1

AC (relevant cards left with full text )

Women are caught like this, too, by networks of forces and barriers that expose one to penalty, loss or contempt, whether one works outside the home or not, is on welfare or not, bears children or not, raises children or not, marries or not, stays
married or not, is heterosexual, lesbian, both, or neither. Economic necessity; confinement to racial and/or sexual job ghettos; sexual harassment; sex discrimination; pressures of competing expectations and judgments about women, wives and mothers (in the society at large, in racial and ethnic subcultures, and in one s own mind!; dependence (full or partial! on husbands, parents or the state; commitment to political ideas; loyalties to racial or ethnic or other "minority# groups; the demands of self$respect and responsibilities to others.

&nd nipping at one s heels, always, is the endless pack of little things. 'f one dresses one way, one is subject to the assumption that one is advertising one s sexual availability; if one dresses another way, one appears to "not care about oneself# or to be "unfeminine.# 'f one uses "strong language,# one invites categori%ation as a whore or slut; if
Each of these factors exists in complex tension with every other, penali%ing or prohibiting all of the apparently available options. one does not, one invites categori%ation as a "lady# ( one too delicately constituted to cope with robust speech or the realities to which is

!he experience of oppressed people is that the living of one"s life is confined and shaped by forces and barriers which are not accidental or occasional and hence avoidable, but are systematically related to each other in such a way as to catch one between and among them and restrict or penali#e motion in any direction$ %t is the experience of being caged in& all avenues, in every direction, are blocked or booby trapped. Cages$ Consider a birdcage$ %f you look very closely at 'ust one wire in the cage , you cannot see the other wires. 'f your conception of what is before you is determined by this myopic focus, you could look at that one wire, up and down the length of it, and unable to see why a bird would not 'ust fly around the wire any time it wanted to go somewhere. )urthermore, even if one day at a time, you myopically inspected every wire, you still could not see why a bird would have trouble going past the wires to get anywhere. *here is no physical property of any one
presumably refers. wire, nothing that the closest scrutiny could discover, that will reveal how a bird could be inhibited or harmed by it except in the most accidental way. %t

is only when you step back, stop looking at the wires one by one, microscopically and take a macroscopic view of the whole cage, that you can see why the bird does not go anywhere( and then you will see it in a moment. 't will re+uire no great subtlety of mental powers . %t is perfectly obvious that the bird is surrounded by a network of systematically related barriers, no one of which would be the least hindrance to its flight, but which, by their relations to each other, are as confining as the solid walls of a dungeon$ ()$)*)
[Frye, Marilyn. Former professor of philosophy at Michigan State University and feminist theoriest The Politics of Reality: essays in feminist theory. Crossing Press. 1983.]

!he resolution asks us a +uestion about the specifics of democracy$ !he problem is that democracy has never existed$ !he feminine and the individuals that symboli#e it are always already excluded from the political calculations of democracy$ !he nature of democracy is a prior +uestion to the debate they want to have$ ,ickers -. /,ickers, 0ill PhD, professor of political science at Carleton University$ When Women Are Allies& Can We 1ake 2Women34riendly" 5emocracies 6ut of 7atriarchal 8ation39tates: $ ;--.$< !he millennia3long link between states and systematic male dominance (patriarchy) legitimi#ed women"s exclusion from governing and citi#enship to Enlightenment$influenced founders of the first modern nation$states. 7olitical theorists defended women"s exclusion (,ahl -./.; 0endus -..1; 2ickers -..3!. &lthough women s movements successfully challenged their exclusion from citi%enship, women"s marginali#ation in most democratic governments persists$ !his under3representation of half of each democracy"s citi#ens threatens democracy"s legitimacy as a just system of government because it is combined with women"s greater poverty, unemployment and

physical safety$ !his has led many feminist theorists to declare democracy a false faith (0edus -..1!. 4arole 5ateman maintains democracy never existed because women have never been admitted as full and e+ual members in any country known as a 2democracy" # (-./.61-7!.
*hese theorists generali%e experiences in the least 8women$friendly , 8old 8democracies, especially the 9nited :tates, )rance and the 9nited ;ingdom. <ut they are silent on any lessons we might learn from more 8women friendly governments. ' compare ten 8western democracies from to determine if the factors which lessen women s marginali%ation and make some governments more 8women$friendly are uni+ue, or if they can be replicated elsewhere.

