Definitions by Dumu The Void

Patholighting

A vicious form of gaslighting that involves pathologizing the other person—labeling their thoughts, feelings, or behaviors as symptoms of mental illness, thereby dismissing everything they say without engaging with its content. Patholighting happens when you express a legitimate concern and are told you're "being paranoid," when you disagree with someone and are told you're "delusional," or when you question authority and are told you're "schizophrenic." The goal is to make you doubt not just your perception of reality, but your own sanity. Once you've been pathologized, nothing you say matters—it's just the illness talking. Patholighting is especially common in online arguments, where "touch grass," "seek help," and "you're clearly mentally ill" serve as conversation-enders that require no engagement with the actual argument.

Patholighting Example: "She pointed out logical flaws in his argument, and he patholighted her immediately. 'You're so obsessed with this,' he said. 'It's not normal. You might have some kind of disorder.' Her points remained unaddressed, her logic unanswered, but now she was also worried that maybe she was too invested. The patholighting had worked: she was defending her sanity instead of her argument."

Patholighting by Dumu The Void February 15, 2026

Pathospreading

The verbal equivalent of manspreading—taking up excessive conversational space by pathologizing everyone and everything, leaving no room for genuine discussion. The pathospreader occupies the conversation with unsolicited diagnoses, clinical observations, and armchair psychology, treating every interaction as an opportunity to demonstrate their supposed expertise in human behavior. When someone expresses an opinion, they're "defensive." When someone disagrees, they're "in denial." When someone gets angry, they're "having an episode." The pathospreader's interpretations leave no room for the simple possibility that people might just mean what they say. Every conversation becomes a therapy session they're running, and everyone else is just a patient who didn't consent to treatment.

Pathospreading Example: "At the family dinner, Uncle Bob pathospread across the entire conversation. His niece expressed political views—she was 'brainwashed by academia.' His son disagreed with him—he had 'authority issues.' His wife asked him to pass the salt—she was 'passive-aggressively criticizing his attentiveness.' By dessert, everyone had been diagnosed, no one had been heard, and Bob felt very smart. The family felt very tired."

Pathospreading by Dumu The Void February 15, 2026

Pathosplaining

The act of explaining someone's emotional state to them, typically in a condescending manner that dismisses their feelings as irrational, excessive, or symptomatic of deeper issues. Pathosplaining happens when you're told you're "not really angry, you're just projecting," or when your frustration is met with "you seem to have some unresolved trauma around this." It's the emotional equivalent of mansplaining, but with a clinical twist: the pathosplainer positions themselves as the expert on your feelings, diagnosing you from a position of supposed objectivity while ignoring what you're actually saying. Pathosplaining is how people avoid engaging with your points by instead engaging with your supposed psychological state, which they've diagnosed without your consent.

Pathosplaining Example: "She expressed frustration about workplace inequality, and her coworker pathosplained her feelings. 'You're not really frustrated with the system,' he said. 'You're projecting your personal insecurities onto the workplace. Have you considered therapy?' She had considered violence, but that wasn't helping her case. Her feelings were dismissed, her argument ignored, and her coworker felt very wise."

Pathosplaining by Dumu The Void February 15, 2026

Patholighting

A vicious form of gaslighting that involves pathologizing the other person—labeling their thoughts, feelings, or behaviors as symptoms of mental illness, thereby dismissing everything they say without engaging with its content. Patholighting happens when you express a legitimate concern and are told you're "being paranoid," when you disagree with someone and are told you're "delusional," or when you question authority and are told you're "schizophrenic." The goal is to make you doubt not just your perception of reality, but your own sanity. Once you've been pathologized, nothing you say matters—it's just the illness talking. Patholighting is especially common in online arguments, where "touch grass," "seek help," and "you're clearly mentally ill" serve as conversation-enders that require no engagement with the actual argument.

Example: "She pointed out logical flaws in his argument, and he patholighted her immediately. 'You're so obsessed with this,' he said. 'It's not normal. You might have some kind of disorder.' Her points remained unaddressed, her logic unanswered, but now she was also worried that maybe she was too invested. The patholighting had worked: she was defending her sanity instead of her argument."

Patholighting by Dumu The Void February 15, 2026

Arbitrary Burden of Proof

The meta-fallacy where one side is forced to prove every assertion, back every claim, and satisfy every demand for evidence, while the other side can simply move goalposts, demand new sources, dismiss evidence as insufficient, and never provide anything themselves. The arbitrary burden of proof is the debate equivalent of one person carrying a piano while the other skips ahead, occasionally turning around to complain that the piano-carrier isn't keeping up. It's how conspiracy theorists can demand that scientists prove negatives (prove that vaccines don't cause autism, prove that the moon landing wasn't fake), while offering no proof for their own claims and dismissing any evidence against them as part of the conspiracy.

Example: "She was trapped under an arbitrary burden of proof. Every time she provided a source, he moved the sourcepost. Every time she met his standard, he raised it. After two hours, she'd provided twenty sources, and he'd provided zero. When she asked what he believed, he said 'I'm just asking questions.' The questions were infinite, the answers were never enough, and the burden was hers alone."

Arbitrary Burden of Proof by Dumu The Void February 15, 2026

Logical Double Standards

The meta-fallacy of applying different logical standards to different participants in a discussion, typically demanding impeccable reasoning from your opponent while allowing yourself hand-waving, gut feelings, and outright contradictions. Logical double standards are the rhetorical equivalent of a tennis match where one player's shots must land inside the lines and the other's can land anywhere in the county. This fallacy is how someone can demand "proof" for climate change while accepting election fraud claims based on a single Facebook post, or require their opponent to cite peer-reviewed studies while offering their own opinions as self-evident truth. The double standard is invisible to the person wielding it, which is what makes it so effective and so infuriating.

Example: "The logical double standards were staggering. She had to provide sources for every claim; he could say 'everyone knows' and it was accepted. She had to address every point; he could ignore hers and repeat his. When she pointed out the double standard, he said that was just her opinion. The standards weren't double; they were whatever allowed him to feel right."

Logical Double Standards by Dumu The Void February 15, 2026

Poisoning of Fallacies

A advanced form of poisoning the well where the arguer preemptively declares that every argument their opponent might make is fallacious, therefore everything they say and any conclusion they reach is automatically false. This meta-fallacy creates an impenetrable fortress of dismissal: you can't use logic because logic is a tool of the patriarchy; you can't use evidence because evidence can be manipulated; you can't use emotion because emotion is irrational. Everything is contaminated, everything is suspect, and the only thing left standing is the poisoner's own position, which they've conveniently exempted from their own critique. The poisoning of fallacies is how you win arguments without ever engaging with them—by declaring the entire game rigged before it starts.

Poisoning of Fallacies Example: "In the debate, he poisoned all fallacies preemptively. 'Any statistics you cite will be biased,' he announced. 'Any personal experience will be anecdotal. Any expert opinion will be bought. Any logical argument will be a construct.' She asked what kind of evidence he would accept. He said 'none, because all evidence is tainted.' She realized she wasn't in a debate; she was in a performance where the goal was her silence."

Poisoning of Fallacies by Dumu The Void February 15, 2026