Rational Double Standards

The practice of applying different standards of rationality to different people or positions—deeming one's own reasoning rational while dismissing similar reasoning from opponents as irrational. Rational Double Standards are what allow people to see their own biases as insights, their own emotions as intuitions, their own leaps as logic—while seeing the same things in others as errors. They're the cognitive machinery of hypocrisy, the engine of special pleading, the foundation of every double standard that privileges one's own side.

Example: "His gut feeling was intuition; her gut feeling was irrational emotion. Rational Double Standards in action: same phenomenon, different labels, depending on who was experiencing it. The double standard was invisible to him, which is how it worked."

by Dumu The Void March 10, 2026

Reason Double Standards

The practice of applying different standards of reason to different people or positions—treating one's own reasoning as reasonable while dismissing comparable reasoning from others as unreasonable. Reason Double Standards are the everyday currency of argument, the unspoken assumption that "my reasons are reasons; yours are rationalizations." They make genuine dialogue impossible because they ensure that one side is always already reasonable and the other always already wrong.

Example: "His reasons were careful analysis; her reasons were just rationalizations. Reason Double Standards in action: same thing, different labels, depending on who was doing the reasoning. The double standard was invisible to him, which is how it worked."

by Dumu The Void March 10, 2026

Epistemological Double Standards

The practice of applying different epistemological standards to different kinds of knowledge or different knowers—demanding rigorous proof from marginalized perspectives while accepting hand-waving from dominant ones, requiring evidence from outsiders while taking insider claims on faith. Epistemological Double Standards are what make knowledge production political: who gets to know, whose knowledge counts, what standards apply to whom. They're the signature of epistemic injustice, the mechanism by which some ways of knowing are privileged and others marginalized.

Example: "He demanded rigorous evidence from indigenous knowledge systems while accepting Western science's claims on faith. Epistemological Double Standards in action: different standards for different knowers, different rules for different knowledge. The double standard was invisible to him, which is how it maintained epistemic injustice."

by Dumu The Void March 10, 2026

Scientific Double Standards

The practice of applying different scientific standards to different research programs, different findings, or different researchers—demanding extraordinary evidence from inconvenient results while accepting ordinary evidence from favored conclusions. Scientific Double Standards are what make science political: funding flows to some questions, peer review favors some paradigms, publication privileges some findings. They're the signature of science as institution, not science as ideal—the gap between how science is supposed to work and how it actually works.

Example: "The study supporting his view was accepted with minimal review; the study challenging it was subjected to endless scrutiny. Scientific Double Standards in action: different standards for different findings, depending on whether they confirmed or challenged. The double standard was invisible to him, which is how science becomes ideology."

by Dumu The Void March 10, 2026

Double Standard

When a situation is desirable for one group but deplorable for another.

Double Standard. A concept that permits and excuses certain behaviors and actions from one group or person but violently opposes the same actions from another.

by hypocritical actions April 16, 2013

double standard

Mathematically speaking, the obnoxious idea that it's OK for 56 to insult 82, but it's NOT OK for 82 to insult 56. Of course, 56 and 82 can be replaced with many different races, religions, etc.

#1:
A man sleeps with numerous women: Considered OK
A women sleeps with many men: Considered NOT OK

#2:
A woman physically hurts a man because she feels abused: ACCEPTED
A man physically hurts a woman because he feels abused: NOT ACCEPTED

#3:
A white person is successful: Assumed to be because of HARD WORK
A black person is successful: Assumed to be because of AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

#4:
A black person does poorly on a standardized test: Assumed to be because of BIAS in the test
A white person does poorly on a standardized test: Assumed to be because of LAZINESS, LACK OF EFFORT, etc.

#5:
A Christian is a very strong believer and mentions his love of God: Viewed as HEALTHY and PASSIONATE

An Atheist is very strong in his belief of no God: Viewed as CRAZY, CONFUSED, MISLEAD, etc.

#6
An Atheist views Christians as unaccepting as a group: Viewed as NORMAL and is ACCEPTED

A Christian views Atheists as unaccepting as a group: Viewed as being UNFAIR and DOGMATIC

...I could go on forever. Point is: DOWN WITH DOUBLE STANDARDS! People aren't that different, and double standards only enforce all kinds of discrimination! GRRRR...

by MrCuddles November 10, 2006

Double-Standard Debbie

A girl who preaches that men should look past her looks and see her personality, but harshly judges men based on their appearances.

Deborah: Ugh, I hate men! All men want these days is a barbie doll with huge boobs and a big ass! They only marry the girls who look like strippers! Why can't a guy just accept me for me and love me the way I am?!

Jane: Well, Haiden likes you. Wanna try dating him?

Deborah: Hell no, he's 5'5 and works as a cashier. If a man's not at least 6'0 tall, he don't deserve me.

Jane: You're a Double-Standard Debbie. It's no wonder you're single.

by A random nobody :) April 30, 2023