August 14, 2024 • 40 mins
6:13 - Camp One Clap 2024: Day 13
For notes and details about the episode, check out the website here:
https://www.oneclapspeechanddebate.com/post/camp-one-clap-2-episode-13-natalyia-kopack-on-flexibility-courage-and-gender-bias-in-debate
Today's episode of the One Clap Speech and Debate podcast features the inspiring journey of Natalyia Kopack, a rising junior at Cheyenne East High School. Natalyia debuts at camp to talk about trying new events and the importance of equality in Speech and Debate!
Read Natalyia's Equality in Forensics article here: https://www.equalityinforensics.org/blog/a-girl-debaters-guide-to-keep-goin
If you’d like to join the discussion here at One Clap Speech and Debate, shoot me an email at lylewiley@gmail.com or reach out here on the website.
You could also contact me on social media:
Facebook: @oneclappodcast
Instagram: @one_clap_podcast
TikTok: @oneclapspeechanddebate
YouTube: www.youtube.com/channel/UCyvpV56859lLA-X-EvHVYUg
Your voice matters!
Get your cool One Clap Speech and Debate merchandise here (now featuring hats!): https://www.bonfire.com/store/one-clap-speech-and-debate/
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Lyle Wiley (00:09):
Hey campers.
Spooky day 13 of theclapocalypse is here and
frightening indeed.
But today at Camp One Clap,natalia Kopak is here to help.
Natalia debuts at camp to talkabout trying out new events and
the importance of equality inspeech and debate.
I'm your camp director and hostof the One Clap Speech and
(00:31):
Debate podcast, lyle Wiley.
Hopefully this year's Camp OneClap is providing inspiration
and resources to encouragespeech and debate coaches and
competitors to embrace theirfears and move forward with
resolve to speak their truth inthis coming season.
Quick reminder check theOneClap socials for today's
social media challenge.
The engagement with thesechallenges has been really fun
(00:51):
this year.
Let me tell you a little bitabout today's guests.
Natalia Natalia Kopak is arising junior competing for
Cheyenne East High School.
She's a self-certifiedjack-of-all-trades and has
competed in Lincoln Douglas PugBook Forum, extempt Debate
Congress, duo, drama andInformative.
Her article A Girl Debater'sGuide to Keep Going was
(01:15):
published in the Equality andForensics blog.
Listen to her episode to findout more about the challenges
women face in the debate sphere,as well as some perspective on
trying out new events andstaying passionate about the
activity.
Without further ado, here's myinterview with a student called
smarter than Abraham Lincoln byher coach, natalia Kopak.
Welcome to Camp One, clapNatalia Kopak.
(01:39):
Hey, it's really great to haveyou on the podcast.
You've, however, inadvertentlystumbled upon the clapocalypse
and I'm so glad you're here.
Natalyia Kopack (01:49):
I'm so glad to be here.
Thank you for having me, Lyle.
Lyle Wiley (01:53):
Yeah, we know each other from the Wyoming Forensics
Institute.
It was really great to workwith you last summer and, of
course, I've seen you around theWyoming circuit and you're a
fabulous debater and it's justreally great to have you on here
.
I do want to like start thingsoff, though, by talking about
fear and terror and scary stuff.
What's your favorite scarystory like movie, book?
Natalyia Kopack (02:14):
Probably anything by Tim Burton or Henry
Selick I'm a big fan of, likeCoraline, the Night Before
Christmas and Corpse BrideThey've kind of rotated being my
favorite movie since I wasreally little and also I got
introduced to the it franchiselast summer and I really loved
that.
Lyle Wiley (02:29):
Yeah, that's a creepy franchise for sure.
My daughter's really intoCoraline Been a big fan of that
story for a long time.
It's pretty weird the buttonson eyes thing that gets to me.
Do you like horror movies?
Natalyia Kopack (02:42):
Yeah, actually, every year during October I do
a big thing with some of myfriends where we watch a horror
movie for every day of October.
So I get, I get exposure to alot of them every year.
Lyle Wiley (02:53):
Well, that's pretty exciting.
So, uh, speaking of theapocalypse on a scale of one to
10, how likely do you think youwould survive an actual
apocalypse like apost-apocalyptic wasteland?
You think you would survive anactual apocalypse like a
post-apocalyptic wasteland,something out of a dystopian
novel?
Would you be a survivor?
You strike me as a survivor.
Natalyia Kopack (03:09):
Well, I'd like to think I was a survivor, but I
think if we're looking at ithonestly, I might be at about a
four or five on that one to tenscale.
I think intellectually I havesome talents, but I don't think
I have the physical prowess tosurvive any apocalypse and I
might kind of get done after awhile with that mental capacity
and just be like oh, I don'tknow about this anymore yeah.
Lyle Wiley (03:30):
Do you have any skills that you'd bring to the
table in a the apocalypsesituation?
Natalyia Kopack (03:35):
I think I could be a supervisor a super, yeah.
I'll allocate our resources andlike, ration everything out,
maybe decide some tasks and puteverybody else to work, but I
think I'll just stay there andnot maybe do any of the labor or
anything like that.
Lyle Wiley (03:51):
Like an intellectual sort of emotional support
leader, like that sort ofsituation.
Natalyia Kopack (03:56):
Yeah.
Lyle Wiley (03:56):
Yeah, I have a feeling talking to these speech
and debate folks who are themost wonderful people in the
world, however, maybe not themost prepared for a
post-apocalyptic wastelandpeople Cause, like most folks so
far, are saying that they don'tfeel comfortable about their
survival chances.
Natalyia Kopack (04:14):
I think we're definitely not a physical club.
Lyle Wiley (04:18):
That's probably a fair generalization.
So I've never had a chance tohave you on the podcast now, so
I'm going to ask you somegeneralized questions about your
speech and debate experiencefirst, and then we're going to
talk about a whole bunch ofother stuff.
So what got you into speech anddebate?
What's your story?
What's your speech and debateorigin story?
Natalyia Kopack (04:37):
I kind of have an origin pulled from a bunch of
different areas.
I grew up doing communitytheater in Cheyenne and Ashley
Schultz, one of my coaches allof her kids were also super
involved in the community.
So Dani was always someone thatI really looked up to and
thought was super awesome in thetheater community.
And suddenly she stopped tryingout as much and participating
and I was like where are yougoing?
(04:57):
Like what's going on?
And she had joined Speech andDebate and was focusing on that
a lot more.
And that was kind of my firstintroduction was oh, she's
really cool, maybe, if she likesit, I should try it once I get
to high school.
And then also Jeff Pope, ourpolicy coach, has always been
kind of a cousin to me.
We're not actually related butour families are really close.
So hearing that he coachedpolicy, I was like oh, another
(05:18):
person I know is in speech anddebate, maybe I should try it
out.
And then, joining high school,I got to meet Viney and a bunch
of people on the team who kindof introduced me to different
events and all of that and I gottrapped and I'm stuck here.
Lyle Wiley (05:33):
Yep, they got you, they got you.
They got you tied down.
There's nothing you can doabout it now.
What kind of events are youcompeting in Like?
What event do you like the best?
Natalyia Kopack (05:45):
What event do I like the best?
That's such a hard questionbecause I have competed in quite
a few.
I think debate is obviously myfavorite.
I have a pretty big leaningtowards LD, but my favorite
favorite has to be ExtemptDebate.
I know it's not like a mainevent or anything crazy, but
ever since I was introducedtotend Debate last year it's
been my favorite of all time.
(06:06):
I think it is kind of the bestform of debate that the NSC
offers.
It's a great balance ofeducation on current issues and
kind of keeping competitors ontheir toes with different topics
and all of that.
And I also find that itsimplifies debate down to the
bare bones and makes it aboutweighing arguments and kind of
turning them instead of who hasmore people on their team to do
prep and who has more cards.
It's super fundamental and Ithink our competition kind of
(06:29):
gets more progressive styleevery year when it comes to our
other debates and it's so barebones that you can't really make
it more progressive and youkind of just get to debate
fundamentals.
Lyle Wiley (06:39):
Yeah, I love extemp debate.
What a fun debate.
I wish we had more of it on ourWyoming circuit for sure.
What other events have you done?
You've dipped into PlatformInterp any of that stuff?
Natalyia Kopack (06:50):
I've dipped into Interp.
I did Duo and Drama my freshmanyear and then I also had
scripts for a couple other thatI practiced, but I never ended
up competing anything else.
And then I've also done thesame thing with Platform, where
I've written speeches and kindof practiced them and I go to
practices but I've never kind ofactually competed with them and
dip my toes completely in.
(07:11):
And then I did.
I've done pretty much everydebate event except for policy,
except debate.
I've done LD, I've done publicforum and then I also do
Congress.
Lyle Wiley (07:20):
Awesome, so you really have gotten involved in a
lot of the activities.
Do you have any plans to dosomething different this year?
Natalyia Kopack (07:26):
Yeah, I'm actually planning on maybe
trying out policy this year,which is new for me.
I think there's a stigma aroundit, so I'm kind of excited to
try that out.
And then I've been trying towork up the energy and the
motivation to do an info for thepast two years and I haven't
done it.
So I'm thinking of maybe doingan oratory or an informative
(07:47):
instead of Congress.
Lyle Wiley (07:48):
Okay, cool, cool.
Well, one of the things we'lltalk about is like trying
different activities and stuff.
So we'll get there.
We'll talk about how, uh, youshifting gears and different
kinds of debates.
It's kind of informed the waythat you think about debate, but
, uh, what's something aboutthis season that's unique, that
you learned about yourself, orjust a good memory that you have
?
Anything that stands out fromthis season specifically?
Natalyia Kopack (08:12):
I think for this season, everything about it
for me was kind of about beingless stressed.
My freshman year I switchedbetween LD and PF and I always
felt kind of stressed andanxious about it because I
didn't know if I was allowed tobe switching and I wasn't sure
which one I liked more and allof that.
And this year once again Icompeted Lincoln-Douglas in
public forum and I kind of feltmore comfortable switching
(08:35):
between the two and realizingthat it's okay to like more than
one event.
