Discussion History WMG / StarTrek

There are tons of ways that \\\"Spongebob is Gay\\\" can be refuted, but the point of the example was to demonstrate what Context-Dropping actually is, as opposed to creating a watertight case against the MoralGuardians. The point I am trying to illustrate is not \\\"Spongebob is not gay\\\" but rather \\\"to apply a concept to an entity manifestly outside said concept\\\'s boundaries is fallacious.\\\" Another reason for using this particular example is that I am trying to sustain reader interest here; this is TVTropes and as such articles should [[RuleOfFunny at least be somewhat entertaining to read]]. I could have written this entire article in dense academic prose, but no, I would rather it be easily understood by a relatively casual audience.

Additionally, I have used the \\\"Spongebob Controversy\\\" as an example in several different papers, including assignment submissions for postgraduate subjects at my University, and not a single other person has objected to it.

In any case, you are at best rebutting an example. And finally, this is a UsefulNotes page on Objectivism, of course there is going to be some element of AuthorTract involved. Even providing a clear and precise explanation of what Objectivism actually states can be accused of being an AuthorTract considering how the content of the philosophy is systematically distorted by its frequently-deceptive detractors.