Mere logical fallacies are no longer sufficient to capture the full scope of the collective derangement that pours unchecked out of freefromthoughtblogs, Skepchick and now it’s brain-damaged crack-baby Atheism+. Their cocktail of rabid witch-hunting, indoctrinational disinformation and the nouveau theology of Oppression is birthing its whole own schema of perfidious gobbledygook that defies classification as simply fallacy and deserves its own sub-section in the Skeptics Dictionary – that of logical incoherencies.

A couple, such as ad himinem and reductio ad Watsonum, have been mentioned previously. A broader principle, that of Myers’ law – that what you say to any denizen of their sheltered workshops never has any realistic relation to what they actually hear – has also been postulated and covers the origin of much of the baboons’ general incoherence. Myers’ law is easy enough for anyone to verify by simply attempting to initiate a discussion in any of their forums (degree of difficulty: like falling off a toilet drunk).

The undisputed queen of logical incoherencies has to be Ophelia Benson. This is the FfTB celebrity that brought you parallel logic – and as best as anyone can work out, an example of this is the obvious relationship between the folks that organise JREF’s Amazing Meetings and concentration camp gas chamber operators.

But even queen’s get toppled. Hotly yapping at her heels are many others, most notably Stefanny Zwan (my apologies, but spelling her name correctly is no longer an option). Zwan has been fooling us all along… Whilst successfully deceiving us with her charade that she is on a jihad against misogynists, MRAs, PUAs, chill girls etc. and their various collaborators, her real mission in life is now becoming readily apparent – The War on the English Dictionary. Zwan is on a crusade to rescue is from our own language while rewriting it. This is just a small sample of her more recent creative, yet truthful, revisionism –

Harassment – reading her blog and disagreeing with it

– reading her blog and disagreeing with it Stalking – reading her blog, disagreeing and then blogging about it

– reading her blog, disagreeing and then blogging about it Misogyny – making any kind of action other than nodding furiously in agreement when she addresses you

I just wish Zwan would start formalising her new, improved language for us, instead of just continuously implying it. Awfully confusing for those unfamiliar with FfTB – they might think it’s like the outside world. And that always ends in tears…

But I digress, as per usual. Two thoroughly wonderful logical incoherencies got spurted out of the gates of rape loving hell almost simultaneously this week, one from AnimalAndy, the other from the omni-talented Mykeru (who’s Youtube vivisections of the baboons cannot be recommended enough). I present them below, respectively –

Zvan’s Law: “The chance of being called a privilege-blind misogynist has a direct correlation with the number of factual arguments you make.” Mykeru’s Law: “As any progressive movement grows and achieves success, the probability of it being co-opted by women who want to make it all about their vagina approaches 1”

Both are so beautiful, I just can’t pick a favourite.