And I think this season hasreally just been big for me in
finding where my passion inspeech and debate is, because I
love speech and debate butthere's different parts that I
love more than others andfiguring that out has been huge
for me because it's a lot easierto stay motivated and to
continue competing with all ofmy heart when I'm aware that I
(08:56):
can do different events and thatI'm allowed to kind of do what
makes me happy in the community.
Lyle Wiley (09:03):
Cool, yeah, like let's, let's talk about that a
little bit.
So I know a lot of competitorsI've coached in the past get
pretty like comfortable eitherin one event or they maybe they
feel like it's just too much totry to take on something new or
different and they're hesitantto try different kinds of new
competitions.
I mean it can be kind of scaryto try new stuff, but like, what
(09:25):
are some of the reasons thatyou think that students hesitate
to shift gears and try newevents?
Natalyia Kopack (09:31):
I think that it starts with how maybe jarring
it is to join speech and debate.
A lot of the kids that are inthe community are surprisingly
the shocking or shockingly quietkids, the people who maybe
don't speak up as much as they,as you would expect.
So I think already joiningspeech and debate is kind of
difficult and something that isreally scary.
So trying to do multiple eventsor trying to drift events
(09:51):
especially your novice year,when it might be the most useful
to be changing around andfiguring out what you really
like it's easier to stick to onebecause that's the skill set
you're learning, that's theformat you understand and it's
easier to stay there.
I also think that there's someissues that we have around
stigma of certain events.
I'm not completely sure whatit's like in Interp and Platform
, but I know that in debatespecifically, there's definitely
a bad attitude around kids thatdo policy or kids that do
(10:13):
Congress, where it's like, oh,those events are bad, you can't
do them that kind of keep peopleaway from them.
And I'm sure there's similarevents in Platform and Interp
that have those same issues, butI think that's also an issue.
And then also when it comes tocommunity, when you join Speech
and Debate.
You have so much interactionwith other teams from different
parts of the state.
And when you're doing one event, you meet all of the people in
that event and you get morecomfortable because you realize
(10:35):
that you can go to tournamentsand have people to talk to and
know the people in your eventsand kind of have this steady
system and community around you.
And when you're joining newevents or trying different
things out, it's new people,it's new formats, it's different
skill sets that you have tolearn.
And I think that can be reallyjarring for people, especially
novices, because I think you'rea novice, you really should be
experimenting and figuring outwhat you like the best.
(10:56):
But it can be really difficultwith all of those different
things that are just kind ofscary and loom over you.
Lyle Wiley (11:01):
Absolutely.
Do you think the fact that ouractivity is competitive and some
of the pressures that come withtrying to be competitive might
have something to do with thistoo?
Like folks may be dipping intoevents that they feel like they
can have more success in, asopposed to events that maybe
they're more drawn to?
Natalyia Kopack (11:20):
Yeah, of course I think sometimes people look
at the competition pool and go,oh maybe I could do better in
this event and I want to placereally well, and so they join it
and they don't really have thepassion to be doing the event,
they just want the trophies oranything like that.
And I also think it can go theopposite way, where someone
tries to go to an event thatthey're drawn to and they have
that learning curve wherethey're not placing at first and
(11:41):
instead of sticking with it,they kind of go.
Maybe I should just stay in mybox and not try to experiment.
Lyle Wiley (11:47):
Yeah Well, and I don't know if there's a right
answer for what direction astudent should go, but depending
on goals and stuff, I thinkit's important to think about
that, probably in terms of whatyou choose.
So, so you've had someexperience trying out some
different stuff.
What are some of the challengesand advantages of trying new
and different events?
Natalyia Kopack (12:07):
I think one of the primary challenges is just
learning those different skillsets.
I think that can be reallyscary at first, and especially
in the debate world joining PFversus joining LD.
It's a completely new format.
The way we construct cases isdifferent and kind of, even
though there are fundamentaldebate skills that every debate
carries, there is more tailoredskills in each event that you
(12:29):
kind of have to adapt to.
I think that's one of thebiggest challenges is just
learning the new format,learning how to do things and
sticking to it instead ofrunning away the first time that
you're scared.
And then I also think that thatperformance learning curve was
really hard for me.
That was originally.
The reason why I switched topublic forum in the first place
was I competed in varsity forthe first time for LD and I kind
of had this fear and impostersyndrome, like I'm not good
(12:51):
enough, I don't deserve to bedoing this event.
So I ended up switching into apartner event where I started
doing well in the varsity season.
And I think that performancelearning curve where when you're
switching or when you're tryingnew events and you don't place
well automatically can be reallyscary because you feel like you
don't need to be there and youhave to switch because you're
not doing well enough, and alsojust that fear and self-doubt
about having the abilities tochange, because a lot of people,
(13:13):
myself included, just feel likeit is really difficult and
maybe I'm not built to be tryingnew events, maybe I'm not made
for this one, and instead ofsticking to it, I think it's
really easy to leave and go backto that box.
Lyle Wiley (13:26):
What about, like advantages, like what are some
of the things that are goodabout, like getting out of your
comfort zone and trying newevents?
Natalyia Kopack (13:32):
I think different skill set is also a
advantage, because when you arelearning those different things
you become more confident allaround the board.
Because when you realize thatyou can do both formats and you
can debate and you can do allthese different events, it's so
much easier to keep competingand to say I am good enough.
And then your performance inevery event that you do starts
to go up because you realizethat you do deserve to be here
(13:54):
and that this event is somethingthat you're able to do and that
you have the skill set to do.
And then I also think thatthere's just another
understanding and appreciationof other events that kind of
bonds teams together.
When you understand whatinterpreters have to do, what
platformers have to do, whatdebaters have to do to succeed
in their events and the workthat goes into everything, I
think you just have more of anunderstanding and respect for
(14:15):
the work that your teammates do,which creates a healthier
environment where everybody kindof appreciates and understands
each other, and I think it makesit a lot easier to have respect
on the team.
And then also just finding newpassions and interests Speech
and debate, I think, sometimeswith specific topics and debate,
or maybe your speech it kind ofgets a little dull and you
start to feel unmotivated by theend of the season and maybe
(14:37):
just burnt out.
But when you have other eventsthat you like and you're not
just stuck to one, you have morepassion and you have more
interest in staying in thecommunity because there's
different things for you to try.
And even if you're notswitching events all the time
and you don't have multiple,knowing that you can change
events and kind of thinkingabout that makes it easier to
stay and say, hey, even if I'mnot feeling it right now,
(14:58):
there's always opportunity totry something else and to stay.
And then I just think overallit obviously helps your
self-image and confidence if youknow that you can change and
you're happy with yourperformance and confident in
what you're doing.
Lyle Wiley (15:10):
That's some great stuff.
I totally agree with all thosethings.
I do want to take a moment fora ghostly interlude here and ask
you if you believe in ghostsand the paranormal.
Natalyia Kopack (15:22):
I do.
I think it is completelyimpossible that there's so many
coincidences, like in specifichaunted places everybody's
saying, oh yeah, I saw thisghostly figure and everybody's
saying the same thing.
I have a hard time believingthat that's a coincidence.
I think that the ghostdefinitely has to be there and
also you just see a lot of maybenot evidence but recording and
firsthand experiences ofparanormal activity and of
(15:44):
seeing ghosts, and I don't thinkthat it is possible that
everybody's just making that uptogether.
Lyle Wiley (15:50):
I think it has to be based in truth there is a lot
of unexplained phenomena outthere, isn't there?
Natalyia Kopack (15:57):
yeah, and I think just because we don't
understand something doesn'tmean that it isn't real,
especially with the paranormal.
Just because we might notscientifically get it doesn't
mean that it isn't real,especially with the paranormal.
Just because we might notscientifically get it doesn't
mean we won't in the future andthat it is happening.
Lyle Wiley (16:08):
Yeah, yeah, preach Nat, so we are going to shift
gears a little bit.
Thank you for your perspectiveon multiple events and, yeah,
you think you might try somedifferent stuff this year,
potentially.
Natalyia Kopack (16:23):
Yeah, that's what I'm hoping for is I do like
to stay on my toes and debateand just kind of try out
different things and figure outwhat speaks to me the most.
So that's my goal this year isto try out some new stuff.
Lyle Wiley (16:33):
Cool, that's exciting.
But I also really want to talkwith you about this really great
article that you wrote forEquality and Forensics this year
.
So I mean, it was a reallythoughtful and an important and
a personal article.
You titled it A Girl Debater'sGuide to Keep Going, and I'd
like to really talk with youabout that, if that's okay.
First off, you know, wow, likeyou point out in the article,
(16:56):
the stats are clear that girlcompetitors are leaving debate
faster than guys.
So why is this?
What specific obstacles dogirls uniquely have to navigate
in this debate world?
Natalyia Kopack (17:09):
Yeah, so there's a lot of issues that
women face, and I also think itis important to note that the
issues that I do talk about alsoapply to other demographics and
minorities, like people ofcolor and people that maybe
aren't cisgender in thecommunity, although I do think
I'm most specifically qualifiedto talk about the female issues.
I think it is important torealize that they do affect
everybody.
And then also, when you go intothe issues that do affect
(17:30):
people, my article talks aboutjudge bias and higher standards
as two of the main issues, andthen also discouragement and
bullying.
So first, starting with thatjudge bias and higher standards
I think that it can kind of besplit into two subsets of issues
.
The first one is thestereotypes and the gender
stereotypes that women have tokind of tailor to and adapt to
in the debate community, becausea lot of people, especially
(17:51):
maybe older judges that we havetruly believe that girls should
be quiet, non-argumentative andreally polite in rounds, and
that can be incredibly damagingand harmful for debaters,
because being argumentative isthe entire purpose of debate.
The entire point is for us tomake arguments in that bold and
assertive way and to defendourselves.
It is completely vital towriting a case and participating
(18:11):
in a round, and although that'sthe goal of debate, women are
losing grounds for doing it.
The stats that I talk about inmy article say that women are
17.1% less likely to win a roundagainst male debaters, and it's
not just because they can'thack it.
It's because of these genderstereotypes and because of the
higher standards that they facewhen you look to it.
(18:34):
There's also judge bias when itcomes to clothing.
Most girls will tell you thatthey have to think about their
outfits much harder than theaverage male in debate, and it's
for good reason, because almostevery judge has this
preconceived notion of what afemale debater should be wearing
, and some of them want you towear pants and be more masculine
in your attire.
