Violations of Argumentation Standards in Contemporary Debates on Health and Reproductive Rights

This article presents an exercise in prebunking, a preventive strategy based on inoculation theory (McGuire, 1964), aimed at enhancing cognitive resistance to misinformation. The analysis examines a set of arguments articulated from prejudicial and false information circulating in the debate on the inclusion of trans people in the field of reproductive health and rights. Through an assessment of their underlying premises, logical coherence, and empirical support, it is revealed that, while some of these arguments may be formally valid, their soundness and relevance in the context of reproductive and gender justice are questionable. By exposing readers to misleading arguments concerning the inclusion of trans people in the realm of reproductive health and rights, we seek to generate “cognitive antibodies” that will enable them to identify and reject these discourses. In this way, we seek to cognitively equip individuals who encounter such arguments and to promote better informed and empathetic debates about the inclusion of trans people in the struggle for reproductive justice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Alternatives Global Local Political
Published
2025-03-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/03043754251330396
Citations
1
Primary Topic
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.44
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Violations of Argumentation Standards in Contemporary Debates on Health and Reproductive Rights

Blas Radi, Claudio Cormick
1 citations
Alternatives Global Local Political
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
2.44
article

Violations of Argumentation Standards in Contemporary Debates on Health and Reproductive Rights

Blas Radi, Claudio Cormick
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This article presents an exercise in prebunking, a preventive strategy based on inoculation theory (McGuire, 1964), aimed at enhancing cognitive resistance to misinformation. The analysis examines a set of arguments articulated from prejudicial and false information circulating in the debate on the inclusion of trans people in the field of reproductive health and rights. Through an assessment of their underlying premises, logical coherence, and empirical support, it is revealed that, while some of these arguments may be formally valid, their soundness and relevance in the context of reproductive and gender justice are questionable. By exposing readers to misleading arguments concerning the inclusion of trans people in the realm of reproductive health and rights, we seek to generate “cognitive antibodies” that will enable them to identify and reject these discourses. In this way, we seek to cognitively equip individuals who encounter such arguments and to promote better informed and empathetic debates about the inclusion of trans people in the struggle for reproductive justice.

Alternatives Global Local PoliticalVol. 51(1)
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (AR), Universidad de Buenos Aires (AR)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 14%
LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy
2.44
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.