keep just bringing up different random arguments that are way easier to argue about, because you know more about them
person 1: the letter h is better because it is harder to break
person 2: h causes extra weight which means less efficiency and reliability, it is also less aerodynamic
person 1: this isn't F1 stop using the strawman method
person 2: h causes extra weight which means less efficiency and reliability, it is also less aerodynamic
person 1: this isn't F1 stop using the strawman method
by h_lover28 January 20, 2022
Get the strawman method mug.Strawman Arguments (I call them Stickman Arguments, sometimes) are arguments in which someone who you are debating takes your points and twists them to get ground on you in order to form a refutation in which they are correct.
Person A: *Signs on to start a topic saying:* For anyone out there who questions God because God doesn't always answer your prayers, the truth is: God doesn't help us because we have free will.
Person B: That's an unsound argument because it has no ground to stand on and it is overused. It's like saying, "What if I'm right and you're wrong and you go to Hell?" to an atheist.
Person A: We're not talking about Hell, therefore your refutation has no grounds.
Person B: Please take your strawman arguments somewhere else
Person A: You're going to burn in Hell for not believing in God!
Person A signs off.
Person B facepalms.
Person B: That's an unsound argument because it has no ground to stand on and it is overused. It's like saying, "What if I'm right and you're wrong and you go to Hell?" to an atheist.
Person A: We're not talking about Hell, therefore your refutation has no grounds.
Person B: Please take your strawman arguments somewhere else
Person A: You're going to burn in Hell for not believing in God!
Person A signs off.
Person B facepalms.
by Life's Outcast Of Death April 3, 2009
Get the Strawman Arguments mug.Related Words
What 99% of the definitions and examples on Urban Dictionary articles that have even the smallest relationship with religion and/or politics.
Strawman Fallacy:
From UD's humanist entry: "Ha, you believe in God? We humanists are smarter than you because we think we are just going to rot in a hole in the ground and that the universe just appeared on it's own one day."
"And that is smart because...?"
"Uh... gay pride?"
"God have mercy on these morons..."
Strawman Fallacy: From UD's entry on liberal: 2. "I hate liberals. Stupid pinko liberals are ruining America."
"Yeah, damn liberals and their...their...liberty. Psht, this is America, we don't need liberty. God bless America."
"Hey, wait..."
From UD's humanist entry: "Ha, you believe in God? We humanists are smarter than you because we think we are just going to rot in a hole in the ground and that the universe just appeared on it's own one day."
"And that is smart because...?"
"Uh... gay pride?"
"God have mercy on these morons..."
Strawman Fallacy: From UD's entry on liberal: 2. "I hate liberals. Stupid pinko liberals are ruining America."
"Yeah, damn liberals and their...their...liberty. Psht, this is America, we don't need liberty. God bless America."
"Hey, wait..."
by Flambe December 18, 2009
Get the Strawman Fallacy mug.Strawmen are usually meant to be a misrepresentation of an opponent's argument that makes it easier to attack. For examples of strawmen being used, put the word "SJW" or "conservative" into the search bar of this godforsaken website.
Normally, an appropriate response is to call out the fact that this is a gross simplification in order to discourage the use of logical fallacies and promote basic fucking debate skills.
However, some people instead choose to become the Strawman Incarnate, in which they embrace every negative aspect of the opponent's grossly exaggerated characterization for the sake of "owning" them
For examples of this, see /pol/ on 4chan, or (insert bad thing the left did so I don't get dislike bombed by conservatives).
Normally, an appropriate response is to call out the fact that this is a gross simplification in order to discourage the use of logical fallacies and promote basic fucking debate skills.
However, some people instead choose to become the Strawman Incarnate, in which they embrace every negative aspect of the opponent's grossly exaggerated characterization for the sake of "owning" them
For examples of this, see /pol/ on 4chan, or (insert bad thing the left did so I don't get dislike bombed by conservatives).
Simplified example of Strawman Incarnate:
Person A: Side B is bad because they eat babies!
Person B walks out and returns holding a baby and a fork
Person B: I BETCHA FEEL STUPID NOW, HUH?!?
Person A: Side B is bad because they eat babies!
Person B walks out and returns holding a baby and a fork
Person B: I BETCHA FEEL STUPID NOW, HUH?!?
by PostTraumaticSwagDisorder May 8, 2025
Get the Strawman Incarnate mug.An argument strategy in which person A, after calling person B something derogatory, brings up misinformation on a subject which a person rightfully belonging under said derogatory label would be passionate about, even if the information is relatively common knowledge. If person B is struggling for a rebuttal and decides to instead criticize person A's lack of understanding of the subject as a means of degrading them, they will instead end up lending validity to person A's insult by appearing to be knowledgeable on topics which a person belonging to the derogatory label would normally be knowledgeable on. Anyone attempting a Fool's Strawman can appear less intelligent and jock-ish due to the nature of the maneuver, but is usually of higher intelligence than the person they are roasting. It is best explained by example:
A: Wow, I bet you jerk off to those Chinese hentais you f***ing f**g.
B: Haha, those are Japanese not Chinese, you can't even get that right? R****d.
A: I wouldn't know, I don't watch that s**t... you would know though.
As we can see, B falls right into the Fool's Strawman by showing some degree of knowledge on the topic of hentai, thus making A's accusations more credible. Let's keep going:
B: Wow you're so edgy, f***ing memelord using tricks he learned on Urban Dictionary and s**t.
A: What the f**k is a memelord? Are you one of those 4chan f****ts? Are you gonna be triggered if I don't get your gender right?
B: That's not a 4chan thing, that's Tumblr!
A: Sorry, I don't sit on my computer jerking off to hentai and going on 4chan instead of talking to girls.
B: Haha, those are Japanese not Chinese, you can't even get that right? R****d.
A: I wouldn't know, I don't watch that s**t... you would know though.
As we can see, B falls right into the Fool's Strawman by showing some degree of knowledge on the topic of hentai, thus making A's accusations more credible. Let's keep going:
B: Wow you're so edgy, f***ing memelord using tricks he learned on Urban Dictionary and s**t.
A: What the f**k is a memelord? Are you one of those 4chan f****ts? Are you gonna be triggered if I don't get your gender right?
B: That's not a 4chan thing, that's Tumblr!
A: Sorry, I don't sit on my computer jerking off to hentai and going on 4chan instead of talking to girls.
by R@D November 8, 2016
Get the Fool's Strawman mug.A: Trump has repeatedly demonstrated racially insensitive behavior
B: "Everyone I disagree with is Hitler."
A: That is a recursive strawman.
B: "Everyone I disagree with is Hitler."
A: That is a recursive strawman.
by ovusar December 7, 2020
Get the Recursive Strawman mug.A specific form of strawman where the person inverts the typical dynamic by claiming that the term used to describe them doesn't apply because they don't understand it. The classic "you can't call me racist because I don't know what racism means." This inverts the strawman: instead of misrepresenting someone's position, they misrepresent the term's applicability, using their own ignorance as a shield. The fallacy lies in making the validity of a description depend on the described person's vocabulary rather than their actions.
"He used racial slurs, but when called racist, said 'I don't even know what racism is, so you can't call me that.' That's Inverted Strawman Fallacy—making his ignorance the standard for judgment. But actions define racism, not vocabulary. Not knowing the word doesn't make the deed disappear. Ignorance as innocence is a con, not a defense."
by Dumu The Void March 3, 2026
Get the Inverted Strawman Fallacy mug.