Girls should not be allowed to play in boys' sports leagues or on boys' teams.

Sorry for forfeiting last round. Family matters came up over the weekend that I had not anticipated, and I didn’t have a chance to submit my round of the debate. Thankfully, this shouldn’t have affected the order and outcome of the debate (other than conduct possibly). If anyone wants to see my round, here is the link. As Con posted his rebuttals last round anyway, I don’t know if this will matter. https://docs.google.com... EDIT: This is a short round, as I do not have much spare time on my hands, what with family issues and all. I believe that I have fulfilled the BoP, however. This round, I’ll defend my arguments first, then possibly post some new ones at the end of the round. Point 1You want some real evidence to back up my claim that co-ed teams are uncomfortable and awkward. However, there is not really any way to provide any proof of this. Anecdotal evidence may be the most reliable source here; anyway, most people have likely encountered this in one way or another. Point 2Nobody should be left out of a sport they really enjoy. I agree with this. There is one major problem, though - if they’ve never experienced the sport themselves, they can’t really enjoy it. It is rare for a sport to be cut off for girls at a certain age. Normally, there is either a team available from a young age all the way to high school and past, or there is no team at any age. “What should be done when a girl shows interest in football but has nowhere to play?" If a girl is really interested, this means that she has played on a football team in the past. Seeing as football is a sport that is nearly always aimed towards boys, she had probably played on a boys' team. If we had disallowed this from the start, there would be no problem in the first place. Point 3Not to get cocky, but I think you have just slipped up. You say that there should be no double standards, and that boys should be allowed to play in a girls’ league/team if there is no male counterpart. Following this logic, girls should only be able to do the same if they have no opportunity to play in their own league. This completely knocks out your first and second points from Round 2. If girls have a height advantage, but they have their own league, it doesn’t matter. If girls’ leagues are less athletic, but they have their own league, it doesn’t matter. Now, you only have one major point backing you up, and as a result, I have only one to disprove. I now have the opportunity to state my own points. 4. Title IX gives both boys and girls equal opportunity in sports. I never thought I would be using Title IX to argue something against genders being equivalent in every way, as this is practically the only common use. However, I do believe it supports my cause to some extent. Title IX, as is commonly known and accepted, provides boys and girls in federally funded organizations equal opportunity in sports. I can not interpret what the law strictly states, because it is mainly judicial jargon, yet there is enough information found to show that this is exactly what it means. From your arguments, one has enough information to conclude that girls should ONLY be able to play in a boys’ league or one a boys' team if they have no way to play with other girls. Because of Title IX, boys and girls do legally have equal opportunity to play in sports. There is clearly no reason for girls to play with boys in sports, so I believe I have fulfilled the BoP. Thanks for an engaging debate, jakulanko. Once again, I apologize for the inconveniences caused by my unintentional forfeit. I would urge the voters to ignore this as it didn’t disrupt the debate at all, yet I can understand your thoughts if this affects the outcome of the debate.