Skip to content
June 5, 2013 / compassioninpolitics

How to answer “Speaking for Others” or Anti-essentialism Ks

• What would the alternative of necessity say about your opponents social location?
• Does the alternative coopt your solvency ever?
• I would question the idea of “the perfect narrative.” Its (an unending) quest for authenticity and “the real.” –which itself is a loaded term.
• The case turn argument is empirically disproven. Two vectors:
1) Cite historical examples.
2) Cite how their K turns the clock back.
3) Clarify what that would mean.

Read the “Speaking for Others” article (Alcoff is the author). It should be available online. It has at least 2 arguments I seem to remember, but mostly speaking for other key/good/inevitable.

You might also read critiques of anti-essentialism. The last part of “Feminist Legal Methods” by Bartlett goes through the 3 to 4 major branches of feminism and explains the some of the problems with each. Its available in PDF form online for free. I highly recommend skipping to the end. The whole article is probably 40 pages….the meat of the argument is at the end. Almost everything up to the end isn’t helpful for debate. There are sections on “Feminist conciousness raising good”–but you can pick that out fairly easily.

This article has two core things:
1) The critique of pomo feminism/anti-essentialist feminism
2) Positionality. Which is the permutation or the way you can frame your affirmative.

Then you get to compare. No narrative….versus.

Then you get your aff impacts versus the K. As long as you answer the core claims & case turn.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: