A question for parents

[Esquilax]

Ahh, no.
Strawman;
The so-called typical "attacking a straw man" implies an adversarial, polemic, or combative debate, and creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and then to refute or defeat that false argument, ("knock down a straw man,") instead of the original proposition.

Oh my fucking god, you are entirely too stupid to talk to. That's what I said. A strawman fallacy relies upon debating a position that you don't hold in order to have the appearance of winning. The first part of that is that you need to not hold the position I asked you about.

But all I did was ask you if your question was serious or not. So, to sum up, you asked a person for evidence in favor of a position you already agree with, which clearly means you have some factors that convinced you of this. So you asked for evidence of a position you already agreed with and were in possession of evidence, in order to give the other guy a hard time.

That sure as fuck sounds obtuse and contrarian to me!

Oh, and incidentally? Your fucking link is broken, so good work there, too.