Gender Privacy K

Frontline

1NC (Short)
Privacy is a malecentered concept that is used to justify the
oppression of the non-male outside of public view
Fineman et al. 94(Martha Fineman, is an American jurist and legal theorist,
known for her work in feminist legal theory and family law. Roxanne Mykitiuk is an
Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School where she teaches in the areas of
Disability Law, Health Law and Bioethics, Law and Family Law. 1994. The Public
Nature of Private Violence Psychology Press pg. 36-37 //MV)
The notion of the family as a sphere of privacy, immune from state interference, is
central to Griswold. But Griswold involved a state law that prohibited contraception
and is premised on an idealized vision of marriage as "enduring and intimate,
promoting harmony in living. For women in the United States, intimacy with men,
in and out of mar- riage, too often results in violence . The concept of freedom from state intrusion into
the marital bedroom takes on a different meaning when it is violence that goes on in that space. The concept
of marital privacy, established as a constitutional principle in Griswold, historically has been the key
ideological rationale for state refusal to intervene to protect battered women within
ongoing intimate relationships. This chapter explores the ways in which concepts of privacy
permit, encourage, and reinforce violence against women , focusing on the Com- plex
interrelationship between notions of "public" and "private" in our social understandings of woman abuse?

Historically, male battering oi women was untouched by law, protected as part of

the private sphere of family life. Over the last twenty years, however, as the battered women's
movement in this country has made issues of battering visible , battering is no longer perceived as a
purely "private" problem, and has taken on dimensions of a public issue . There has
been an explosion of legal retort and social service efforts: the development of battered womens shelters and

New legal remedies for

battered women have been developed which have been premised on the idea of
battering as a "public" harm. However, at the same time, there is widespread
resistance to acknowledgment of battering as a "public" issue . The ideological tenacity of
conceptions of battering as "private" is revealed in the United States Supreme
Court's decision in DeSha-nay 11. Winnebago County Deport- mznt of Social Services (1989), in the
inadequacy of legal reform efforts to date, and in tensions that exist within the
battered women's movement. The concept of privacy poses a dilemma and a challenge
to theoretical and practical work on woman abuse . The notion of marital privacy has
been a source of oppression of battered women and has helped to maintain
women's subordination within the family. However, a more afiirma- tive concept of privacy, one that
hotlines, many state and federal governmental reports, and much state legislation.

encompasses liberty, equality, freedom of bodily integrity. autonomy, and self-determination is important to women

The challenge is not simply to reject privacy for battered women

and opt for state intervention, but to develop both a more nuanced theory of where
to draw the boundaries between public and private, and a theory of privacy that is
empowering.
who have been battered.

The alternative is to vote negative and endorse a politic

of testifying that replaces public representation with the
private world--- thus bringing the oppression of women
into light
Patriarchal Militarism will cause extinctionrecognition of the
non-male in a reversal of the public and private is key to
prevent it
Reardon 93 (Betty, UN consultant, 1993, Women and PeaceFeminist Visions of
Global Security p. 21-25 //MV)
Women's traditional roles of engaging in multiple activities, as generalists, have given them this broad, integrated
view of peace and secunty that provides a hopeful alternative to the more narrow and fragmented views that most

nothing can be
more provocative of new ways of thinking about security than turning the present
notions upside down. The shortest. strongest. and perhaps mostmeaningful way of describing this view is
influence present processes of national and international security policy formation. Perhaps

reversing the common relationship between means and ends. Women, as is evident from the foregoing passages
quoted from The Nairobi Forward Looking Strategies, see peace as the route to security rather than the other way
around. Gandhi's assertion, "There is no way to peace. Peace is the way," is an excellent summary of a feminine
view of security, a view largely formed by women's experience of nurturing, caregiving, and household
maintenance. Peace, as will be noted in the discussion of positive peace in chapter 3, provides the conditions and
resources most conductive to caregiving and nurturing. War and preparation for war reduce and destroy resources
and limit and complicate the conditions for care and nurture. Women who bring forth human life, and carry the
responsibility for maintaining it and providing it with the most humane quality possible see security in terms of the
possibilities for life, its maintenance, and the improvement of its quality. Security lies in things hoped for and

Security, we
argue, is as much a matter of perception as "reality"; as is well attested by the real
insecurity produced by the present security system which (in spite of the warming ofthe Cold
War) still relies heavilv on armed force and the threat system, a reliance which erodes
all other dimensions of security. Authentic human security, we believe, derives mainly from the
planned for, perhaps more than in things as they are. Secunty is in large part futures perception.

reasonable expectation of well being. In that women's lives have been largely devoted to fulfilling expectations of
well-being, feminists who see the relevance and values of women's experience discern it in a new multi-dimensional
approach to security The holistic feminist approach contrasts starkly with conventional security, views and
policies which reduce virtually all the issues to the questions of "national security" and "military preparedness." The
dysfunctionality of this reductionist view of security is readily evident to all who are concerned with the quality of
the life to be made secure. Feminists see in its deleterious effects on women how the inordinate priority given to
the military erodes authentic security, global, national, and local. (Scott and Reardon 1991) What women
householders and caregivers experience as authentic security is the expectation of well-being for those for whom
they are providing care: their families, their communities, and the vulnerable and impoverished whose need for

It is the pursuit of these

positive expectations that women bring to the endeavor, both in the private sphere
and in the public sphere, where they campaign for security at all social levels from
neighborhood or village to the international system. T heir campaigns reveal their
notions of what constitutes security. Women's views of global security might be summarized as a
care and nurturance many women feel as they feel the needs of "their own."

world in which all the Earth's peoples could live with four fundamental expectations. And women's actions for peace
are inspired by the severe threats to the realization of those expectations posed by the present world order. First,
that our planet will continue to be able to sustain life. Yet scientists have warned that the ozone layer has been so
seriously damaged that it may be irreparable. The damage is causing severe harm to the human immune system
and bringing about a drastic increase in skin cancer. Deforestation, especially in the Amazon Basin, has significantly
reduced the Earth's supply of oxygen. Without sufficient oxygen, life cannot be sustained. Waters polluted by
poverty and industrial misuse, and atmosphere damaged by weapons testing, are destroying natural systems. Yet

The very weapons we have

developed to defend our security are themselves a threat to our security in the
research and development of chemical and biological weapons continue.

potential consequences of their use in combat and in the actual processes of their
development and testing. Next, that the basic needs of life will be met. Yet. as more people of the world
fall into poverty, millions are without clean, potable water, housing, adequate food, fundamental education, and
health care of any kind. Most of these are women. Inflation is rampant, unemployment is increasing; uncared for
children roam the streets of the world's great cities. Third, that human dignity and integrity will be respected, and
personal well-being and possibilities for individual and social development will not be impeded by traditional
customs, social structures, or political policies at local, national, or global levels. Yet a review of the Declaration of
the Convention on All Forms of Discrimination against Women provides a list of a broad and tragic range of
impediments to women's personal well-being that still prevail throughout the world. Apartheid and racism in various

The arms produced for national

defense have been used to maintain racist, repressive systems that deny the
personal well being and human rights of ethnic groups and political dissenters . Fourth,
forms impede the social development of many indigenous peoples.

that we can be protected from preventable harm and cared for in times of disaster without enduring greater harm,
that the life and well-being of the Earths peoples will not be harmed as a consequence of imbalanced security

in a highly militarized world. local conflicts

rage that daily impose death and suffering on noncombatants as well as armed
forces. The 1991 war in the Persian Gulf and the 1992 war in a disintegrating Yugoslavia took uncounted numbers
policies, preparation for war, and armed conflict. Yet,

of civilian lives, produced hundreds of thousands of refugees. and reduced living conditions to circumstances that of

A flourishing trade in conventional arms fuels the flames of these

conflicts and consumes resources in a truly incendiary manner, leaving in ashes
people's hopes for even a minimal standard of life. The technological arms race,
with its advancing weapons development, has also further diverted resources from
social and human purposes as it escalates to the point of the possibility of total
destruction. Arms development cannot be relied upon to prevent aggression and warfare. A case can be made
themselves were lethal.

that, on the contrary, arms production and trafficking encourage armed conflict, eroding rather than assuring our
expectation of protection or "defense." Each of these expectations has been the focus of major United Nations
reports and declarations on development, human rights, the environment, and disarmament and security. But little
public heed has been paid. However, women's movements and initiatives are insisting that we must turn our
attention to meeting these four fundamental expectations that constitute authentic security. They help to point out
that we must attend to the obstacles to these expectations in an integrated, comprehensive fashion based on an
understanding of the interrelationships among them. Until we understand the connections among these four
expectations and the other global problems deriving from their frustration, neither the world nor any of its people

Alternative approaches are an urgent necessity. Women's experiences

and feminine values are sources of such alternatives . Feminine Characteristics as Approaches to
will be secure.