Some don't really care at alland others want you to be as
feminine as possible in skirtsand heels and all of that.
(18:55):
But those aren't the onlyrequirements, because then you
see more things like if yourskirt is too short, then you're
not being professional enoughand everything about your look
has to be feminine but can't beshowy or skimpy.
And there's just a milliondifferent perspectives on attire
that girls should be wearingand everybody kind of has to
like hold up the world trying tofigure out what the best outfit
to appeal to the most judges isgoing to be.
(19:16):
And that's on top of alreadydoing all of the prep and
research.
That male debaters are doing isbecause they have to figure out
their outfits, they have tofigure out how to appeal to
these gender stereotypes sothey're not losing rounds
because simply there isn'treally a huge way around it.
And they also have to cut allof these cards, write their
cases.
It's kind of this double loadof work, I think.
And then also we see a lot ofdiscouragement and bullying,
(19:38):
which I think once again comesin two different forms.
First is, of course, judges andcoaches, who I think are the
people with the most impact.
When we see that the standardsare unfair for girls and we look
at that judge bias, we're goingto see more losses on women's
ballots.
That stuff I told you earlieris from an empirical study of
gender differences incompetitive high school debate,
and then another one.
The Talon says that they foundthat two men have a 37.6% higher
(20:02):
chance of winning over twowomen in the same debate format,
and that can be incrediblydiscouraging when girls are
aware of the issue and knowingoh, I might be at a disadvantage
going into this round becauseI'm going up against a boy.
It can be really discouragingand bad on your self-esteem and
mental health is going.
Oh, I don't think I'm going towin this.
I have to debate boys.
And then, additionally, whenyou are getting those losses on
(20:28):
your ballot for things that youcan't control, like whatever you
were wearing or if you wereallegedly too loud by a judge,
it can be really difficult tohear over and over again because
you know that you should beperforming well, your coaches
know that you should beperforming well, but the judges
simply aren't giving it to youbecause of your gender or
they're judging you harderbecause of it, and that can be
super discouraging.
And then also we see a lot ofissues with bullying when it
(20:49):
comes to debate.
I think recently it has kind oftransformed into a boys club.
I think debate has always beentailored a little bit more for
males.
That was the people who werefirst debating and joining these
teams and because of that therereally is a dynamic where girls
are kind of looked down upon bya lot of debaters and obviously
it isn't everyone and sometimesit isn't intentional.
But also when you have a bunchof casual relationships between
(21:11):
teenagers, like we're all inhigh school together, we're all
hanging out on the weekends andwe all know each other.
They are casual friendships ina more professional environment.
You see, sometimes things slidethat shouldn't like maybe
misogynistic remarks or jokesthat cross a line and nobody
says anything because oh, it'sjust a joke, it's just my
teammate, it's okay.
But really it isn't okay and itsometimes can evolve into
(21:34):
bullying and harassment and allthese different issues.
And then also, you know,sometimes male debaters, just
like everybody else, say nastythings about their female
counterparts and say, oh, I'mgoing to win this round because
I'm against a girl, or just kindof horrible things are said
that leave girls feeling unsafein the environment.
You know, just not reallyhaving that encouragement and
motivation to keep going,because everybody is kind of
(21:56):
beating down on you, betweenjudges and your male teammates
and things like that, it canjust get really difficult to
stay afloat.
Lyle Wiley (22:02):
Some heavy stuff and it's all very real.
I don't know how comfortableyou are to talk about this, but
have you experienced some ofthese injustices and biases on
your own debate journey?
Natalyia Kopack (22:12):
Yeah, I have.
My freshman year was kind ofdifficult because I've always
been a really feminine girl, soI love pink suits and dressing
up and I think it's really funand I think when I was looked
down on for doing that, I knowthis year specifically I
experienced a couple of maledebaters in my Congress rounds
referring to me as like legallyblonde and not in a good way,
not like she's a Harvardgraduate kind of way, but in a
(22:35):
pretty degrading way, and thathas always been really hurtful.
Is people looking down on mebecause of that?
And then also I just think itis really hard to have a team
where you don't have any of thatmale toxicity towards female
debaters.
I think sometimes it wasn'tmalicious or intentional to try
to drive me out of debate oranything like that, but I've
experienced a lot of commentsabout, maybe, my body in a
(22:55):
debate round that didn't need tobe spoken about or just things
like that that were incrediblyhumiliating and degrading and
did make me want to quit for awhile.
I debated coming back mysophomore year because I just
didn't want to deal with itanymore and I really was
struggling with just kind ofdealing with some of the boys in
debate and also I'm in Congress, which I think has some of the
(23:15):
most toxicity out of anything,because it is an inherently
political event and it does kindof become a boys club even more
than other events.
It does get kind of difficultto have boundaries and things
like that, and I've also alwayshad trouble speaking up for
myself and saying, hey, that'snot funny, don't say that.
And sometimes it just getsworse and worse and worse.
Before I'm kind of like, hey,whoa, let's not say those things
(23:37):
anymore.
Lyle Wiley (23:38):
Well, first off, I'm sorry you've experienced those
things.
This is unacceptable in ourcommunity and it's one of the
reasons why we have to talkabout it a lot.
We try to on this podcast.
But yeah, I was thinking aboutCongress and just how unmoored
it is in a lot of ways fromtraditional rules and structures
.
I should just say structuresthere's rules in Congress but
(23:59):
they're not always superfollowed.
But the structure of Congresskind of lends itself to
sometimes getting a little outof control.
Huh.
Natalyia Kopack (24:05):
Yeah, it can be really difficult because it is
a student-run event, because alot of judges don't know what
they're doing when they'rejudging Congress, so sometimes
it's harder to stop when thingsare going wrong.
And also it is really politicalwhen it comes to chair
elections and it comes to who'sgetting to speak first, and
there's just a lot of just likeour real Congress.
There's a lot of room forcorruption and things like that
and it is kind of a breedingground for issues if it's not
(24:28):
kept in check at tournaments andon teams themselves.
Lyle Wiley (24:30):
If you have a Congress team and you're not
talking to them and making surethat things are being run
properly and that they're notdoing crazy things in round,
then things kind of do get outof control and yeah, one of the
things I'm going to ask youabout is solutions and just
thinking about Congressspecifically, is there something
(24:51):
we could do to shore up some ofthose loose structures in
Congress to try to help thatevent a little bit specifically,
be a little less Wild West-yand reach places of
inappropriateness?
Natalyia Kopack (25:05):
Yes, I think it is something that first needs
to be talked about by coachesany coach that has maybe even
two kids in Congress or just onetalking about what is
appropriate in what isn'tappropriate in congress.
At the end of the day, eventhough it is kind of a more fun
and wild westy event, there arestructures and rules and it
(25:37):
isn't just a free-for-all.
We don't want to be wastingjudges time and making a mockery
of the event that they came tojudge.
We don't want to be beingdisrespectful or hurting people
in round and I think when acoach talks to their students
about that and says, hey, let'stalk about what's appropriate in
round and decorum and etiquetteand all of these different
things that are important tokeeping it less Wild Westy, I
(25:58):
think we start to see some ofthose issues dissolve because
students know what isappropriate and know that there
will be consequences or it willbe addressed if they do
something that isn't appropriate.
And then also, I think it couldbe wildly helpful for
tournaments that have theresources to do a little bit
more required judge training forCongress.
I think Congress and policy aresome of the hardest events to
judge, just because they're alittle more complicated, and in
(26:19):
Congress you're keeping track ofso many people that it is kind
of hard to look at what else ishappening in the round besides
speeches.
But I think if we one areputting the more experienced
judges on those rounds in thefirst place, we're going to see
less issues like that.
Because I think even for kidsthat don't want to respect their
coaches and actually follow theboundaries and structure of
Congress, when you have a judgein that room saying what are we
(26:41):
doing?
That needs to stop, you seebetter behavior, I think, and
then also just really helpingout Congress judges and saying,
hey, this is what the event issupposed to look like.
It has all of the sameetiquette, rules and
appropriateness that otherevents have.
Let's make sure that that'sbeing followed, and things like
that.
When you kind of give thejudges more support, I think
it's easier to control thoserounds.
Lyle Wiley (27:02):
Oh, thanks for that, nat.
That's some good feedback aboutCongress specifically, and
there will be some overlap withthis next question.
But let's talk about solutions.
How can we, as a community andas teams, create more
sustainably equitable and safeenvironments for all competitors
(27:22):
?
You know the local level, thecoach level, competitor level,
regional level, national level.
Do you have some thoughts aboutsolutions?
It's a large question, I know,but I know you got this.
Natalyia Kopack (27:34):
Yeah.
So of course I am like a highschool girl.
I don't have the answers toeverything, but I do have some
perspective on this.
I think the first thing is it'simportant to note that there is
kind of a ripple effect whenyou're an informed and equitable
competitor, that makes thepeople around you more equitable
, which makes your team moreequitable, and that goes up to
coach region and nationals.
So I think the first thing tolook at is the competitor,
(27:56):
that's the person it kind oftraces back down to.
And first of all, I thinkcompetitors need to be aware and
acknowledge issues of differentdemographics in the community,
like going on to that example ofsexism and kind of the misogyny
that we see.
Being aware that that ishappening and knowing that it is
an issue makes it a lot easierto kind of check your behavior
and say is what I'm doing normalright now or is it something
(28:19):
that maybe is misogynistic ormakes someone feel unsafe?
When you're aware of all of theissues in the community, it's
easier to not be a part of them.
I also just think beingrespectful and kind of thinking
kindness 101, at the end of theday, this is a more professional
kind of club.
You are doing events thatreally matter and that affect
people.
But just thinking about howyour actions and what you're
(28:40):
saying do affect everybodyaround you, whether it's at a
tournament, whether it's at apractice or whether it's just in
a regular conversation aboutdebate, that should be something
that we're all looking at, andthen also, I think, for the
competitors, looking at otherpeople's boundaries and
respecting them, and then alsotalking about your boundaries.
To have an equitable team, youneed to be aware of what is okay
and what isn't okay.
