You will need to collaborate with your subgroup members to determine the affirmative and negative points (you can do this by email (no need to copy me))
You can use the Debate Preparation Worksheet.docxPreview the document
Each subgroup will discuss the top 2-4 points that they would like to make.
Once the top points are made, assign them to each subgroup member.
This is to to ensure that everyone participates and has an opportunity to present their unique view(s).
As each member constructs their argument they must use two or more references from course readings or from readings that you have discovered.
The pro-side will present their initial argument and reasoning.
The con-side will present their initial argument and reasoning.
Once the two-sides have presents, let the rebuttal discussion begin.
be methodical and orderly (see below)
Important note! When posting make sure to identify your position (i.e. affirmative, negative).
Any written assignment must be in the student’s voice. The use of lengthy quotes or lists obtained from resources are not acceptable. If you feel you need to use quotes make sure they are brief and in APA format.
Debate Preparation Worksheet
Team Members: ________________________________________________________________
1. Our position on the debate topic:
2. Reasons for our position (examples and cited facts)
3. Rebuttal Strategies
Things our Opponents might say against us: Our potential responses:
The debate: Tearoom Trade Study Methodology
In the 1960’s Ph.D. student in sociology, Laud Humphreys studied men who have sex with other men in public restrooms of city parks. These restrooms were known as “tearooms”. Humphreys got his information by acting as “watch queen”, playing the role of the lookout and warning the men if anyone was coming. The men involved did not know he was a researcher.
In addition to recording the sex acts of over 100 men, Humphreys had a small subset who knew he was a researcher and spoke to him about sex in public places and homosexuality (which was in the 1960s criminalized in the United States).
Humphreys wanted to understand the relationship between these men’s anonymous homosexual acts and their public lives. He recorded their license plates as they returned to their cars and then found out their addresses. A year later, he changed his hair, dress, and car and went to the home of 50 of these men. Portraying himself as a social health researcher he interviewed them under false pretenses to gain information on their marital status, sexuality, and sexual orientations and occupations.
At the time of Humphreys’ research having sex with men was a crime in most of the U.S. Men could be arrested and sentenced to years in prison for it. If the police had got hold of Humphreys’ data or if the identities of the men involved had been revealed, they would have been severely stigmatized, their family lives ruined, they could have lost their jobs, or even been arrested and imprisoned.
In not identifying himself as a researcher Humphreys argued he was doing nothing wrong, he was merely observing behavior in public spaces and said he masqueraded as a gay “watch queen” so as not to interfere with the research. Most social scientists agree that observing people’s acts in public spaces is not unethical, as long as people are not identified.
On risk that his notes could have been seized to identify men engaged in illegal acts said he would have risked going to jail rather than hand them over. Others have said no researcher should have such power over others, no matter how good their intentions are.
Most have found his most serious ethical violation the way he disguised himself and went to mens’ homes on a false pretext, invading their privacy. Humphreys argued his deception was justified as the acts were so stigmatized he would not have got the information otherwise.
– After you have constructed your argument you will go the DISCUSSION forum and post your argument in the appropriate group forum and thread. Please make sure your subject topic line states the position you are presenting – affirmative or negative.