Junior Debate: Girls at Ludgrove??
Saturday 3rd December 2011 This House Believes that Ludgrove
Should Become Co-Educational
This was the inaugural Junior Debate at Ludgrove and was led
by Div III, who have been considering the Motion for the last few weeks in
lessons. The Debate was opened by Charles Aithrie, speaking for the Motion. He
spoke eloquently of his ideas that Ludgrove could become richer and bigger if
clever girls came to the school. He envisaged the school growing massively and
he took the example of Cheam which has become much more successful and larger
since they admitted girls over 10 years ago. He made the point that sisters
could attend the same school as brothers, and that boys would not have to play
the parts of girls in plays. He assured the House that girls would have to be introduced
slowly.
Charles’s twin brother then spoke against the Motion. Victor Hope reminded the House that many boys had escaped from their sisters by coming to Ludgrove. He also told the House that girls could be catty and that they held grudges for ages whereas boys had short and sharp arguments and then became friends again. He also pointed out that many boys liked playing the parts of girls in plays and dressing up in frocks. He did not want Ludgrove to grow larger, and he wanted the school to stay small as all of the boys knew the names of all of the other boys.
Alexander Farquhar and Freddie Pickthorn then game a double speech for the Motion, as they had worked on their speech together. They wanted to see the reputation of Ludgrove grow as it became larger and more talented in so many more areas of activity. They said that the standards in the classroom would go up as the boys would have to work harder to stay ahead of the girls. They pointed out that the food would improve as girls would demand better meals as they were fussier.
Callum MacGregor and Edward Rhodes then gave a combined speech against the Motion, as they had similarly worked together on their speech. They did not want ballet lessons or flower-arranging classes at Ludgrove, nor did they want to spend money on new facilities for the girls. They warned the less clever boys that they might have to leave if the school took girls and there would be no room for them. They re-iterated the point that the school was good because it was small and why change when Ludgrove worked well as it was.
The Debate was then opened to the floor. There were 58 contributions. Among the many good points, Alexander Bathurst envisaged a Berlin Wall being built along the dormitory corridor whereas Toby Hordern and Igor Utkin both made the point that it was more normal to go to school with girls and boys. Many of the contributors expressed conservative views that they did not want change, whereas others felt that the school would be even better if it expanded, and there were more opportunities that girls would bring.
Victor Hope then summed up against the Motion and tackled some of the issues raised from the floor head-on, before Alexander Farquhar summed up for the Motion and re-emphasised the new look Ludgrove that he envisaged.
A vote was then taken and the Motion was narrowly defeated by 53 votes to 57. As there were only 103 boys in the room, it may have been the case that some boys voted for both sides, thereby negating their vote. It was a lively and good-humoured debate and many of the boys impressed with the clarity of their speeches.
Thank you to the main speakers and all of the boys who spoke from the floor or listened attentively. Junior Debates are now firmly part of the Ludgrove calendar.
RNMD