Tournament: UMKC | Round: 2 | Opponent: Kansas HW | Judge: Haynal
Haunting1AC

“I want a dyke for president. I want a person with AIDS for president and I want a fag for vice president and I want someone with no health insurance and I want someone who grew up in a place where the earth is so saturated with toxic waste that they didn’t have a choice about getting leukemia.

I want a president that had an abortion at sixteen and I want a candidate who isn’t the lesser of two evils and I want a president who lost their last lover to AIDS, who still sees that in their eyes every time they lay down to rest, who held their lover in their arms and knew they were dying. I want a president with no air conditioning, a president who has stood on line at the clinic, at the DMV, at the welfare office and has been unemployed and laid off and sexually harassed and gay-bashed and deported.

I want someone who has spent the night in the tombs and had a cross burned on their lawn and survived rape. I want someone who has been in love and been hurt, who respects sex, who has made mistakes and learned from them. I want a black woman for president. I want someone with bad teeth and an attitude, someone who has eaten that nasty hospital food, someone who cross dresses and has done drugs and been in therapy.

I want someone who has committed civil disobedience. And I want to know why this isn’t possible. I want to know why we started learning somewhere down the line that a president is always a clown: always a john and never a hooker. Always a boss and never a worker, always a liar, always a thief and never caught.”
Zoe Leonard wrote this and distributed it during the 1992 Presidential election cycle, during the height of the AIDS crisis. The rhetoric of assimilation would soon drag queerness far underground as we were carefully and deliberately taught to hate our fabulous selves. This assimilation means destruction for all queer bodies.

Even when I was 16 years old I knew that identifying as queer would be death for me.  My family reinforced over and over again how evil those queers were.  At school it was even worse I saw how they treated the one out boy in my class and even though he was my friend I didn’t want to be treated the way they treated him.  I closeted myself to avoid the body blows after school, the looks of absolute abjection, and how other boys saw him as a monster.

Nick was my friend but I was too scared to be seen with him, because if I was then I might have been outed and been forced to suffer the same the same violence that he did.

In 2004 Matilda Sycamore explains

Assimilation is violence, not just the violence of cultural erasure, but the violence of stepping on anyone who might get in the way of your upward mobility.

This violence for Nick reached its finale when two weeks before his sixteenth birthday he went to a doctor and found out he had HIV.  He decided that he couldn’t live with this and ended his life with the business end of his fathers shotgun, living with HIV was too much for him to handle, he didn’t want his parents to have to have a child with HIV.

Sycamore continues

this false dichotomy serves gay assimilationists as well, by silencing queers who threaten the power that lies behind their sweatshop-produced nylon rainbow flags. When gay assimilationists dutifully affirm, over and over again, to fanatics who want them dead, that of course gay identity is not a choice, because who would choose it, they unwittingly expose the tyranny of simplistic identity politics.

I refused to be seen with him for fear of the things that would happen to me as a result of being associated with a queer, because as I had so clearly seen to do so for me would be death.

Sycamore concludes  

Assimilation means erasure: a ravenous gay mainstream seeks control, not only of our bodies and minds, but of the very ways we represent our own identities

The word “queer” moves beyond describing sexual orientation or gender identity. This radical shift is key to unveiling the multiplicity of ways in which anti-queer violence operates.
CJ Cohen writes in 1997 (Cathy J. Cohen, also CJ Cohen, is an American author, feminist and social activist whose work has focused on the African-American experience in politics from a perspective which is underlined by intersectionality. May 1997. “Punks, Bulldaggers, and Welfare Queens: The Radical Potential of Queer Politics?” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 3(4): 437-465 http://glq.dukejournals.org/content/3/4/437.refs) ds
I contend, therefore, that the radical potential of queer politics, or any
AND
most promising avenue for the destabilization and radical politicalization of these same categories.