Peace and Security The discussions in this book and elsewhere of the need for women's participation in public
affairs are essentially a call to valorize those feminine characteristics that are conducive to peace and

these characteristics hold the

greatest possibilities to move us from the present condition of continuous armed
conflict, potential nuclear annihilation, and ecological collapse toward the
achievement of a truly just world peace and authentic global security.
comprehensive approaches to security. Some feminists argue that

1NC (Long)
Privacy is a malecentered concept that is used to justify the
oppression of the non-male outside of public view
Fineman et al. 94(Martha Fineman, is an American jurist and legal theorist,
known for her work in feminist legal theory and family law. Roxanne Mykitiuk is an
Associate Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School where she teaches in the areas of
Disability Law, Health Law and Bioethics, Law and Family Law. 1994. The Public
Nature of Private Violence Psychology Press pg. 36-37 //MV)
The notion of the family as a sphere of privacy, immune from state interference, is
central to Griswold. But Griswold involved a state law that prohibited contraception
and is premised on an idealized vision of marriage as "enduring and intimate,
promoting harmony in living. For women in the United States, intimacy with men,
in and out of mar- riage, too often results in violence . The concept of freedom from state intrusion into
the marital bedroom takes on a different meaning when it is violence that goes on in that space. The concept
of marital privacy, established as a constitutional principle in Griswold, historically has been the key
ideological rationale for state refusal to intervene to protect battered women within
ongoing intimate relationships. This chapter explores the ways in which concepts of privacy
permit, encourage, and reinforce violence against women , focusing on the Com- plex
interrelationship between notions of "public" and "private" in our social understandings of woman abuse?

Historically, male battering oi women was untouched by law, protected as part of

the private sphere of family life. Over the last twenty years, however, as the battered women's
movement in this country has made issues of battering visible , battering is no longer perceived as a
purely "private" problem, and has taken on dimensions of a public issue . There has
been an explosion of legal retort and social service efforts: the development of battered womens shelters and

New legal remedies for

battered women have been developed which have been premised on the idea of
battering as a "public" harm. However, at the same time, there is widespread
resistance to acknowledgment of battering as a "public" issue . The ideological tenacity of
conceptions of battering as "private" is revealed in the United States Supreme
Court's decision in DeSha-nay 11. Winnebago County Deport- mznt of Social Services (1989), in the
inadequacy of legal reform efforts to date, and in tensions that exist within the
battered women's movement. The concept of privacy poses a dilemma and a challenge
to theoretical and practical work on woman abuse . The notion of marital privacy has
been a source of oppression of battered women and has helped to maintain
women's subordination within the family. However, a more afiirma- tive concept of privacy, one that
hotlines, many state and federal governmental reports, and much state legislation.

encompasses liberty, equality, freedom of bodily integrity. autonomy, and self-determination is important to women

The challenge is not simply to reject privacy for battered women

and opt for state intervention, but to develop both a more nuanced theory of where
to draw the boundaries between public and private, and a theory of privacy that is
empowering.
who have been battered.

Patriarchy causes extinction--- malecentered thinking

recreates the problems it attempts to solve
Warren and Cady 94 (Karen Warren and Duane Cady, Professors of Philosophy
at Macalester College and Hamline University. Feminism and Peace: Seeking
Connections. Hypatia. Vol. 9 Issue: 2, Pg. 2 //MV)
The notion of patriarchy as a socially dysfunctional system enables feminist
philosophers to show why conceptual connections are so important and how
conceptual connections are linked to the variety of other sorts of woman-naturepeace connections. In addition, the claim that patriarchy is a dysfunctional social system
locates what ecofeminists see as various "dysfunctionalities" of patriarchy-the
empirical invisibility of what women do, sexist-warist-naturist language, violence
toward women, other cultures, and nature-in a historical, socioeconomic, cultural,
and political context.(10) To say that patriarchy is a dysfunctional system is to say
that the fundamental beliefs, values, attitudes and assumptions (conceptual
framework) of patriarchy give rise to impaired thinking, behaviors, and institutions
which are unhealthy for humans, especially women, and the planet. The following diagram
represents the features of patriarchy as a dysfunctional socialsystem: Patriarchy, as an Up-Down system of power-over relationships
of domination of women by men, is conceptually grounded in a faulty patriarchal belief and value system, (a), according to which
(some) men are rational and women are not rational, or at least not rational in the more highly valued way (some) men are rational;
reason and mind are more important than emotion and body; that humans are justified in using female nature simply to satisfy
human consumptive needs. The discussion above of patriarchal conceptual frameworks describes the characteristics of this faulty

Patriarchal conceptual frameworks sanction, maintain, and perpetuate

impaired thinking, (b): For example, that men can control women's inner lives, that it is
men's role to determine women's choices, that human superiority over nature
justifies human exploitation of nature, that women are closer to nature than men
because they are less rational, more emotional, and respond in more instinctual
ways than (dominant) men. The discussions above at (4) and (5),are examples of the linguistic and psychological forms
belief system.

such impaired thinking can take. Operationalized, the evidence of patriarchy as a dysfunctional system is found in the behaviors to

For example, in the United States,

current estimates are that one out of every three or four women will be raped by
someone she knows; globally, rape, sexual harassment, spouse-beating, and sadomasochistic pornography are examples of behaviors practiced, sanctioned, or
tolerated within patriarchy. In the realm of environmentally destructive behaviors, strip-mining, factory farming, and
pollution of the air, water, and soil are instances of behaviors maintained and sanctioned within patriarchy . They, too, rest
on the faulty beliefs that it is okay to "rape the earth," that it is "man's God-given
right" to have dominion (that is, domination) over the earth, that nature has only
instrumental value, that environmental destruction is the acceptable price we pay
for "progress." And the presumption of warism, that war is a natural, righteous, and
ordinary way to impose dominion on a people or nation, goes hand in hand with
patriarchy and leads to dysfunctional behaviors of nations and ultimately to
international unmanageability. Much of the current "unmanageability" of contemporary life
in patriarchal societies, (d), is then viewed as a consequence of a patriarchal
preoccupation with activities, events, and experiences that reflect historically malegender identified beliefs, values, attitudes, and assumptions. Included among these
real-life consequences are precisely those concerns with nuclear proliferation, war,
environmental destruction, and violence toward women , which many feminists see
as the logical outgrowth of patriarchal thinking. In fact, it isoften only through observing these
which it gives rise, (c), and the unmanageability, (d), which results.

dysfunctional behaviors--the symptoms of dysfunctionality--that one cantruly see that and how patriarchy serves to maintain and
perpetuate them. When patriarchy is understood as a dysfunctional system, this "unmanageability" can be seen for what it is--as a

predictable and thus logical consequence of patriarchy.(11) The theme that global environmental crises, war, and violencegenerally
are predictable and logical consequences of sexism and patriarchal culture is pervasive in ecofeminist literature (see Russell 1989,
2). Ecofeminist Charlene Spretnak, for instance, argues that "a

militarism and warfare are continual

features of a patriarchal society because they reflect and instill patriarchal values
and fulfill needs of such a system . Acknowledging the context of patriarchal conceptualizations that feed
militarism is a first step toward reducing their impact and preserving lifeon Earth" (Spretnak 1989, 54). Stated in terms of
the foregoing model of patriarchy as a dysfunctional social system , the claims by Spretnak and
other feminists take on a clearer meaning: Patriarchal conceptual frameworks legitimate impaired
thinking (about women, national and regional conflict, theenvironment) which is manifested in
behaviors which, if continued, will make life on earth difficult, if not
impossible . It is a stark message, but it is plausible. Its plausibility lies in understanding the conceptualroots of various
woman-nature-peace connections in regional, national, and global contexts.

