BK Tech 201

5
A/T Fem Kritik
1. No Link - Their link evidence never specifies a SCOTUS
ruling on strip searches, it only mentions <<link>>.
Their generic evidence does not specifically prove how
we link to the K, therefore we dont.
2. Link Turn- Our Miller card says prisons justify violence
towards black and brown people. This allows for certain
bodies to be more easily effected by (kritik) [then give
an example for either poor or brown people, etc.]. We
already address black and brown bodies being affected
by our aff is a pre req to having an ethical engagement
with oppressed peoples.
3. Impacts Outweigh - Even if you buy the Kritik, realworld impacts will always outweigh philosophical
impacts. INCITE 08! and Keeton and Eren 15 specifically
address how current policies are used to target trans
individuals and people of color. Miller is crystal clear in
how these policies legitimize not only sexual violence,
but the prison-industrial complex itself. The Kritik
doesnt specify how you measure it against case,
because you cant. They deal in abstraction whereas
the aff is grounded in reality.
4. Alternative Flawed - The Negative team offers no
viable alternative. They are living and arguing in a
dream world. We deal with reality.
A) Alternative cant solve, they can neither prove
that their alternative can solve for our advantages
nor truly prevent their own potential harms.
B) Impossible to weigh - Theres no way to prove
the impact of rethinking and the K doesnt
indicate how you weigh it against the advantages
If you are not angry, then you are not paying attention.

BK Tech 201
5
of our case. Nothing in the K denies our solvency
or advantages therefore our case outweighs the
Kritik.
Anti-foundationalist arguments cannot be used against a
foundationalist societythe neg is based solely on theory
and has no political grounding
Baker 92 (Lynn A. Baker is one of the nation s leading scholars on issues
of professional responsibility and is also a professor at the University of Texas
Law in Austin. Just Do It: Pragmatism and Progressive Social Change.
Virginia Law Review. April 1992. Page 715)
First, Rorty states that pragmatist philosophy might aid feminist politics because of the way the former
conceptualizes and redescribes social progress: "by substituting metaphors of evolutionary development
for metaphors of progressivelyess distorted perception," and "by drop[ping] the appearance-reality
distinction in favor of a distinction between beliefs which serve some purposes and beliefs which serve
other purposes."94 Rorty adds that feminists can easily fit their claim that a new voice is needed into a

will prophets really profit from conceptualizing

the societal change they advocate as part of a larger, endless evolutionary
process? Not necessarily. For such a conceptualization to be useful, it should
somehow make the prophet's work easier or more effective . Rorty does not make a
pragmatist view of moral progress.95 But

case that this conceptualization, without more, would be useful in this way. Nor is such an argument easy

an anti-foundationalist conception of social change as

evolution may dilute both the prophet's belief in her own vision and
her motivation to effect social change. It is one thing to believe, as a prophet by
to generate. Indeed,

definition does, that the status quo is neither necessary nor the best possible state of affairs; but it is quite
another to believe that the better world one envisions and would work toward achieving is also a
contingency, a mere resting point in a larger evolution. Rorty claims that the recognition of contingency
underlying the anti-foundationalist conception of social change need not dilute the prophet'sense of
conviction in her vision. He argues that "a belief can still regulate action, can still be thought worth dying
for, among people who are quite aware that this belief is caused by nothing deeper than contingent

the question still remains as to whether this

recognition of contingency makes the prophet more effective in any way . Rorty
historical circumstance. "96 Perhaps. But

makes no case that it does. Rorty's second claim is that anti-foundationalism offers feminist prophets
useful rules of rhetoric. He suggests that feminists quit invoking "an ahistoricist realism" through the use of
phrases like "in truth" and "in reality," and instead see themselves as creating anew language through
which they would simultaneously be fashioning what they did not before have: "a moral identity as women.
"7 Rorty promises that with new, anti-foundationalistnguistic practices come new social constructs.98 In
addition to abandoning their old universalist and realist rhetoric, Rorty suggests that feminists should use
substantively different arguments in attempting to persuade others to their view. Feminists, he argues,
should "drop[ ] the notion that the subordination of women is intrinsically abominable, drop[ ] the claim
that there is something called 'right' or 'justice' or 'humanity' which has always been on their side, making
their claims true."99 Instead, they should "just make invidious comparisons between the actual present
and a possible, if inchoate, future."10 This is the only form of argument left, Rorty notes, when "one sees
the need for something more than an appeal to rational acceptability by the standards of the existing

