Transing ChildrenSo the new Blue's Clues (you know, that show for 3 and 4 year olds) has nu-wave Pride be what the 'P' stands for in their alphabet song

submitted by fuckupaddamsBisexual Terve from imgur.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 29 insightful - 1 fun29 insightful - 0 fun30 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Yay for proving that the slippery slope fallacy is the weakest fallacy because it keeps coming true, and is therefore not really a fallacy!

[–][deleted] 23 insightful - 1 fun23 insightful - 0 fun24 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Pretty much! The only place conservatives fucked up (at least in this specific example) is thinking you can bully or brainwash someone into (or out of) same sex attraction. You can't. But you absolutely CAN bully and brainwash people into being trans and parroting the 'correct' views on gender identity politics.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 16 insightful - 1 fun16 insightful - 0 fun17 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah. The only part they really got wrong was that there was an extra step involved. The same people and organizations they said would be doing this are doing it, but the T had to be added first so they could be the beneficiary of all this nonsense. They never were worried about the ins and outs of sexuality, they just knew the queers would try to taint the children, and that's exactly what's happening.

[–]Constantine 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There's misconception about that fallacy. There's a difference between the "slippery slope fallacy" and "slippery slope arguments." All slippery slope fallacies are slippery slope arguments, but not all slippery slope arguments are fallacious. The fallacious ones are defined by the proposed consequences of a said action or movement being wild and unlikely. Clearly, this argument was not as wild and unlikely as we would've liked to think, and thus was not fallacious (in this way - I'd say it still was in other ways since the consequences are with a different group than the same-sex attracted).

They should really rename the fallacy.

[–]Three_oneFourWanted for thought crimes in countless ideologies 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's also why there's a fallacy fallacy. Even if someone's argument is or appears fallacious, that does not mean that the argument is inherently false. It may be fully or partially true due to reasons not brought up in the fallacious argument, so just saying, "Ah! That's a strawman!" or "Boo! That's a slippery slope fallacy!" is not enough to disregard another's argument.

It does mean the other party is bad at arguing, but not that they are wrong