The alternative is to vote negative to endorse a politic of

testifying that replaces public representation with the
private world--- thus bringing the oppression of women
into light
Goodman 10(Robin Truth Goodman is associate professor of English at Florida
State University. Jean Said Makdisi's Beirut Fragments as a Thought Experiment in
Public Sphere Disintegration. Spring 2010. Contemporary Literature. Vol. 51. No.
1 //MV)
Private spaces and private understandings appear , then, as the only remaining trace
of social cohesion, and therefore as the defensive upholder of gender conventions,
particularly in ascribing work. Also, however, the now-distorted communicative functions
that have been truncated in their institutional forms are handed over to private
appropriation. With the state made inoperative and its structures fallen to rubble ,
Makdisis Beirut Fragments envisions the only remaining form of public discourse in a politics
of testifying that replaces public representation with the everyday practices of
subjective utterance, private life, and womens work. Unlike in Habermass liberalism, private
life does not deliver the immanence of communication in modern life, moving from
its archaic origins to an emancipatory alternative to modern systems appropriation,
but rather is defensive, drawn back upon itself, unable to associate beyond its
immediate context because of the violence on the outside . Makdisis depictions of war-torn Beirut
provide a parallel case study for the social relations that neoliberal ideologies also envision, where the public sector can no longer

What is more, as in these neoliberal scenarios, the Lebanese public sector is replaced with
womens work as a synecdoche for the privatization of public life . [T]he war, she explains,
function.

imposed more and more responsibilities on me and other women. The crises of the war were often ones which fell into the
traditional realm of women. We had to provide domestic supplies, deal with wrecked homes, create alternative shelters, cope with
death (21). In the aftermath of a bomb attack, Makdisi time and again [d]ecide[s] to clean the house. . . . Start[s] dusting (22) in
a futile attempt to restore order and normalization: I

also remember every now and then going into a

frenzy of housecleaning, but this had less to do with 52 CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE normal housewifely motives
than with a kind of manic desire to clean up the whole world, the whole cruel world,
the world of killing and of babies dying from drinking salty water and of horizons
sooty with fire and pain (175). She runs home, worries about her children, attends dinner parties.

Links

Generic Surveillance
Decreasing surveillance is just an increase in privacy--- we
must question the principles of surveillance curtailment
Patton, Jason W., 2k, "Protecting Privacy In Public? Surveillance Technologies And The Value Of Public
Places," Ethics And Information Technology Volume: 2 Issue: 3 Page: 181-187 //MV

Because the value of public places is not reducible to privacy, the importance of
sociality provides another avenue for questioning surveillance technologies. This
analysis on the framing of surveillance as a privacy issue shows that more is at
stake than the rights of the individual. In contrast to privacy as an individual right,
sociality suggests a relational value between people or a contextual value of public
places. Formulations from feminist ethics and environmental ethics provide starting
points for developing such an approach. Carol Gilligans ethics of care contrasts the
differentiated individual of enlightenment thinking who possesses rights with the
individual whos identity is constituted by social relationships.26 While the former
emphasizes the rights of the individual based on conceptions of fairness. Gilligans
formulation rests on the responsibility of people to others in caring for relationships.
In the context of public places, sociality emphasizes the informal relations between
people that form a background for social and civic lives . The value exists between
people in terms of a responsibility for others, even for urban strangers who share a
sense of community, identity, and the social contract. In addition to the individuals
privacy and the groups sociality, the concept of a contextual value points to the
public place as a space that supports these relations.

Privacy
The Private sphere as a safe space is fundamentally flawed
normalizes patriarchal exploitation
Etzioni 15 Amitai, The New Normal Finding a Balance between Individual
Rights and the Common Good, Transaction Publishers New Brunswick, NJ, Senior
Advisor to the Carter White House; taught at Columbia, Harvard Business, Copyright
2015, ISBN 978-1-4128-5477-1)
To suggest that the time has come to leave behind the reasonable expectation of privacy standard is not to say that

pre-Katz Fourth Amendment analysis, which gave considerable

weight to the home as the locus of privacy . In Katz the majority ruled that "the Fourth Amendment
protects people, not places:' rejecting the "trespass" doctrine enunciated in Olmstead. However, even after
this, the home remained largely inviolable in The eyes of the courts
the courts should revert to

.ItseemsKatzdidnotdetachFourthAmendmentsafe- guards from the home but rather extended the sphere ofprivacy
beyond it to other protected spaces. Information collected about events in one's home is still
often considered a priori a violation of privacy, while much more license is granted to the state in collecting

the very core' of the

Fourth Amendment 'stands the right ofa man to retreat into his own home and there be free from
information about conduct in public and commercial spaces. As Justice Scalia put it, "at

unreasonable governmental intrusion: With few exceptions, the question whether a warrantless search of a home is
reasonable and hence constitutional must be answered no:'18

This is an idea that has deep roots in

American and English common law: "Zealous and frequent repetition of the adage that "a man's house
is his castle;' made it abundantly clear that both in England and the colonies, " the freedom of one's
house" was one of the most vital elements of English liberty :'19 In Dow Chemical Company v.
United States, the Court established that the expectation of privacy was lower in an industrial plant than a home
because the latter "is fundamentally a sanctuary, where personal concepts of self and family are forged, where
relationships are nurtured and where people normally feel free to express themselves in intimate ways."20

Feminist scholars correctly and roundly criticized the inviolability of the home and
the private/public distinction in privacy law. Catharine MacKinnon writes the problem with granting
the home extra protection is that "while the private has been a refuge for some, it has been a
hellhole for others, often at the same time:'21 Linda McClain points out that freedom from
state interference in the home "renders men unaccountable for what is
done in private-rape, battery, and other exploitation' .'22

Economy
Discourse of the economic only reinstitutes the maledominated society--- the non-male falls to the periphery
Fraser 87(Nancy Fraser, is an American critical theorist, currently the Henry A.
and Louise Loeb Professor of Political and Social Science and professor of philosophy
at The New School in New York City, Winter 1987, Women, Welfare and the Politics
of Need Interpretation, Hypatia, Vol. 2, No. 1 pg. 102-122 //MV)
Consider that the ideological (as opposed to economic) effects of the JAT's mode of need
interpretation operate within a specific and relatively new societal arena. I call this arena
"the social" in order to mark its noncoincidence with the familiar institutionalized spaces of family and official-

the social is not exactly equivalent to the traditional public

sphere of political discourse defined by Jiirgen Habermas (1975,1981); nor is it coextensive
with the state. Rather, the social is a site of discourse about people's needs,
specifically about those needs which have broken out of the domestic and/or
official-economic spheres that earlier contained them as "private matters." Thus,
the social is a site of discourse about problematical needs, needs which have come
to exceed the apparently (but not really) selfregulating domestic and economic
institutions of male-dominated, capitalist society." As the site of this excess, the
social is by definition a terrain of contestation . It is a space in which conflicts among
rival interpretations of people's needs are played out. "In" the social, then, one would expect to
find a plurality of competing needs discourses. And in fact what we do find here are at least three major
kinds: 1) "expert" needs discourses of, for example, social workers and therapists, on
the one hand, and welfare administrators, planners and policy makers, on the other; 2) oppositional
movement needs discourses of, for example, feminists, lesbians and gays, people of
color, workers and welfare clients; and 3) "reprivatization" discourses of constituencies
seeking to repatriate newly problematized needs to their former domestic or officialeconomic enclaves. Such discourses, and others, compete with one another in addressing the fractured
economy. As I conceive it,

social identities of potential adherents.

National Security
Discourse of National Security is dominated by masculine high
politics--- and ostracizes female voices
Blanchard 3 (Eric M. Blanchard, is currently Adjunct Assistant Professor in the
Political Science department at Columbia University in New York City. Summer 2003.
Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. Signs, Vol. 28, No. 4 (Summer
2003), pp. 1289-1312 //MV)
National security discourses are typically part of the elite world of masculine high
politics. Statesmen, diplomats, and the military conduct the business of states, and
too often war, imbuing the relations and processes of the society of nation-states
with an atmosphere seemingly devoid of women and an interest in issues of
concern to women. The academic discipline charged with theorizing this world, international
relations (IR), has only recently made a place for feminist analysis, and then only
grudgingly. Academic feminism and IR are contemporaries, each developing
through the war-torn twentieth century and motivated by some of the same
international events, although work in IR often overlooks womens contributions , such
as the 1919 International Congress of Women, which ran parallel to Versailles (Grant 1992, 86). While in some
respects estranged from the mainstream of IR ,

feminist and gender scholars have launched an

important critique of the core issues of the discipline: war, peace, and the quest to
secure the boundaries of the nation-state. In a rapidly changing , post-9/11 world,
feminist voices must be heard if the international system is to achieve a more
comprehensive security in the face of terror networks, technowar, and mounting
civilian casualties.