antifoundationalism cannot provide prophets (or anyone else) with a method for
selling their visions (or doing anything else): "There is no method or procedure to be
community."101 There are two problems with Rorty's suggestions. As Rorty himself acknowledges,

If you are not angry, then you are not paying attention.

BK Tech 201
5
And, as Rorty also notes, the
extent to which metaphysics holds sway in our world means that ''practical
politics will doubtless often require feminists to speak with the universalist
vulgar... 9"103 Indeed, anti-foundationalist rhetoric and arguments would
seem to be of questionable use to prophets who are selling their
vision to a foundationalist society
followed except courageous and imaginative experimentation."102

5. Permutation Do Both - Even if you buy the

negatives argument theres no reason we cant do all
parts of the alternative that isnt rejection of the Aff
plan, however the Affirmative must be the first step as
our impacts are already occurring and must be stopped
immediately. We are the K! Our very first card in our
1AC, our INCITE O8 card, shows this. We are looking at
the issue at hand through the eyes of the oppressed,
including women. The alt is trying to get rid of
patriarchy, which in the end they say will lead to
<<impact>>, but by taking away power from the state,
specifically the prison guards- we are decreasing the
power of the patriarchy, because the USFG is mainly
men as well as prison guards are mainly men. We solve
for both the impacts of our case and the alt, another
reason to perm. (check the alt).
Perm solves only through a combination of political
construction and critical security analysis can we begin to
break down systems of domination.
Hudson, 05 (Heni, Doing Security As Though Humans Matter: A Feminist
Perspective on Gender and the Politics of Human Security, University of the
Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa)

Reflectivist critique and conceptualization of human security by feminists and

critical security analysts has done what no other theory of security (and IR) did
before: it has made the discipline self-aware and forced although with obliqueness at times the
discourse outside the confines of mere problem-solving and into the realm of
engaging with power. The acid test for such endeavors is whether they can use

If you are not angry, then you are not paying attention.

BK Tech 201
5
critical insights into issues of domination and subordination to penetrate
statist discourse, not to subvert the state but to imbue it with a sense of
critical realism. Without the study of power and an understanding of the
process of political construction, security becomes depoliticized and
decontextualized.

State influence inevitable only mobilizing focus on state

reforms efforts can effectively challenge patriarchy
Connell 90 (R. W. Connell, Austrlian Sociologist The State, Gender, and
Sexual Politics: Theory and Appraisal, Theory and Society, Vol. 19, No. 5,
October, JSTOR)
the state is a major stake in gender politics;
and the exercise of that power is a con- stant incitement to claim the stake.
Thus the state becomes the focus of interest-group formation and mobilization in sexual
politics. It is worth recalling just how wide the liberal state's activity in relation
to gender is. This activity includes family policy, population policy, labor force and labor market management, housing policy,
Because of its power to regulate and its power to create,

regulation of sexual behavior and expression, provision of child care, mass educa- tion, taxation and income redistribution, the creation and

Control of the
machinery that conducts these activities is a massive asset in gender
politics. In many situations it will be tactically decisive. The state is
therefore a focus for the mobilization of interests that is central to gender
politics on the large scale. Feminism's historical con- cern with the state,
and attempts to capture a share of state power, appear in this light as a necessary
response to a historical reality. They are not an error brought on by an
overdose of liberalism or a capitula- tion to patriarchy . As Franzway puts it, the
state is unavoidable for feminism. The question is not whether feminism will
deal with the state, but how: on what terms, with what tactics, toward what
goals.5" The same is true of the politics of homosexuality among men. The ear- liest attempts to
use of mili- tary forces - and that is not the whole of it. This is not a sideline; it is a major realm of state policy.

