Is there a name for this error in reasoning?

 I was thinking of a particular error of reasoning today, and I couldn't remember if there was a fallacy name for it. I searched around and didn't find it. It seems like a formal fallacy, as it's a set-logic error.

Imagine the following scenario; I claim to someone that I love the taste of cake, however, I don't love what cake does to my body.

They respond by saying: "Aha, you are being contradictory, for you love and don't love cake."

Clearly, it's not a contradiction, because what you love is a particular quality of the cake, and what you don't love is a different particular quality of the cake. They want to generalize the qualities and then claim contradiction.

So is there any.. False Contradiction Fallacy? Or False superset contradiction fallacy?

It would only be a contradiction if you both loved and hated the taste of the same cake. Even then, one can love the taste of the cake but hate the taste of the frosting. By accusing the person of being contradictory, they are essentially creating a strawman fallacy .

I could see a reasonable argument being made here. If someone says how much the love eating cake, they are being more specific now about the entirety of the experience rather than just the taste of the cake. Granted, this isn't clear either but because of the ambiguity, we can't really fault one for reaching an unreasonable conclusion if they were to claim contradictory.

In the more common example with veganism, if a meat eater claims to "love meat," they are almost always referring to things like the taste, the satiation, and perhaps the health benefits of the healthier meats. If this same person happens to hate how some animals are mistreated in farming, or even the idea of killing the animals for food, they might be psychologically conflicted about eating meat, but they are not being logically contradictory.

Paula: I love the taste of cake, but I don't love what it does to my body.

Patrick: That's a contradiction. You can't both love and not-love cake. You either love it or you don't.

Well for starters, Patrick is just wrong. Liking a food exists on a scale. You can totally like (love) it, like it/dislike it a little bit, or totally dislike (hate) it. So insisting that it's an either-or (the implication of suggesting Paula contradicted herself) is a false premise.

To expand on that, here's Patrick's syllogism:

P1) Paula likes aspect X of A

P2) However, she does not like aspect Y of A

Implicit P) It is contradictory to like some aspects of A while not liking others (false)

C) Paula contradicted herself

Secondly, "love" can be used in multiple senses. We can "love" a particular quality of something, while not loving another quality of that thing. Patrick is switching the senses of the word 'love' in a manner that constitutes equivocation.

You are expressing how you feel about two different aspects of cake. 

"I love the taste of cake" - aspect one

"I don't love what cake does to my body" - aspect two

They are both an Opinions and not an argument of facts.

I like Cars but I do not like red cars.

If anything it is a strawman.

I see an ambiguity fallacy in that the expressions "love the taste of cake" and "love cake" are both used, with the implication that they are equivalent.  Since there are many aspects or features about cake, it's highly likely that one might love some aspects while disliking others.  Therefore, I see no contradiction in saying "I like this aspect of cake" and "I don't like that aspect of cake".  

The fallacy lies in the equivocation (or giving two different meanings to one phrase) by implying that they mean the same thing:  "love the taste of cake" and "love cake".

If we re-phrase the statement into "I love the sweet taste of cake but I don't love how eating cake puts me into a diabetic coma.", it might not seem like such a contradiction.  The appearance of a contradiction is reduced by removing the ambiguity or equivocation about whether the statement relates to one feature of cake or to cake in general.  It's sort of like saying, "I enjoyed the chicken served at dinner, but I didn't like the broccoli!" – not a contradiction, just different reactions to different elements of the meal.