Democracy
Representations of democracy exclude the non-male--- the
public/private split inhibits participation
Romany 93 (Celina Romany, A Professor of Law, Practicing Attorney, Mediator
and Arbitrato, 1993, Women as Aliens: A Feminist Critique of the Public/Private
Distinction in International Human Rights Law. Pg. 100-101. //MV)
Both the family and the state are units of government within which actors play
fiduciary roles, while the market is deemed pre-political. Both the family and the
state lack the relative freedom from rules which the market enjoys since family and
state decisions are informed by "overarching ideals . '71 Both the family and the state share
similar discourses whereby political philosophy refers to family ideals while family theorists allude to political ideals,

The dichotomization
of the public and private spheres cripples women's citizenship. It inhibits the
authoritative speech and dialogue that derive from self-determination and thus
impairs the successful participation of women in democratic life .73 ii. "Private" Terror in the
Patriarchal Family The family, through canonization , becomes the refuge for the flourishing of those spheres of privacy and freedom which lie at the core of the nonpolitical foundations of the liberal state. At the root of the enshrinement of family in
conventional human rights law lies a con- vergence of narratives which legitimates
a hierarchical ordering of intimate relations; this convergence is hidden behind the
notion that the family as a social unit is beyond the purview of the state. Love and
sharing an arsenal of linguistic imagery of the market as a cornerstone of consent.72

intimacy become guards on the borders that place the family unit "beyond justice."

War
Normative analyses of war are rooted in masculinity--- the
levels-of-analysis mirror the public-private split
Blanchard 3 (Eric M. Blanchard, is currently Adjunct Assistant Professor in the
Political Science department at Columbia University in New York City. Summer 2003.
Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. Signs, Vol. 28, No. 4 (Summer
2003), pp. 1289-1312 //MV)
Applying gender as a category of analysis to show the possibility of a more
comprehensive notion of security, Tickner traces the linkage between the system of
international relations (and its theorization) and multileveled, gendered insecurities.
Against realisms assumption of autonomous states and its prescription of self-help in a hostile anarchical
environment, Tickner argues that the threats of the nuclear age, cross-border environmental degradation, and
evidence of increasing international cooperation demand that interdependence be taken seriously (1992). For

the assumption that there is order within and anarchy beyond the bounds of
the community effects a divide between international and domestic politics that
mirrors the public-private split that feminist theorists argue perpetuates domestic
violence. Tickner rejects the analytic separation of explanations for war into distinct
levels and the identification of security with state borders, arguing that violence at
the international, national, and family levels is interrelated, ironically taking place in
domestic and international spaces beyond the reaches of law (1992, 58, 193). Feminists in IR
find the levels-of-analysis approach particularly inappropriate to their concerns
because the problem of the system of patriarchy cannot be addressed solely by
reference to particular actors, whether they are men or states (Brown 1988, 473).
Tickner,

Constructions of war and relations mirror the public/private

split that pushes women to the periphery of politics
Blanchard 3 (Eric M. Blanchard, is currently Adjunct Assistant Professor in the
Political Science department at Columbia University in New York City. Summer 2003.
Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. Signs, Vol. 28, No. 4 (Summer
2003), pp. 1289-1312 //MV)
Waltz turns to the canons of political philosophy for an explanation of the causes of
war by asking whether wars are caused by human nature , by the internal structure
of states, or by the international system. An important component of the study of IR is a selfpositioning in the tradition of Western political theorytracing an intellectual lineage to Machiavelli and Hobbes

Feminist analysis of this pedigree shows that the

feminine has long served as a symbolic threat to militarized Western
conceptualizations of political community, from the ancient Greeks to the twentieth
century; Aeschyluss Furies and Machiavellis Fortuna are but two examples (Harstock 1983). Rebecca Grant
(1991) argues that a gender bias in IR, transmitted unproblematically from Western
political thought to the study of IR, results in the question of gender being taken as
irrelevant. For Grant, IRs interpretation of Hobbes allows no room for the question of how gender relations
particularly as it concerns the state.

affect the transition out of the brutish state of nature and into society, while Jean-Jacques Rousseaus famous stag
hunt, often invoked as a parable of the problems of security, ignores the familial relations that control the hunters

Taking men as the sole political actors and citizens,

the political theory borrowed by IR postulates a domestic/international divide
premised on the private/public distinction that relegates women to a
defection from the hunting circle (1015).

space outside politics (9). Jean Bethke Elshtains rich blend of political theory, personal narrative, and
history, Women and War ([1987] 1995), serves as a rejoinder to the disciplines philosophical conceit and issues a
key challenge to the domestic/international divide that Grant identifies. In a sweeping survey of the discourse of
womens complex relationships to the body politic ,
and thus to war, as they emerge from the narratives (war stories) that are constitutive of war.
Elshtain focuses on the ways in which wars productive destructiveness inscribes and
reinscribes mens and womens identities and thus the boundaries of community :
War creates the people. War produces power, individual and collective (16667).
war from the Greeks onward, Elshtain details

Reacting to what she sees as the onset of scientism and hyperrationality in academic IR, Elshtain critiques the
retreat into abstraction that the quest for scientific certainty produced in professionalized war discourse and
attempts to revive the bond between politics and morality broken by Machiavelli. By reifying state behavior,
Elshtain argues, the realist narrative ignores human agency and identity: No

children are ever born, and

nobody ever dies, in this constructed world. There are states, and they are what is
(91)

Impact

Militarism
Militarism will cause extinctionrecognition of the feminine in
a reversal of the public and private is key to prevent it
Reardon 93 (Betty, UN consultant, 1993, Women and PeaceFeminist Visions of
Global Security p. 21-25 //MV)
Women's traditional roles of engaging in multiple activities, as generalists, have given them this broad, integrated
view of peace and secunty that provides a hopeful alternative to the more narrow and fragmented views that most

nothing can be
more provocative of new ways of thinking about security than turning the present
notions upside down. The shortest. strongest. and perhaps mostmeaningful way of describing this view is
influence present processes of national and international security policy formation. Perhaps

reversing the common relationship between means and ends. Women, as is evident from the foregoing passages
quoted from The Nairobi Forward Looking Strategies, see peace as the route to security rather than the other way
around. Gandhi's assertion, "There is no way to peace. Peace is the way," is an excellent summary of a feminine
view of security, a view largely formed by women's experience of nurturing, caregiving, and household
maintenance. Peace, as will be noted in the discussion of positive peace in chapter 3, provides the conditions and
resources most conductive to caregiving and nurturing. War and preparation for war reduce and destroy resources
and limit and complicate the conditions for care and nurture. Women who bring forth human life, and carry the
responsibility for maintaining it and providing it with the most humane quality possible see security in terms of the
possibilities for life, its maintenance, and the improvement of its quality. Security lies in things hoped for and

Security, we
argue, is as much a matter of perception as "reality"; as is well attested by the real
insecurity produced by the present security system which (in spite of the warming ofthe Cold
War) still relies heavilv on armed force and the threat system, a reliance which erodes
all other dimensions of security. Authentic human security, we believe, derives mainly from the
planned for, perhaps more than in things as they are. Secunty is in large part futures perception.

reasonable expectation of well being. In that women's lives have been largely devoted to fulfilling expectations of
well-being, feminists who see the relevance and values of women's experience discern it in a new multi-dimensional
approach to security The holistic feminist approach contrasts starkly with conventional security, views and
policies which reduce virtually all the issues to the questions of "national security" and "military preparedness." The
dysfunctionality of this reductionist view of security is readily evident to all who are concerned with the quality of
the life to be made secure. Feminists see in its deleterious effects on women how the inordinate priority given to
the military erodes authentic security, global, national, and local. (Scott and Reardon 1991) What women
householders and caregivers experience as authentic security is the expectation of well-being for those for whom
they are providing care: their families, their communities, and the vulnerable and impoverished whose need for

It is the pursuit of these

positive expectations that women bring to the endeavor, both in the private sphere
and in the public sphere, where they campaign for security at all social levels from
neighborhood or village to the international system. Their campaigns reveal their
notions of what constitutes security. Women's views of global security might be summarized as a
care and nurturance many women feel as they feel the needs of "their own."

world in which all the Earth's peoples could live with four fundamental expectations. And women's actions for peace
are inspired by the severe threats to the realization of those expectations posed by the present world order. First,
that our planet will continue to be able to sustain life. Yet scientists have warned that the ozone layer has been so
seriously damaged that it may be irreparable. The damage is causing severe harm to the human immune system
and bringing about a drastic increase in skin cancer. Deforestation, especially in the Amazon Basin, has significantly
reduced the Earth's supply of oxygen. Without sufficient oxygen, life cannot be sustained. Waters polluted by
poverty and industrial misuse, and atmosphere damaged by weapons testing, are destroying natural systems. Yet

The very weapons we have

developed to defend our security are themselves a threat to our security in the
potential consequences of their use in combat and in the actual processes of their
development and testing. Next, that the basic needs of life will be met. Yet. as more people of the world
research and development of chemical and biological weapons continue.

fall into poverty, millions are without clean, potable water, housing, adequate food, fundamental education, and
health care of any kind. Most of these are women. Inflation is rampant, unemployment is increasing; uncared for
children roam the streets of the world's great cities. Third, that human dignity and integrity will be respected, and
personal well-being and possibilities for individual and social development will not be impeded by traditional
customs, social structures, or political policies at local, national, or global levels. Yet a review of the Declaration of

the Convention on All Forms of Discrimination against Women provides a list of a broad and tragic range of
impediments to women's personal well-being that still prevail throughout the world. Apartheid and racism in various

