Summary

• Objects (0 modified, 0 added, 1 removed)
  • Caselist.CitesClass[12]

Details

Caselist.CitesClass[12]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,63 +1,0 @@
1		-=**~~#NoHetero**=
2		-==1AC==
3		-==== ~~Analytic/Narrative~~ ====
4		-
5		-==== ~~McGregory 14~~ The term "ally" has become a label for an identity rather than a goal, both on college campuses and off of them. The use of the word "ally" has come to pacify queer support. McGregory 14====
6		-~~McGregory, Aileen. "Queer Killjoys: Individuality, Niceness, and the Failure of Current Ally Culture." CiteSeerX. Pennsylvania State University, Apr. 2014. Web. 21 Dec. 2016.~~
7		-Later, as this thesis aims to demonstrate, "ally" has come to
8		-AND
9		-one would like to help, just not enough to actually do so.
10		-
11		-
12		-==== ~~McGregory 2~~ People need allies, but a revision of what that means is necessary to legitimate and create true allyship. McGregory 2====
13		-I have repeatedly expressed frustration with people who would claim to be my allies; none of the opinions I have just voiced are ones that had previously gone unmentioned. I am lucky to be in a place where I can feel safe doing so. But not everyone does; to not be able to ask to have one’s needs met by people whose presence is supposedly for one’s benefit- in other words, allies-seems not only to defeat their purpose. It is also a perpetuation of systematic inequalities when those who exercise power over those they are supposed to be allied to are enabled to continue calling themselves allies. Due to all of the problems I see in "my" allies, I have a great deal of motivation to do better when I attempt to act in solidarity with others. I try to listen, to defer to their expertise, to acknowledge my own privilege and work against it. But I do not always succeed. And I have been called out on this failure. Just last semester, I came out of a racially-charged classroom discussion and was told by another student, "I was looking at you because I wanted you to say something and you didn’t." This experience was difficult for me. But it was more difficult, I would presume, for my friend, who had had to listen to his peers say clearly racist things while no one flat out told them they were wrong and that they were being oppressive. Sometimes it is helpful for an ally to be the one to speak, rather than the one of only two black students in the class, who might have neither the energy nor the obligation to fight racism constantly. Sadly, too, the other white student may have seen me as more objective than a black student on matters of racism and thus listened more carefully to my opinion. However, I did not take my opportunity to exercise my privilege in a slightly more positive way. It’s not that I did not say anything, it’s that I did not say enough. And what is good enough is not for me to decide: he told me that it was not enough, so it was not enough. I needed to try harder. What happens in these moments is complex: I, in part, did not speak up because I did not want to speak over the students of color in the room. I never want to assume that my white voice is desired or helpful, and in my general understanding of allyship, this assumption is frequently one of the greatest flaws of self-described allies. Yet in this case, my wariness actually prevented me from responding to the needs of someone with whom I was supposed to be in solidarity. Fear of being a "bad ally" can be paralyzing. But still, the only option is to work harder to occupy useful positions as allies, knowing that the usefulness of our actions must be determined by those with whom we act in solidarity and in the context of those actions, not by our own self understandings. If I am to be an ally, I ~~one~~ must first recognize that it is not an identity, but a goal. This does not mean that I will never do the right thing or that I will never help. I simply mean to say that I can never accomplish allyship. Such work is never done, because allyship must always be relational. I am allied to someone. We cannot see ourselves as individuals, disconnected from other people who share our identities and our privileges, while those who are oppressed must be communities. I am implicated in white privilege, in the oppression of others, and in the failures of allies, both my own and those of others. I am guilty of letting people think that what they do is good enough, and of thinking that of myself. Allyship is not an individual endeavor, or a title one can bestow on oneself. It is necessarily relational and, for once, the usual hierarchy of knowledge and validation must be reversed to allow for the power to rest with those who are oppressed. For these reasons, I hold this project close to my heart, as allyship is an issue that profoundly and directly affects my life. My lack of objective removal from the topic does not, however, prevent my ability to study it. Rather, I would prefer to think that my connection enhances and even helps to legitimate my work, as I am not speaking over others, or at least no more than is unavoidable. All of the sites in which I conducted my research were ones that I was familiar with before I officially began this project. Part of my understanding of ally culture, and reactions to it, is due to my personal immersion into this process. One does not enter into such a project- or into allyship- without an emotional connection. But an emotional connection, on its own, is not enough. It was in part due to this that I have completed this project: simply feeling badly about current forms of allyship does not accomplish what I hope to accomplish here. Instead, I hope to point to more specific, but also more systematic problems, in order to draw out how the bigger conflicts and moments of "bad allyship" become possible and even defendable. I do this not because I believe that there is something wrong with wanting to help create change, or greater equality, but rather because I believe that in order for these goals to be truly achievable they must be approached in a different way. I hope this thesis might provide some critical ground for rethinking allyship.
