Aff Answers

IVAWA causes US interventionism that destabilizes regimes. Iraq

proves-- the CP only causes worse violence
Thompson, 8 – (Nissa Thompson is a producer for Chicago Public Radio's daily
international affairs program, Worldview. Before working on Worldview, Nissa was as an
oral historian on the History of Women at the University of Chicago project and a rape
crisis counselor in Chicago. Does the International Violence Against Women Act
Respond to Lessons from the Iraq War,
https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1267&context=bglj) NL
leading up to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, the protection and promotion of Iraqi
In the days

women's rights was used as fuel for war. Today, many Iraqi women are worse off after
the invasion as they suffer the daily loss of loved ones, food shortages, and increased
levels of violence. In 2007, Iraqi activist Haifa Zangana published a scathing book on the role of "colonial feminists" in encouraging the war
in Iraq, and American feminists' misguided focus on the legal representation, rather than the immediate safety of women in their post invasion
activities.1 In October 2007, U.S. Senators Joseph Biden and Richard Lugar introduced the International Violence Against Women Act (I-VAWA) to the
U.S. Senate. 2 The bill would fund U.S. government initiatives that aim both to prevent violence against women and support legal and health systems
given the United States' actions in Iraq,
for survivors of gender violence. Is this bill a good thing for women worldwide? Or,

should women in other countries see IVAWA as another way the U.S. government is

carelessly intervening in foreign countries' politics with potentially harmful

consequences for women? I believe that Americans must seriously and more carefully
consider the consequences of international political or military actions in the name of women's
rights. Therefore, I will critically analyze the proposed I-VAWA bill by measuring it against timely and unheeded standards derived from Zangana's
criticisms of and suggestions for the proper role of feminism in foreign policy. The promotion of Iraqi women's rights as a

justification for the invasion has proven to be the mother of all failures. Instead, Iraqi
women have lost all they had achieved as activists before the invasion, and they
comprise thousands of the 650,000 casualties, a number that has climbed since mid-
2006.

IVAWA has lost credibility due to spreading of false statistics in the

media
McElroy, 14 – (Wendy McElroy is a Canadian individualist feminist and anarcho-
capitalist writer. She was a co-founder along with Carl Watner and George H. Smith of
The Voluntaryist magazine in 1982 and is the author of a number of books. I-VAWA’s
Global Lie http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/197947-i-vawas-global-lie)
NL
(I-VAWA) wants a lie to go global: Men are not victims of
The International Violence Against Women Act

gender violence. Or, if they are, they do not deserve recognition. I-VAWA is before Congress with strong support from Democrats. The act
embeds the prevention of gender violence and the empowerment of women into American foreign policy. But females are the only victims addressed.
Not even boys are included. I-VAWA constitutes a 5-year redirection of foreign aid funds in order to insert politically-correct feminism into the structure
of other nations. The I-VAWA summary states, “Emphasis is placed on promoting political, legal, and institutional reforms” in targeted nations and
training their “police and the judiciary.” U.S. personnel would train “professional foreign military” on handling of “violence against women and girls.” I-
VAWA aims at changing the attitudes, social norms, and law enforcement of other
societies to reflect Western values. Historically speaking, other nations resent such
attempts, and resist violently. I-VAWA should be rejected. But it should be studied as an example of how PC feminism controls the
debate to exclude males as victims. Consider domestic violence in general. The vast majority of studies indicate men and women

are victimized at about the same rate. A 32-country survey of university students found women were

more likely to initiate violence. Even if the nations selected by I-VAWA disproportionately victimize women, a significant number of
male victims would also exist there. In one place, the act acknowledges male victims. A Tanzanian survey on violence against children is quoted:
“nearly 3 in 10 females and 1 in 7 males experienced sexual violence prior to the age of 18.” The sentence immediately following states that abused
boys are “significantly more likely” to commit domestic violence as men. Abused boys are acknowledged only to point
out a risk factor for females. The other reference to males is on the need to engage them in reducing violence. 'How' is not
specified. Legal sanctions and judicial enforcement are mentioned repeatedly, however. Presumably, males would be engaged as actual or potential
abusers. I-VAWA's exclusion of males will be justified by the targeting nations which severely abuse females. That begs the question. The targeting
recognizing male victims would not change the training of police
itself is a dismissal of males. Moreover,

and judges unless such training views females as the only victims. Moreover, some I-VAWA programs
impact males as much as females; for example, stemming the spread of HIV/AIDS. To retain females as the only victims, I-VAWA must

control discussion by controlling data. Predictably, I-VAWA mandates data collection through a super-agency to coordinate
“the Department of State and...the international programs of all other Federal agencies.” The coordinating agency would produce “original research or
analysis” and establish standards to judge data, including existing research. Until the findings exist, however, no knows whether an accurate ratio of
male-to-female victims will be reflected. Thefinal step in controlling data is to entrench false information . A
recent occurrence provides insight. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder supports PC feminism. On December 18, 2013, the Washington

Post fact checker ran findings on Holder's 2009 claim that intimate-partner homicide was the leading cause of
death for black women ages 15 to 45. The Department of Justice (DOJ) website posted the statistic and it spread from there. The statement

is false. The Washington Post reported, “Centers for Disease Control and Prevention data show that, for the year 2008...cancer, heart
disease, unintentional injury and HIV/AIDS all topped homicide . Then if you break out intimate-partner
homicide, that ends up being seventh or eighth on the list.”

India proves legislation like IVAWA fails and makes civil rights worse
SIF, 10 – SIF is a foundation founded on working to prevent Indian men from being removed from their
children for claims where they have not been found guilty for, I-VAWA: A failed experiment
http://www.saveindianfamily.org/i-vawa-a-failed-experiment/) NL
The International Violence against Women Act (I-VAWA) was recently introduced in the Senate (S.2982) and House (H.R.4594) with the purported
countries have had extensive experience with
goal of stopping domestic violence around the world. India and other

such abuse-reduction laws, which have had a disastrous impact on our society. India enacted
its first domestic violence laws in 1983, over a decade before the United States passed the Violence Against Women Act in 1994. Section 498A of the
Indian Penal Code mandates the arrest and jailing of the husband accused of domestic violence, along with his male/female relatives. Under
Indianlaw, such persons are presumed guilty until proven innocent. According to a survey by Professor
Murray Straus of the United States, females in India are more likely to engage in severe domestic

violence (punch, hit, kick, or choke) than males.1 Despite that fact, Indian domestic violence laws consider
only women as victims and does not take account the male victims. This method of prevention
of domestic violence has failed in India. In four years from 2004-2007, more than 1,23,000 women and

4,23,000 men were arrested and jailed without investigation or trial under the domestic violence
legislation Section 498A. This is one of the worst violations of civil rights ever reported in India .
Therefore, the Indian Home Ministry has directed all the States to stop misuse of this law and put an end to jailing of innocent people. Therefore, we
oppose the enactment of I-VAWA. And if the law is passed, we strongly urge the United States Congress include statutory language to specifically
exclude India from the scope of this program.