College Policy Debate Forums
November 18, 2017, 07:40:37 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: IF YOU EXPERIENCE PROBLEMS WITH THE SITE, INCLUDING LOGGING IN, PLEASE LET ME KNOW IMMEDIATELY.  EMAIL ME DIRECTLY OR USE THE CONTACT US LINK AT THE TOP.
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register CEDA caselist Debate Results Council of Tournament Directors Edebate Archive  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: women's rights topic?  (Read 8497 times)
psadow
Newbie
*
Posts: 15


« on: April 11, 2012, 05:02:46 PM »

I've been thinking about this as a potential topic area this year in particular - there have been highly publicized rollbacks in women's rights and the emergence of the highly charged "war on women" trumpeted as one of the major issues of the upcoming presidential election, and one cannot understate the ongoing difficulties women face in access to healthcare, protections against sexual violence, reproductive rights, and economic equality/benefits.

I think this year might be a particularly good opportunity to discuss these issues in a policy debate context for a few reasons.

1. the current political climate and upcoming election makes this an excellent time to discuss potential policy options for redressing this issue, such that debaters can both contribute to scholarship on the issue and be involved in public advocacy about the issue.

2. there has been, to my knowledge, only one topic in recent memory that dealt directly with these issues (the courts topic).

3. this topic would be an excellent time to examine the differences between state and national policy on women's issues especially since most of the major rollbacks in women's rights have taken place on the state level (and the states counterplan or some variation thereof is possible negative ground - do we want federal legislation or state-by-state protection)

4. the topic would provide a forum for debates within and among different brands, waves, and branches of feminist criticism (and all that that entails)
 
5. there are also areas for more 'traditional' policy style affirmatives - the US's position on women is perceived around the globe and impacts our relationship with other countries and the actual policies of other countries, furthermore, there is potential to discuss the economic importance of advancing women's rights.

This is obviously still in the very early stages so I cannot produce a specific mechanism or anything particularly detailed in those regards, but hopefully this is a topic that the community can come together on and really discuss the problematic exclusion of women ongoing in society as a ethical, social, political, and economic issue.

thoughts?

-peter s. (umkc)
my email: pcs2p8 (at) mail.umkc.edu
« Last Edit: April 11, 2012, 05:10:09 PM by psadow » Logged
zelias
Newbie
*
Posts: 1


« Reply #1 on: April 12, 2012, 07:00:58 AM »

I think this is the exact type of topic suggestion that is proposed because of the current heat of the news cycle. While the issue itself is clearly of real world political relevance, that doesn't make it a good debate topic. Policy aff ground? Not much. I'm not excited to hear Culpepper's article read out of context over and over again. Disads? There's the elections disad...until November. Other than that, there really isn't a unique link to much else, given that the administration itself has recently and is relatively likely to take executive action to improve women's rights in the near future. I also don't think we should invite the states debate. Even if federal protection is better in the abstract, it's going to be ridiculously difficult to quantify the solvency deficit to the states vs. the risk of a politics disad (again, the only possible disad on such a topic).

Important issue? Absolutely. Good debate topic? I would say, probably not.
Logged
kelly young
Full Member
***
Posts: 237



WWW
« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2012, 07:57:00 AM »

I think this is the exact type of topic suggestion that is proposed because of the current heat of the news cycle. While the issue itself is clearly of real world political relevance, that doesn't make it a good debate topic. Policy aff ground? Not much. I'm not excited to hear Culpepper's article read out of context over and over again. Disads? There's the elections disad...until November. Other than that, there really isn't a unique link to much else, given that the administration itself has recently and is relatively likely to take executive action to improve women's rights in the near future. I also don't think we should invite the states debate. Even if federal protection is better in the abstract, it's going to be ridiculously difficult to quantify the solvency deficit to the states vs. the risk of a politics disad (again, the only possible disad on such a topic).

Important issue? Absolutely. Good debate topic? I would say, probably not.