The arms produced for national

defense have been used to maintain racist, repressive systems that deny the
personal well being and human rights of ethnic groups and political dissenters . Fourth,
forms impede the social development of many indigenous peoples.

that we can be protected from preventable harm and cared for in times of disaster without enduring greater harm,
that the life and well-being of the Earths peoples will not be harmed as a consequence of imbalanced security

in a highly militarized world. local conflicts

rage that daily impose death and suffering on noncombatants as well as armed
forces. The 1991 war in the Persian Gulf and the 1992 war in a disintegrating Yugoslavia took uncounted numbers
policies, preparation for war, and armed conflict. Yet,

of civilian lives, produced hundreds of thousands of refugees. and reduced living conditions to circumstances that of

A flourishing trade in conventional arms fuels the flames of these

conflicts and consumes resources in a truly incendiary manner, leaving in ashes
people's hopes for even a minimal standard of life. The technological arms race,
with its advancing weapons development, has also further diverted resources from
social and human purposes as it escalates to the point of the possibility of total
destruction. Arms development cannot be relied upon to prevent aggression and warfare. A case can be made
themselves were lethal.

that, on the contrary, arms production and trafficking encourage armed conflict, eroding rather than assuring our
expectation of protection or "defense." Each of these expectations has been the focus of major United Nations
reports and declarations on development, human rights, the environment, and disarmament and security. But little
public heed has been paid. However, women's movements and initiatives are insisting that we must turn our
attention to meeting these four fundamental expectations that constitute authentic security. They help to point out
that we must attend to the obstacles to these expectations in an integrated, comprehensive fashion based on an
understanding of the interrelationships among them. Until we understand the connections among these four
expectations and the other global problems deriving from their frustration, neither the world nor any of its people

Alternative approaches are an urgent necessity. Women's experiences

and feminine values are sources of such alternatives . Feminine Characteristics as Approaches to
will be secure.

Peace and Security The discussions in this book and elsewhere of the need for women's participation in public
affairs are essentially a call to valorize those feminine characteristics that are conducive to peace and

these characteristics hold the

greatest possibilities to move us from the present condition of continuous armed
conflict, potential nuclear annihilation, and ecological collapse toward the
achievement of a truly just world peace and authentic global security .
comprehensive approaches to security. Some feminists argue that

Environmental Destruction
This manifests in environmental destruction and oppression of
women through the public/private framework
Gaard 10 (Greta Gaard currently serves on the Executive Council for the
Association for the Study of Literature and the Environment. She works in the areas
of ecocriticism, queer studies, animal studies, and environmental literature. Fall
2010. Reproductive Technology, or Reproductive Justice? Ethics & the Environment
Volume 15, Number 2 //MV)
the emphasis on choice and privacy served to split social conservatives,
but ultimately backfired against larger feminist goals . As Catharine MacKinnon (1987) explains,
privacy doctrine reaffirms and reinforces what the feminist critique of sexuality
criticizes: the public/private split (93). Rosalind Petchesky (1990) concurs: What is lost in the
language of liberal privacy is the concept of social rightsthat the society has a
responsibility to ameliorate the conditions that make either abortion or childbearing
a hard, painful choice for some women; and that the bearers of this right are not so
much isolated individuals as they are members of social groups with distinct needs
Strategically,

(xxv). In sum, there are several shortcomings to the framework of privacy and choice, as Marilyn Fried (2005) observes: first,

privacy rights undercut demands for public funding of abortion; second, the rhetoric
of choice appeals only to those who have options, but is meaningless to those
who do not, and thus it politically divides women by race and economic class, since
these factors circumscribe womens choices. No wonder that middle-class white
women have tended to be the champions of abortion rights , while low income women and women
of color have faced numerous restrictions on their fertility under the rhetoric of population/poverty control. As radical feminists

choice rhetoric and the privacy framework

together fit into a larger constellation of malecentered liberal perspectives that rely
on separation rather than interconnectedness for definitions of selfhood, science
(Merchant 1980), and social relations. These views treat nature as a resource for human
needs rather than a living ecosystem where humans flourish through
interdependence; [End Page 107] they divide personhood into various bodily parts (i.e.,
the uterus, ovaries, breasts) which can then be commodified by choice and
manipulated in concert with Western cultures control of nature as a path to
human liberation. Together, these shortcomings made the framework of
reproductive choice both marginally effective and vulnerable to appropriation.
(Corea 1985) and ecofeminists (Diamond 1994) have observed,

Structural Violence
Malecentered policy only creates spaces in which non-male
bodies experience endless violence
Sheperd 13 (Laura J, an Associate Professor of International Relations at the
School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, UNSW, 2013 Gender,
Violence and Popular Culture: Telling Stories, pg 6-7 //MV)
Both concepts, moreover, are in part rendered intelligible through their position-ing in relation to other concepts,
particularly metaphysical concerns about order and being and questions of moral philosophy regarding legitimacy,

Butler argues that we cannot understand what it means to be human in

this world without reference to gender, that the matric of gender relations is prior
to the emergence of the human (1993: 7) and that performances of gender that
transcend the binary, dimorphic schema that determines Western imaginings of
gender are perceives as illegitimate, if not untrue. Similarly, certain violences are
widely held to be just (cf. Just War theory in toto) and to bring forth order from chaos: one
only has to investigate the arguments put forward in defence of humanitarian
intervention and the emergence of debate around a responsibility to protect the
citizens of states whose governing regimes are perpetrating violence against them
to understand that violence can be conceived of as defensible in certain
circumstances (see, for example, the classes discussion in Wheeler 2000 and, more recently, Barnett and
justice and truth.

Weiss 2008; Belammy 2004, 2005, 2006, 2008, 2011). A more prosaic example of the widespread acceptance of
violence as legitimate under certain conditions is the existence of the death penalty as punishment for

The ana-lytical priority given to these two concepts,

then, is a result of their productive power in the social imaginary of Western political
thought. Both gender and violence are core thematic concerns of so many of the stories we tell and are told;
relatedly, a core thematic concern of this volume as a whole is the function performed by gender and
violence, in that they are (re)productive of culturally intelligible subjects and
appropriate modes of behaviour. This owes a clear intellectual debt to a
poststructural conceptualization of power, to which I now turn in the context of elaborating the
transgressions of the law in certain places.

theoretical insights drawn upon, and methodological strategies employed, in this book.

Devaluation (?)
Devaluating the feminine results in the objectification,
violation, assault, discrimination, abduction, trafficking and
murder of both females and "insufficiently masculine" men
Peterson 13 (Professor Spike Peterson Ph.D., is a Professor University of Arizona
in the School of Government and Public Policy (website) with courtesy appointments
in the Department of Gender and Womens Studies (website), Institute for LGBT
Studies, Center for Latin American Studies (website), and International Studies
(website). She is also an Associate Fellow, Gender Institute, London School of
Economics (2008-2011), Edited by Aili Tripp,
http://muse.jhu.edu/books/9780814770139 Gender Violence and Human Security.
pg 65 //MV)
Devaluation of the feminine translates here into silencing, objecti- fying, violating,
assaulting, and even killing women and (feminized, Othered) civilians;
discriminating against and often punishing insuf- ficiently masculine men; using
women as sexual decoys (Eisenstein 2007); abducting women and girls for ransom;
trafficking in women and children; and prioritizing masculinized identities, practices,
and objectives in the name of military needs. Whether or not combatants have a stake in ending
conflict depends critically on their estimated probability of victory, or at least their share of postconflict resources
and power. In new wars, the interaction of identity politics and milita- rized masculinities appears to deepen

Insofar as this is the

case, it obviously exacerbates the already significant difficulty of achiev- ing a
sustainable peace.
combatants resistance to nego- tiations that promise less than complete victory.

