Too "Emotional" To Debate: Why Girls Quit

“I would've ranked you higher, however, you were a bit too aggressive. Consider toning it down if I am your judge again.” 

This is a quote from one of my ballots after a national circuit congressional debate round. A comment I had become all too familiar with. My passion and confidence for debate had once again been misinterpreted as aggressive and misplaced emotion. But we all know my male opponents, who were ranked top three in our rounds, were all praised for their boldness and assertiveness. I was left to wonder why I couldn't debate like them. Why did my judges look past my excitement and drive, and instead twist it into an unacceptable speech style?

The debate community has long prided itself on being an environment where debaters are judged on the merit of their arguments and the persuasiveness of their speaking. Yet, sexism persists, silently ruining the principles of fairness and equity that the community of debate strives to uphold. This issue remains clear when we look at judging biases, expectations for speaking styles, outfit discrimination, and sexual harassment, all of which contribute to a toxic environment for female debaters. All of these perpetuate male superiority in an already male-dominated activity. Debate is meant to empower, not suppress.

A pervasive issue in the debate space is the unconscious, and conscious, bias that judges bring into the activity. Male debaters are often rewarded for traits such as assertiveness and confidence. On the other hand, these traits are frequently perceived as "aggressive" or "unlikable" when exhibited by female debaters. This inconsistency creates a double standard for women, who must balance between the standards of appearing confident and avoiding labels that might harm their rankings. In questioning during a debate, just to prevent the allegations of aggression, Kathryn McAuliffe lets her opponents speak much longer than she does and refuses to interrupt them for fear of being dropped from the ranking.

“A lot of girls are aggressive and that can affect their ballots. I never interrupt somebody even if they’re talking too long in cross-examination,” McAuliffe said. “I’ve been talked down to in the middle of rounds, so I’m not huge on cross-ex. I knew the questions were pointless because he was going to twist what I said anyway.” Women fear to speak up, knowing the biases that persist with certain judges. How could a woman ever compete to the same standard as a man, when men believe that they do not belong in such an activity?

 Past US Secretary Hillary Clinton would hardly be able to choke out an answer to a question during the 2016 presidential debate due to Donald Trump and the mediator constantly interrupting. Because heaven forbid that a woman would want the betterment of our country, and even worse, her herself want to carry it out. What does this tell women in debate? This tells women that the more you speak, the lower you rank. Because to them, womanhood is a stereotype. This stereotype involves remaining unheard.

Speaking style expectations exacerbate the gender bias in debate. Female debaters are often pressured to adopt a "collaborative" or "soft" tone to avoid being labeled as overly aggressive, while male debaters are encouraged to be bold and direct. These implicit expectations place an unfair burden on women to conform to a narrow set of standards, often at the expense of their rhetorical effectiveness. 

Ms. Borgsmiller, a Human Communications teacher, looks to the Internet for video examples of voice types to teach to her class. She reports that she had searched for “the thin voice, a voice that resonates just in your mouth that doesn’t go in the chest or the nose.” However, after her search, explained, “Everything that I found in that initial search…was articles about the most annoying voices that women have.” Borgsmiller explained that “They were labeled as ‘horrible’ and ‘annoying,’ and that’s just the perception that people have. That thin voice has to be a female voice; it’s annoying, and we don’t want to hear it." 

If my voice during debate is “too aggressive” and “too masculine”, but my feminine and dainty voice is “annoying” and “horrendous,” what should I do to appease you instead? The answer is clear. They'd rather us women stay silent, and leave debate to men.

Outfit discrimination further showcases the gendered expectations placed on female debaters. Women in debate are often judged for their attire, facing the unwritten rule of dressing "appropriately" by the male-defined standards in our society. A woman wearing an outfit deemed "too casual" might be penalized for not appearing “professional” enough, while a more formal choice might still be critiqued as overly flashy or distracting. Kristina Humphrey, a female debater, perfectly highlights this pressing issue. She had worn “a red dress, and the judge took off points because it was ‘too much,’” Humphrey said. Frustrated, she exclaims to the interviewers “Girls have to wear certain things to appeal to judges, whereas guys are fine. It’s just really annoying.” Humphrey is far from the only female debater who actively receives low scores over something she can't control, her gender. Hundreds of girls feel unsafe and attacked for something so miniscule, that they start to feel the need to dress solely for the “judge gaze.” After having to consider that, we see the society we live in is truly sick. 

Girls today are no longer judged for their speaking but for their outfits in the eyes of grown men. This pressure is combined with the fear that any deviation from these unspoken standards could result in a lower ranking. Male debaters, on the other hand, typically face no such problem, as their professional attire options are more standardized and less subject to judgment. When a woman is assertive, it is seen as “aggressive”, when a man is seen as assertive, it is seen as “confident.” Women can't win, even when we debate like they request.

To continue off of the lack of a safe space, sexual harassment remains one of the most pressing and underreported issues in the debate community. Female debaters, often face inappropriate comments or behavior from peers, judges, or even coaches. These incidents create a hostile environment that undermines the value of the activity itself. Ella Schnake's NSDA POI finals speech in 2019 titled "Debate Like a Girl", tells the story of a girl from Blue Valley High School, who recounts her male opponent in 2015 stated he would concede the round if she would send nude photos of herself to him. This shows that he prioritized seeing the girl's naked body over debating her as an equal.  He viewed her merely as an object in verse of an opponent. In a man’s mind, they view female competition as meaningless, solely because of their gender. This behavior is not only most disgusting, but it is accepted, as girls from all over the world already believe that they are nothing more than an object to stare at, instead of a force to be reckoned with. We ask “What happened to the male opponent?” We later see he was only barred from one tournament and later was allowed to become an assistant coach for that same debate team. What message does this send the debate community? It shows that they don't believe that the harassment and assault that goes on is a priority and that no matter how many women live to the standards they’ve been put to, the male gaze destroys any chance they have of coming into a round as equals.

The cumulative effect of these issues—judging bias, speaking style expectations, outfit discrimination, and sexual harassment—creates a debate environment that systematically disadvantages women. If you still don't believe mine and all the other women's testimonies, at the very least believe the statistics. A study published by SSRN in 2020 shows that within Public Forum debate, female-female teams are 17.1% less likely, and male-female teams are 10.0% less likely to win a debate round against male-male teams. Female debaters are 30.34% more likely to quit than male debaters. These statistics alone should show the trend, that women's voices are suppressed and women do not feel as represented in the space. Due to this, they are leaving the activity entirely. The activity that promised to bring them empowerment, and instead brought them oppression.

Now the question remains clear: what can be done to solve this? The answer is an unfortunate one that goes beyond what the NSDA can implement. The root of this problem can't be solved through policy, but instead through changes in mindset. 

We need people to understand their mental biases. Because we see that sexism in debate is not an insurmountable problem, but addressing it requires commitment from the entire community. Judges, coaches, debaters, and tournament organizers must all take responsibility for fostering an environment where women can compete on an equal footing. As individuals, we can challenge our biases, advocate for inclusive policies, and support our female peers. As a community, we can demand systemic reforms and prioritize equity and inclusion. By working together, we can break stereotypes in debate and create a space where all voices are valued and heard.

Debate is more than competition—it is about preparing the next generation of leaders, advocates, and changemakers. To fulfill this goal, we must ensure that the activity reflects the principles of fairness and justice it seeks to instill. We must ensure that we empower women's voices, amplify those whose voices have been oppressed, and ensure debate truly is the safe space it claims to be. We need to do this so that the next generation of female debaters don't have to experience what I did: crying over my “over-emotion” and “aggression,” and instead, be inspired by their ballots to become more passionate, and more involved.