The targeting and killing of queer bodies influences international relationships, especially to those deemed savage, terrorist, and dangerous. For example, the attempt by society to demonize Bin Laden  and the terrorist was to make him into a queer, only by making Bin Laden a fag could the terrorist become the monster of the nation  state.  However those who assimilated still fine, they were able to fight against any perceived homophobia while ignoring the racism inherent in the “war against terror” which was a really a war against fags, a war against the aberrattions of modernity.
Jasbir Puar and Amit Rai write in 2002 (Jasbbbir K. Puar is Associate Professor of Women's and Gender Studies at Rutgers University and author of Terrorist Assemblages: Homonationalism in Queer Times, Dr. Amit Rai is a senior lecturer in New Media and Communications at Queen Mary University of London and the author of Rule of Sympathy: Race, Sentiment, and Power. “Monster, Terrorist, Fag: The War on Terrorism and the Production of Docile Patriots” Social Text, Fall (72), Vol. 20, no. 3, 2002, 117-148.) sbb
We start by simply noting some obvious factors that constitute the heteronormative character of American
AND
way that terrorism studies positions the relationship of the psyche to the terrorist.

The result of this form of bodily destruction is overkill, the simple ending of life is not the goal when it comes to violence done toward queer bodies. This violence is an extreme motion to erase queer bodies from history.  Acts of overkill are never isolated they are in fact representative of the ordering logics of modernity.
Eric Stanley writes in 2011 (Eric A. Stanley is a PhD candidate in the history of consciousness at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and is editor of the collection Captive Genders: Trans Embodiment and the Prison Industrial Complex (2011). Summer 2011. Social Text 107 •Vol. 29, No. 2 “Near Life, Queer Death Overkill and Ontological Capture” http://socialtext.dukejournals.org/content/29/2_107/1.abstract) sbb
Overkill is a term used to indicate such excessive violence that it  pushes a body
AND
, what it must mean, to do violence to what is nothing.

Phenomenological bodies are the fundamental core for action, comportment, and orientation—it is through historical sedimentation that the body engages in a horizon of possibility.
Sara Ahmed writes in 2006 (Sara, “Orientations: Toward a Queer Phenomenology,” GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies, 12.4: 543-574, LM.)

We can stay with the example of the table. As an object it also
AND
"tend to do" are effects of histories rather than being originary. 

The role of the ballot is who best performatively and methodologically haunts the present.

We must visit these pasts. We are all affected by the representations of the monster, terrorist, fag.  We aren’t those that have chosen to assimilate, we are the queer that Zoe Leonard speaks about, and it is through this that we are able to examine and reveal  the bodies that actually suffer under the foundations of anti-queerness and the overkill that reveals the queer as the anti-subject of humanity.
Jasbir Puar writes in 2007 (Puar, J.k. , Terrorist assemblages: Homonationalism in queer times. Durham: Duke University Press.  Pp xx-xxii) ds
Here "ghostly matters" signal the primacy of the past and our inheritance of
AND
, within all these of these: snapshots, flashpoints, and assemblages.

Sara Beth and I affirm a politics of historicity that interrogates future oriented political action, mere optimism, and traditional movements

These things fail to expose the foundations for social exclusion because of their divisive politics, identities, or “foundational” static understandings of reality. Our 1AC promotes a reflectivity from the past that places queer bodily understanding at the forefront of analysis.
Heather Love writes in 2007 (Heather Feeling backward: Loss and the politics of queer history. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. 2007) sbb
Queers face a strange choice: is it better to move on toward a brighter
AND
off the most vulnerable, the least presentable, and all the dead.

Tournament: D114 | Round: 6 | Opponent: Fresno State Ahmed-Lewis | Judge: Kephart III
We are an army because we have to be. We are an army because we are so powerful. We have so much to fight for; we are the most precious of endangered species. And we are an army of crip lovers because it is we who know what love is. Desire and lust, too. We invented them. We come out of the closet, face the rejection of society, face firing squads, just to love each other!

The strong sisters told the brothers that there were two important things to remember about the coming revolutions. The first is that we will get our asses kicked. The second is that we will win.

How can I tell you? How can I convince you, brother; sister that your life is in danger. That everyday you wake up alive, relatively happy, a functioning being, you are committing a rebellious act. You as an alive and functioning crip queer are a revolutionary. There is nothing on this planet that validates, protects or encourages your existence. It is a miracle you are hearing these words. You should by all rights be dead.