Rape
Patriarchy makes society a space in which the worst
atrocities---such as rape---are justified
Sheperd 13 (Laura J, an Associate Professor of International Relations at the
School of Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, UNSW, 2013 Gender,
Violence and Popular Culture: Telling Stories, pg 6-7 //MV)
Just as Foucault argues that prisons and other disciplinary institutions are located in
some sense in an extra-social space in domestic society a space in which 'normal'
rules and regulations cannot apply, so too can these arguments be extended to the
spaces of war-fighting. With the suspension during war of 'the right and the law' in
the immediate interpersonal interactions of human subjects, war zones are also
places of 'physical and sexual violence'. Further, Foucault suggests that the very existence of
prisons indicates the thorough imbrication of liberal ideals in Western imaginations ([1977]1991: 232) for it is only
when we accept the right to liberty as a foundational aspect of humanity that incar- ceration is a meaningful
punishment. More significantly for this analysis, however, is Foucault's notion that 'the self-evidence of the prison
is also based on its role, sup- posed or demanded, as an apparatus for transforming individuals' (ibid.: 233). In Oz,
this transformation is made immediately apparent with the introduction of each character according to his prison
ID number and the crime for which he has been imprisoned. In this way, the identity of social being is stripped
away and the subject is transformed into a prisoner, identified by a number and a crime; through such disciplinary
techniques and juridical practices of power, individuals are subjected to and in the regimes of the prison and are

through the existence of prisons

in our juridical architecture, we can constitute the subject of the 'imprisoned,' the
'criminal', and measure ourselves against this subject as it represents that which we
are not. This insight also translates to the macro-international level, as individuals
are tried for war crimes in international criminal courts and perpetrators of violence
are brought to justice using these mechanisms. Contrary to Sigler's claim that 'the very idea of
reproduced as 'docile bodies' (Foucault [1977] 1991: 135-70). Further,

state-sanctioned rape is so anathema that we would almost certainly reject it as unacceptably barbaric' (2005/6:
584), a Foucauldian analysis of the prison system asks about the productive power of illegality and violence and
the management of the same in the service of subjectivity literally, making bodies into subjects - and Oz allows
the critically engaged viewer great insight into the relationship between gender and violence in this particular

Rape, on this view, is both a form of governmentality and a technique of

biopower. It is the former as it delineates "the conduct of conduct" at a variety of
sites and through rationalities not limited to those formally countenanced as
political (Brown 2006: 4); it is not within the power of the sovereign (in the case of the prison, under the direct
social system.

and formal authority of the warden) but it nonetheless 'has the population as its target and apparatuses of
security as its essential technical instrument' (Foucault [l978]2007: 108) if we understand 'apparatuses of security'
to include violent correction of perceived transgression. It is the latter as it is not within the permts of law but is

'The law always refers to the sword. But

a power whose task is to take charge of life needs continuous regulatory and
corrective mechanisms' (Foucault [1976]1998: 144).
still a regulatory mechanism that produces human subjects.

Alt
1. The alternative is a dissolution of the public sphere--- a role
reversal in which womens work takes the place of the public
sphere
2. A politic of testifying creates spaces in which the
dichotomy of the public and private and dichotomy of gender
is dissolved by preventing the feminine from being forced into
the concept of the private.
3. Disintigration of the public sphere would bring womens
work into view--- collapsing patriarchy
Goodman 10(Robin Truth Goodman is associate professor of English at Florida
State University. Jean Said Makdisi's Beirut Fragments as a Thought Experiment in
Public Sphere Disintegration. Spring 2010. Contemporary Literature. Vol. 51. No.
1 //MV)
The link that Makdisi's memoir forges between the disintegration of the public
sphere and women's work can be read as a critique of the work that gender is
supposed to do in liberalism's political narratives. The critique shows that liberalism's
universalizing objectives and self-projection of total inclusion come upon its fundamental contradiction in the
reprivatization of women's labor now orchestrated globally .

As a universalizing philosophy that

would constantly be forced to confront its negative reflection in those it excludes,
liberalism was to advance by extending rights. As Seyla Benhabib has argued, "The gender
blindness of much modern and contemporary universalist theory, in my opinion,
does not compromise moral universalism as such, it only shows the need to judge
universalism against its own ideals and force it to make clear its own unjustified
assumptions" (51). Women's work poses a particular problem for liberalism:
representing the private sphere that would protect some cultural practices and
relationships from political control or state interventions, private women's work
would need to be maintained as the foundation against which liberalism's
universalisms could be measured.10 At the same time, gender would need [End Page 34] to
disappear as an organizational principle that creates differential values in rights and
labor as women get absorbed into a broadened conception of abstract equal rights
and participation. 11 Makdisi shows that liberalism's narrative is being challenged by the
privatization of women in the neoliberal age . When the bombs come, Makdisi gathers her family
together, retrieves her children from the yard, and descends to the shelter in the garage, where she hunkers down

The exploding technologies

trap them inside, as the outside lots, streets, and neighboring residences crumble
and fall. Women's work that once indicated an outside to the institutionalization of
the public here exposes the demolition of its institutions. The situation that Makdisi describes
under the crashing debris of modern buildings in the heart of a modern city.

as the Lebanese civil war underscores a deep alienation that occurs in war as a result of a decline in politics that
war inflicts. I am reading this particular situation, however, as a broader metaphor of alienation, and particularly for

the regulatory public sector is

weakened in its efforts to bring productivity into line with public needs and
collective good, so that those needs fall onto individual responsibility and private
initiatives.
the type of alienation made prevalent under neoliberalism, where

Framework

2NC FW
Counter interpretation: The role of the ballot is to interrogate
knowledge produced in the round. Means you evaluate the
epistemic implications of the aff as a prior question.
1. Thats best for fairness- Its the only interp that grants
equal balance to the fiatted benefits of the aff arguments and
grants the neg good responses. Precluding feminist pedagogy
from the discussion closes off the ballot from discussion of
proper treatment of female bodies that are oppressed under
the plan.
2. Ground Gives the aff ground for fiat if they win the interp,
and lets the neg get equal ground.
3. Ks are a fundamental part of debate.
4. They should at least be prepared to defend their actor and
their actions, thats all our K does. Allowing patriarchy to
persist in exchange for solving for mundane impacts like
[INSERT THEIR IMPACTS HERE] is like voting for the KKK based
on their economic model.
5. Best for critical education Where else can we learn about
this? Debate space is the only place we can talk about the
state and reformulate ideas.
6. Teaches the most important skills for debate.
This turns all their education impact claims- be highly skeptical
of their evidence because patriarchy infects their authors
Evaluate the K as a prerequisite to the Aff. It challenges the
system and helps us to break it down. The alternative is
another means of solving for the impacts of the 1ac, just as
the aff would have to defend against a CP/DA, they should be
prepared to defend themselves against the k as well.

Fiat is Illusory
Fiat is illusory: we arent USFG policymakers, we are
intellectuals discussing ideas. The K solves absolutely the
same level as the plan. At the end of the round, we are faced
with the question of what we take away from the round. What
we really learn and take away from the round will be our
knowledge and understanding of debate and our ideas about
the world. Reject the assumptions of standardized debate, the
utilitarian framing of impacts and empirical body count are just
imperialist justifications for the system.

AT: Patriarchy Inevitable

1. The alt is vital to breaking down patriarchy--- it is only
entrenched in the status quo: their evidence doesnt assume
the alternative.
2. Patriarchy not inevitable- primates, cultural selection, and
improved female status prove
Hudson et al 9 (Valerie, Mary Caprioli, Bonnie Ballif-Spanvill, Rose McDermott,
Chad F. Emmett, Professor and George H.W. Bush Chair in the Bush School of
Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University, PhD and MA from the
University of Connecticut, The Heart of the Matter: The Security of Women and the
Security of States, International Security, Volume 33, Number 3, 2008/2009,
Accessed from Project Muse, pg 17-18)
Patriarchy and its attendant violence among human collectives are not inevitable ,
however; and this is not simply a politically correct viewit is the view of evolutionary theorists. As Wrangham and
Peterson note, Patriarchy is not inevitable. . . . Patriarchy emerged not as a direct mapping of genes onto behavior,
but out of the particular strategies that men [and women] invent for achieving their emotional goals. And the

We offer three reasons why male

dominance is not inevitable in human society. First, other primate groups, such as
bonobos, avoided it by developing strong female alliances male dominance is not order-wide
among primates. Second, cultural selection models natural selection through
engineering of social structures and moral sanctions. Examples include how socially
imposed monogamy, posited as leading to the depersonalization of power through
democracy and capitalism, helped to open the way for improved status for
women.32 Third, cultural selection for improved female status in many human
societies also changes females in both emotional and endocrinological ways, and
these changes have a good chance of being passed to their female offspring,
making them less likely to submit and yield to male coercive violence.33 This in turn
may serve to make female alliances against males more likely within such societies ,
strategies are highly oexible, as every different culture shows.31

providing an effective countervailing force to violent patriarchy. For example, Clarice Auluck-Wilson reports how one

the Mahila Mandal, was able to reduce domestic violence

by having all the women run as one to the home of any woman who was being
beaten by her husband and protecting her from further abuse. 34 The Mahila Mandal was
female village organization in India,

also able to force domestic abusers to temporarily leave the home for a cooling-off period, rather than the victim
having to leave her home.

By such collective action, levels of domestic violence against

women decreased.