14		-
15		-
16		-==== ~~McGregory 3~~ Neoliberal discourse directs our attention to homonormative politics where the queer individual is forced to consign to norms set out by and validated by so-called "allies" and attempts to question these hierarchies are met with opposition. This actualizes into a new closet for queer people. McGregory 3====
17		-As I described above, neoliberalism as a cultural formation has shifted LGBT ~~queer~~ politics away from liberation and towards a politics of homonormativity: visibility, assimilation, and sameness. Visibility acclimatizes more of the dominant group to the existence of LGBT ~~queer~~ people, serving to normalize them. According to Yuvraj Joshi, visibility is crucially connected to respectability politics, as "public recognition of gay people and relationships is contingent upon their acquiring a respectable social identity" (Joshi 2012 417). Visibility, respectability, and normalization are intertwined: in order for visibility to be valuable, it must make acceptance seem appealing to the mainstream. This is done by presenting a normalized, respectable image of LGBT ~~queer~~ people (or perhaps just gay and lesbian people). As Lisa Duggan (2003), Jose Munoz (2009), and others have argued, the homonormative platforms of the LGBT ~~queer~~ movement have met a certain success in the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and the growth of marriage equality in the United States. So, for example, the assimilationist aims of the current mainstream LGBT ~~queer~~ movement focus primarily around marriage. Often, discourse promoting marriage utilizes an understanding of LGBT ~~queer~~ people as normal, or as the same as straight, cisgender people, with similar life goals and desires for the same kind of nuclear family structure. As Joshi argues, "since the late 1970s, there has been a paradigm shift within queer politics in which equality politics have eclipsed liberation politics. Legal recognition of same-sex relationships has become heralded as the final frontier of queer politics" (Joshi 2012 416). In this model, allies become important to the LGBT ~~queer~~ movement: cisgender, heterosexual people who "ally with" the LGBT ~~queer~~ movement can serve to validate the normality or sameness of LGBT ~~queer~~ people. Indeed, it is the visibility and the support of allies, regardless of their political action, that is imagined to advance the LGBT ~~queer~~ cause. Additionally, a neoliberal understanding of the individual assumes that everyone can assimilate as a market citizen, and that this is the most crucial step towards freedom and equality. The application of market logic in terms of practicality and mass marketing fosters the current emphasis on visibility and market presence as tools toward LGBT ~~queer~~ equality, where equality might be imagined to be achieved through good consumer citizenship. However, such visibility politics, connected with normalization and assimilation, ignore the ways in which "the cost of being folded into life might be quite steep, both for the subjects who are interpellated by or aspire to the tight inclusiveness of homonormativity offered in this moment, and for those who decline or are declined entry due to the undesirability of their race, ethnicity, religion, class, national origin, age, or bodily ability" (Puar 2007, 10, see also Foucault 1979, 187).
18		-Continues
19		-those who "fight fire with fire," who respond to negativity (
20		-AND
21		-cheek:" to be "nice," non-judgmental, and understanding.
22		-
23		-==== ~~Analytic~~ ====
24		-==== ~~Analytic~~ ====
25		-
26		-
27		-==== ~~McGregory 4~~ I stand in affirmation of the enactment of the queer killjoy (modeled after Sara Ahmed’s "feminist killjoy"), creating a starting point for inclusion that allows queer and all marginalized groups to join the conversation. My method of engagement counters preconceived roles of queer people through self-empowerment and calls to anger at the collective wrong doings of the systems. We must rage against sustained signs of normalcy even if it means laying our bodies on the line. McGregory 4====
28		-Sara Ahmed writes about the "feminist killjoy," who refuses to orient herself towards a normative happiness. Rather than creating negativity or killing happiness, however, Ahmed suggests that the killjoy merely reveals it and puts it in the open. She asks: Does bad feeling enter the room when somebody expresses anger about things, or could anger be the moment when the bad feelings that circulate through objects get brought to the surface in a certain way? The feminist subject "in the room" hence "brings others down" not only by talking about unhappy topics such as sexism but by exposing how happiness is sustained by erasing the signs of not getting along. (Ahmed 2010b, 66) In this analysis, "getting along" is key to happiness, which relies on not "bringing others down" by discussing sexism, for example. Ahmed’s work reveals the ways that those who experience oppression are both more likely to be unhappy (feel "out of place") and will be blamed for their own and others’ unhappiness if they reveal