Jump to content
Owen

China vDebate Owen (Aff) vs. NativeWarlock (Neg)

Recommended Posts

Bomb aff, some cx

 

Do you defend a hypothetical policy implementation?

 

Bauer says: "My politics are not abstract. They cannot be sacrificed for social convenience, because they are not about saving the pandas, they are about preserving myself and my friends."

Why is saving endangered species bad- does preserving individual selfhood trade off with pragmatic solutions to extinction?

 

Give me a line in MacDonald that is specific to status quo high school/college policy debate?

 

Why does the resolution mandate you castrate Chinese men or be the savior to women?

 

What does it mean to be transgender?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bomb aff, some cx

 

Do you defend a hypothetical policy implementation?

Nah

 

Bauer says: "My politics are not abstract. They cannot be sacrificed for social convenience, because they are not about saving the pandas, they are about preserving myself and my friends."

Why is saving endangered species bad- does preserving individual selfhood trade off with pragmatic solutions to extinction?

Before this quote they talk about people not viewing them as approachable. They're not saying that saving the pandas is bad but rather that people view saving pandas as something approachable because it's not about people and doesn't involve a shift away from their transphobic tendencies. Preserving selfood doesn't trade off, it was a metaphor about how trans politics are seen as abstract because they're about people and that stopping extinction is seen as normal because it's some distant thing.

 

Give me a line in MacDonald that is specific to status quo high school/college policy debate?

It's not specific about debate, but it talks about how creative activities, like debate, are governed by a single image of thought. This image of thought, as shown through other cards, is transphobia.

 

Why does the resolution mandate you castrate Chinese men or be the savior to women?

One sided literature about China is constructed to sustain exceptionalist ideas about the US. The engagement with China is built around this one sided lit.

 

What does it mean to be transgender?

To identify as a gender different than the one you were assigned at birth.

*This includes nonbinary people (like myself  :) )

 

Also-

 

What's the monster?

The monster in the context of Stryker is Frankenstein's monster. She goes on to talk about how her experience being trans shows the same experiences as the monster, thus uncovering that the state constructs trans people as monsters.

 

And why vote aff?

To use performance of rage to fight against transphobia in the debate community and IR theory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to judge this debate!

I have a wiki which is here: https://judgephilosophies.wikispaces.com/Maruri%2C+Vinay

 

the short version with stuff that will probs apply to this round: do whatever you want. any sort of strat is fine and i'm cool with, run any number or kinds of K you want; also, i'm pretty neutral on all questions of T, FW, or theory- just have a debate over it and i'll evaluate who wins the flow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FW: 

Why should we value cis fairness over trans education?

What's the bright line to meaningful dialogue?
Are you saying that trans discussions aren't meaningful?

 

PIK:
Your card talks about how swear words have to be read as a code in order to fight the patriarchy. Why don't you read them as a code?

Status?

 

K:

Your Pecaido 13 card talks about sexual identity, what does that have to do with the aff?

What is a historical materialist analysis?

 

Case

Is your Theil 14 card talking about how we need queer theory research in the IR field?

Can you explain your first warrant on the double bind?

How do we treat the ballot as currency?

Where do I ask for pity?

What allows you to say what trans people do and don't need?

 

**edited for problematic question.

Edited by Owen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FW: 

Why should we value cis fairness over trans education?

What's the bright line to meaningful dialogue?

Are you saying that trans discussions aren't meaningful?

 

PIK:

Your card talks about how swear words have to be read as a code in order to fight the patriarchy. Why don't you read them as a code?

Status?

 

K:

Your Pecaido 13 card talks about sexual identity, what does that have to do with the aff?

What is a historical materialist analysis?

 

Case

Is your Theil 14 card talking about how we need queer theory research in the IR field?

Can you explain your first warrant on the double bind?

How do we treat the ballot as currency?

Where do I ask for pity?

Are you trans?

If you plan to read this aff during the year *please* don't ask people this question. 

Edited to add *please*. 

Edited by CapitalismIsNotCool
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you plan to read this aff during the year *please* don't ask people this question. 

Edited to add *please*. 

Alright! I edited it out.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alright! I edited it out.

To clarify, my request wasn't from a personal standpoint, sorry if it came off like that.

But you do understand why that question can get you in trouble, especially in a debate about trans identity/gender, right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To clarify, my request wasn't from a personal standpoint, sorry if it came off like that.

But you do understand why that question can get you in trouble, especially in a debate about trans identity/gender, right? 