(29:00):
So if someone says something toyou or there's behavior
happening on your team that youthink isn't appropriate, making
sure that your coaches knowabout it, making sure that the
people around you or the peoplethat are acting that way are
being told hey, that isn't okay,because at the end of the day,
sometimes not every behavior ismalicious.
And if you're sitting there andgoing, hey, this actually is
really hurting me, this isn'tall right, maybe they'll stop,
maybe there's more of room forgrowth and less harm to other
(29:25):
people within that, and thenobviously that then goes to the
team.
When you have all of thosepeople doing those things, then
you have a healthier team.
Obviously, competition makes itinevitable that there is going
to be some butting heads, buthaving good conflict skills and
making sure that you'reminimizing infighting and kind
of dealing with the issues whenthey arise.
(29:45):
You have to have positivecommunication channels.
So when everybody feelscomfortable talking to each
other and they know that it isnot a toxic environment and that
you can talk about issues thatare happening, then it is more
clear what is going on and moreclear how to handle it.
Because when those issues arise, if you feel comfortable
talking to your coach about it,then the coach can feel
comfortable handling it.
(30:05):
Then on the coach level, Ithink they're one of the most
important people that have themost impact on everybody in
speech and debate.
Without healthy coaches, youkind of have a whole community
fall apart.
So, first of all, settingboundaries and rules with your
team and saying that there iszero tolerance for things like
discrimination, harassment.
Any bad behavior that harmsother students needs to have no
tolerance, and set rules aboutwhat's going to happen if it
(30:27):
does occur.
And just having thoseboundaries with your students to
be very clear about what isn'tallowed.
And then also handling theissues when they arise.
If you have good communicationwith channels with your kids and
they're coming up to you andsaying, hey, this is happening,
I'm not comfortable with it.
Actually talking to thestudents that are causing issues
and handling those issues isincredibly important to make
sure that everybody feelslistened to and the environment
(30:48):
stays healthy.
And then I think if you havehealthy coaches and these
healthy teams, you havehealthier regions, because
coaches who have positiveenvironments with their kids and
appreciate and respecteverybody in the community are
going to again have that rippleeffect and the coaches around
you then become more equitableand tournaments become more
equitable.
So, and I also think regionally, there needs to be this
(31:09):
understanding that if there iscoaches or kids that are
disrespectful and do causeissues for other students, that
are causing harm to thecommunity and the integrity that
speech and debate has, thenmaking sure that we're aware of
that Because not necessarily doyou have to shut anybody from
tournaments or not allow them todo things, but making sure that
(31:29):
you have systems in place forpeople that act that way and
when issues do arise can bereally important at the regional
level, at tournamentsspecifically, and then also, if
you're running tournaments,making sure that if you have the
resources, having diversity andinclusion stations, having
plans in place for when thingsgo wrong and just making sure
that that's okay.
And then the national level.
(31:50):
I kind of have a hot take aboutthe NSDA right now.
I think recently the NSDA haskind of been putting profit
before their students and Ithink there's a lack of
integrity in the activity incomparison to previous years.
A lot of inclusion efforts thatyou see are rather new.
When you look at the equitycommitments and those rostrums,
they started in 2018, which ispretty recent.
(32:12):
They haven't been there sincethe start of speech and debate
and they are obviously stillworking towards making it better
and having more inclusion.
But I think they need to honedown specific issues.
If you look to the 2023-2024equity commitments, you can see
that not a single commitment oreffort to help female debaters
was specifically made this year,and next year's commitments
(32:32):
don't outline anything either.
I think the NSDA really needsto look and acknowledge the
issues that are happening andthen look at solving them
specifically instead of kind ofhaving these wide diversity
commitments.
And then also, I think there'sissues like the belonging and
inclusion stations arerelatively new and they do
require them or they try to havethem at every district
(32:53):
tournament and at the nationaltournament, but I think it
should be at every tournamentthat we have officers that are
helping with that, that we havethese stations to help kids and
overall, I just think the NSDAneeds to put in a little bit
more effort to honing in onspecific issues.
And then also, if you havecoaches and you have regions
that are healthy, you're goingto have a national level that's
more healthy.
Lyle Wiley (33:13):
Some good stuff.
I kind of agree with your hottake too.
I mean, at the individual level, I think there's a lot of
really well-meaning people, butI do feel like often there's
some performative sort of stuffhappening instead of like actual
stuff happening yeah, I agree.
Natalyia Kopack (33:35):
I think sometimes they are looking to
have representation instead ofsolving the issues and obviously
representation is a great thing, but I think there could be
more resources funneled towardsfixing thing the root causes
absolutely, I think.
Lyle Wiley (33:47):
I think that's fair, I think, and I hopefully,
hopefully that'll improve.
I just feel like we've come tothis party awfully late.
This has been a problem, uh,for a really long time, and it
doesn't seem as though nsda hashad much sense of urgency and do
anything to fix it.
Natalyia Kopack (34:04):
So seems a little bit like a back burner
effort yeah, although I mean ithas.
Lyle Wiley (34:10):
They've definitely at least made some commitments
last few years that, um that Imean, are steps in the right
direction.
They just feel sort of likebaby steps.
So yes yeah, yeah, I'm with you.
Hopefully we can continue tohave these kinds of
conversations and and pushpeople to thinking about stuff
that is not always really allthat comfortable for people to
think about, but they need tothink about it.
Natalyia Kopack (34:32):
Yeah.
Lyle Wiley (34:33):
And, yeah, I'm very sorry again for your experience
as a young debater in the state,a young, talented debater that
we need to like, foster yourtalent and help you to excel.
I think it's kind of sad andhard to hear that you've had
moments where you weren't surethat you were going to continue
this because of the treatmentthat you've received as a woman.
Natalyia Kopack (34:54):
Yeah, thank you .
I think it is difficult, but Ialso think it's important to
look at the good in speech anddebate and, while it is
important to have theconversations and educate people
on the issues that arehappening, because they can't be
solved if people don't knowabout them, I am happy that I'm
in speech and debate and I thinkit has been a great experience
for me, and I'm glad that I'vechosen to stay, despite any
treatment that has happened inthe past.
Lyle Wiley (35:16):
Well, we're glad to have you.
Hopefully we as a community cando a better job of advocating
for everyone in this activity,but that does lead into.
I do want to like give you anopportunity to talk about some
of the things that you reallythink are great about speech and
debate.
First off, what are you mostlooking forward to this upcoming
season?
What are you excited about?
Natalyia Kopack (35:38):
I'm really excited to be trying out new
events and I'm also just excitedto stay connected with other
teams.
One of my favorite parts aboutspeech and debate is the
community that we have andmeeting all these people from
across the state and even at thenational level.
I attended nationals for thefirst time this year and you
meet so many people and it'sreally cool to be around people
that have the same passion asyou and the same interests.
Where you not everybody has afamily that wants to hear about
(36:00):
the political and socioeconomicstate of the world.
So being in an environmentwhere you can talk about all of
these different issues thateverybody cares about is so
important to me and it has mademy life so much better.
I think I just feel heard andincluded, being able to talk to
all of these people around thestate.
So that's probably the thingI'm most excited about is seeing
those people that maybe livefour hours away and don't always
get to come visit, and seeingthem at tournaments and
(36:22):
participating with them andgetting to hang out with them,
because it really I think a lotof passion for the events comes
from the community, Because ifyou don't have those people that
you love competing with youkind of lack a little passion
for the event on occasion,because it just becomes harder
without friends.
So that's probably one of thethings I'm most excited about is
just seeing everybody again andjust getting to make progress
(36:43):
in my events and trying out newthings.
Lyle Wiley (36:45):
For you is that?
Is that probably the best partof speech and debate is the
community.
Natalyia Kopack (36:50):
Yeah, I think so.
I just love everyone here somuch and I also love my events,
of course.
My other favorite part isdefinitely case construction and
actually doing fundamentaldebate stuff.
I love cutting cards, evenduring the summer.
Sometimes, if I know potentialtopics, I'm writing cases and
maybe starting on my researchjust because I find a lot of
(37:10):
enjoyment in that.
But I do think the community isdefinitely my favorite part.
Lyle Wiley (37:15):
Oh, that's lovely.
Well, thank you so much forchatting with me here, Nat.
I do want to end our interviewwith a little bit of fear talk.
You know, I think publicspeaking is it's widely known as
one of the greatest fears forthe public.
It's a visceral horror for alot of folks outside of speech
and debate.
So why is participating inspeech and debate worth the
(37:37):
terror, the anxiety, the horror?
Natalyia Kopack (37:42):
I think there's a lot of reasons why it is
worth the terror, I think, first, you're going to have new
skills that you can put intoeverywhere.
If you're learning how to debate, if you're learning how to
speak publicly, that transfersover to your school, to
education and being able tomaybe give a presentation in
front of your class without asmuch anxiety as before.
And learning those new skills.
And also it makes you feelbetter about yourself.
(38:03):
When you know that publicspeaking is one of the biggest
fears in the world and you cando it every single weekend and
you choose to do it, I think youget a little more confidence in
yourself to say, oh, I can dothis here, I can do this
everywhere, I can public speakwhenever I want, and all of
these skills are applicable allof the time.
And just knowing that you aregood enough to do something like
(38:25):
this and I just think thatmakes you feel better about
yourself, it increases yourself-image and your confidence.
And also, just do it to meetthe people.
At the very minimum, go meetsome new friends from Wyoming or
from whatever state you're inand have those new friendships
and lasting relationships withthose people, because it can be
(38:45):
really helpful and add to yoursuccess as a person to meet all
of these different people withdifferent perspectives and to
just participate in speech anddebate and learn about other
people, learn about yourself andto appreciate the world around
you.
Lyle Wiley (38:59):
Thanks for helping us navigate the clapocalypse,
which I'm still figuring outexactly how to say the
clapocalypse, yeah, just thankyou so much for being here and
joining me and chatting with me.
I appreciate you.
Natalyia Kopack (39:11):
Thank you for having me.
I think it's been an honor tobe on OneClap.
This has been my dream for thepast two years, so I'm very
excited to be here.
Lyle Wiley (39:18):
Thanks so much to Nat for her candid, helpful and
fun interview.