3. The first step to breaking political hierarchies is by

disrupting key elements of male dominance
Hudson et al 9 (Valerie, Mary Caprioli, Bonnie Ballif-Spanvill, Rose McDermott,
Chad F. Emmett, Professor and George H.W. Bush Chair in the Bush School of
Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University, PhD and MA from the
University of Connecticut, The Heart of the Matter: The Security of Women and the
Security of States, International Security, Volume 33, Number 3, 2008/2009,
Accessed from Project Muse, pg 18-20)

Theories of political sociology underscore the view of evolutionary theorists that the legacy of violent patriarchy

The primal character of violent patriarchy

ensures that it becomes a template for broad classes of social behavior
specifically, those that concern social difference. Because human males, generally speaking,
comes to permeate all levels of social intercourse.

code the primal difference between male and female as a hierarchy in which the naturally selected goal is control

all those coded as different will be treated in

accordance with that template of control and domination: out-group males, outgroup females, and even in certain circumstances in-group males. Thus, the ultimate
and domination of the subordinate female,

causes posited by evolutionary theory are supplemented by more proximate causal mechanisms in the diffusion of

Theories of social diffusion are not alien to security

studies. Scholars in the field have investigated the relationship between the spread
of new forms of social relations, such as democracy, and resulting observable
differences in state security and behavior.35 Interestingly, several theorists believe that the rise of
these templates of domination and control.

democracy is rooted in the amelioration of violent patriarchy. For example, some have posited that the social
imposition of monogamy and later marriage for women (leading to a lessening of gender inequality) were
necessary, though not sufacient, conditions for the rise of democracy and capitalism in the West. 36

Breaking
key elements of male dominance hierarchies polygamy, patrilocality, early to
mid-teen marriage for females may have been the first, critical steps to
eventually breaking the political power of such hierarchies. Although in the initial
stages the rise of democracy did not facilitate womens political power, without an
adjustment in the fundamental character of male female relations, these scholars
assert that democracy may never have been a historical possibility for humans. And
as norms of democracy arose, the stage was set for women to achieve political power. If these theorists are correct,

levels of violence against women should be more predictive of state security

and peacefulness than levels of procedural democracy. In other words, in states where
then

democracy arose from within through the amelioration of gender inequality, we should and greater state security;

where democracy was imposed or veneered over systems where male-female

relations did not undergo fundamental transformation, we should not see as
significant differences in state security and peacefulness . Just as a proclivity toward
but

international peace in democratic societies is based, in part, on tolerance and a respect for the rights of

scholars might also contemplate that norms of gender-based violence

have an informatory impact on domestic and international behavior . For example, studies
opponents,37 so

have shown that if domestic violence is normal in family conoict resolution in a society, then that society is more
likely to rely on violent conoict resolution and to be involved in militarism and war than are societies with lower
levels of family violence.38 A vicious circle may result, where such state violence may in turn lead to higher levels
of gender violence.39

Indeed, lower levels of gender inequality hinder the ability of

societies to mobilize for aggression through demoralizing women .40 Johan Galtung, a
political scientist specializing in political sociology, offers two concepts that help explain how a generalized
ideological justiacation for violence is formed and diffuses throughout society: structural violence and cultural
violence.41 Galtungs conceptualization of structural violence paints a picture of pervasive and systematic
exploitation that makes open violence in the public sphere unnecessary The

amateur who wants to

dominate uses guns, the professional uses social structure.

AT: State Good

1. This is not about state good or state bad. This is a debate
about the representations of the 1AC--- and the public/private
framework upheld by the 1AC.
2. U.S. approaches to sexual violence is key to reform as it acts
as a model abroad, and reforms must be done void of state
action--- this alsoappliesto the perm
Bumiller 13 (Professor Kristen Bumiller, is a Professor of Political Science at
Amherst College, Edited by Aili Tripp, http://muse.jhu.edu/books/9780814770139
Gender Violence and Human Security. pg 192-193 //MV)
An evaluation of the American experience is all the more pressing as its distinctive
approach to addressing sexual violence is increasingly being exported abroad and
used instrumentally as part of security and human rights policy .Thecomplexdevelopmentofstrategies
tocombatviolenceagainstwomenintheUnitedStatesprovidesanexampleofthehazardsoftoomuchrelianceuponthestatetoaddresshumansecurityissues.A
historical analysis of policy responses to sexual vio- lence reveals how state-based
action has become more removed from and inconsistent with the initial goals of the
feminist movement. Whilethemovementwaslargelysuccessfulinputtingintoplacesocial,medical,andcriminaljusticeinterventions,
professionalsandbureaucratsunfamiliarwiththeaspirationsofthemovementoftencarryouttheseinterventions. As a result, other priorities
guiding state action usually prevail. These unanticipated outcomes in the United
States signal the critical importance of designing human security policies in other
con- texts that account for the dynamic and interlinking effects of powerful states. In
thischapterIbrieflydescribehowtherelationshipbetweenfeministactivistsandtheAmericanstateevolved,theconsequencesofthisallianceforcriminaljusticeand
socialpolicies,andtheimplicationsforfutureeffortstorespondtoviolenceagainstwomennationallyandinternationally.

AT: Cede the Political

1. Broadening the scope of politics is key to effective
engagement
Grondin 4 [David, master of pol sci and PHD of political studies @ U of Ottowa (Re)Writing the National
Security State: How and Why Realists (Re)Built the(ir) Cold War,
http://www.er.uqam.ca/nobel/ieim/IMG/pdf/rewriting_national_security_state.pdf]

A poststructuralist approach to international relations reassesses the nature of the political. Indeed, it calls for
the repoliticization of practices of world politics that have been treated as if they were not political. For instance,
limiting the ontological elements in ones inquiry to states or great powers is a political choice. As Jenny Edkins puts
it, we need to bring the political back in (Edkins, 1998: xii). For most analysts of International Relations, the
conception of the political is narrowly restricted to politics as practiced by politicians . However, from a
poststructuralist viewpoint, the political acquires a broader meaning, especially since practice is not what most
theorists are describing as practice. Poststructuralism sees theoretical discourse not only as discourse, but also as

Theory therefore becomes practice. The political space of poststructuralism is not that of
exclusion; it is the political space of postmodernity, a dichotomous one, where one thing always signifies at least one
thing and another (Finlayson and Valentine, 2002: 14). Poststructuralism thus gives primacy to the political, since it
acts on us, while we act in its name, and leads us to identify and differentiate ourselves from others. This political act
is never complete and celebrates undecidability, whereas decisions, when taken, express the political moment. It is
a critical attitude which encourages dissidence from traditional approaches (Ashley and Walker, 1990a and 1990b).
It does not represent one single philosophical approach or perspective, nor is it an alternative paradigm (Tvathail,
1996: 172). It is a nonplace, a border line falling between international and domestic politics (Ashley, 1989). The
poststructuralist analyst questions the borderlines and dichotomies of modernist discourses, such as inside/outside,
the constitution of the Self/Other, and so on. In the act of definition, difference thereby the discourse of otherness
is highlighted, since one always defines an object with regard to what it is not (Knafo, 2004). As Simon Dalby
asserts, It involves the social construction of some other person, group, culture, race, nationality or political system
as different from our person, group, etc. Specifying difference is a linguistic, epistemological and, most
importantly, a political act; it constructs a space for the other distanced and inferior from the vantage point of the
person specifying the difference (Dalby, cited in Tvathail, 1996: 179). Indeed, poststructuralism offers no definitive
political practice.

answers, but leads to new questions and new unexplored grounds. This makes the commitment to the incomplete
nature of the political and of political analysis so central to poststructuralism (Finlayson and Valentine, 2002: 15). As
Jim George writes, It is postmodern resistance in the sense that while it is directly (and sometimes violently)
engaged with modernity, it seeks to go beyond the repressive, closed aspects of modernist global existence. It is ,

not a resistance of traditional grand-scale emancipation or conventional radicalism imbued with authority
of one or another sovereign presence. Rather, in opposing the large-scale brutality and inequity in human society, it
is a resistance active also at the everyday, com- munity, neighbourhood, and interpersonal levels, where it
confronts those processes that systematically exclude people from making decisions about who they are and what
they can be (George, 1994: 215, emphasis in original). In this light, poststructural practices are used critically to
investigate how the subject of international relations is constituted in and through the discourses and texts of global
politics. Treating theory as discourse opens up the possibility of historicizing it. It is a myth that theory can be
abstracted from its socio-historical context, from reality, so to speak, as neorealists and neoclassical realists believe.
It is a political practice which needs to be contextualized and stripped of its purportedly neutral status. It must be
understood with respect to its role in preserving and reproducing the structures and power relations present in all
language forms. Dominant theories are, in this view, dominant discourses that shape our view of the world (the
therefore,

subject) and our ways of understanding it.