Yeah, don't want to make people uncomfortable/out them.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FW: 

Why should we value cis fairness over trans education?

Our interp doesn't exclude your form of trans education, and a topical plan doesn't have to be inherently cis.

What's the bright line to meaningful dialogue?

Dialogue that allows the Neg to have a predictable and functioning counter-word against the 1AC.

Are you saying that trans discussions aren't meaningful?

Nope

 

PIK:

Your card talks about how swear words have to be read as a code in order to fight the patriarchy. Why don't you read them as a code?

I mean our advocacy is to examine and criticize your use of "fuck" in a way that reveals the patriarchal/hetero undertones of your language- that's the code we're deciphering.

Status?

Condo

 

K:

Your Pecaido 13 card talks about sexual identity, what does that have to do with the aff?

Preciado explains how the super structure of bio-capitalism actively defines gender subjectivity, ie testosterone is economically labeled a product only for 'male' use

What is a historical materialist analysis?

A social examination of transphobia in relation to the macro structure of capitalism

 

Case

Is your Theil 14 card talking about how we need queer theory research in the IR field?

Theil says we can combine trans identity politics with legal change to pursue material relief for trans subjects. 

Can you explain your first warrant on the double bind?

If identity politics are good then I should be able to access the acknowledgement of queer oppression as per the 1AC- but because this is a competitive space, I am disallowed from that advocacy and have to negate it which forces me to battle against queer politics which is counter-intuitive and mimics the oppressive power structures you criticize. 

How do we treat the ballot as currency?

The ballot is allegedly a first step toward a better trans future. 

Where do I ask for pity?

Our argument is that predicating your speech act upon trans identity as only existing in the confines of victimhood portrays queer bodies as always needing a savior.

What allows you to say what trans people do and don't need?

The premise of your question begs me to identity very specifically which I'd argue is a form of coerced coming out which is probably harmful for debate space. But if its a matter of sexual/gender orientation I've witnessed forms of discrimination which your Stanley evidence quantifies as overkill which probably means I can weigh in on the AFF. 

 

**edited for problematic question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your 6th arg on FW says the AFF is a good conversation-

-what's a conversation?

-when do I actually get to "converse" about the AFF? All i get is 3 minutes to find out what the hell your advocacy is

 

You Bauer evidence says we create binaries- where does our FW mandate that AFFs affirm the male-female binary?

 

Your Stanely ev on cap says the AC is collective- how do we access the discursive transformation of the AC if we can't engage it to begin with?

 

Spade just says that gender should also be recognized in our analysis- how is that not already the ALT as per recognizing transphobia in relation to capitalism?

 

What does the world of the perm look like?

 

And Sjoberg answering 1nc4 seems to indicate that politicians should understand transphobia in a way that actually engages IR- if that's true then why is policy implementation bad?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your 6th arg on FW says the AFF is a good conversation-

-what's a conversation?

A talk, but this argument is actually talks about dialouge, not conversation.

-when do I actually get to "converse" about the AFF? All i get is 3 minutes to find out what the hell your advocacy is

Once again, we're talking about dialogue. This argument is talking about how the aff, instead of most arguments, acknowledged that dialogue only creates dialogue and how our dialogue is the best form in this round because we don't claim that our dialogue goes out of round and changes the world.

 

You Bauer evidence says we create binaries- where does our FW mandate that AFFs affirm the male-female binary?

You embrace the dominant types of education in society. These education systems are transphobic. By embracing this education system, you force us to go about an education system that is cissupremacist. We're saying that we need a re-education rather than to embrace the dominant system in society.

 

Your Stanely ev on cap says the AC is collective- how do we access the discursive transformation of the AC if we can't engage it to begin with?

We still access the transformation because of the dialogue in round. We're still talking about transphobia which is very different than what is going on in a "normal" round. (I might have misinterpreted the question, if I did let me know).

 

Spade just says that gender should also be recognized in our analysis- how is that not already the ALT as per recognizing transphobia in relation to capitalism?

You need to have gender the starting point of deconstruction of capitalism in order to truly solve for it.

 

What does the world of the perm look like?

We have a historical materialist pedagogy, but instead of the focus of deconstructing capitalism, we start with gender and use that to deconstruct capitalism.

 

And Sjoberg answering 1nc4 seems to indicate that politicians should understand transphobia in a way that actually engages IR- if that's true then why is policy implementation bad?

Because the state is transphobic and any policy implementation wouldn't happen; the state doesn't want to fight transphobia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...