I'll link to Natalia's articlepublished in Equality and
Forensics on the website and youshould definitely give it a
read.
What's going on in theclapocalypse tomorrow?
Well, casper College competitorand Lander High School alum,
josie House, will be here for aninterview.
Don't miss it.
Remember to check the socialmedia challenges on our socials
(39:40):
and we'll see you tomorrow.
Campers oh yeah, I told myfriend Adrian that we were all
the way to day 13 at camp and hesaid 13, not on my watch or on
my clock.
Huh for camp, one clock.
This is camp director Wileysigning off.
Hey campers.
Spooky day 13 of theclapocalypse is here and
frightening indeed.
But today at Camp One Clap,natalia Kopak is here to help.
Natalia debuts at camp to talkabout trying out new events and
the importance of equality inspeech and debate.
I'm your camp director and hostof the One Clap Speech and
(00:31):
Debate podcast, lyle Wiley.
Hopefully this year's Camp OneClap is providing inspiration
and resources to encouragespeech and debate coaches and
competitors to embrace theirfears and move forward with
resolve to speak their truth inthis coming season.
Quick reminder check theOneClap socials for today's
social media challenge.
The engagement with thesechallenges has been really fun
(00:51):
this year.
Let me tell you a little bitabout today's guests.
Natalia Natalia Kopak is arising junior competing for
Cheyenne East High School.
She's a self-certifiedjack-of-all-trades and has
competed in Lincoln Douglas PugBook Forum, extempt Debate
Congress, duo, drama andInformative.
Her article A Girl Debater'sGuide to Keep Going was
(01:15):
published in the Equality andForensics blog.
Listen to her episode to findout more about the challenges
women face in the debate sphere,as well as some perspective on
trying out new events andstaying passionate about the
activity.
Without further ado, here's myinterview with a student called
smarter than Abraham Lincoln byher coach, natalia Kopak.
Welcome to Camp One, clapNatalia Kopak.
(01:39):
Hey, it's really great to haveyou on the podcast.
You've, however, inadvertentlystumbled upon the clapocalypse
and I'm so glad you're here.
Natalyia Kopack (01:49):
I'm so glad to be here.
Thank you for having me, Lyle.
Lyle Wiley (01:53):
Yeah, we know each other from the Wyoming Forensics
Institute.
It was really great to workwith you last summer and, of
course, I've seen you around theWyoming circuit and you're a
fabulous debater and it's justreally great to have you on here
.
I do want to like start thingsoff, though, by talking about
fear and terror and scary stuff.
What's your favorite scarystory like movie, book?
Natalyia Kopack (02:14):
Probably anything by Tim Burton or Henry
Selick I'm a big fan of, likeCoraline, the Night Before
Christmas and Corpse BrideThey've kind of rotated being my
favorite movie since I wasreally little and also I got
introduced to the it franchiselast summer and I really loved
that.
Lyle Wiley (02:29):
Yeah, that's a creepy franchise for sure.
My daughter's really intoCoraline Been a big fan of that
story for a long time.
It's pretty weird the buttonson eyes thing that gets to me.
Do you like horror movies?
Natalyia Kopack (02:42):
Yeah, actually, every year during October I do
a big thing with some of myfriends where we watch a horror
movie for every day of October.
So I get, I get exposure to alot of them every year.
Lyle Wiley (02:53):
Well, that's pretty exciting.
So, uh, speaking of theapocalypse on a scale of one to
10, how likely do you think youwould survive an actual
apocalypse like apost-apocalyptic wasteland?
You think you would survive anactual apocalypse like a
post-apocalyptic wasteland,something out of a dystopian
novel?
Would you be a survivor?
You strike me as a survivor.
Natalyia Kopack (03:09):
Well, I'd like to think I was a survivor, but I
think if we're looking at ithonestly, I might be at about a
four or five on that one to tenscale.
I think intellectually I havesome talents, but I don't think
I have the physical prowess tosurvive any apocalypse and I
might kind of get done after awhile with that mental capacity
and just be like oh, I don'tknow about this anymore yeah.
Lyle Wiley (03:30):
Do you have any skills that you'd bring to the
table in a the apocalypsesituation?
Natalyia Kopack (03:35):
I think I could be a supervisor a super, yeah.
I'll allocate our resources andlike, ration everything out,
maybe decide some tasks and puteverybody else to work, but I
think I'll just stay there andnot maybe do any of the labor or
anything like that.
Lyle Wiley (03:51):
Like an intellectual sort of emotional support
leader, like that sort ofsituation.
Natalyia Kopack (03:56):
Yeah.
Lyle Wiley (03:56):
Yeah, I have a feeling talking to these speech
and debate folks who are themost wonderful people in the
world, however, maybe not themost prepared for a
post-apocalyptic wastelandpeople Cause, like most folks so
far, are saying that they don'tfeel comfortable about their
survival chances.
Natalyia Kopack (04:14):
I think we're definitely not a physical club.
Lyle Wiley (04:18):
That's probably a fair generalization.
So I've never had a chance tohave you on the podcast now, so
I'm going to ask you somegeneralized questions about your
speech and debate experiencefirst, and then we're going to
talk about a whole bunch ofother stuff.
So what got you into speech anddebate?
What's your story?
What's your speech and debateorigin story?
Natalyia Kopack (04:37):
I kind of have an origin pulled from a bunch of
different areas.
I grew up doing communitytheater in Cheyenne and Ashley
Schultz, one of my coaches allof her kids were also super
involved in the community.
So Dani was always someone thatI really looked up to and
thought was super awesome in thetheater community.
And suddenly she stopped tryingout as much and participating
and I was like where are yougoing?
(04:57):
Like what's going on?
And she had joined Speech andDebate and was focusing on that
a lot more.
And that was kind of my firstintroduction was oh, she's
really cool, maybe, if she likesit, I should try it once I get
to high school.
And then also Jeff Pope, ourpolicy coach, has always been
kind of a cousin to me.
We're not actually related butour families are really close.
So hearing that he coachedpolicy, I was like oh, another
(05:18):
person I know is in speech anddebate, maybe I should try it
out.
And then, joining high school,I got to meet Viney and a bunch
of people on the team who kindof introduced me to different
events and all of that and I gottrapped and I'm stuck here.
Lyle Wiley (05:33):
Yep, they got you, they got you.
They got you tied down.
There's nothing you can doabout it now.
What kind of events are youcompeting in Like?
What event do you like the best?
Natalyia Kopack (05:45):
What event do I like the best?
That's such a hard questionbecause I have competed in quite
a few.
I think debate is obviously myfavorite.
I have a pretty big leaningtowards LD, but my favorite
favorite has to be ExtemptDebate.
I know it's not like a mainevent or anything crazy, but
ever since I was introducedtotend Debate last year it's
been my favorite of all time.
(06:06):
I think it is kind of the bestform of debate that the NSC
offers.
It's a great balance ofeducation on current issues and
kind of keeping competitors ontheir toes with different topics
and all of that.
And I also find that itsimplifies debate down to the
bare bones and makes it aboutweighing arguments and kind of
turning them instead of who hasmore people on their team to do
prep and who has more cards.
It's super fundamental and Ithink our competition kind of
(06:29):
gets more progressive styleevery year when it comes to our
other debates and it's so barebones that you can't really make
it more progressive and youkind of just get to debate
fundamentals.
Lyle Wiley (06:39):
Yeah, I love extemp debate.
What a fun debate.
I wish we had more of it on ourWyoming circuit for sure.
What other events have you done?
You've dipped into PlatformInterp any of that stuff?
Natalyia Kopack (06:50):
I've dipped into Interp.
I did Duo and Drama my freshmanyear and then I also had
scripts for a couple other thatI practiced, but I never ended
up competing anything else.
And then I've also done thesame thing with Platform, where
I've written speeches and kindof practiced them and I go to
practices but I've never kind ofactually competed with them and
dip my toes completely in.
(07:11):
And then I did.
I've done pretty much everydebate event except for policy,
except debate.
I've done LD, I've done publicforum and then I also do
Congress.
Lyle Wiley (07:20):
Awesome, so you really have gotten involved in a
lot of the activities.
Do you have any plans to dosomething different this year?
Natalyia Kopack (07:26):
Yeah, I'm actually planning on maybe
trying out policy this year,which is new for me.
I think there's a stigma aroundit, so I'm kind of excited to
try that out.
And then I've been trying towork up the energy and the
motivation to do an info for thepast two years and I haven't
done it.
So I'm thinking of maybe doingan oratory or an informative
(07:47):
instead of Congress.
Lyle Wiley (07:48):
Okay, cool, cool.
Well, one of the things we'lltalk about is like trying
different activities and stuff.
So we'll get there.
We'll talk about how, uh, youshifting gears and different
kinds of debates.
It's kind of informed the waythat you think about debate, but
, uh, what's something aboutthis season that's unique, that
you learned about yourself, orjust a good memory that you have
?
Anything that stands out fromthis season specifically?
Natalyia Kopack (08:12):
I think for this season, everything about it
for me was kind of about beingless stressed.
My freshman year I switchedbetween LD and PF and I always
felt kind of stressed andanxious about it because I
didn't know if I was allowed tobe switching and I wasn't sure
which one I liked more and allof that.
And this year once again Icompeted Lincoln-Douglas in
public forum and I kind of feltmore comfortable switching
(08:35):
between the two and realizingthat it's okay to like more than
one event.
And I think this season hasreally just been big for me in
finding where my passion inspeech and debate is, because I
love speech and debate butthere's different parts that I
love more than others andfiguring that out has been huge
for me because it's a lot easierto stay motivated and to
continue competing with all ofmy heart when I'm aware that I
(08:56):
can do different events and thatI'm allowed to kind of do what
makes me happy in the community.
Lyle Wiley (09:03):
Cool, yeah, like let's, let's talk about that a
little bit.
So I know a lot of competitorsI've coached in the past get
pretty like comfortable eitherin one event or they maybe they
feel like it's just too much totry to take on something new or
different and they're hesitantto try different kinds of new
competitions.
I mean it can be kind of scaryto try new stuff, but like, what
(09:25):
are some of the reasons thatyou think that students hesitate
to shift gears and try newevents?
Natalyia Kopack (09:31):
I think that it starts with how maybe jarring
it is to join speech and debate.
