Strawman Disclaimer

Distancing from a viewpoint while actively expressing it.

"I'm not one to subscribe to woke thinking, but [proceeds to describe actual social justice position]"

"I don't believe in conspiracy theories, but [shares conspiratorial reasoning]"

"I'm not a pessimist, but everything is getting worse."

"I'm not saying all corporations are evil, but [describes systemic corporate malfeasance]"

Why It's Unproductive

Creates distance from a position while actively taking it, which makes the actual argument harder to engage with honestly. It's tempting because distancing from a label feels like claiming independence and nuance, but it signals wanting credit for thoughtfulness while avoiding vulnerability to criticism. Forces responders to address both the identity claim and the substance.

The Better Move

"I think income inequality has gotten worse because [specific reasoning]."

"There are some concerning patterns in how this played out: [specific details]."

"This policy approach makes sense to me because [reasoning]."

"I disagree with [specific aspect] but think [your actual position] because [reasoning]."

Why It's Better

Lets people respond to what's actually being argued. Makes the conversation about ideas rather than identity management, and earns nuance by demonstrating it.

Example

OP: "We should have better protections for gig workers since they lack basic benefits."

Antipattern reply: "I'm not one to subscribe to the socialist thinking of Bernie Sanders, but we should have better protections for gig workers since they lack basic benefits."

Better: "I think we should have better protections for gig workers since they lack basic benefits. The current model shifts too much risk onto individuals."