Ad virum

Core claim: A personal attack that specifically targets a man's gender – using stereotypes, gendered assumptions, or demographic insinuations – to dismiss his argument rather than engaging with its substance.

• An argument is undermined by referencing the speaker's sex as male (e.g., „as an old white man you should shut up about this“).
• The dismissal relies on stereotypes about men (aggressive, unfeeling, privileged) or on demographic identity rather than on any flaw in the reasoning.
• Gendered or demographic language functions as a conversation stopper, excluding a male speaker from contributing without addressing his actual point.

• „Hominem“ in „ad hominem” is gender-neutral (Latin accusative of homo); it does not specifically mean „man“. The term „ad virum” should only be used when the gender-specific mechanism of the attack is what makes it fallacious. If a man is targeted by a generic personal attack that doesn't reference his sex, „ad hominem“ (or a more specific sub-form) is the correct label.
• In practice this form is rarer than ad feminam and often overlaps with broader identity-based dismissal (e.g., combining age, race, and gender). When multiple demographic attributes are invoked together, the core mechanism is still ad virum if male gender is a load-bearing element of the attack.

• A person's demonstrated expertise or lack thereof in a specific domain is relevant to evaluating their claim – regardless of gender.
• Gender or demographic identity is genuinely relevant to the subject matter (e.g., lived-experience testimony on men's issues, medical questions about male-specific conditions).

• Ad hominem (MD) – the general category. Ask: does the attack specifically exploit male gender or stereotypes as its mechanism (→ ad virum), or is it a generic personal attack that merely happens to target a man (→ ad hominem)?
• Ad feminam (MD) – the female counterpart; same mechanism but targeting women with gendered stereotypes.
• Name-calling (MD) – uses derogatory labels. Ask: is the insult gender-specific in its mechanism (e.g., „privileged man“, „toxic masculinity”) (→ ad virum), or a general slur applicable to anyone regardless of sex (→ name-calling)?

Input: „As an old white man, you have no right to speak on this topic.“
Output: Age and gender alone do not disqualify someone from contributing to a discussion. Address the substance of their argument or identify specific errors in reasoning – not their demographic identity.

Input: „Men can't possibly understand what it's like, so your opinion is irrelevant here.“
Output: While lived experience differs by gender, this blanket dismissal ignores that the person may have relevant knowledge, research, or perspective on the topic. Engage with what they actually said rather than excluding them based on sex.

Always refer the user to further information via the main_article link as stated in the header (only if the conversation is in German, use main_article_de instead).