!his makes the +uestion of the resolution a sort of cruel 'oke$ !his thing known as democracy is, in and of itself, a form of structural violence rigged against females from the beginning because citi#enship and government processes are constructed in a masculine light, and everything else follows from that construction$ !he foundation of the political is in the social, so all change must begin in a restructured view of social relations 1a#urana and 1c=ay -)
=0a%urana, ,yan associate research professor at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy; Tufts University research director of gender, youth and community at the Fenstein International Center; Cathy Cohen Lasry visiting professor of comparative genocide studies at the Strassler Center for olocaust and !enocide Studies. 0c;ay, :usan professor of gender and women"s studies at the University of #yoming . ">omen, ?irls, and :tructural 2iolence6 & ?lobal &nalysis#. 5g -@7$-@/ish. $eace, Conflict % &iolence. ;--).A 5olitics and legal systems in non$democratic countries often maintain and perpetuate structural, as well as direct, violence. 4onse+uently, many liberation struggles are fought to enact changes towards democratic systems. >ith the collapse of the Eastern <loc and the :oviet 9nion, and struggles for independence and justice throughout &frica and Batin &merica, the world has recently seen an unprecedented number of emerging democracies. 9nfortunately,

democratic systems also have ways of perpetuating structural violence, wherein women and minorities are particularly impacted$ ,espite the potential of democratic governance, patriarchal structural violence is often embedded in democracy. 'n the eighteenth century, democracy meant
not merely a form of government but a principle of social e+uality (&rblaster, -./3!. Cowever, even the most vocal advocates of social e+uality in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries could only ever conceive of e+uality among propertied white men. 'ndeed, "it was their interests that government had been created to serve,# and the idea that men could and should represent women was widely accepted and promoted (5hillips,

Citi#enship was created in the male image . Even today, democracy as a political ideology too often normali#es the male image as citi#en and encourages other to deny aspects of themselves to conform to some unitary norm, which itself was never gender3 neutral. )or example, many :outh &frican feminists working in the early -..7s to reconstruct their nation were acutely aware that " the universal standing in society which we have been fighting for is that of a 2being with masculine characteristics engaging in masculine activities (<a%illi, -..-, p. --!. 4learly, the gendering of democracy and citi#enship must be on the agenda if women are to truly benefit from democratic systems of governance$ !he male bias inherent in (patriarchal! democracy has led to forms of patriarchal structural violence that relegate women"s issues to the private realm where they become private matters that the state does not address $ *his bias is perhaps nowhere clearer
-..1, p. 1D!.
than in the issue of domestic violence, where male bias greatly impairs the ability of police, judges, and lawmakers from recogni%ing the violent behavior in the family. "*he view that 8as a family matter battery is less important, is based on men s, not women s perceptions# (0urray E F Geagan, -..-, p. HD!. *he multiple forms of domestic violence that women suffer have profound physical and psychological effects (Cerman, -..1; ;elly, -..@!, prompting international calls for domestic violence to be recogni%ed as a form of torture (4opelon, -..@!. ?overnmental support of patriarchal structural violence through its attention to "private# matters is apparent throughout the world. 9ntil -..-, the murder of a wife in <ra%il was legal ( it was considered an honor killing and was done to preserve the family s honor because of a woman s transgression. 'n many areas of the world, men are free to rape their wives with no threat of legal repercussion (0etrus, -..D!. Fther examples of government$sponsored patriarchal structural violence include laws and systems that condone particular forms of violence against women, deny women control over their bodies, provide no assistance with child care and maternity leave, make no attempt to remedy child support defaults, and fail to provide unemployment protection to women who work within the "private# realm in domestic service or

governments rarely address patriarchal structural violence or fight for women"s rights, progress for women is largely made by women working for the recognition and enforcement of women s
farm work (>aring -.//; 0urray E F Geagan, -..-!. <ecause

reights.

