SeanPaytonEatsWorms Archive

Upvotes	Title	Category	Author	Subreddit	Date (UTC)

Upvotes	Comment on	Subreddit	Date (UTC)
-5	PURE evil. “Men’s rights”	/r/MensRights	07/03/18 06:43 PM
-1	Are men’s rights not human rights? It’s pretty obvious it’s going to talk about different rights movements and changes through history. But keep getting all worked up and outraged about everything every day. This is why no one takes any of you seriously and never will, you start screeching in rage at any even perceived slight without even taking a second to breathe and think about it. Not everything that doesn’t directly address you is an attack on you. In fact, men are a huge part and often primarily responsible for many of the …	/r/MensRights	01/03/18 11:47 AM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop The Gish Gallop (also known as proof by verbosity[1]) is the fallacious debate tactic of drowning your opponent in a flood of individually-weak arguments in order to prevent rebuttal of the whole argument collection without great effort. That’s yet another fallacy you’ve attempted in defending... a fallacy. NTS is a fallacy of exclusion. In order for it to work you must be excluding someone. More specifically you must be excluding someone for Ad Hoc reaso…	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 09:12 PM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. Did he say that there are not any other kinds of feminism? I wanted to add one last thing to show how truly wrong you are. Nowhere in the definition for NTS do you have to say “only”. In fact, the example you posted and linked don’t show it either. So your semantically based argument about language is totally gone. It’s not called “only Scotsmen” after all 😉 That means not only did you erroneously try to argue about “nonessential” mattering and we’re wrong but you also didn’t understand that the…	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 08:26 PM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. Did he say that there are not any other kinds of feminism? “This is real feminism” Therefore... anything not like her is fake feminism. It’s basic logic. So yes, it’s quite obvious he’s saying that people who aren’t like her aren’t feminists. It’s simple English and logic. Bonus point: you literally spent all day arguing exactly what I’m saying without realizing you proved my point. You’re really struggling today.	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 07:52 PM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. It seems like if anyone is suffering from bias, its you. Tu Quoque fallacy. You are adding words that don't exist. The implication is clear. The fact you’re trying to argue otherwise and having to resort to such a sad argument about semantics shows how far your argument has fallen. And I'm not implying you're stupid. I'm saying it. You are stupid. Ad hominems don’t suddenly make your point work chief. Go read up on fallacies before posting again or else you’ll always have to deal with people cal…	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 07:48 PM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. Again, with the failure to understand the fallacy. “This is what real feminism looks like”. Meaning, anyone not like her isn’t a feminist. Do you understand the word “implication”? It’s textbook, something you should try reading before nothing to post again 👍 Time for you to delete this account and make a new one chief.	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 07:43 PM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. More attempts at changing the subject and deciding what you believe “feminism” is. “Only real feminists are like this” is exactly what he wrote. It’s a fallacy. And as you’re getting frustrated you’re moving into ad hominems by implying I’m “stupid”. Also, notice how you gave up the “essential” argument once I called you out on it. This is too easy bud.	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 07:40 PM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. It is a fallacy and your own biased opinion. You’re deciding (based on nothing but your own opinion) that only true feminists are like this woman. Anyone who isn’t like her or doesn’t care about basically only these things isn’t a “true feminist” Funny watching you keep trying to change the subject. Hint: that’s a fallacy too. Remember, you wrote a huge rant because someone mistakenly said the wrong fallacy and now you’re desperately trying to avoid simply admitting that this post and your argum…	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 07:23 PM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. Writing a small novel doesn’t change the obvious point that the post is a No True Scotsman fallacy. there must a non essential element. I.E. "No true Scotsman would ever put ice in his brandy." No, that isn’t part of it at all. Not really sure where you made that up from honestly. It’s about the argument, not whether you arbitrarily determine something as “essential” The defining characteristic of Feminism is equality between the sexes and working toward that goal. And you’re trying to argue tha…	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 06:46 PM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. It would be, excepting one thing. The no true scotsman fallacy requires ad hoc generalization or moving of goalposts Which is what’s happening clearly. “Only a true feminist does this and anyone who isn’t like this isn’t “feminist”” That’s literally the argument of the post. It’s a fallacy. It’s as straightforward as it gets. Your entire follow up attempt at a defense is just more of the same argument. I’ll quote someone in this thread: “So what we can determine from this is that you have no clu…	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 10:37 AM
1	Chaps, this is what a real feminist looks like. And in the interests of this sub, we should applaud her for it. It is still a fallacy though and it’s fairly obvious that it is one. It’s saying that only true feminists are like this woman and everyone else is wrong. It’s an obvious form of the No True Scotsman fallacy.	/r/PussyPassDenied	29/01/18 02:15 AM