A lot of the kids that are inthe community are surprisingly
the shocking or shockingly quietkids, the people who maybe
don't speak up as much as they,as you would expect.
So I think already joiningspeech and debate is kind of
difficult and something that isreally scary.
So trying to do multiple eventsor trying to drift events
(09:51):
especially your novice year,when it might be the most useful
to be changing around andfiguring out what you really
like it's easier to stick to onebecause that's the skill set
you're learning, that's theformat you understand and it's
easier to stay there.
I also think that there's someissues that we have around
stigma of certain events.
I'm not completely sure whatit's like in Interp and Platform
, but I know that in debatespecifically, there's definitely
a bad attitude around kids thatdo policy or kids that do
(10:13):
Congress, where it's like, oh,those events are bad, you can't
do them that kind of keep peopleaway from them.
And I'm sure there's similarevents in Platform and Interp
that have those same issues, butI think that's also an issue.
And then also when it comes tocommunity, when you join Speech
and Debate.
You have so much interactionwith other teams from different
parts of the state.
And when you're doing one event, you meet all of the people in
that event and you get morecomfortable because you realize
(10:35):
that you can go to tournamentsand have people to talk to and
know the people in your eventsand kind of have this steady
system and community around you.
And when you're joining newevents or trying different
things out, it's new people,it's new formats, it's different
skill sets that you have tolearn.
And I think that can be reallyjarring for people, especially
novices, because I think you'rea novice, you really should be
experimenting and figuring outwhat you like the best.
(10:56):
But it can be really difficultwith all of those different
things that are just kind ofscary and loom over you.
Lyle Wiley (11:01):
Absolutely.
Do you think the fact that ouractivity is competitive and some
of the pressures that come withtrying to be competitive might
have something to do with thistoo?
Like folks may be dipping intoevents that they feel like they
can have more success in, asopposed to events that maybe
they're more drawn to?
Natalyia Kopack (11:20):
Yeah, of course I think sometimes people look
at the competition pool and go,oh maybe I could do better in
this event and I want to placereally well, and so they join it
and they don't really have thepassion to be doing the event,
they just want the trophies oranything like that.
And I also think it can go theopposite way, where someone
tries to go to an event thatthey're drawn to and they have
that learning curve wherethey're not placing at first and
(11:41):
instead of sticking with it,they kind of go.
Maybe I should just stay in mybox and not try to experiment.
Lyle Wiley (11:47):
Yeah Well, and I don't know if there's a right
answer for what direction astudent should go, but depending
on goals and stuff, I thinkit's important to think about
that, probably in terms of whatyou choose.
So, so you've had someexperience trying out some
different stuff.
What are some of the challengesand advantages of trying new
and different events?
Natalyia Kopack (12:07):
I think one of the primary challenges is just
learning those different skillsets.
I think that can be reallyscary at first, and especially
in the debate world joining PFversus joining LD.
It's a completely new format.
The way we construct cases isdifferent and kind of, even
though there are fundamentaldebate skills that every debate
carries, there is more tailoredskills in each event that you
(12:29):
kind of have to adapt to.
I think that's one of thebiggest challenges is just
learning the new format,learning how to do things and
sticking to it instead ofrunning away the first time that
you're scared.
And then I also think that thatperformance learning curve was
really hard for me.
That was originally.
The reason why I switched topublic forum in the first place
was I competed in varsity forthe first time for LD and I kind
of had this fear and impostersyndrome, like I'm not good
(12:51):
enough, I don't deserve to bedoing this event.
So I ended up switching into apartner event where I started
doing well in the varsity season.
And I think that performancelearning curve where when you're
switching or when you're tryingnew events and you don't place
well automatically can be reallyscary because you feel like you
don't need to be there and youhave to switch because you're
not doing well enough, and alsojust that fear and self-doubt
about having the abilities tochange, because a lot of people,
(13:13):
myself included, just feel likeit is really difficult and
maybe I'm not built to be tryingnew events, maybe I'm not made
for this one, and instead ofsticking to it, I think it's
really easy to leave and go backto that box.
Lyle Wiley (13:26):
What about, like advantages, like what are some
of the things that are goodabout, like getting out of your
comfort zone and trying newevents?
Natalyia Kopack (13:32):
I think different skill set is also a
advantage, because when you arelearning those different things
you become more confident allaround the board.
Because when you realize thatyou can do both formats and you
can debate and you can do allthese different events, it's so
much easier to keep competingand to say I am good enough.
And then your performance inevery event that you do starts
to go up because you realizethat you do deserve to be here
(13:54):
and that this event is somethingthat you're able to do and that
you have the skill set to do.
And then I also think thatthere's just another
understanding and appreciationof other events that kind of
bonds teams together.
When you understand whatinterpreters have to do, what
platformers have to do, whatdebaters have to do to succeed
in their events and the workthat goes into everything, I
think you just have more of anunderstanding and respect for
(14:15):
the work that your teammates do,which creates a healthier
environment where everybody kindof appreciates and understands
each other, and I think it makesit a lot easier to have respect
on the team.
And then also just finding newpassions and interests Speech
and debate, I think, sometimeswith specific topics and debate,
or maybe your speech it kind ofgets a little dull and you
start to feel unmotivated by theend of the season and maybe
(14:37):
just burnt out.
But when you have other eventsthat you like and you're not
just stuck to one, you have morepassion and you have more
interest in staying in thecommunity because there's
different things for you to try.
And even if you're notswitching events all the time
and you don't have multiple,knowing that you can change
events and kind of thinkingabout that makes it easier to
stay and say, hey, even if I'mnot feeling it right now,
(14:58):
there's always opportunity totry something else and to stay.
And then I just think overallit obviously helps your
self-image and confidence if youknow that you can change and
you're happy with yourperformance and confident in
what you're doing.
Lyle Wiley (15:10):
That's some great stuff.
I totally agree with all thosethings.
I do want to take a moment fora ghostly interlude here and ask
you if you believe in ghostsand the paranormal.
Natalyia Kopack (15:22):
I do.
I think it is completelyimpossible that there's so many
coincidences, like in specifichaunted places everybody's
saying, oh yeah, I saw thisghostly figure and everybody's
saying the same thing.
I have a hard time believingthat that's a coincidence.
I think that the ghostdefinitely has to be there and
also you just see a lot of maybenot evidence but recording and
firsthand experiences ofparanormal activity and of
(15:44):
seeing ghosts, and I don't thinkthat it is possible that
everybody's just making that uptogether.
Lyle Wiley (15:50):
I think it has to be based in truth there is a lot
of unexplained phenomena outthere, isn't there?
Natalyia Kopack (15:57):
yeah, and I think just because we don't
understand something doesn'tmean that it isn't real,
especially with the paranormal.
Just because we might notscientifically get it doesn't
mean that it isn't real,especially with the paranormal.
Just because we might notscientifically get it doesn't
mean we won't in the future andthat it is happening.
Lyle Wiley (16:08):
Yeah, yeah, preach Nat, so we are going to shift
gears a little bit.
Thank you for your perspectiveon multiple events and, yeah,
you think you might try somedifferent stuff this year,
potentially.
Natalyia Kopack (16:23):
Yeah, that's what I'm hoping for is I do like
to stay on my toes and debateand just kind of try out
different things and figure outwhat speaks to me the most.
So that's my goal this year isto try out some new stuff.
Lyle Wiley (16:33):
Cool, that's exciting.
But I also really want to talkwith you about this really great
article that you wrote forEquality and Forensics this year
.
So I mean, it was a reallythoughtful and an important and
a personal article.
You titled it A Girl Debater'sGuide to Keep Going, and I'd
like to really talk with youabout that, if that's okay.
First off, you know, wow, likeyou point out in the article,
(16:56):
the stats are clear that girlcompetitors are leaving debate
faster than guys.
So why is this?
What specific obstacles dogirls uniquely have to navigate
in this debate world?
Natalyia Kopack (17:09):
Yeah, so there's a lot of issues that
women face, and I also think itis important to note that the
issues that I do talk about alsoapply to other demographics and
minorities, like people ofcolor and people that maybe
aren't cisgender in thecommunity, although I do think
I'm most specifically qualifiedto talk about the female issues.
I think it is important torealize that they do affect
everybody.
And then also, when you go intothe issues that do affect
(17:30):
people, my article talks aboutjudge bias and higher standards
as two of the main issues, andthen also discouragement and
bullying.
So first, starting with thatjudge bias and higher standards
I think that it can kind of besplit into two subsets of issues
.
The first one is thestereotypes and the gender
stereotypes that women have tokind of tailor to and adapt to
in the debate community, becausea lot of people, especially
(17:51):
maybe older judges that we havetruly believe that girls should
be quiet, non-argumentative andreally polite in rounds, and
that can be incredibly damagingand harmful for debaters,
because being argumentative isthe entire purpose of debate.
The entire point is for us tomake arguments in that bold and
assertive way and to defendourselves.
It is completely vital towriting a case and participating
(18:11):
in a round, and although that'sthe goal of debate, women are
losing grounds for doing it.
The stats that I talk about inmy article say that women are
17.1% less likely to win a roundagainst male debaters, and it's
not just because they can'thack it.
It's because of these genderstereotypes and because of the
higher standards that they facewhen you look to it.
(18:34):
There's also judge bias when itcomes to clothing.
Most girls will tell you thatthey have to think about their
outfits much harder than theaverage male in debate, and it's
for good reason, because almostevery judge has this
preconceived notion of what afemale debater should be wearing
, and some of them want you towear pants and be more masculine
in your attire.
Some don't really care at alland others want you to be as
feminine as possible in skirtsand heels and all of that.
(18:55):
But those aren't the onlyrequirements, because then you
see more things like if yourskirt is too short, then you're
not being professional enoughand everything about your look
has to be feminine but can't beshowy or skimpy.
And there's just a milliondifferent perspectives on attire
that girls should be wearingand everybody kind of has to
like hold up the world trying tofigure out what the best outfit
to appeal to the most judges isgoing to be.
(19:16):
And that's on top of alreadydoing all of the prep and
research.
