Let's Keep it Cute

Picture this: you’re staying in a hotel, maybe on a nice family trip, and out of the corner of your eye you catch over three hundred high school students in suits and skirts. The sweaty, sleep-deprived herd veers towards you. As they pass by, you hear phrases such as “check tab” and “when's my next round?”

While your trip may be ruined, this is what a normal weekend for a speech and debate student looks like, specifically the tedious and timely process of preparing for a tournament.

Whether it’s a full glam moment for your domestic extemp round, or a classic suit and tie for an interp round, a nice, professional look is something to hold yourself to. However, with this tradition comes an issue: suits and most professional wear is SO expensive, and it is not at all accessible to those who can’t afford them or do not attend schools or programs that are willing to cover these expenses. As someone who has had the same jacket since the eighth grade and borrows their dads “fancy shoes” when a tournament arises, I find this issue very fitting (no pun intended).

The NSDA’s equity statement is as follows: 

“The National Speech & Debate Association is committed to modeling and fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion for all speech and debate communities.

We are continuously transforming our organization to reflect and operationalize the values of equity, integrity, respect, leadership, and service.

We will take responsibility. We will heed, learn, and evolve. We will work conscientiously to model and foster an inclusive and equitable speech and debate experience for all.” 

I’d like to spotlight the first line in the NSDA’s equity statement regarding the NSDA’s commitment to model and fostering diversity, equity, and inclusion for all of speech and debate — while not blaming an institution for the  systemic and classist issue of not being able to afford appropriate attire, I feel this provides a structure and a bulletin of how we should treat others. It’s so easy to find ourselves webbed in the idea that a person doesn’t deserve the 1 in a round because they are in a T-Shirt and jeans. It’s therefore imperative that we remember that the way we dress or present ourselves shouldn’t affect the interpretation of or argument presented in a round. 

It’s also important to recognize that there is no rule that says, “A competitor needs to wear this.” There is no clear outline to how someone should dress, and there is truly no better way to outline this idea without referencing the Original Oratory “Disrespectful?” by Myles Bell 

In this round, Myles appears in a cropped-tank top and low-cut jeans with boots. In Myles’ own words, “This is not a traditional oratory, I’m not dressed like a traditional orator.”

Watching this live-streamed in my theater classroom was simply earth shattering in the best way possible. The smile of my entire team was one that was audible. The speech community had never been called out so publicly before, but it made a very clear and poignant point: why do we do it? Why do we wake up criminally early to button every button, tie every tie, and lace up our shoes?

Because it’s what's always been done — since the NSDA’s beginnings in the early 1900’s, professional attire has been the norm for tournaments and events.

Specifically in Texas, the UIL competing circuit is infamously known for being egregiously strict when it comes to a competitor's attire and look. A typical ballot for a person competing in an event would like prose or poetry would maybe include the following:

“Performer portrayed a good story, used physicality to further expand on message… maybe try a new suit jacket color!”

While I wish this was a hyperbolic instance of hyper-professionalism, It’s unfortunately not. Attached from the UIL website is a powerpoint on the acceptable “Debate Uniform”.

Whether it one’s nail color or even the style of their hair, the UIL has a dangerous standard for those competing. That should change. For example, when competing in prose and poetry you compete within prompts, one of this years was “Inspiring change; Striving for a better future”. I think it’s redundant to advocate for change when docking points on a female performer for the lack of pantyhose. For a community where change and social justice is the main driving force behind performance, appearance should not affect the outcome of one's score.

As a community, we need to strive to leave a lasting impression in our areas, and districts. We should all strive to make speech and debate an equal playing field. I encourage everyone to research what we can do to help not only community members, but spread awareness to others. I ask that we continue this conversation and to call out institutions for redundant and hypocritic behaviors. I ask that we uplift our teammates despite factors that hold them back. Fundraise! Donate! Advocate! Most importantly, inspire change! A speech and debate student is so much more than the suit and tie.

The NSDA actually provides resources on how to begin the fundraising process for a speech and debate team. Resources like these are essential to have change and help. It’s important to recognize the beneficial work the NSDA has done to support teams around the nation.

This is such an important discussion to have, as we have missed so many potential national and state champions because they were eliminated from prelims for having a suit that didn’t match, a tie with a “distracting” pattern, or something as simple as open-toed shoes. It’s important to highlight these general issues, however when we look at specific cities and regions we see the real effect of these rules. Sometimes the only professional shoes Goodwill has are open-toed, and there might not be a matching suit and pants set to go with it. These standards can be debilitating for some competitors, who may not have access to this attire otherwise. So, let's level the playing field, and remember that the next time you see someone wearing a non-typical outfit at a speech tournament, let’s keep it cute.