Sources:a. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19665229?fbclid=IwAR0ZlhkxhKisd8o3plu7Q8lzbJs_OwREp6ls_6ICONZApSvfVgcGA71n1Ckb. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/all-about-sex/201601/evidence-mounts-more-porn-less-sexual-assault?fbclid=IwAR1KNpPK5M14y_H1Fdw7Xr7qMizSiDQvsDi6qW0_Uquq_pNYSqFYIsUF58Ic. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101130111326.htm?fbclid=IwAR2v1_XwHwlX8TpTF1ere-m20Vqcl88NVsIu0sXGsCsZE-M7U-aomQAUyGsd. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00224499.2015.1023427?fbclid=IwAR29NJrqPgmy0wHerkDWDiZbEznY-QzWjxGdirBW4FsY-OVW-WqX1UDTI0Q&journalCode=hjsr20e. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10508-007-9212-1?fbclid=IwAR1FmkJB6YYhPcigUW7S5Hg1S-X2Afeaw4bELgrVSUPjcz-peRVKWCBOz3cf. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/women-who-stray/201307/your-brain-porn-its-not-addictive?fbclid=IwAR1LG_m3SpNKgtaYGP-Z1haUsqcpka7wKvhzd-hPQ7vVpzshzDYIVt199qwg. https://www.medicaldaily.com/why-couples-who-confess-watching-porn-are-happier-and-have-better-relationships-266505?fbclid=IwAR2n5g5raTHogTXwozse-Q0VkTLdkzkk7ucWkeQtve12wzoe0_JB3hrP-M4h. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0092623X.2012.751077?fbclid=IwAR2ccg6hIKXfVnhiM8gcMjCRPcDElaIh_Hu00fMPOZqUYjVwuTK2I1zdBhg#.UswVZZyOeAZi. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269763975_Viewing_Sexual_Stimuli_Associated_with_Greater_Sexual_Responsiveness_Not_Erectile_Dysfunction?fbclid=IwAR1DWwsLAu2EyAv--S-4zbVI18KGuVfhWePhK4Wymf90AkosshIjvU6WaTYj. https://aeon.co/essays/does-too-much-pornography-numb-us-to-sexual-pleasure?fbclid=IwAR11URFRo77Y9yx0_9pOVdhKmE5uNddaJ7tRfdKsKNK9pi19Q1SspyiQhN0
Pro presentation 4/5, Used good lighting and framied himself as well as he could. The background could have been less noisy. Laying on a bed might have been appropriate for the subject, but is not the ideal way to present yourself. Looked well groomed. Sound was clear without disturbance.Pro Personality 4/5Was very polite to his opponent and spoke eloquently at all times with good diction and almost no verbal pauses. Came across as friendly and good natured. Would give a 5 here, but I do feel pro would come off a little too formal or bookish for many, Presents himself as a person the common man might like, but not identify with.Pro educates about the topic and his position: 3/5The topic as stated left the burden of proof ambiguous. "I say y is not x" almost shifts the burden, so that con has to prove x is y instead of debunking x is not y.. To me, the topic implies "here are all the reasons people think x is y and I am going to address these one by one." Pro does this in his introduction, but then lets himself get focused on con's sole argument, as though it was up to Con to prove x is y. I felt he should have steered the discussion back to arguments others might make about x being y, such as promotion of female body image issues, mistreatment of women in the porn industry, etc. These issues were addressed somewhat, but I think con let himself forget he had the burden here. Pro addresses opponents points: 4/5: Nothing con said was left off the table, but as I don't think he understood the "reptilian brain knowledge" point, he should have asked his opponent clarifying questions about that which didn't let him ramble, so that con could interpret those statements in his own words, then address them.Con Presentation: 2/5Bad atmosphere with poorly lit background. His face was clear enough and his sound was clear. Was not framed well.Con Personality: 3/5Came across friendly and polite. Constant problems with diction, stammering, nervousness. Generally just inarticulate. Spoke more on the audiences level, but came across far less apt than his opponent, Con educates about the topic and his position: 2/5Though he had some research in his head about the point he showed up to make, he should have taken some time to perhaps write down what he meant about reptilian brain comprehension so that he could convey it better. I understood it, but I think very few people would. Should also have presented more than one counterargument of the several he could have used and the one he did use, seemed to not be precisely on topic. As pro pointed out, potential harm to an individual is not the same as harm to society, which I take to imply as harm to productivity levels, health, well being, victimization or people getting along with one another. His argument kind of addressed well being, but that's all.Con addresses opponents points: 2/5Con let nearly all of what Pro said in his introduction go unaddressed. Pro brought up several studies about received benefits from porn to couples and individuals that con left on the table. He addressed these in terms of medical theory, dopamine etc, but not in terms of social research.
@duncan_king Thanks for watching and for the fair assessment. I agree that at times I was a bit too formal and that lying on a bed is not the most professional way of coming across. If it was a tournament debate I'd be sitting at my desk and I'd put more effort into the background behind me. As far as burden of proof, I made some initial points that I came back to several times, showing the advantages of porn to society, and like you noted, they went unaddressed. As long as those are unaddressed, my points are proven, and thus my burden of proof is covered. Then it's just about weighing how my points match up against his opposing points, which was why I zeroed in on his one argument.Also strategically speaking, there's no reason for me to bring up arguments that contradict my position. That's his job. If he had brought up the point about the porn industries mistreatment of women, I had articles I could have pointed to about how the porn industry on the whole is actually quite welcoming to it's models, who report higher levels of happiness and spirituality than average people, but he didn't bring up the criticism so I didn't need to go there.
@sharkb8 That's what I mean about how the topic left the burden ambiguous. I don't think it matters what con brings up. Since you're to prove x is not y, I think you have to adress what anyone might bring up. I agree that you did do this, but the topic got so distracted that it got lost in the shuffle. So I guess I would amend that while you did address the various arguments about porn being harmful to society, the fact that the subject was not steered back to these points, perhaps by asking "I said this and that, what do you think?" it might keep the audience distracted and thus not educated enough about the issue. If we're just talking about beating your opponent, then you would get a higher score in my view than if we are talking about educating the audience. I guess our difference there is my own philosophy about what debates are for.I'm one of those people who almost never give a 5/5 for anything, so don't take a 4 as very critical. I just explained why I didn't consider the performance perfect, not that I didn't think it was good.
@duncan_king Fair enough. And while I do want to have an educational, informative discussion for the audience, I do always have in the back of my mind that I'd prefer to win the exchange haha. I'll take on any comers against my position, but I'm not gonna help them come at me. They gotta make their own points imo.