But we declare now that we are born as liberated beings. Our identities do not derive from being disabled. We have the same value as people who are not disabled, and we reject attempts to label us or classify us. We will not allow any authority or institution to deprive us of our freedom of to choose

Robert McRuer examines the co-constituency of our queer and disabled bodies--
(Robert McRuer, professor of English at The George Washington University from his book “Crip theory: cultural signs of queerness and disability” New York University Press: 2006 pg 9-10) sbb
It is with this repetition that … compulsory, of an ablebodied identity.11

Do not be fooled, straight white able-bodied men own this world and the only reason we have been spared is we are smart, lucky, and fighters. These people have a privilege that allows them to do whatever they fucking want. Not only do they live a life free of fear; they flaunt their freedom in our faces. Their images are on our TV, in the magazine I bought, in the restaurant we want to eat in, and on the campus where we go to school.

No institutions need be created to "cure" us. These institutions have been used to "manage" us in ways that non-disabled people are not expected to accept. We do not need institutions whose purpose is to punish us for being disabled. We will not be confined for the convenience of others. We reject the notion that we need "experts," to tell us how to live, especially straight able-bodied experts. We are not diagnoses in need of a cure or cases to be closed.

Fiona Campbell describes the ambivalent compromise that is disabled life -
(Fiona Kumari Campbell, Adjunct Professor in Disability Studies, Department of Disability Studies, Faculty of Medicine, University of Kelaniya, Ragama, Sri Lanka,  Problematizing Vulnerability: Engaging Studies in Ableism and Disability Jurisprudence, “Keynote Legal Intersections Research Centre, Disability at the Margins: Vulnerability, Empowerment and the Criminal Law, University of Wollongong, “) ds
I have proposed the notion … of resistance and agency (DiFruscia, 2010).

I'm angry for being condemned to death by strangers saying, "You deserve to die" and "AIDS is the cure" as if we were the disease. Fury erupts when a Republican woman wearing thousands of dollars of garments and jewelry minces by the police lines shaking her head, chuckling and wagging her finger at us like we are recalcitrant children making absurd demands and throwing a temper tantrum when they aren't met.

And I'm angry when the newspapers call us "victims" and sound alarms that "it" might soon spread to the "general population." And I want to scream "Who the fuck am I?"

And I'm angry at people who sit smugly wrapped in their self-protective coat of monogamy and heterosexuality confident that this disease has nothing to do with them because it only happens to "those people." And the teenage boys who upon spotting my "Silence = Death" button begin chanting "Faggots gonna die" and I wonder, who taught them this?

Eric Stanley argues that this state of ambivalence leads to bodily destruction in the form of overkill, a violence representative of the ordering logics of modernity that seeks not just to end lives but to erase deviant bodies from history
(Eric A. Stanley is a PhD candidate in the history of consciousness at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and is editor of the collection Captive Genders: Trans Embodiment and the Prison Industrial Complex (2011). Summer 2011. Social Text 107 •Vol. 29, No. 2 “Near Life, Queer Death Overkill and Ontological Capture” http://socialtext.dukejournals.org/content/29/2_107/1.abstract) sbb
Overkill is a term used to indicate … must mean, to do violence to what is nothing.

I hate having to convince straight people that queers live in a war zone, that we're surrounded by bomb blasts only we seem to hear, that our bodies and souls are heaped high, dead from fright or bashed or raped, dying of grief or disease, stripped of our personhood.

I hate understandings of disability that perpetuate our bodies as appropriate metaphors for incompetence, stupidity, ugliness or weakness. We have been considered objects of charity and we have been considered commodities. We are here to tell you that we are neither. We reject charitable enterprises that exploit our lifestyle to titillate others, and those which propose to establish the rules by which we must live without our participation.

I hate straight people who say, "I don't see why you feel the need to wear those buttons and t-shirts. I don't go around tell the whole world I'm straight." Being queer is not about a right to privacy; it is about the freedom to be public, to just be who we are.

Sami Schalk explains our method which strategically disidentifies with status quo disability and queer theories and instead endorses a politics of identifying with the multiplicity of ways in which access to power and oppression by power affects each of us can, which we will defend as the most effective form of politics --
(Sami Schalk, MA candidate in Gender Studies at Indiana University, “Coming to Claim Crip: Disidentification with/in Disability Studies” http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3705/3240) sbb
Despite the fact that both Ferguson .. as this term is currently culturally understood.

