innapropriate to base a ballot on. If I had the say, I would go to policy-level dress, street clothes or costumes. Nor do I live in a world where I care about winning all that much. What it comes down to is my desire to debate and the way that desire is facilitated by the dress code. My team has a dress rule, and like it or not, a lot of judges care about how you present yourself as much as your arguements. The speaking points are the optional part of the ballot, if you don't care you can still win the round. If wearing the right shoes is what offers me the chance to break into the next round, then my choice is easy.
I don't enjoy being told that I should buy a new suit, since I wear the same one every day. And I didn't love buying three dress shirts that I have to clean by hand every week since I can't pay the damn drycleaning. But I don't have the power myself to change the system at it's core, or the views of those judges who truly feel that the dress code is legit and neccesary. So take it as it is: a neccesary evil that any good debater should be able to argue around if it ever really becomes an issue.
Practice in Converse, perform in Hush Puppies, be brilliant in both.

[KSrules]

well my subject pretty much tells it all. I don't think it is unresonable to dress up on a weekend where you are debating world/national events and goings on. I think that congress and the senate still do that

[scooter]

Ohhhhh, __that's__ what Tommy and Trent have been trying to do!

Wow, talk about your failed attempt (on oh! so many levels...!

S

[pattybar]

Do you think that policy debate doesn't have a dress code?

They have one, it is just different than that of parli. If you don't think so, try going to a policy tournament in a suit. You are likely to get ballot comments about trying to buy ballots by dressing up and being worried more about dress than arguments. My guess is that you won't be taken seriously.

Having judged and coached parli and IEs for six years, I have noticed that IE judges tend to be more concerned with clothes. Since parli competitors tend to also do IEs and schedules are mixed at tournaments, I think keeping some level of 'dressing up' as a standard is acceptable, just so that those who are cross-entered can be both comfortable and competitive on both sides.

Face it, it would be easier to enter a parli competition in jeans and a sweater than persuasion or extemp.... and since we don't have control over the IE side of things, why not make the standard such that wearing a suit does not violate it?

Patty

ps, Brendo -- can't your shirts go into your laundry bag?? If not, next time buy the wrinke-free (really winkle-less.... but they don't need an iron...) from Penny's.... Jason competed for 4 years and I never took his shirts to the drycleaner's -- way too expensive, and both of us were working at the time :) ...

[glueboy1]

Patty, this isn't really true. I debated with Scott Fuqua (a CEDA nationals quarterfinalist in 1997) who always wore a suit and never seemed to suffer for it. Several Dartmouth debaters did/do wear suits (Meade from the team of Farrahany and Meade comes to mind as well as Lhotsky from Hung and Lehotsky). I don't really care one way or another about dressing etc, but at major policy tournaments there are generally several successful competitors at least wearing ties and slacks if not suits.

[Branarchist]

Someone said,
"But I don't have the power myself to change the system at it's core, or the views of those judges who truly feel that the dress code is legit and neccesary."

That's exactly the problem: the belief that you cannot change things only makes you feel better about yourself when you sell out. Wear what you want to wear- just don't pretend like you disagree with the dress code if you don't want to do anything about it.

Me personally, I don't really mind dressing up a bit. But when I wear slacks and a sweater and a critic tells me I "should really consider getting a power suit" then I think we have a problem.

Audrey :) (posting under Brandan's name because he was last logged on to the squad computer)

[ML]

Yeah, I thought that would get his attention:

Phil Says:
"It just occured to me that if one is okay with a judge helping them out for dressing a certain way, then they can't complain if I burn them on my ballot for dressing well.
Oh yeah and if you want to run a Kritik of your opponents for dressing up, I will vote on that because Kritiks are the best part of this activity."

In the words of our favorite umpire, "Steeee-rike!"

Love,
ML

[WWUPhil]

Errr... wait...

ML- You hit that nail on the ass. I guess I am trying to say something to people who say "I don't like dressing up, I don't like the negative ramifications of a classist, elitist, sexist system, but I want to win." That pisses me off a bit, if you couldn't tell. I know that most of you take legit stances... 1) I like doing it... right on 2.) I don't think it is any of those bad things- I won't agree but that is legit 3) People shouldn't punish on the ballot for it...

