Appeal: equivocation
From HEATED Debate w/ Feminists. Wage Gap, Pro Choice ft. @MikeRashidOfficial.
- #20362:07:24overturned Isla psogos: equivocation (+1)
The council overturned the call, so no points were given away.
“Both of you. Yeah. It's amazing.”
Diogenes: Fresh's question was about the decision after conception (whether to abort), and Isla had just said he could not make her. Her "Both of you" moves back to the joint choice to have sex, running the two decisions together, a distinction she had drawn herself earlier ("they do have a say in creating the baby").- Aristotle overturn: On the record: Isla's position of record throughout this segment is that conception is a shared responsibility ("it takes two," "he also allowed himself to come back to the house... take his pants off... finish inside that girl"), while acknowledging separately that the abortion decision itself is legally hers alone; "Both of you" restates the shared-conception thesis, not the abortion-control question. The exchange is a chaotic, overlapping barrage of rapid gotcha questions from Fresh that never fixes what "it" refers to (bodily control over abortion vs. moral responsibility for the pregnancy occurring); given that ambiguity was introduced by the questioner's own shifting framing rather than by Isla exploiting a term, and her answer matches the shared-responsibility position she has held consistently, the elements of equivocation (a single speaker knowingly trading on an ambiguous term to win a point) are not clearly present in the record.
- Socrates overturn: Read blind, found "direct answer". Fresh pressed a forced yes/no ("Can I make you have an abortion? ... who chooses it, ultimately?") designed to force the concession that the woman alone decides. Isla answers the actual question head-on with "Both of you" rather than accepting the false binary, and the trailing "Yeah, it's amazing" is sarcasm riding alongside a real answer already given, not standing in for one.
- Plato overturn: On the record: Isla's position throughout this stretch (since 120:26 "it's a 50/50... choice... between a man and a woman," reaffirmed at 126:08 "he also allowed himself...") has consistently been that responsibility for the situation is shared even while she maintains the final abortion decision is the woman's alone (her "No" to "can I make you have an abortion"); "Both of you" is a restatement of that same standing position, not a new move. Fresh's own question ("who chooses it") is itself ambiguous between "who has final say over the abortion" and "who is responsible for the situation," and in this heavily overlapping, interrupted exchange Isla's answer reads as a continuation of her consistently-held shared-responsibility framework rather than a deliberate shift in the meaning of "choice" to dodge a pinned-down question; equivocation needs a clearer semantic switch than this crosstalk supports.
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.