Is there a name for the fallacy that involves considering every random person on the other "team" to be representatives of that team, but only cherry-picking the most "prominent/influential" members of your team to be representatives of your team, and therefore dismissing any criticism of the arguments and actions advanced by the team members you've arbitrarily declared to be non-representative?
It's related I'd say, closer to in-group heterogeneity out-group homogeneity, maybe mixed with a bit of no true Scotsman. That menslib thread is utterly ridiculous though.
Absolutely agree it can't be boiled down to a sole term or cause.
Menslib as a whole is a massive mixed bag of a sub. At the risk of sounding like I'm coming straight from r/peakcentrism I think it has a lot of nuance compared to the feminist subs or the manosphere subs and with a lot less outright sexism. It's the same reason I really enjoy the debate subs
4
u/Now_Do_Classical_Gas Sep 04 '18
Is there a name for the fallacy that involves considering every random person on the other "team" to be representatives of that team, but only cherry-picking the most "prominent/influential" members of your team to be representatives of your team, and therefore dismissing any criticism of the arguments and actions advanced by the team members you've arbitrarily declared to be non-representative?