Girls and Boys Should Attend Different Schools

My opponent fails to understand what I'm saying. I want to debate the actual resolution, not the resolution with some extra criterias you added after I accepted the debate. My opponent made it so after I agreed to debate, that there would be other stuff I have to debate. For example the resolution simply states, "Girls and Boys Should Attend Different Schools". The resolution doesn"t state that this has to be about only high schools, not selective school. Therefore it"s not fair that my opponent didn"t say this in the acceptance round for clarification. Then my opponent claims that I could have asked in the comments section, but it"s not my fault that my opponent failed to restrict the resolution beforehand. This point also doesn"t work because then basically anyone could put any restrictions they want as long as the opponent didn"t ask about it in the comment section. Therefore my point stands. My opponent then says I contradicted myself by saying that I want to talk about preschools, but yet talk about the present. This is in no way a contradiction. My opponent conceded that there are single sex preschools, therefore in the now, they are taken into consideration. How are single sex preschools in the now, not part of the now? My opponent again doesn"t understand that yes you are suppose to use sources, but in order for the opponent to refute them, the person who has the sources have to cut the quotes into their argument. The reason why is because it"s not fair to make someone read a bunch of stuff without know what the opponent is specifically talking about. Therefore yes you are suppose to use evidence but you also need to quote them. It would not be fair if I posted ten sources with a hundred pages in each of them and told you to look for my evidence. Therefore it"s not fair that my opponent input these restrictions after the debate began, and does not quote their evidence. My opponent asserts that they didn"t mean every second of school, but that"s not what I mean either. With any amount of time if we are constantly catering to individuals to their weaknesses instead of helping them develop their weaknesses, then the teachers are making them even weaker. This would lead to them not being flexible with other challenges which is how someone is to improve himself. And they should have a style for all situations in order to best adapt, if they have a style for one situation, how would that be any good? I would then like to point out that my opponent selects a few arguments and doesn"t even argue all of my arguments. For example pro didn"t refute this "Plus the study is also assuming that the same effort is being put in from both sides, but if they aren"t and some minutes get added, it most likely that they still wouldn"t put effort in" and "And what about the girls that are better than boys at math? They are going to be wasting their time. It"s evident that the study is impossible to make this conclusion considering they can"t read minds and therefore not tell how much effort was put in." and "Plus school is suppose to even the subjects out because it would be unfair to pick out a subject and say that subject should hold priority over the others, because obviously the students have different subject priorities, and schools are suppose to prepare them for the college study they want to get into". This solely shows how my opponent did not actually refute my argument. My opponent goes on to say that the female worker never had the chance to learn extra minutes of mathematics, but neither did the boys. One sex has to be inevitably better than the other at a subject realistically. This is not necessarily the fault of intrinsic properties, but of effort or some other choice, or maybe girls are just less interested. Also they could study at home, or in college. This is a really bad excuse. EVERYONE WATCHING THIS, LOOK AT THE ARGUMENTS. My opponent is attempting to deceive people into thinking they actually said that they didn't mean all distractions, but I will provide people with the exact quote. "This problem can"t occur in a single sex school because the other gender is not there to cause distractions." Pro also says they stated dramatic decrease, but no where in the argument is it said. Therefore my opponent has lied to the watchers. Then my opponent says that students have a lot of time to socialize with the other gender, but It"s certain that it would be easier if it were in school. There would be more excuses for talking to the opposite sex, for example help with homework. And in real life someone has to actively go out and seek the opposite sex which would be harder to achieve than as if it were at school. Sometimes you may even be forced to talk to the opposite sex for an assigned partners group. Plus since they"re students they may be too busy being studious. Therefore my opponent has refuted zero arguments. Now since I literally have 4 minutes I will refute my opponent"s arguments with shorts lines since they aren"t any good. First, people aren"t necessarily comfortable just because the other gender. There are gay people, and those who don"t want to be judged by friends and strangers. Second, a study can"t prove that sex doesn"t improve education, but that doesn"t mean it harms it. Therefore it doesn"t matter. Also education isn"t everything, what about happiness? Nowhere does it say it ruins it, only that it doesn"t improve. Third, if they are scared of girls then they have to adapt. They have to overcome their fear which is how someone becomes mature. Fourth, I already refuted the last paragraph. Stop saying single sex schools excel, it doesn"t sound good, it just sounds annoying. '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...