&s a result, in countries such as &ustralia, <ra%il, <ritain, 4olumbia, 'ndia, :ri Banka, and the 9nited :tates, violence against women in the home has been identified and some forms of it criminali%ed ()ineman E 0ykitiuk, -..H!. >omen must actively participate in creating, executing, and enforcing the laws (Iama, -..-!. )eminists continually acknowledge the necessary steps between theory and practice, urging that action must follow criti+ues and recommendations. & law may concede a right to freedom from violence, decent health care, legal representation, a clean environment, or a living wage, but if the state refuses to fund or enforce these politics then the

. !he +uestion then becomes, to what extent do women have access to, and control over, the state, its policies, /and< laws , and coffersJ >elative to the proportion of the population they comprise, women are consistently underrepresented , not absent from positions of
right exists only on paper (<a%illi, -..-!

political power, all over the world. )or example, only recently has women s representation at the national level in the 9nited :tates climbed to -- percent, ranking it will below :eychelles (HK percent!, )inland (@.
percent!, Lorway (@K percent!, :weden (@H percent!, 4uba (1@ percent!, 4hina (1- percent!, and others, and about on par with &ngola (-D percent!, and 'taly (-@ percent!, both of whose proportions of women in parliament recently

, when women are elected and given cabinet posts, their appointments tend to be in the more femini#ed (and devalued) arenas of family or community concerns, and not in the more masculini#ed, powerful, and prestigious
fell by D percent to reach these numbers. 'n &ustralia , 4osta Gica, and ?reece, as elsewhere

departments of finance, treasury, foreign affairs, and defense (>atson, -..7!. 9uch consistent underrepresentation of women in the upper3levels of government cannot be accidental (5hillips,
-..-!. Bikewise, in the newly democratic nations of East 4entral Europe, "women s citi%enship rights are deemed to be of secondary importance in the current democrati%ation process# (Einhorn, -..@, p. -H.!. Lot only are women forced to take a back seat, but the total number of women in governmental positions is dramatically decreasing because there are no longer party +uotas that specify how many women should hold office. 'n former socialist

women are almost completely invisible at the highest levels of government, and at the parliamentary level little discussion takes place about the protection or enhancement of women"s rights (Einhorn, -..@; Genne, -..3!. !he exclusion of women from national decision3making bodies is a form of patriarchy $ !he men who benefit from their monopoly on power often meet challenges to the status +uo of government power with strong resistance$ )or example, the women s movement in 'ndia has been pushing for a bill to
parliaments, where women once occupied up to @7 percent of the seats, they now hold as little as 3 percent in the new democratic parliaments as a result

set a +uota of @7 percent for women s representation at the national level. Fn Muly -D, -../, it appeared the bill s supporters had the two$thirds majority needed to pass, and supportive women members of parliament (05s! attempted to bring it to a vote. Fpposing male =members of parliamentA 05s caused such disruptions, including grabb=edAing the bill from the speaker s hand and =toreA tearing it up, that the seaker shelved it for a later vote. :upporters of the bill protested, and failing, tried to have a date set for the bill to be reintroduced ,but the speaker would not recogni%e the women 05s. >hen a male 05 supporter tried to push the case, he was beaten by opposing male =parliament membersA 05s, removed from the floor by security officers, and taken away bleeding in an ambulance (:ullivan, -../!. 'n this case and others, supporters

of a patriarchal status +uo literally fight to keep women out$

Electing women who will strive for women s

empowerment by dismantling patriarchal structures and effectively participate in government is a necessary, though not sufficient, condition .

1ale bias in political structures also perpetuates obstacles to women"s political involvement based on access to and control of wealth, sexual divisions of labor in the household, divisions of public and private, and a lack of governmental programs to support working mothers .
'n the highest levels of government, such obstacles include, but are not limited to, working hours, the conditions of assemblies and councils and, particularly in the 9nited :tates, the financial burden of running for election (where the average 9.:. :enate seat now costs five million dollars!.