agitate for toleration produced a half-illegal, half-aca- demic mode of organizing that reached its peak in Weimar Germany, and was smashed
by the Nazis. (The Institute of Sexual Science was vandalized and its library burnt in 1933; later, gay men were sent to concentration camps or
shot.) A long period of lobbying for legal reform followed, punctuated by bouts of state repression. (Homosexual men were, for instance,

The gay liberation movement changed the

methods and expanded the goals to include social revolution, but still dealt
with the state over policing, de-criminalization, and anti-discrimination . Since the
early 1970s gay politics has evolved a complex mixture of confron- tation,
cooperation, and representation. In some cities, including San Francisco and Sydney, gay men as such have
successfully run for public office. Around the AIDS crisis of the 1980s, in countries such as the United States and Australia,
gay community based organizations and state health services have entered a
close - if often tense - long-term relationship.' In a longer historical perspective, all these forms
of politics are fairly new. Fantasies like Aristophanes's Lysistrata aside, the open mobiliza- tion of
groups around demands or programs in sexual politics dates only from the
mid-nineteenth century. The politics that characterized other patriarchal gender orders in history were constructed along
other lines, for instance as a politics of kinship, or faction formation in agri- cultural villages. It can plausibly be argued that modern
targeted in the McCarthyite period in the United States.)

If you are not angry, then you are not paying attention.

BK Tech 201
5
patterns re- sulted from a reconfiguration of gender politics around the
growth of the liberal state. In particular its structure of legitimation through
plebiscite or electoral democracy invited the response of popular mobilization

Reform is the only way to solve Connnell 90 (R. W. Connell, Australian Sociologist The State, Gender,
and Sexual Politics: Theory and Appraisal, Theory and Society, Vol. 19, No. 5,
October, JSTOR)
Is the state patriarchal? Yes, beyond any argument , on the evidence dis- cussed above.
It is not "essentially patriarchal" or "male"; even if one could speak of the
"essence" of a social institution, this would exagger- ate the internal
coherence of the state. Rather the state is historically patriarchal, patriarchal as
a matter of concrete social practices. State structures in recent history institutionalize the European
Appraisals

equation be- tween authority and a dominating masculinity; they are effectively con- trolled by men; and they operate with a massive bias

At the same time the pattern of state patriarchy

changes. In terms of the depth of oppression and the historical possibilities of
resistance and transformation, a fascist regime is crucially different from a
liberal one, and a liberal one from a revolutionary one. The most favorable
histori- cal circumstance for progressive sexual politics seems to be the early
days of social-revolutionary regimes; but the later bureaucratization of these regimes is devastating. Next
best is a liberal state with a reformist government; though reforms
introduced under its aegis are vulnerable in periods of reaction. Though the state is
patriarchal, progressive gender politics cannot avoid it. The character of the
state as the central institutionalization of power, and its historical
trajectory in the regulation and constitution of gender relations, make it
unavoidably a major arena for challenges to patriarchy . Here liberal
feminism is on strong ground. Becoming engaged in practical struggles for a
share of state power requires tactical judgments about what developments
within the state provide opportunities. In the 1980s certain strategies of reform
have had a higher relative pay-off than they did before. In Australia, for instance, the
towards hetero- sexual men's interests.

creation of a network of "women's services" was a feature of the 1970s, and the momentum of this kind of action has died away. Reforms that
have few budgetary implications but fit in with other state strategies, such as modernizing the bureaucracy, become more promi- nent.

Equal employment opportunity and anti-discrimination legisla- tion have been

highlighted; decriminalizing homosexuality is consistent with this.

1. By doing the affirmative first we are solving

immediately for those being sexually assaulted in
prisons as we speak, if we were to do the alt, the time
frame would be much longer, subjecting these people

If you are not angry, then you are not paying attention.

BK Tech 201
5
to sexual violence for much longer than by doing the
aff.
2. Link turn. We need to have better engagement with
those oppressed by the prison industrial complex
3. Our aff is the pre req to the kritik

If you are not angry, then you are not paying attention.