Some of us take the stance that as long as it happens, I will ride the wave to my advantage(not me)... I am from the school of Dugaw... that is smart and pragmatic to take that approach, but it isn't the right reaction if you truely feel the system should change... I coach my kids to dress to a compromise that they feel fits them. Mix your style with the "code." Some do, some don't. I will fight for the ones that don't.

So, if people are cool with judges hurting others, then maybe you won't be as comfy if I hurt you.

And BTW ML... some of your teams only stand to benefit from that paradigm... no names. You know you are striking me regardless of what I writ in my paradigm. I'm the new lose cannon of the NW. :)

P.S. I love kritiks when argued well, kinda like I love every other argument when run well. I think some people dis them wrongly. Maybe we need a thread praising Kritiks in Parli, cause they could use some improvements.

P.S.S. Could Jed or Shipley get an FAQ on how to LOGOUT? There seems to be some confusion in squadrooms around the nation.

[BrendoFTC]

Audrey posts that the problem is the belief that one cannot change the system. I guess its the old trade-off: support freedom in dress at the cost of points and hopefully change a few minds or set a new precedent. I think that it's absolutely admirable to take such a stand, But I go with the flow.
I just don't see a strong enough concurrant sentiment to warrant doing it- though that may just be my cop-out way of saying I'm not the one to go first. I suppose it all comes down to doing as you feel is best, and if you argue it properly, I don't think a ballot can be denied of you.
Besides, Pattybar just gave me some fashion advice that I can't ignore- I'm off to Penny's!

[Western Steve]

A good discussion here by all.

A key element is to not discriminate against people based on their attire, even if it is dressed up.

I hope that judges ( who are the real problem, as usual, the students seem to be quite sensible) do not choose to judge the credibility of a team based on sexist, classist standards.

All debaters KNOW that appearance effects credibility. Why make them practice it over and over?

We do not diminish the intellectual integrity of the activity by a variety of our appearances. Judges should know better.

Hoping that the substantive rules out over the superficial.

Steve

[pattybar]

Glue,

I'm glad to be wrong.. although I've never seen a policy debater dressed up... I don't look for them often either.

It seems reasonable to say that there is a cultural norm of casual dress in policy and that someone must overcome it with performance.

Trust me, if Jason had shown up in his IE/Parli suit to do policy and debated like an NFA-LDer with the proper evidence, he' have a tougher road to breaking than someone who conformed to the norms....That isn't to say that I don't think that it would be even harder for someone to take their policy-style performance and dress to parli and break...

Plus, there is still the IE cross-overs = access to parli, so dress code is ok point..

Patty

[scooter]

Oh yes, I actually remember comments concerning how "fashionable" one's IE interp book looked (black cover front, pages, black cover back-- how fashionable could one get!?)

I also I recall the IE "tie-o-meter" (as in neckware). I recall ballots that actually ranked one's tie as an effective/eye catching part of the performance. But even better were the odd (perhaps in intent more than in occurence) comment concerning one's socks and how they should/should not match one's tie (GQ jury still out on that one, but the major answer: After trousers, suit coat, shirt (if not a white shirt), and then tie (if not a mixed pattern)-- although some reversed the last two items). And one of the more interesting: Comments concerning how well duo partner's outfits (and of course coiffures) complimented each other...

So we can do our little dance on the catwalk...

or at least down the aisle to get our novice communication analysis trophy.

S

[pattybar]

And don't forget the plumping of the interp book with extra pages to add to the credibility... Don't forget, having an navy blue book instead of a black one = 6,6,6-----

I seriously would have loved to see one of our debaters enter interp and use the instruction manual from the van.. it was in an interp-sized book.

I'm so glad I don't have to explain the IE rituals to my new team (which is growing and developing nicely...). They are mystified enough about the hand on the head for POI thing some do...

Patty

[HollowHope]

Hey All-
This year I decided that I no longer wanted to dress up. I admit, I did at a few tourneys, but a majority of my touneys I have competed in jeans, a t-shirt, and birkenstocks. It's just more comfortable. And, desipte many claims that have been made, it hasn't effected my performance AT ALL. At CC I managed to get a speaking award, and was forth seed out of prelims. Reif and Schrader from Regis where also dressed in regular clothes, and they were I belive the second seed coming out of prelims, and plush and sirimarco from CSU were also dressed "down" for a debate tourney and broke.
In fact, I have only recived three comments about dress standards, and the judges who made them didn't appear to be penalizing me in any way.
But, more important than that I don't care if I do get penalized. I think that debate is about the arguments that get made, and the stratagies that are deployed. If I am wearing a suit, or a t-shirt that labels me as an "ex-phone solicitor" I will be making the same arguments. To tell me that my arguments are worse, or that what I say has less "credibility" because I didn't spend 200 dollars on a suit seems to be counter-intuitive. I think that as a community we should move beyond associating clothing with the argument, let people wear what they will, be it a skirt, some jeans, a three piece suit, or a snoopy hat.