Being queer means leading a different sort of life. It's not about the mainstream, profit-margins, patriotism, patriarchy or being assimilated. It's not about executive directors, privilege and elitism. It's about being on the margins, defining ourselves; it's about gender-fuckery and secrets, what's lies beneath and deep inside the heart; it's about the night.

It means everyday fighting oppression; heteronormativity, racism, ableism, misogyny, colonialism, the bigotry of the religious hypocrites and our own self-hatred – and make no mistake, we have been carefully taught to hate ourselves.

When I risk it all to be out, I risk it for both of us. When I risk it all and it works (which it often does if you would try), I benefit and so do you. When it doesn't work, I suffer and you do not. An army of crip lovers cannot lose -- but honey you cannot sit around and wait for crip queers to make the world safe for you.

Tournament: Shirley | Round: 1 | Opponent: Nevada Las Vegas Velto-Rodriguez | Judge: Najor
In the debate space women are uniquely targeted for sexual violence, but I am additionally targeted as a disabled and asexual woman. Compulsory sexuality is the logic that allows this experience to happen to me, a logic that says that bodies are required to be sexual for the benefit of others. This compulsory sexuality traps me in a constant bind of being disabled, female, and asexual, marking my body as an object to de-sexualize and a site to be conquered.
Qualmann 12 (Jo Qualmann is a contributor to The Asexual Agenda and owner of A Life Unexamined, “Sex Scribbled on my Skin: body politics and sexuality” http://alifeunexamined.wordpress.com/2012/09/28/sex-scribbled-on-my-skin-body-politics-and-sexuality/) sbb
Despite sex being so naturalised in our society, there are still a multitude of
AND
not unless we make a conscious effort to understand them and reclaim them.
This misogyny in debate is so perverse that it goes unnoticed and unchecked. It becomes normalized through positive reinforcement by our own community.
Le, et al 13 (Shelly Le, Rachel Alexander and Karah Kemmerly, writing for the Whitman Pioneer, “As Longtime Coach Steps Down, Debate Culture Under Scrutiny” 20 May 2013, http://whitmanpioneer.com/news/2013/05/20/debate-culture-under-scrutiny/) sbb
Alumnus Ethan Robertson ‘13, who was a debater on the parliamentary team from
AND
that a thing that I should have done?’” he said.
Compulsory sexuality positions the asexual body outside of rape culture, allowing coercive rape to happen.
TPA 09 (TransPolyAce is a well known intersectionality blog, the author writes anonymously. “Asexuality and Rape” 2 Nov 2009. http://transpolyasexual.wordpress.com/2009/11/02/asexuality-and-rape/) sbb
That problem is how asexuals are exceptionally prone to the outskirts of the rape culture
AND
” for no reason other than our messed up sexual and relationship mores.

The role of the ballot is to make the debate space a safe space for everyone who is participating. The debate space is not just this round, but also the hotel lobbies, and the van rides, and the squad rooms. Your ballot influences this activity – any assumption that your ballot has no political power only reinforces patriarchal pedagogies.
Eisenberg 12 (Stephanie Eisenberg is a former competitor from SFSU, and a former coach from SFSU. “WHAT WE SAAID: BUILDING COMMUNITY and BREAKING DOWN BARRIERS TO WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION IN POLICY DEBATE” 20 Apr 2012) sbb
Another male judge states in his philosophy that he is unhappy with the way that
AND
indicates that there are various perspectives on the notion of a politicized judge.
Objectification of women as sexualized objects forces women out of the activity.
Le, et al 13 (Shelly Le, Rachel Alexander and Karah Kemmerly, writing for the Whitman Pioneer, “As Longtime Coach Steps Down, Debate Culture Under Scrutiny” 20 May 2013, http://whitmanpioneer.com/news/2013/05/20/debate-culture-under-scrutiny/) sbb

