Sexuality & Society Midterm Debates

Each study group will be given one opportunity to engage in a structured debate about a current event, legal battle, or policy initiative. Two weeks before the debate, groups will be assigned a topic and a position to defend (which they may adapt but not invert). Students should prepare by carefully reading the course texts and the provided synopsis. Opening statements and an outline of key arguments (including evidence that these arguments are sociologically supported) should be prepared prior to the debate and submitted alongside a 1-page reflection on the day of the debate.

  1. A fully written opening statement that clearly articulates your group’s position and outlines the logic of your argument

  2. A complete argument outline which articulates (a) your position, (b) the best argument in support of that position, (c) the sociological significance of/reasoning for this position, and (d) evidence to support it

  3. Notes that will enable you to quickly organize a short rebuttal in response to what you anticipate your opposing group might argue and notes for a concluding statement

  4. A 1 page reflection (each team member will produce their own) on your ownposition on the debate topic (not the position you were assigned)

  5. A portfolio of all your debate materials, also to be turned in on the day of the debate

* Groups are encouraged to meet with me once outside of class, prior to their debates

Debate #1

Topic

“Washington (CNN) The Senate voted Wednesday to approve an anti-sex-trafficking bill that would allow victims of sex trafficking to seek justice against online platforms that knowingly facilitate the act, a move that prosecutors, victims and anti-trafficking activists are heralding as an essential step in cracking down on the crime. But others, such as tech advocacy groups, fear the limitations it could place on free speech on the Internet. The bill passed 97-2, and now goes to the White House for President Donald Trump's signature.”

Access full description here: https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/21/politics/sex-trafficking-bill/index.html (Links to an external site.)

Prompt

Do the benefits of the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act outweigh its weaknesses?

PRO: The passage of SESTA protects children from trafficking and should be passed.

CON: The passage of SESTA threatens free speech and intensifies the vulnerability of sex workers in the US.

Debate #2

Topic

"(Reuters) - A white Ohio woman sued a sperm bank in federal court on Friday for mistakenly giving her, and her white same-sex partner, sperm from an African-American donor, court documents showed.  Jennifer Cramblett of rural Uniontown in northeastern Ohio filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Chicago claiming fraud, misconduct and negligence on the part of Midwest Sperm Bank because of the sperm it used to inseminate her in December 2011, according to the complaint. Cramblett gave birth to a “beautiful, obviously mixed race, baby” girl on August 21, 2012, after she learned five months beforehand that the sperm bank in Akron, Ohio used sperm from a black donor rather than a white donor as she had requested, court documents showed. Cramblett “is now facing numerous challenges and external pressures associated with an unplanned transracial parent-child relationship for which she was not, and is not, prepared,” the suit said."

Access full description here: https://www.reuters.com/article/illinois-sperm/ohio-woman-sues-sperm-bank-after-birth-of-mixed-race-baby-idUSL2N17P1OA (Links to an external site.)

Prompt

“Should Cramblett be awarded $150,000 in damages from Midwest Sperm Bank?

PRO: Cramblett should be awarded damages, as the negligence of the bank resulted in a violation of her body and her sexual agency.  She consented only to being impregnated by Donor A and is entitled to compensation. 

CON: The sperm bank is not responsible for Cramblett’s “limited cultural competency” or the “external pressures” associated with an administrative mistake.

Debate #3

Topic

A lobbying group in Massachusetts has rallied around a piece of state legislation that would outlaw genital modification interventions for children under the age of 18 in circumstances where the child's physical health is not seriously threatened.  The bill would allow for surgical procedures that prevent impairment, but would disallow largely cosmetic procedures (including the surgical modification of "atypical or ambiguous" genitalia). Religious exemptions are accounted for.

Prompt

You've been hired by one of the lobbying groups involved to speak to a room of Massachusetts voters, should Massachusetts support the passage of this bill?

PRO: This bill serves to protect the sexual agency of minors, and to reduce unnecessary, invasive modifications to intersex children.

CON: This bill restricts freedom and does not appropriately classify potential fertility and mental health consequences as "impairments."

Debate Rubric.jpg