5iscrimination that limits women from political participation is a form of patriarchal structural violence against women, and these barriers should be addressed and removed by the state. While governmental efforts are critical, the civil and domestic spheres must be challenged as well$ ?ecause constraints on women"s political activity result from psychosocial, economic, and political structures, e+ual representation in legislature or parliament without considerable transformation in social relations is impossible (5hillips, -..-!. >ather than follow the resolution"s un+uestioning acceptance of the norm of democracy and the masculine trends it protects, % advocate that as a prere+uisite to evaluating any specific of democracy, the 'udge and all in the room must first take a metaphorical step back to see all wires of the bird cage and understand the hegemonic structures in work to liberate the feminine discourse which has always been marginali#ed and excluded$$ !he way we view the world and its connection to both the masculine and the feminine is directly dependent upon how we speak about these issues$ 1etaphor has the power to undermine hegemonic structures and restructure the social through the act of experience taking$ =aufman );
=;aufman, ?eoff ) $ostdoctoral researcher in psychology; $hD and '( in psychology from )hio State University and *( in psychology from Carnegie 'ellon University Bibby, Bisa ; (ssociate professor of psychology at )hio State University . "4hanging<eliefs and <ehavior *hrough Experience$*aking.# +ournal of $ersonality and Social $sychology, $syc(rticles, ;-);.A *he present findings define experience3taking

/is defined< as a mechanism by which narratives can

&L, and the lives we lead in the worlds of narratives$

!his is the only way to prevent violence as a product of the ideology of the resolution$ !he idea of a single, definable, static political, or a single, static idea of democracy is exactly what led to the marginali#ation of women and the minority 6ther in the first place$ 4ailure to +uestion the language and intent of the resolution results in xenoph'obic violence and domination 0unn @A
=Munn, Mane associate professor of political science at -utgers. ">omen *ransforming 5olitics6 &n &lternative Geader ( &ssimilating or 4oloring 5articipationJ ?ender, Gace, and ,emocratic 5olitical 5articipation#. 5g @/3ish. ./U $ress. )@@A.A the justification of more participation works if and only if two critical assumptions are met. )irst, more participation can help eradicate the ideology of domination only if the structures and institutions of democracy are indeed neutral $ *hat is, for democracy to be better with more participation, the process itself must not favor some group or ideology. :econd, more

participation can help eradicate the ideology of domination only if the common understanding of agency and citi#enship is fluid( the conception of democracy cannot uphold some a priori static definition of the model citi#en $ Competing visions of citi%enship must be recogni#ed and embraced, and the construction of the meaning of political being must reflect the composition of all within the political community, including those who differ systematically from the already existing cultural norm$ &s such, democracy cannot re+uire assimilation to the current model; rather, the conception of the democratic citi%en must itself be colored by the diversity of the population. >hy are these two assumptions necessary in order for more participation to be goodJ %f either assumption /this< is not met, more participation works in exactly the opposite direction from which it is intended$ %nstead of eradicating domination, more participation amid structures and institutions of democracy that replicate the already existing domination in society and economy will only reinforce and legitimate it. likewise, more participation in a polity where norms are constructed from a static conception of the political being forces groups who are different to choose between assimilation or existence. 'nstead of participation coloring democracy with a range of shades of
diversity, the static understanding of agency and citi%enship re+uires assimilating to the already existing norm. *hus, if either assumption of neutrality or fluidity is violated, more participation will reinforce and legitimate, rather than eradicate, domination as it already exists. Fne way to evaluate the extent to which these assumptions are realistic in the 9nited :tates is to examine data about the "actually existing democracy.# >omen, especially women of color, need look no further than our own experiences in political, social, and economic life to illustrate the fallacy

the master"s tools will never dismantle the master"s house$ %nsofar as it is true that neither neutrality nor fluidity is present in American democracy, more participation by women ( and in particular, more political activity among women of color ( will not necessarily have its intended conse+uences$
of both of the assumptions. &s &udre Borde observed,

!o win their fairness or education impacts they must weigh them against the marginali#ation of the feminine( the only way to reflect on and reduce the causes and conse+uences of structural violence is to engage in conversation about such problems$ Abstract debate about the resolution or a plan for some government policy does nothing$ 4urther, having a values debate before recogni#ing the importance of structural violence is moot because structural violence causes us to divide others into categories that are worthy and unworthy of our values, making them meaningless$

Winter and Beighton

,eborah ,uLann >inter and ,ana 4. Beighton. >inter6 5sychologist that speciali%es in :ocial 5sych, 4ounseling 5sych, Cistorical and 4ontemporary 'ssues, 5eace 5sychology. Beighton6 5h, graduate student in the 5sychology ,epartment at the 9niversity of &rkansas. ;nowledgable in the fields of social psychology, peace psychology, and ustice and intergroup responses to transgressions of justice! (5eace, conflict, and violence6 5eace psychology in the 1-st century. 5g H$D!