the ways in which they and their oppressors are "not getting along." Although this means that it is difficult to reveal such affective tension, the revelation of negativity can both unite communities and allow for a reorientation away from conventional happiness. As Deborah Gould writes, "the ability to evoke affective states and emotions, as well as to establish and enforce norms about feelings and their expressions- the power of an emotional habitus- is a dimension of power that we tend to overlook" (Gould 2009 40). Those who can dictate acceptable and desirable feelings, and can proceed to police the tones and expressions of others, have a great deal of power, as such affect shapes both actual actions and what actions are thinkable. However, Gould also more hopefully claims that affect also "has the potential to escape social control, and that quality creates greater space for counterhegemonic possibilities and for social transformation" (Gould 2009 39). Despite the existence of emotional habitus, or sets of norms, there is still the potential for affect that eludes this structure, or subverts norms and works towards changing current emotional and social orders. Histories of unhappiness can similarly spark social movement and situate these bad feelings within larger structures that contribute to them. Heather Love writes, "tarrying with this negativity is crucial; at the same time, the aim is to turn grief into grievance – to address the larger social structures, the regimes of domination, that are at the root of such pain" (Love 2007 151). In what follows, I focus on negativity and positivity as two poles of political affect at work in ally culture. I aim to illustrate that policing negativity- through what is called "derailing" or through accusations of "straight hate"- is one way that the political power of ally and LGBT ~~queer~~ movements is flattened. At the same time, the 14 critiques of ally culture online reveal some of the political potential of negativity – as a way to challenge the discourse of positivity, individuality, and tolerance that depoliticizes LGBT ~~queer~~-ally relationships and rejects critical engagement.
29		-
30		-
31		-==== ~~Copenhaver 14~~ The 1AC is an embodiment of the queer killjoy and exemplification of queer rage, my rage that is critical to challenge all forms of oppression. My experiences as a cis, able bodied Indian queer person of color differs from other bodies, but rage translates into accessibility - we engage in a new world where everyone can use anger that tears at the walls of normalcy. Queer rage is beautiful and energizing. It demands change. Copenhaver 14====
32		-~~Robert Copenhaver identified as a Queer person of faith, graduate of Idaho State University, whose interests include queer theory, politics, and theology. He will be starting a masters in theological studies at The Lutheran School of Theology at Chicago next fall; "Queer Rage"; published 2/19/14; http://coperoge.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/queer-rage/~~
33		-I hate straight people who can’t listen to queer anger without saying "hey,
34		-AND
35		-in which anti-queerness continue to perpetuate violence against queer bodies everywhere.
36		-
37		-
38		-==== ~~ROTB~~ Thus, the role of the ballot is to endorse the best strategy to disrupt normalcy.====
39		-
40		-==== ~~Analytic~~ ====
41		-==== ~~Analytic~~ ====
42		-==== ~~Analytic~~ ====
43		-==== ~~Analytic~~ ====
44		-
45		-
46		-==== ~~Vaccaro 12~~ Debate matters. This is the training ground for people who end up in positions of power in business, academia, and politics – we need to hold people accountable in debate or else we’ll reproduce the squo structures of domination. Classrooms, such as the debate space, create a unique pedagogical experience where ideologies of queer identities can change. Vaccaro et. al. 12 ====
47		-~~(Annemarie (Department of Human Development and Family Studies at the University of Rhode Island), Gerri August (Department of Educational Studies at Rhode Island College), and Megan S. Kennedy (faculty member in the Department of Education at Westfield State University,). Inside the Classroom Walls, Chapter 5, pg 83-84) SK~~
48		-Classroom walls create an impression of dichotomy—the academic arena within, the personal
49		-AND
50		-progresses as young people move through our educational system—kindergarten through college.
51		-
52		-
53		-==== ~~Mary Nardini Gang 09~~ Being queer is social death and societal exile – society is normal while queer is the abnormal. Queer life becomes queer death because it is always against society. Mary Nardini Gang 09====
54		-~~Criminal queers from Milwaukee, Wisconsin "toward the queerest insurrection" 2009~~
55		-In the discourse of queer, we are talking about a space of struggle against
56		-AND
57		-details were all inter-related, had a meaning: my exile."
58		-
59		-
60		-==== ~~Analytic~~ ====
61		-
62		-
63		-==== ~~Advocacy~~ Thus, I DEMAND that public universities and colleges in the United States not restrict any constitutionally protected speech.====

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-2017-03-06 04:50:32.0

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Matt Delateur

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Harker RJ

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-16

Round

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-2

Team

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Quarry Lane Karavadi Aff

Title

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-NoHetero AC

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,0 @@
1		-Golden Desert