2. If you choose to interpret the ballot through the Affs impact

calculus, you are voting for an ethically wrong ideology that
chooses to see massive death counts over daily injustice and
oppression that women face when designated as the Other.

AT: Perm
1. Every link is a DA to the perm cross-apply all of our link
work here. Any allowances of patriarchy accepted through the
plan mean that patriarchy remains entrenched within our
current system and the impacts remain, any risk that they link
means they get voted down.
2. The alt has to be separated from the masculine institution of
the state to ensure that the oppression of the state does not
co-opt the feminist agenda. The states quest to sovereignty is
particularly problematic to the feminist advocacy because it
was perpetuated on the destruction and conquest of the Other.
Any power given to the state when adapting the feminist
agenda means that feminism will not be given the attention it
needs to end daily abuse.
3. The perm will never function
a) The alt breaks down the male institution that drives current
oppression--- including the masculine public sphere means
that we can never solve
b) The perm destroys any education coming from the round
because then this discussion becomes centered on how
patriarchy can sometimes be good the fact that they link
should be reason to vote them down already.
c) The permutation devolves into self-serving rationalizations
ethical compromises are unacceptable.
Lupisella & Logsdon 97 (Mark, masters degree in philosophy of science at
university of Maryland and researcher working at the Goddard Space Flight Center,
and John, Director, Space Policy Institute The George Washington University,
Washington, DO WE NEED A COSMOCENTRIC ETHIC?
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.25.7502)
a hybrid view combining homocentrism as applied to terrestrial
activity combined with biocentrism towards worlds with indigenous life .32 Invoking such
Steve Gillett has suggested

a patchwork of theories to help deal with different domains and circumstances could be considered acceptable and
perhaps even desirable especially when dealing with something as varied and complex as ethics. Indeed, it has a

instead of digging deeply into what is certainly a

legitimate epistemological issue, let us consider the words of J. Baird Callicott: But there is both
a rational philosophical demand and a human psychological need for a selfconsistent and all-embracing moral theory. We are neither good philosophers nor
whole persons if for one purpose we adopt utilitarianism, another deontology, a
third animal liberation, a fourth the land ethic, and so on. Such ethical eclecticism is
certain common sense appeal. However,

not only rationally intolerable, it is morally suspect as it invites the suspicion of ad

hoc rationalizations for merely expedient or self-serving actions. 33

More Ev
The masculinity has already been defined in the 1AC--- they
cannot simply add feminist perspectives
Peterson 05 (V Spike, Department of Political Science, University of Arizona,
Tucson; How (The Meaning of) Gender Matters in Political Economy, New Political
Economy 10.4 Dec //MV)
Making women empirically visible is thus an indispensable project. It inserts actual (embodied) women in our picture of economic
reality, exposes how women and men are differently engaged with and affected by political economy, and reveals women as agents

But adding women to existing

paradigms also raises deeper questions by exposing how the conceptual structures
themselves presuppose masculine experience and perspective. For example,
women/femininity cannot simply be added to constructions that are constituted as
masculine: reason, economic man, breadwinner, the public sphere. Either women as feminine cannot be
added (that is, women must become like men) or the constructions themselves are
transformed (namely, adding women as feminine alters their masculine premise and
changes their meaning). In this sense, the exclusions are not accidental or coincidental but required for the analytical
and activists, as well as victims of violence and the poorest of the poor.

consistency of reigning paradigms.10

This prevents alt solvency--- it overlooks how social systems

shape gender
Hondagneu-Sotelo 03 (Pierrette, Professor and Director of Graduate Studies
in the Department of Sociology at the University of Southern California, Gender and
U.S. immigration: contemporary trends, U Cal Press: Berkeley and Los Angeles //MV)
both "add and stir" and
"women only" efforts were often mired in some vari- ant of sex-role theory . In this view,
women's migration is explained with respect to "sex-role constraint," generally
understood to be a set of stable, freestanding insti- tutional practices and values
rather than a fluid and mutable system that intersects with other social institutions.
In the sex-role paradigm, separate spheres of public and private reign and men's and
women's activities are seen as complementary and functional, while the
manner in which these are relational, contested and negoti- ated, and
imbued with power, privilege, and subordination is glossed over . In retrospect, we
can see that the immigrant "women only" and "add and stir" approaches limit our
understanding of how gender as a social system shapes im- migration processes for
all immigrants, men and women. Only women, not migrant men, are marked as "gendered," and institutions with which they
interact family, education, and employment, etc/are presumed to be gender neutral . The preoccupation with
writing women into migration research and theory stifled the- orizing about the ways in
which constructions of femininities and masculinities organize migration and
migration outcomes.
Equally problematic, as Cynthia Cranford and I have pointed out elsewhere {1999),

Misc

Feminism is a prior question

The right to privacy cannot be obtained without a feminist
question status quo privacy rhetoric will always cause
oppression of women.
Lindgren 10 (Yvonne F. Lindgren, J.S.D. Candidate 2012, University of California,
Berkeley School of Law (Boalt Hall). ARTICLE: PERSONAL AUTONOMY: TOWARDS A
NEW TAXONOMY FOR PRIVACY LAW. Lexis. //MV)
Feminists have long criticized "privacy" as a concept steeped in the oppression of
women because it reinforces the status quo and fails to situate abortion in the
context of women's subordination. n235 The term "privacy" relies on a public/private
sphere dichotomy in which the world is divided into two spheres: the "private
sphere" of home and family, which should be free from state intervention, and the
"public sphere" of business and commerce, in which the state is involved . n236 The
separate-spheres ideology has historically been used to legitimize excluding women
from the public sphere because women were thought to be more intimately bound
to "private" sphere responsibilities, like giving birth and raising children . n237 The
liberal notion of a private sphere of home, family, intimacy, and childrearing free from
governmental intrusion relies on a premise that the actors have full rights to
exercise autonomy in the private sphere, and thereby fails to recognize women's
oppression. n238 The privacy paradigm is fundamentally flawed because it assumes
that individuals, regardless of gender, may exercise rights and autonomy within the
private sphere freely and equally. This liberal ideal of privacy fails to acknowledge
the fact that women do not have the guarantees of "individual bodily integrity,
personal [*482] exercise of moral intelligence, and the freedom of intimacy" upon
which a right of privacy is founded.

Privacy is fake silly

The right to privacy is a myth; it is impossible to discern the
personal from the political
Lever 05 (Annabell Lever is an Honorary Senior Fellow in the Philosophy
Department of University College London, and is working on a book on privacy for
Routledge. 2005. Feminism, Democracy, and Privacy. An Internet Journal of
Philosophy. Vol. 9. //MV)
the personal is political was, as well, a way of encapsulating womens
insights into the ways that these practices had been justified in the past, and into the
obstacles to overcoming them in the present. For it neatly and accurately summarised the idea not
only that women are victims of injustice, but that these injustices have political
causes, consequences and remedies, and should be treated as such. They have
political causes, because sexual inequality is not simply a personal misfortune that
falls from the sky, or the product of the personal deficiencies of particular women
and men, but the predictable, and sometimes intentional, result of the ways in
which societies distribute and justify power over others . But, once one grants the claim that the
personal is political, it is hard to see what the public/private distinction could be referring
to, or what could possibly by the point and justification of privacy rights . If the
personal identities, aspirations and relations of individuals are fundamentally shaped by political
factors, and have important political consequences, then normatively and empirically it will be hard
to determine what, if anything, is personal rather than political . These problems are
well illustrated by the limitations of contemporary justifications of privacy rights.
These limitations reflect the seemingly endless, and apparently irresolvable,
controversies amongst lawyers and legal theorists over Brandeis claim that common law protection for privacy is not
But the slogan that

reducible to torts against defamation, theft, misappropriation and misrepresentation.3 It dominates discussion of the extent to which
the US constitution supports a distinctive right to privacy that is not simply a right to marry, procreate and be free from certain ways
in which government can intimidate, threaten and demoralise its opponents.4 In each case, what is at issue is this: the coherence of
thinking that individuals have a distinctive set of interests that can count as privacy interests, and the justification for believing that,
so described, these interests merit legal protection by right. Similarly,

philosophers find it hard to explain

why individuals have a moral right to privacy let alone one that deserves
recognition and enforcement by law. At present, therefore, there is an unresolved
debate amongst moral philosophers about the best way to understand the content
and justification of privacy rights, and how far, if at all, these various solutions serve
to meet sceptical complaints that talk of privacy rights though, not necessarily, of other rights is
what Bentham so memorably referred to as nonsense upon stilts.5