That male debaters are doing isbecause they have to figure out
their outfits, they have tofigure out how to appeal to
these gender stereotypes sothey're not losing rounds
because simply there isn'treally a huge way around it.
And they also have to cut allof these cards, write their
cases.
It's kind of this double loadof work, I think.
And then also we see a lot ofdiscouragement and bullying,
(19:38):
which I think once again comesin two different forms.
First is, of course, judges andcoaches, who I think are the
people with the most impact.
When we see that the standardsare unfair for girls and we look
at that judge bias, we're goingto see more losses on women's
ballots.
That stuff I told you earlieris from an empirical study of
gender differences incompetitive high school debate,
and then another one.
The Talon says that they foundthat two men have a 37.6% higher
(20:02):
chance of winning over twowomen in the same debate format,
and that can be incrediblydiscouraging when girls are
aware of the issue and knowingoh, I might be at a disadvantage
going into this round becauseI'm going up against a boy.
It can be really discouragingand bad on your self-esteem and
mental health is going.
Oh, I don't think I'm going towin this.
I have to debate boys.
And then, additionally, whenyou are getting those losses on
(20:28):
your ballot for things that youcan't control, like whatever you
were wearing or if you wereallegedly too loud by a judge,
it can be really difficult tohear over and over again because
you know that you should beperforming well, your coaches
know that you should beperforming well, but the judges
simply aren't giving it to youbecause of your gender or
they're judging you harderbecause of it, and that can be
super discouraging.
And then also we see a lot ofissues with bullying when it
(20:49):
comes to debate.
I think recently it has kind oftransformed into a boys club.
I think debate has always beentailored a little bit more for
males.
That was the people who werefirst debating and joining these
teams and because of that therereally is a dynamic where girls
are kind of looked down upon bya lot of debaters and obviously
it isn't everyone and sometimesit isn't intentional.
But also when you have a bunchof casual relationships between
(21:11):
teenagers, like we're all inhigh school together, we're all
hanging out on the weekends andwe all know each other.
They are casual friendships ina more professional environment.
You see, sometimes things slidethat shouldn't like maybe
misogynistic remarks or jokesthat cross a line and nobody
says anything because oh, it'sjust a joke, it's just my
teammate, it's okay.
But really it isn't okay and itsometimes can evolve into
(21:34):
bullying and harassment and allthese different issues.
And then also, you know,sometimes male debaters, just
like everybody else, say nastythings about their female
counterparts and say, oh, I'mgoing to win this round because
I'm against a girl, or just kindof horrible things are said
that leave girls feeling unsafein the environment.
You know, just not reallyhaving that encouragement and
motivation to keep going,because everybody is kind of
(21:56):
beating down on you, betweenjudges and your male teammates
and things like that, it canjust get really difficult to
stay afloat.
Lyle Wiley (22:02):
Some heavy stuff and it's all very real.
I don't know how comfortableyou are to talk about this, but
have you experienced some ofthese injustices and biases on
your own debate journey?
Natalyia Kopack (22:12):
Yeah, I have.
My freshman year was kind ofdifficult because I've always
been a really feminine girl, soI love pink suits and dressing
up and I think it's really funand I think when I was looked
down on for doing that, I knowthis year specifically I
experienced a couple of maledebaters in my Congress rounds
referring to me as like legallyblonde and not in a good way,
not like she's a Harvardgraduate kind of way, but in a
(22:35):
pretty degrading way, and thathas always been really hurtful.
Is people looking down on mebecause of that?
And then also I just think itis really hard to have a team
where you don't have any of thatmale toxicity towards female
debaters.
I think sometimes it wasn'tmalicious or intentional to try
to drive me out of debate oranything like that, but I've
experienced a lot of commentsabout, maybe, my body in a
(22:55):
debate round that didn't need tobe spoken about or just things
like that that were incrediblyhumiliating and degrading and
did make me want to quit for awhile.
I debated coming back mysophomore year because I just
didn't want to deal with itanymore and I really was
struggling with just kind ofdealing with some of the boys in
debate and also I'm in Congress, which I think has some of the
(23:15):
most toxicity out of anything,because it is an inherently
political event and it does kindof become a boys club even more
than other events.
It does get kind of difficultto have boundaries and things
like that, and I've also alwayshad trouble speaking up for
myself and saying, hey, that'snot funny, don't say that.
And sometimes it just getsworse and worse and worse.
Before I'm kind of like, hey,whoa, let's not say those things
(23:37):
anymore.
Lyle Wiley (23:38):
Well, first off, I'm sorry you've experienced those
things.
This is unacceptable in ourcommunity and it's one of the
reasons why we have to talkabout it a lot.
We try to on this podcast.
But yeah, I was thinking aboutCongress and just how unmoored
it is in a lot of ways fromtraditional rules and structures
.
I should just say structuresthere's rules in Congress but
(23:59):
they're not always superfollowed.
But the structure of Congresskind of lends itself to
sometimes getting a little outof control.
Huh.
Natalyia Kopack (24:05):
Yeah, it can be really difficult because it is
a student-run event, because alot of judges don't know what
they're doing when they'rejudging Congress, so sometimes
it's harder to stop when thingsare going wrong.
And also it is really politicalwhen it comes to chair
elections and it comes to who'sgetting to speak first, and
there's just a lot of just likeour real Congress.
There's a lot of room forcorruption and things like that
and it is kind of a breedingground for issues if it's not
(24:28):
kept in check at tournaments andon teams themselves.
Lyle Wiley (24:30):
If you have a Congress team and you're not
talking to them and making surethat things are being run
properly and that they're notdoing crazy things in round,
then things kind of do get outof control and yeah, one of the
things I'm going to ask youabout is solutions and just
thinking about Congressspecifically, is there something
(24:51):
we could do to shore up some ofthose loose structures in
Congress to try to help thatevent a little bit specifically,
be a little less Wild West-yand reach places of
inappropriateness?
Natalyia Kopack (25:05):
Yes, I think it is something that first needs
to be talked about by coachesany coach that has maybe even
two kids in Congress or just onetalking about what is
appropriate in what isn'tappropriate in congress.
At the end of the day, eventhough it is kind of a more fun
and wild westy event, there arestructures and rules and it
(25:37):
isn't just a free-for-all.
We don't want to be wastingjudges time and making a mockery
of the event that they came tojudge.
We don't want to be beingdisrespectful or hurting people
in round and I think when acoach talks to their students
about that and says, hey, let'stalk about what's appropriate in
round and decorum and etiquetteand all of these different
things that are important tokeeping it less Wild Westy, I
(25:58):
think we start to see some ofthose issues dissolve because
students know what isappropriate and know that there
will be consequences or it willbe addressed if they do
something that isn't appropriate.
And then also, I think it couldbe wildly helpful for
tournaments that have theresources to do a little bit
more required judge training forCongress.
I think Congress and policy aresome of the hardest events to
judge, just because they're alittle more complicated, and in
(26:19):
Congress you're keeping track ofso many people that it is kind
of hard to look at what else ishappening in the round besides
speeches.
But I think if we one areputting the more experienced
judges on those rounds in thefirst place, we're going to see
less issues like that.
Because I think even for kidsthat don't want to respect their
coaches and actually follow theboundaries and structure of
Congress, when you have a judgein that room saying what are we
(26:41):
doing?
That needs to stop, you seebetter behavior, I think, and
then also just really helpingout Congress judges and saying,
hey, this is what the event issupposed to look like.
It has all of the sameetiquette, rules and
appropriateness that otherevents have.
Let's make sure that that'sbeing followed, and things like
that.
When you kind of give thejudges more support, I think
it's easier to control thoserounds.
Lyle Wiley (27:02):
Oh, thanks for that, nat.
That's some good feedback aboutCongress specifically, and
there will be some overlap withthis next question.
But let's talk about solutions.
How can we, as a community andas teams, create more
sustainably equitable and safeenvironments for all competitors
(27:22):
?
You know the local level, thecoach level, competitor level,
regional level, national level.
Do you have some thoughts aboutsolutions?
It's a large question, I know,but I know you got this.
Natalyia Kopack (27:34):
Yeah.
So of course I am like a highschool girl.
I don't have the answers toeverything, but I do have some
perspective on this.
I think the first thing is it'simportant to note that there is
kind of a ripple effect whenyou're an informed and equitable
competitor, that makes thepeople around you more equitable
, which makes your team moreequitable, and that goes up to
coach region and nationals.
So I think the first thing tolook at is the competitor,
(27:56):
that's the person it kind oftraces back down to.
And first of all, I thinkcompetitors need to be aware and
acknowledge issues of differentdemographics in the community,
like going on to that example ofsexism and kind of the misogyny
that we see.
Being aware that that ishappening and knowing that it is
an issue makes it a lot easierto kind of check your behavior
and say is what I'm doing normalright now or is it something
(28:19):
that maybe is misogynistic ormakes someone feel unsafe?
When you're aware of all of theissues in the community, it's
easier to not be a part of them.
I also just think beingrespectful and kind of thinking
kindness 101, at the end of theday, this is a more professional
kind of club.
You are doing events thatreally matter and that affect
people.
But just thinking about howyour actions and what you're
(28:40):
saying do affect everybodyaround you, whether it's at a
tournament, whether it's at apractice or whether it's just in
a regular conversation aboutdebate, that should be something
that we're all looking at, andthen also, I think, for the
competitors, looking at otherpeople's boundaries and
respecting them, and then alsotalking about your boundaries.
To have an equitable team, youneed to be aware of what is okay
and what isn't okay.
(29:00):
So if someone says something toyou or there's behavior
happening on your team that youthink isn't appropriate, making
sure that your coaches knowabout it, making sure that the
people around you or the peoplethat are acting that way are
being told hey, that isn't okay,because at the end of the day,
sometimes not every behavior ismalicious.
And if you're sitting there andgoing, hey, this actually is
really hurting me, this isn'tall right, maybe they'll stop,
maybe there's more of room forgrowth and less harm to other
(29:25):
people within that, and thenobviously that then goes to the
team.
When you have all of thosepeople doing those things, then
you have a healthier team.
Obviously, competition makes itinevitable that there is going
to be some butting heads, buthaving good conflict skills and
making sure that you'reminimizing infighting and kind
of dealing with the issues whenthey arise.