How's about we wait until people put some effort into addressing these concerns in a controversy paper before we start tearing them apart? These are very likely important concerns, but we are entirely too critical too early in this topic area creation process. Also, many of these concerns are true of any domestic topic, so I would imagine there are plans by the authors to address the obvious.
Logged

Director of Forensics/Associate Professor
Wayne State University
313-577-2953
kelly.young [at] wayne.edu
www.wsuforensics.org
tcram
Full Member
***
Posts: 165


« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2012, 08:46:49 AM »

This is obviously an issue that merits the study CP.  Kelly is totally on the mark that it is silly to dismiss ideas out of hand.  The literature should guide our options and assessments, not our preformed notions of what is out there.  I do think you raise a very valid point about how 'tangible' the 'war on women' is at the level of Santorum/media-frenzy.  However, I think all that means is that this paper's research group should make an attempt to parse between the 'sound-byte' war that erupted recently and the more durable, structural ways that women are disadvantaged or oppressed like equal pay, health-care access, equitable health-care costs and a variety of other manifestations that are more meaningful and persistent than the words of some dip-shit Wyoming billionaire.
Logged
Chris Crowe
Newbie
*
Posts: 26


« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2012, 04:19:19 PM »

We have way too many smart people in this community to not have figured out a way around the states counterplan. It's not unique to this topic suggestion, but we've been afraid to debate a wide variety of domestic topics for a long time for fear of the states cp. It's not an invalid concern, it is just one that's created quite the chilling effect on domestic topics.

Between other possible agents in the resolution to teaching how to defeat these types of counterplans on theory, we can do a lot better than "nope - don't debate this because of the states cp." It seems like the popularity of the consultation counterplan has waned as debaters became more effective at answering it, so maybe that can serve as a model.
Logged

Chris Crowe
stables
Administrator
Sr. Member
*****
Posts: 334


« Reply #5 on: April 12, 2012, 10:05:13 PM »

Let me echo a couple of comments -

1 - At this stage we need more creativity and exploration. The idea of organizing a topic around women's legal rights is important subject matter that has certainly not been over-debated in recent years. There may be different controversies inherent in this subject matter, but the topic certainly warrants additional consideration.

2 - The States CP is a seemingly constant concern and I would reinforce Chris' comment that we need to explore the best possible topics. Our community is certainly willing to be self-reflexive and consider adjusting our practices to serve broader educational goals. If even the prospect of the States CP is enough to dissuade serious consideration of important domestic issues we certainly need to assess our practices.

As an example of the types of approaches that might be considered, I included an argument in my earlier education paper (re-submission under way) about why a counter-interpretation that allows the negative to have fiat that extends to those states who have a propensity to work together on such issues now. In inter-state areas where states act to coordinate there is more reasonable discussion of state authority without the extreme 50 state model. This is just one example and I am sure our community can consider many others.
Logged

Gordon Stables
Assistant Dean for Student Affairs
Director of Debate & Forensics
Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism
University of Southern California
kevin kuswa
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 345


« Reply #6 on: April 12, 2012, 10:34:45 PM »

R: The rights of women should be drastically expanded in the U.S.

That would really be a great topic.   Some folks should put it together, get something in this area on the ballot.

Keep up the brainstorming! 
Logged
Malgor
Full Member
***
Posts: 220


« Reply #7 on: April 13, 2012, 09:35:32 AM »

I think this is the exact type of topic suggestion that is proposed because of the current heat of the news cycle. While the issue itself is clearly of real world political relevance, that doesn't make it a good debate topic. Policy aff ground? Not much. I'm not excited to hear Culpepper's article read out of context over and over again. Disads? There's the elections disad...until November. Other than that, there really isn't a unique link to much else, given that the administration itself has recently and is relatively likely to take executive action to improve women's rights in the near future. I also don't think we should invite the states debate. Even if federal protection is better in the abstract, it's going to be ridiculously difficult to quantify the solvency deficit to the states vs. the risk of a politics disad (again, the only possible disad on such a topic).

Important issue? Absolutely. Good debate topic? I would say, probably not.

If you really think this area is fruitfal irl but not for debate then a) debate has failed us and/or b) you need to work on research skillz.
Logged
Malgor
Full Member
***
Posts: 220


« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2012, 11:32:12 AM »

i do love people that cite the states cp as a reason to reject a topic as though we are all passive and powerless in the face of a made up argument.  um, you do realize if people generally don't want the states cp in a topic we can start, ya know, not voting for it, vote on theory, put in our philosophies that we don't want to hear it on this topic, etc.

arguments don't just appear as legitimate they are made that way by actual people. those same actual people can generate norms that make such an argument illegitimate.

here's an interpretation of fiat for you:  the neg only fiats the agent of the rez, no more.  I know it's a crazy notion to exclude tons of arbitrary irrelevant 'counterplans' but with a little know how and some elbow grease we can make this crazy world a reality!
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SMF customization services by 2by2host.com
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!