The CEDA sexual harassment policy provides a mechanism for one to direct complaints about sexual harassment at the CEDA National Tournament and it explicitly provides that "we cannot guarantee that the environment will be comfortable for all members of the community all of the time. Often, arguments in debate are unsettling and disturbing. When one's ideas are under attack the experience can be both painful and highly educational." It is also unclear how the mechanisms for addressing SH accusations transfer to a typical tournament since the CEDA SH officer is unlikely to be there.
There are lots of ways to react to the feelings generated by debate performances. The most obvious of those is to communicate them in arguments....which is what we hope will happen and what we believe will further the education of the community on these issues. Another way that one might respond is to say that the intrusion into my legal rights is so substantial that I do not wish to engage at all and I seek a ruling that will prevent this action. There are clearly times when that approach is warranted. My feeling is there should be a high presumption against invoking the latter when the former is a possibility. That being said, when the presumption is overcome we should all recognize that the debate round is unlikely to produce the desired results and the proper protection of everyone's interest.
I do not think that anyone was asserting a violation of criminal law. Speaking for myself, I would like to see legal claims evaluated by lawyers rather than to have the debate community self-censor whenever an assertion of legal rights is made (it raises the stakes so much that it is hard to give credence to the injury done when arguments are shut down.)
In the end maybe there are mechanisms that we could develop that would create the "in-between" option...ultimately, my purpose in this thread.
Shawn
Just to play the advocate here, it is my understanding that CEDA has specific policies against harassment in debate rounds. I know when we put an invitation out to our tournament and claim to be "CEDA-sanctioned" we are agreeing that those policies will be enforced at the tournament that we are hosting. If people feel that your argument is in violation of those rules, what's wrong with asking the tournament to take action. I must also confess that I am not as familiar with the CEDA rules as I am with the NDT governing documents, and am not sure what a host is supposed to do in response to such accusations. It is also the case that probably every University in the United States has policies opposing harassing language on campus. From my experience with various university policies that were implicated at summer debate camps over the years, most universities prefer that harassment issues be dealt with within the university before calling in law enforcement (unless a physical assault was involved). Is your objection to last weekend's action that your arguments were characterized as "illegal"? Would you really have preferred that police be called?
There are lots of ways to react to the feelings generated by debate performances. The most obvious of those is to communicate them in arguments....which is what we hope will happen and what we believe will further the education of the community on these issues. Another way that one might respond is to say that the intrusion into my legal rights is so substantial that I do not wish to engage at all and I seek a ruling that will prevent this action. There are clearly times when that approach is warranted. My feeling is there should be a high presumption against invoking the latter when the former is a possibility. That being said, when the presumption is overcome we should all recognize that the debate round is unlikely to produce the desired results and the proper protection of everyone's interest.
I do not think that anyone was asserting a violation of criminal law. Speaking for myself, I would like to see legal claims evaluated by lawyers rather than to have the debate community self-censor whenever an assertion of legal rights is made (it raises the stakes so much that it is hard to give credence to the injury done when arguments are shut down.)
In the end maybe there are mechanisms that we could develop that would create the "in-between" option...ultimately, my purpose in this thread.
Shawn
Just to play the advocate here, it is my understanding that CEDA has specific policies against harassment in debate rounds. I know when we put an invitation out to our tournament and claim to be "CEDA-sanctioned" we are agreeing that those policies will be enforced at the tournament that we are hosting. If people feel that your argument is in violation of those rules, what's wrong with asking the tournament to take action. I must also confess that I am not as familiar with the CEDA rules as I am with the NDT governing documents, and am not sure what a host is supposed to do in response to such accusations. It is also the case that probably every University in the United States has policies opposing harassing language on campus. From my experience with various university policies that were implicated at summer debate camps over the years, most universities prefer that harassment issues be dealt with within the university before calling in law enforcement (unless a physical assault was involved). Is your objection to last weekend's action that your arguments were characterized as "illegal"? Would you really have preferred that police be called?
Sherry
_______________________________________________ CEDA-L mailing list [email protected] http://www.ndtceda.com/mailman/listinfo/ceda-l
