Appeal: clarification
From HEATED Debate w/ Feminists. Wage Gap, Pro Choice ft. @MikeRashidOfficial.
- #20101:45:33upheld Isla epainos: clarification (+1)
The council upheld the call: Isla earned 1 point.
“As soon as you get this sad [stat] though, like where... Like how do you ask 90% of women…”
Diogenes: Isla asks how Myron's "10 to 20% of men / 90% of women" figure was measured. The question goes to his method, which is a more specific challenge than simply disbelieving the number.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Isla's position throughout this stretch of the debate has been to press Myron for the source and method behind his repeated statistical claims rather than accept them on assertion; this question continues that same line rather than departing from it. Isla's question here — how such a "10-20% of men / 90% of women" statistic could even be measured or surveyed — is a specific methodological challenge to Myron's claim, not a mere assertion of disbelief; it presses him on how the underlying data collection would work, which is a legitimate request for clarification of an unsupported claim's basis. This fits the pattern she and other panelists maintain throughout this segment (e.g., "where are these studies coming from?", "show me the stats") of demanding grounding for Myron's repeated "studies show" claims.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "clarification". Rather than simply accepting Myron's bare stat that "10 to 20% of guys are smashing 90% of the chicks," Isla pushes on its evidentiary basis, asking how such a figure could even be measured ("how do you ask 90% of women"). This is a request for the methodology behind an asserted claim rather than an assumption that it is true.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Isla has consistently pushed back on Myron's sweeping, unnamed-study-backed claims throughout the debate (e.g., on the wage gap and career-choice exchanges), and this line continues that same pattern of demanding the basis for his numbers rather than departing from it. Myron had just asserted a specific, unsupported statistic ("10 to 20% of guys are smashing like 90% of the chicks"); rather than simply disbelieving the number, Isla presses on how such a figure could even be measured ("how do you ask 90% of women"), which targets the survey methodology rather than the bare conclusion — a legitimate request for grounding instead of assuming the claim's basis.
Appeal this callout
Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.