Appeal: non sequitur
From HEATED Debate w/ Feminists. Wage Gap, Pro Choice ft. @MikeRashidOfficial.
- #20432:14:54upheld Myron Gaines psogos: non sequitur (+1)
The council upheld the call: Myron Gaines gave away 1 point.
“… we wouldn't have... Be having 9,000 plus people in here if men didn't have a reproductive problem. Women don't have that problem. I don't see no YouTube channels teaching women how to get laid.”
Diogenes: Myron treats the size of his audience and the existence of male dating-advice channels as proof that "most men don't have sexual access to women." The conclusion doesn't follow: people watch for many reasons, and demand for advice shows interest, not how sexual access is distributed. He made the same move at 111:42.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Myron's declared method throughout the debate is to back his "balance of probability" generalizations with anecdote, unnamed studies, and now audience-size/market evidence rather than direct data; this line continues that same evidentiary habit rather than departing from it. The conclusion (a real, structural "reproductive problem" for men) does not follow from the premise (a large audience and a market of dating-advice content); audience size shows demand/interest, not the actual distribution of sexual access, and the referee correctly notes Myron repeats this same inferential leap at 111:42, making it a real, if minor, non sequitur consistent with — not a departure from — his pattern of substituting popularity/anecdote for evidence.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "hasty generalisation", on the same ledger as the callout. Myron infers from a single show's viewer count and his personal impression that no comparable channels exist for women straight to the sweeping, essentialist conclusion that "men have a reproductive problem, women don't have that problem" — the same pattern of leaping from thin, anecdotal premises to a universal claim about the sexes already flagged repeatedly through the debate (e.g. 87:46, 113:57).
- Plato uphold: On the record: Myron's declared framework throughout is to back sweeping claims with "facts" that are frequently just anecdote, audience size, or market data rather than the studies he claims to be citing (as this bench found at 129:49 and elsewhere); this line continues that same pattern of substituting an unrelated data point for actual support. The size of Myron's own audience and the existence of male dating-advice content shows only that there is demand for such content; it does not establish the empirical claim that most men lack sexual access to women, which is exactly the logical gap the non sequitur label names, and the move recurs elsewhere in the debate (e.g. the OnlyFans/porn-revenue argument at 111:42, and again at 134:22-134:33 just before this quote).
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.