The Reality of Gender Discrimination in Debate.

Gender discrimination continues to be a barrier for women in debate. Empirical studies persistently confirm that significant inequities exist. Women are 18.8% more likely to lose rounds and 30% more likely to quit (Yi and Nie 2020). They are underrepresented and underserved by a community that is meant to uplift and empower them. Despite pressures to implement institutional changes, internal and cultural shifts are necessary to resolve the unyielding issue. We spoke to 7 debaters from every debate event (Lincoln Douglas, Public Forum, Congress, World Schools, Extemp, and Policy) to discuss their personal experiences and solutions to reform a broken community.

In speaking to these debaters who participated in completely distinct events in different regions of the country, they all shared similar experiences with gender discrimination. The striking consistency demonstrates the pervasiveness and unfortunate potency of inequities in debate. Some of the issues that persist today included:

• Irrational comments about appearances: Judge ballots that unnecessarily comment on the way women debaters dress. Inappropriate critiques from powerful figures calling women who wear skirts “sluts”. Comments from competitors about how women debaters dress, do their hair, or wear makeup. “There is pressure on girls to appeal to judges who want you to dress conservatively and to be more ‘feminine’. Gender minorities have been forced to hide their identities or take on different pronouns.”

• The formation of exclusionary cliques: Male debaters continue to shut out women competitors in dockets, prep groups, labs, and communication channels. Teams separate debaters by gender and access to resources is not equitable. “A lot of women are pushed to the side. [Debate is] very exclusionary and hard to break into.”

• Irrational comments about “aggression”: Judges and competitors continue to hold women to different standards in rounds, maintaining outdated and sexist expectations. “You get louder and more aggressive to match [a male debater] but it's never them who gets blamed, it's always you. You are the woman in the situation and you should be trying to calm it down.” 

• Intimidation and overt pressures: Numerous spectators are brought in to intimidate women. Aggression in speeches and crossfire to assert dominance and shut out women debaters. “There would be a wall of men trying to intimidate [you]. Being a woman in debate is scary because you constantly feel there are people trying to intimidate you and simply don’t want you to succeed.”

• Sexual comments: Male debaters continue to act and speak in inappropriately sexual ways towards their women counterparts. “Guys drawing women naked without permission, guys actively stalking, acting very inappropriately consistently. There is always an incident whether it’s Title 9, stalking, or sexual harassment.”

• Lowered credibility: Women in debate continue to be treated as inferior. Because of their gender, minority judges’ credibilities and decisions are irrationally questioned in comparison to their male counterparts. Male-presenting competitors continue to gain unwarranted credibility from both competitors and judges in comparison to women. “Women do not get the same level of respect and adoration, people do not talk about their debate abilities in the same way.”

These issues relentlessly devastate women, enabled by a culture that is increasingly toxic and exclusionary. “The biggest problem with why these issues are so persistent is because of the constant echo chambers. [...] They never understand that what they are doing is wrong because they are surrounded by people who normalize their behavior.” Cliques not only block out minority debaters, but also serve as “insular communities” that permit the spread of harmful rhetoric and actions. By segregating men and women in the space, offenders are unchecked and unhinged, fueling a cycle of constant discrimination. These issues work to remove women in the space, making many feel isolated and attacked as the community shuts them out and marginalizes them. Without adequate support in the face of relentless hate, women leave and the monster of discrimination is further enabled to persecute gender minorities. 

Solutions need to be implemented by all to counter this unyielding machine of inequity. While talking to debaters from across the space, three key aspects emerged as necessary reforms.

1. The holistic exposure of discrimination: Many debaters fail to recognize that inequities and discrimination actually exist and that their actions may actively harm women competitors. “[Discrimination] actually happens, it should be viewed as reality. The first step to changing something is for people to realize that.” Stories that seem aloof and unbelievable silently occur on local levels. “[Men] are surprised [discrimination] happens. ‘It's just like one of those stories that you hear from a Ted Talk.’ They view them as a distant issue or extreme case, but it actually happens to debaters you know and more people need to realize that.” Implicit biases and actions are unearthed by awareness, allowing debaters to recognize instances of exclusion and work to fix them. “A lot of the time, people don’t realize something they’re doing could have a negative reaction on someone else [...] because of the culture we’ve created.” 

2. Accessible help in the form of past debaters and safe spaces: Although it does not directly address the root cause of discrimination, aid is vital to those that are affected by it and builds a stronger network to combat offenses. “It would be helpful if the community as a whole created a culture where younger debaters can talk to older debaters, coaches, or judges so they are not alone and have someone to support them.” “In the midst of all the discrimination you see in the space [...] One of the most valuable things is being able to have a mentor to turn to and talk to.” Furthermore, spaces where inclusion is prioritized similarly allows for the construction of support networks that empower marginalized and persecuted debaters. “Seeing others with similar experiences and seeing themselves represented matters in the long-term to help create solutions.” 

3. Pressure to change: We need external and internal pressures on toxic cliques that permeate gender discrimination in all events. From petitions to callouts, comprehensive action on all levels must be taken to root out inequities. Acts of aggression must be addressed and confronted. Instances of exclusion may occur publicly, but are enabled by isolated cliques that normalize discrimination. Those with access to these groups must call each other out and increase self-awareness. The most powerful force for change comes from within and is the best avenue in combating their widespread enablement of aggression.“After actively having conversations, [male debaters] started to change their ways. Dynamics have gotten better and we started integrating more.” Without checks, they will continue to enable gender discrimination and subvert the entire debate community.

Inequality is a material detriment to debate. We need a culture that promotes inclusivity and actively combats complicit acts of exclusion. These solutions are steps we can all take as individuals to move the space in a direction of greater inclusivity. Understanding that discrimination actually occurs at all levels. The formation of safe spaces and mentorships that are easily accessible. Pressuring peers and calling offenders out are steps to reforming structures that enable exclusion. “Gender discrimination actually affects women, but it shouldn't be the reality.”

Special thanks to the 7 debaters that spoke to us: Julia Low, Mandi Lu, Iman Suleman, Anita Sosa, Taite Kirkpatrick, Ella Huang, and Claire Sim. You have our everlasting appreciation.