Kyle Cheesewright

[DreinCali]

Hey, I understand where people who don't want to dress up are coming from, but can we please stop making these straw person arguments about how much business clothing costs? No one, and I mean absolutely 0% of the posts, emails, statements I have ever seen supporting business casual for forensic competition has ever contended you should "spend 200 dollars on a suit," or any particular dollar amount.

Every time I have this conversation someone makes a comment assuming this, and it just tires me. Has anyone ever had a judge comment on their business attire that it wasn't expensive looking enough? No, right?....I personally have bad fashion sense and can't tell how much your clothes cost, and I don't think most judges can either...I still buy "nice" clothes (used for venues such as debate, interviews, church, nice restaurants, and now, work) at pretty cheap places....

So yeah. Somehow, I think people should wear whatever they're comfortable with, but still manage to convey that they respect debate as an activity and aren't seeing how much they can get away with. Does that make sense? I do have to admit there's something intangible about people not wearing the same thing they go to class in that I liked, mentally, but I can't explain it too well, so I usually cede the argument.

Andrea

P.S. Hi Kyle!

[WWUPhil]

Dre-
Some people buy the drinks, and some people bring their own. Yes, you can find a way to make it happen, but will your friends treat you the same tomorrow?
-P

[properwinston]

This year I made the conscious decision to not dress up at debate tournaments. I could claim revolutionary intent, but my actual motivation is comfort. So far, I 've recieved only one comment from a judge who cowardly stated that "I don't have a problem with your dress, but other people might find it disrespectful." She gave me very low speaks, but it didn't matter because she was my low for the tournament. I think the solution to this problem is simple: the judge's dress should parallel the participants. If I am forced to wear a suit in order to "respect parli debate" then why should my judge be able to wear a faded t-shirt and jeans? Shouldn't our supposed mentors demonstrate an equivalent respect for the activity through their attire? Debate exists for and because of the students. Judges, coaches and administrators believe that they own this activity. As long as I pay for my own tournament fees, I'm not listening to the commands of a non-student.

[scooter]

First, some of us have dressed up. I am sure that you were speaking of your own experiences with a majority of judges, but careful of the assumption concerning all of us.

Second, as far as the payment of fees, two things:
1) Are you actually paying your own fees? If that is the case, it quite commendable but if so you are definitely in the minority as a lot of teams are indeed funded by the University/College Student Activity/Deparmental/Dean's etc. accounts. As such, some easily argue that the University can decide what is acceptable at tournaments, perhaps, vis a vis a coach, even down to attire. If you are from a student run but still funded by the University/College team, you might want to check on any confines of that funding. Yes, some schools have made public performance dress code part of their allocation of funds. Of course, I have no idea if that is the case with your own school.

2) If you are not going to listen to any comments from non-students, than what are you doing to do with your judges' critiques? (Unless, of course, you mean to say that you will only listen to those judges who are also students-- which, in most tournaments, is not allowed but also, might only mean graduate students. Is that your intent?)

Just wondering,


Oh and

"Judges, coaches and administrators believe that they own this activity."

And then we came back from the land of Hasty G...

S

[properwinston]

Every person on my team directly pays for all of the fees. Not one cent comes from the university or other donor.

[Western Amy]

Well, with that attitude I sure don't feel like giving you a critique if I ever judge you (although it wont' affect the decision itself, i now know not to do something that apparently wastes my time as well as yours)

BTW: I do wear nicer clothes to judge in, nor have I docked any debater's points for not dressing up.

[NoGraveButTheSea]

Winston,
Dude that kind of petulance leads
to bad stuff....
Fire Away tough guy.....

[foment]

if you're not wearing Birks or Uggs...you don't deserve a ballot.



j

[properwinston]

Sorry if the statements offended you. I actually like most judges and read most of the judging critiques. I have a problem with getting too pissed off from a few bad seeds.