Alumna Kate Kight ’13, who was a debater her first year at Whitman,
AND
started acting more sexual because I felt that’s what was expected of me.”
Coercive rape, victim blaming, and slut shaming happens here at home -- women in debate are coerced into sexually compromising positions, blamed and shamed when they report such incidents, and targeted for retribution when they refuse to engage sexually with other debaters and judges.
Rothfeld 13 (Becca Rothfeld is a former debater and student at Dartmouth, “The Girl Who Magically Transcended/Overcame Her Femininity” 25 Sept 2013 http://dmouth.com/blog/?author=51a53640e4b07c0410aac583) sbb
In the debate community, my sexuality often seemed like the best bargaining chip available
AND
to identify and therefore difficult to remedy, it warrants consideration and concern.

Tournament: Csun | Round: 1 | Opponent: Nevada Las Vegas King-Cote | Judge: kovacs
We read this case with a narrative of sexual assault in the debate space, and we read it in every aff round at CSUN.

In the debate space women are uniquely targeted for sexual violence. Compulsory sexuality is the logic that allows this experience to happen to me, a logic that says that bodies are required to be sexual for the benefit of others. This compulsory sexuality traps me in a constant bind of being disabled, female, and asexual, marking my body as an object to de-sexualize and a site to be conquered.
Qualmann 12 (Jo Qualmann is a contributor to The Asexual Agenda and owner of A Life Unexamined, “Sex Scribbled on my Skin: body politics and sexuality” http://alifeunexamined.wordpress.com/2012/09/28/sex-scribbled-on-my-skin-body-politics-and-sexuality/) sbb
Despite sex being so naturalised in our society, there are still a multitude of
AND
not unless we make a conscious effort to understand them and reclaim them.

This misogyny in debate is so perverse that it goes unnoticed and unchecked. It becomes normalized through positive reinforcement by our own community.
Le, et al 13 (Shelly Le, Rachel Alexander and Karah Kemmerly, writing for the Whitman Pioneer, “As Longtime Coach Steps Down, Debate Culture Under Scrutiny” 20 May 2013, http://whitmanpioneer.com/news/2013/05/20/debate-culture-under-scrutiny/) sbb
Alumnus Ethan Robertson ‘13, who was a debater on the parliamentary team from
AND
that a thing that I should have done?’” he said.

Compulsory sexuality positions the asexual body outside of rape culture, allowing coercive rape to happen.
TPA 09 (TransPolyAce is a well known intersectionality blog, the author writes anonymously. “Asexuality and Rape” 2 Nov 2009. http://transpolyasexual.wordpress.com/2009/11/02/asexuality-and-rape/) sbb
That problem is how asexuals are exceptionally prone to the outskirts of the rape culture
AND
” for no reason other than our messed up sexual and relationship mores.

And the very culture of this activity allows sexual violence against women to flourish, objectifying women in the debate space.
Eisenberg 12 (Stephanie, Professor at California State University Northridge, “Speaking from the Margins: Negotiating Barriers to Women’s Participation and Success in Policy Debate “, Paper presented at WFA February 2012) ds
While I initially planned to explore barriers primarily related to style and content of  argumentation
AND
academy and Western society, women essentially become  faceless in conversations about sexuality.

The role of the ballot is to make the debate space a safe space for everyone who is participating. The debate space is not just this round, but also the hotel lobbies, and the van rides, and the squad rooms. Your ballot influences this activity – any assumption that your ballot has no political power only reinforces patriarchal pedagogies.
Eisenberg 12 (Stephanie Eisenberg is a former competitor from SFSU, and a former coach from SFSU. “WHAT WE SAAID: BUILDING COMMUNITY and BREAKING DOWN BARRIERS TO WOMEN’S PARTICIPATION IN POLICY DEBATE” 20 Apr 2012) sbb
Another male judge states in his philosophy that he is unhappy with the way that
AND
indicates that there are various perspectives on the notion of a politicized judge.

Coercive rape, victim blaming, and slut shaming happens here at home -- women in debate are coerced into sexually compromising positions, blamed and shamed when they report such incidents, and targeted for retribution when they refuse to engage sexually with other debaters and judges.
Rothfeld 13 (Becca Rothfeld is a former debater and student at Dartmouth, “The Girl Who Magically Transcended/Overcame Her Femininity” 25 Sept 2013 http://dmouth.com/blog/?author=51a53640e4b07c0410aac583) sbb
In the debate community, my sexuality often seemed like the best bargaining chip available
AND
to identify and therefore difficult to remedy, it warrants consideration and concern.