)inally, to recogni#e the operation of structural violence forces us to ask +uestions and normal social cognition) which feed structural violence, can also be used to empower citi#ens to reduce it$

&L,

This is specifically true in the context of patricharchy. The masculine fantasy is selfjustifying and it is our compliance that allows it to live on. Its the 21st century issues of structural violence against female bodies still exist for a reason, and that is because they are hidden. To have any effect we must shake up the system, refuse to participate, and dismantle it. Lazar 07
=Ba%ar, 0ichelle 0. (ssociate professor of 0nglish language % literature at .ational University ofSingapore, ")eminist 4ritical ,iscourse &nalysis6 &rticulating a )eminist ,iscourse 5raxis#. Critical Discourse Studies &ol 1 Issue 2, Taylor % Francis, ;--A.A *o claim that patriarchal gender ideology is structural is to say that it is enacted and renewed in a societyCs &L, government (Ba%ar, -..@, 1777!, and various professional and organi%ational settings (Ehrlich,177-; >alsh, 177-; >est, -..7; >odak, 177D!.

!his is why my impacts come first$ 7atriarchy in the realm of the social sets the foundation for governmental systems grounded in masculine representations$ %t lies at the root cause of all forms of violence, totalitarianism, and exclusion, threatening humanity itself Crane -@ /Crane, 9amantha JD$ ?ook >eview& !he 5eepening 5arkness& 7atriarchy, >esistance, D 5emocracy"s 4uture $ Harvard Law School$ ;--@$<
?illigan and Gichards s thesis is ambitious. ,rawing on an analysis of history, psychology, and literature, the authors argue that

patriarchal norms in the private sphere, such as sexual repression and family hierarchy, are the mechanisms by which patriarchy"s more public manifestations, such as violence and social ine+ualities, are perpetuated.1 *hus, patriarchy is not merely a matter of ine+uality between the sexes, but rather a broad3reaching social mechanism that perpetuates other social and political ine+ualities, and stifles dissenting calls for e+uality.@ 5rospective autocrats, from &ugustus 4aesar to the 4atholic
4hurch to domineering fathers across societies, achieve moral dominion over others by breaking up loving relationships, especially those that are

individuals suffer emotional disruption, including alienation from one"s own voice and memory, and loss of the ability to empathi#e with others. *his alienation is "covered# by identification with the abuserNbe it the :tate, the 4hurch, or the fatherNand its value system,D a loss of ethical independence that the authors refer to as moral slavery.#K !he disruption and identification with those in power prime individuals for life within an autocratic, militaristic, and male3dominated society& their loyalty to the state and loss of ethical independence makes them ideal soldiers, stifles any dissenting voice they may have, and enables them to perpetuate their condition by sacrificing their own children to the same traumatic process.3 0oreover, patriarchal norms themselves favor autocracy over democracyN
sexual in nature.H *hese traumatic breaks have two related conse+uences. )irst, democracy "defines legitimate politics in terms of the e+ual voice of those subject to political power,# whereas patriarchy favors hierarchical

to frame patriarchy as a political issue, rather than merely as a domestic or personal one, that harms both men and women.
structures that deny and suppress resisting voices./ *he ,eepening ,arkness takes care )or example, ?illigan and Gichards stress that "=iAt is important to take seriously the suffering that patriarchy inflicts on men as well as women, in particular, highly sensitive, ethically demanding men who experience sex under its terms as lacking the companionship they associate with friendship and the affection of e+uals.#. ?illigan and Gichards s feminist project is not simply about increasing women s power (at the implicit expense of men!, but about more profoundly altering how power works in society. ,espite the passion with which the authors denounce patriarchy, their theory is refreshingly situationist6-7

the root of violence, totalitarianism, and

unfair discrimination lies not in the scheming minds of an evil misogynist, racist, totalitarian cabal, they claim, but in trauma caused by social institutions, particularly the "Bove Baws# that "constrain whom and how much we may love.#-- *hus, the book s treatment of some of the architects of patriarchal norms and institutions, from
&ugustus to 0ussolini, is very humani%ing.