Jump to content
SP 101

Wat would you run aganist this case

Recommended Posts

The plan doesn't seem to mandate anything. What the heck is "public health assistance based intervention to end gender violence" anyway? And what does it mean to "provide substantial funding" for it?

 

Get them to define these terms in cross-x. WRITE DOWN their definitions. In the 1NC, run a couple basic T traps (you know, the strategy where your T definition is essentially whatever links to your disad) using the terms "PHA" and "substantially." Running a vagueness shell might also be a good idea. After the 2AC, compare their T counterdefinitions to their responses in cross-x. If they aren't IDENTICAL, then either (a) they don't meet their definition, or (B) they're shifting their advocacy.

 

Also, you might wnt to go line-by-line on solvency. Figure out what their cards say the plan needs to do to actually solve, and try to show that their plan doesn't actually do this.

 

Aside from that, run your usual "answers to feminism" strategy on whatever pre-fiat advantage they have. Answer the framework debate so it doesn't give you trouble. Counter-kritik if you have it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

victimization

 

intersectionality

 

queer theory/butler

 

essentialism

 

realism god/inevitable

 

prag good/inevitable

 

defense on pat is not root cause of violence

 

us state bad cards that say us troops will say one thing and perptuate the squo even farther...aka continue raping and shit...

 

lacan if you are good on the debate

 

foucalt if you have ans to the article in which he admits fem can be combined with state to solve <not a good article>

 

 

all are these are winnable args. Unfort most teams that run a case like this are expecting all of these. But the lit is better on these debates than on pat. key to hege b/c a decent team with fem vs. a good hege team will always win b/c the lit is just onface better.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
T - Effects

T - Aspec

 

Cultural imperialism K

 

Pakistan Politx

Iran DA (islam link)

 

 

And disaster porn is a stupid K... especially the Baudrillard cards... I seriously think that Baurdrillard should only be used for reality/hyperreality. Look into some Spanos if your going to run humanism/disaster porn. But really imperialism is a lot more "Real World" and links easier

aspec isnt a very top notch strat though :@ What is the pakistan politics scenario? I don't think its too unique because most of the stuff in the news is about LOST or Iraq etc.

 

hmm, I do not believe that imperialism would be a good choice against this aff. It is something that they do "solve" for or at least do not link to. Thats why spanos would be much more effective, it captures that idea of the vietnam syndrome as the link, and every time they say "we solve" its just another lovely link^^

 

oh hello person that randomly said "shut up" via the mighty rep system :@

  • Downvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

topicality - public health assistance (the white house national security strategy def) with a vaugeness standard tacked on as part of the ground debate

 

t - substantially with f-spec at the bottom of the flow

 

lacan k of geopolitcs

 

afrocentrism, africana womanism, and cap bad on case

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gender violence

Thus we demand: The United States Federal Government provide substantial funding for public health assistance based intervention in resolutionally designated countries designed to end gender violence.

 

It solves for patriarchy

 

Plan Flaw- funding+FG

Xtra T-demand

intl actor CP

politics

compassion fatigue

 

patriarchy D:

-inevitable

-no impact

etc

 

go for a procedural.

  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, so many of the people are offering such terrible strategies. ASPEC? Really?

 

It'd help if the plan weren't vague as shit - there are some excellent CRR (civil rights remedy) turns that were run on the college topic last year. Go to http://opencaselist.wikispaces.com/space.menu07 and cut a few of the cites for negs against Morrison - Gender Violence advantages. If you can't find anything though, look at OU CJ's page; I know they have some good stuff.

 

T's obvious though, as is an international actor c/p + whatever d/a you want to run as a net benefit (politics, spending, relations, aid tradeoff, whatever).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aspec and FX are weak. There isn't really a unique warrant as to why this case is abusive under aspec other than "omg they say usfg". They're not really linking out of any positions. No real ground loss. It's not a hard arg to beat back. And you could build an FX story, but... I just hate FX. Everything I've ever seen could be spun as FX. >< I hate aspec too.

 

PHA T. Proximal risk is good. Domestic violence isn't any kind of proximal risk to human health. Or PHA is disease. These are pretty obvious.

 

Second, the plan links to all your generic $ positions, econ answers, corruption, yadda yadda. You could PEC out of a corrupt country like Zimbabwe or whatever with the disad attached as a net benefit.

 

And, of course, intl agent cps and everything else that was said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...