(29:45):
You have to have positivecommunication channels.
So when everybody feelscomfortable talking to each
other and they know that it isnot a toxic environment and that
you can talk about issues thatare happening, then it is more
clear what is going on and moreclear how to handle it.
Because when those issues arise, if you feel comfortable
talking to your coach about it,then the coach can feel
comfortable handling it.
(30:05):
Then on the coach level, Ithink they're one of the most
important people that have themost impact on everybody in
speech and debate.
Without healthy coaches, youkind of have a whole community
fall apart.
So, first of all, settingboundaries and rules with your
team and saying that there iszero tolerance for things like
discrimination, harassment.
Any bad behavior that harmsother students needs to have no
tolerance, and set rules aboutwhat's going to happen if it
(30:27):
does occur.
And just having thoseboundaries with your students to
be very clear about what isn'tallowed.
And then also handling theissues when they arise.
If you have good communicationwith channels with your kids and
they're coming up to you andsaying, hey, this is happening,
I'm not comfortable with it.
Actually talking to thestudents that are causing issues
and handling those issues isincredibly important to make
sure that everybody feelslistened to and the environment
(30:48):
stays healthy.
And then I think if you havehealthy coaches and these
healthy teams, you havehealthier regions, because
coaches who have positiveenvironments with their kids and
appreciate and respecteverybody in the community are
going to again have that rippleeffect and the coaches around
you then become more equitableand tournaments become more
equitable.
So, and I also think regionally, there needs to be this
(31:09):
understanding that if there iscoaches or kids that are
disrespectful and do causeissues for other students, that
are causing harm to thecommunity and the integrity that
speech and debate has, thenmaking sure that we're aware of
that Because not necessarily doyou have to shut anybody from
tournaments or not allow them todo things, but making sure that
(31:29):
you have systems in place forpeople that act that way and
when issues do arise can bereally important at the regional
level, at tournamentsspecifically, and then also, if
you're running tournaments,making sure that if you have the
resources, having diversity andinclusion stations, having
plans in place for when thingsgo wrong and just making sure
that that's okay.
And then the national level.
(31:50):
I kind of have a hot take aboutthe NSDA right now.
I think recently the NSDA haskind of been putting profit
before their students and Ithink there's a lack of
integrity in the activity incomparison to previous years.
A lot of inclusion efforts thatyou see are rather new.
When you look at the equitycommitments and those rostrums,
they started in 2018, which ispretty recent.
(32:12):
They haven't been there sincethe start of speech and debate
and they are obviously stillworking towards making it better
and having more inclusion.
But I think they need to honedown specific issues.
If you look to the 2023-2024equity commitments, you can see
that not a single commitment oreffort to help female debaters
was specifically made this year,and next year's commitments
(32:32):
don't outline anything either.
I think the NSDA really needsto look and acknowledge the
issues that are happening andthen look at solving them
specifically instead of kind ofhaving these wide diversity
commitments.
And then also, I think there'sissues like the belonging and
inclusion stations arerelatively new and they do
require them or they try to havethem at every district
(32:53):
tournament and at the nationaltournament, but I think it
should be at every tournamentthat we have officers that are
helping with that, that we havethese stations to help kids and
overall, I just think the NSDAneeds to put in a little bit
more effort to honing in onspecific issues.
And then also, if you havecoaches and you have regions
that are healthy, you're goingto have a national level that's
more healthy.
Lyle Wiley (33:13):
Some good stuff.
I kind of agree with your hottake too.
I mean, at the individual level, I think there's a lot of
really well-meaning people, butI do feel like often there's
some performative sort of stuffhappening instead of like actual
stuff happening yeah, I agree.
Natalyia Kopack (33:35):
I think sometimes they are looking to
have representation instead ofsolving the issues and obviously
representation is a great thing, but I think there could be
more resources funneled towardsfixing thing the root causes
absolutely, I think.
Lyle Wiley (33:47):
I think that's fair, I think, and I hopefully,
hopefully that'll improve.
I just feel like we've come tothis party awfully late.
This has been a problem, uh,for a really long time, and it
doesn't seem as though nsda hashad much sense of urgency and do
anything to fix it.
Natalyia Kopack (34:04):
So seems a little bit like a back burner
effort yeah, although I mean ithas.
Lyle Wiley (34:10):
They've definitely at least made some commitments
last few years that, um that Imean, are steps in the right
direction.
They just feel sort of likebaby steps.
So yes yeah, yeah, I'm with you.
Hopefully we can continue tohave these kinds of
conversations and and pushpeople to thinking about stuff
that is not always really allthat comfortable for people to
think about, but they need tothink about it.
Natalyia Kopack (34:32):
Yeah.
Lyle Wiley (34:33):
And, yeah, I'm very sorry again for your experience
as a young debater in the state,a young, talented debater that
we need to like, foster yourtalent and help you to excel.
I think it's kind of sad andhard to hear that you've had
moments where you weren't surethat you were going to continue
this because of the treatmentthat you've received as a woman.
Natalyia Kopack (34:54):
Yeah, thank you .
I think it is difficult, but Ialso think it's important to
look at the good in speech anddebate and, while it is
important to have theconversations and educate people
on the issues that arehappening, because they can't be
solved if people don't knowabout them, I am happy that I'm
in speech and debate and I thinkit has been a great experience
for me, and I'm glad that I'vechosen to stay, despite any
treatment that has happened inthe past.
Lyle Wiley (35:16):
Well, we're glad to have you.
Hopefully we as a community cando a better job of advocating
for everyone in this activity,but that does lead into.
I do want to like give you anopportunity to talk about some
of the things that you reallythink are great about speech and
debate.
First off, what are you mostlooking forward to this upcoming
season?
What are you excited about?
Natalyia Kopack (35:38):
I'm really excited to be trying out new
events and I'm also just excitedto stay connected with other
teams.
One of my favorite parts aboutspeech and debate is the
community that we have andmeeting all these people from
across the state and even at thenational level.
I attended nationals for thefirst time this year and you
meet so many people and it'sreally cool to be around people
that have the same passion asyou and the same interests.
Where you not everybody has afamily that wants to hear about
(36:00):
the political and socioeconomicstate of the world.
So being in an environmentwhere you can talk about all of
these different issues thateverybody cares about is so
important to me and it has mademy life so much better.
I think I just feel heard andincluded, being able to talk to
all of these people around thestate.
So that's probably the thingI'm most excited about is seeing
those people that maybe livefour hours away and don't always
get to come visit, and seeingthem at tournaments and
(36:22):
participating with them andgetting to hang out with them,
because it really I think a lotof passion for the events comes
from the community, Because ifyou don't have those people that
you love competing with youkind of lack a little passion
for the event on occasion,because it just becomes harder
without friends.
So that's probably one of thethings I'm most excited about is
just seeing everybody again andjust getting to make progress
(36:43):
in my events and trying out newthings.
Lyle Wiley (36:45):
For you is that?
Is that probably the best partof speech and debate is the
community.
Natalyia Kopack (36:50):
Yeah, I think so.
I just love everyone here somuch and I also love my events,
of course.
My other favorite part isdefinitely case construction and
actually doing fundamentaldebate stuff.
I love cutting cards, evenduring the summer.
Sometimes, if I know potentialtopics, I'm writing cases and
maybe starting on my researchjust because I find a lot of
(37:10):
enjoyment in that.
But I do think the community isdefinitely my favorite part.
Lyle Wiley (37:15):
Oh, that's lovely.
Well, thank you so much forchatting with me here, Nat.
I do want to end our interviewwith a little bit of fear talk.
You know, I think publicspeaking is it's widely known as
one of the greatest fears forthe public.
It's a visceral horror for alot of folks outside of speech
and debate.
So why is participating inspeech and debate worth the
(37:37):
terror, the anxiety, the horror?
Natalyia Kopack (37:42):
I think there's a lot of reasons why it is
worth the terror, I think, first, you're going to have new
skills that you can put intoeverywhere.
If you're learning how to debate, if you're learning how to
speak publicly, that transfersover to your school, to
education and being able tomaybe give a presentation in
front of your class without asmuch anxiety as before.
And learning those new skills.
And also it makes you feelbetter about yourself.
(38:03):
When you know that publicspeaking is one of the biggest
fears in the world and you cando it every single weekend and
you choose to do it, I think youget a little more confidence in
yourself to say, oh, I can dothis here, I can do this
everywhere, I can public speakwhenever I want, and all of
these skills are applicable allof the time.
And just knowing that you aregood enough to do something like
(38:25):
this and I just think thatmakes you feel better about
yourself, it increases yourself-image and your confidence.
And also, just do it to meetthe people.
At the very minimum, go meetsome new friends from Wyoming or
from whatever state you're inand have those new friendships
and lasting relationships withthose people, because it can be
(38:45):
really helpful and add to yoursuccess as a person to meet all
of these different people withdifferent perspectives and to
just participate in speech anddebate and learn about other
people, learn about yourself andto appreciate the world around
you.
Lyle Wiley (38:59):
Thanks for helping us navigate the clapocalypse,
which I'm still figuring outexactly how to say the
clapocalypse, yeah, just thankyou so much for being here and
joining me and chatting with me.
I appreciate you.
Natalyia Kopack (39:11):
Thank you for having me.
I think it's been an honor tobe on OneClap.
This has been my dream for thepast two years, so I'm very
excited to be here.
Lyle Wiley (39:18):
Thanks so much to Nat for her candid, helpful and
fun interview.
I'll link to Natalia's articlepublished in Equality and
Forensics on the website and youshould definitely give it a
read.
What's going on in theclapocalypse tomorrow?
Well, casper College competitorand Lander High School alum,
josie House, will be here for aninterview.
Don't miss it.
Remember to check the socialmedia challenges on our socials
(39:40):
and we'll see you tomorrow.
Campers oh yeah, I told myfriend Adrian that we were all
the way to day 13 at camp and hesaid 13, not on my watch or on
my clock.
Huh for camp, one clock.
This is camp director Wileysigning off.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Ridiculous History
History is beautiful, brutal and, often, ridiculous. Join Ben Bowlin and Noel Brown as they dive into some of the weirdest stories from across the span of human civilization in Ridiculous History, a podcast by iHeartRadio.