Tournament: Usc | Round: 3 | Opponent: Oklahoma Campbell-Lee | Judge: Shanahan
We spent some time thinking about how to articulate this argument to the case list. We believe that an ethic of disclosure is a good pedagogical practice in debate, however this 1AC is also original scholarship and we don't feel comfortable posting the entirety of it online. We are always available to answer questions about our args at either sarabrooks at gmail dot com or stanfield.dan at gmail dot com, or on Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/sarabethbrooks or https://www.facebook.com/daniel.stanfield**

The aff is a critical engagement of the resolution. We discuss wars perpetuated overseas and those perpetuated domestically through dominant systems of power (ie, war on drugs, war on poverty). We say that the USFG perpetuates an ethos of ableism through war, that war creates disabled bodies to be marginalized. We then analyze the connection to the resolution, and how the negative space of the resolution perpetuates the ethos of ableism. We then bring our arguments down to the community level and discuss the ways that squo debate practices, values, norms, perpetuate an ethos of ableism, using personal examples from our experiences both in D1 and nationally.

We do not read what could be called a "plan text" or "advocacy statement".

Tournament: Texas | Round: 2 | Opponent: Minnesota Crunkilton-Ehrlich | Judge: Pointer
Yeah, we were still reading our poesis arg, The Wars at Home, at Texas. We've read it in every aff round since USC, and almost every neg round. For any neg round where we did not list other citations, we read the Wars at Home. Many people have asked us for additional information ahead of districts/nationals, this is an attempt to synthesize commonly asked questions. As always, we are available to talk about these arguments too. Our contact info is in the original entry for this argument.

This argument may be triggering to those with PTSD. We discuss the beating death of Kelly Thomas in some detail. If this is something you think might trigger you please talk to us before the round about it.

The Wars at Home argument is performed as 9 minutes of slam poetry we wrote about our relationship to the topic. The first constructive is a discussion of the topic and our relationships to it and analyze our own connections to the resolution and to the powers of war. We discuss how the topic is inherently ableist because it does not reduce war, it simply shifts who can "do" war (this is a "negative space of the resolution" argument, that the resolution doesn't ask us to address the impacts of war, just to change the actor of that war). We also discuss broader systems of oppression, such as racism and capitalism, and our relationship to those systems as disabled bodies. The aff methodology is that autobiographical narratives about disability are key to an ontological rupture of ablenormative spaces and compulsory ablebodiedness (we also argue that this is a survival strategy for us in a hostile environment). The argument has changed and developed a lot since USC and we now have a set of interchangable stanzas that we rotate in and out to reflect the ongoing nature of the conversation about disability and ableism in debate. We defend the entirety of the poem as our advocacy statement or alternative text, depending on which side of the debate we are on.

We do not read a role of the ballot and do not think that debates about ROB are productive because they can frequently be summed up as "vote for whoever best does us." We will read a counter ROB if that debate is initiated. We have read a couple of counter role of the ballots on this argument, one was "Vote for who best disrupts the debate space," and the other was "Vote for the team that wins."

The poem is formulated in three chapters. The first talks about our relationship to war, including the war on terror and various "wars" here at home (we talk about the war on crime, the war on drugs, and the war on poverty, as well as critique other rhetorical uses of the word war). We talk about how those wars have affected us. The second chapter talks about the resolution and our relationship to it, makes the negative space argument as articulated above, and some of our personal experiences with being disabled people existing in an ableist debate space. Chapter three is the synthesis of these two thoughts (the "wars" that affect us every day and the resolutional/community analysis). We use the phrase "ethos of ableism" to describe the ordering logic of violence against disabled bodies. The argument is not Debate Bad, but rather, Debate Can Be Better and We Should Hold Ourselves to that Higher Standard. We argue that debate can produce better epistemology than we do in the squo and that through the aff we can become better leaders once we all leave this space.