Ben Shapiro (not exact quote, paraphrase)

I disagree.   If it were only a question of logic—whether being called “Boy Scouts” logically implied that only boys could join, then yes that’s a silly argument.   But I’m sure that’s not what Ben Shapiro meant, so respectfully I would call Dr Bo’s response a classic Straw Man.   If it’s viewed as a social issue- whether there should be organizations where children can learn life skills either as boys, or as girls (in the Girls Scouts), then there’s nothing silly about that and people who believe there should be such organizations shouldn’t be “canceled”.

I am addressing what was written, not what someone might have meant by it. If he said girls can't join because or organization has "boy" in the name, he is giving a reason for his claim, and the reason is fallacious. If he "meant" what you said he meant, then what he said is still fallacious. A strawman fallacy is a misrepresentation of what was said or written, not what we think the person might have meant.

Just wanted to clarify my earlier comment.

In reading that Ben Shapiro said that the Boy Scouts is for boys only (as reflected by the name) and not for girls, to me, at least, it seemed clear that what he meant was that he was bemoaning that society has become so politically correct that we can’t have organizations for boys and organizations for girls.  I agree with what Rationalissimus wrote:  

"He probably meant that it is a male-only organisation, and that is reflected in the name Boy Scouts. As in, it's for  boys, not non-boys."  

One can respond—we should just look at what he said and not read into it—but, I think you'd agree,  someone’s words should be reasonably interpreted and not just literally understood.   To my “reason”, it was so clear that his issue is not the misuse of the word "Boy", but rather the bigger issue of allowing children to be boys or girls in their respective Scout organizations, that it struck me as a Straw Man argument to claim that he was just talking about the use of the name "Boy Scouts"; it didn't even occur to me that that was what he meant.   

(Of course, how we view these things, even how we interpret what others say, is all a reflection of our biases, to which, incidentally, I found the videos you previously recommended by Kevin deLaplante very enlightening.)

[To Ed F]

But to be fair based on Ben Shapiro's philosophy I believe he meant it literally. I understand what you are saying and most people would mean it the way you put it. But Ben Shapiro practices orthodox Judaism. He is very culturally conservative and even mentioned one time that he has libertarian leanings but believes that authority (government, institutions) should (to a moderate extent) distill morals, especially religious ones. Based on his background I have strong reason to believe he meant what he said literally. I believe he has more old-fashioned morals with stronger gender roles. Not that there is anything wrong with that but it's just not how I see things. My concern with him is the "orthodoxy" whether it is Christian or Jewish orthodoxy I feel that religious orthodoxy is too far to the extreme and has strict interpretations in which they take things too literally. I think Ben Shapiro is considered a voice of reason for many but people do not understand how strongly religious he is and out of touch with mainstream American values. The majority of Americans on both sides of the political aisle are not in line with what he says and that's why it concerns me that he has a large following. People seemed to be getting swayed by him because of his ability to manipulate and instigate anger. Again, I am not saying he should be canceled. I just think people are playing a dangerous game listening to him and taking to heart what he says. I can't do anything about it though and I won't do anything about it because I believe what he is doing is the epitome of what it means to be American. If a day comes in which what he says is not allowed I would be right by his side to defend him until the end. 

Fair enough

Who said anything about "canceled"? And yes that is what Ben Shapiro meant! He believes in strict interpretations of the law and religious conservatism. He is living in a different time compared to the general populous and he is nostalgic for a time he didn't live in. He uses these simplistic arguments to appeal to a shrinking base of people who like him are trying to relive a time in which they weren't around. He does this by using a straw man in the example I used above. I really never had much respect for Mr. Shapiro and the more I learn about logical fallacies the more I see how ridiculous he is. He is nothing more than a magician or con man who believes in talking fast, using straw man and other simplistic arguments to appeal to a shrinking but still large base of people and make his opponent look weak or bewildered. The way he instigates and capitalizes on our country's division is just sick. But I digress

Pre Wikipedia, "Cancel culture" refers to the act of "shunning an individual (often a celebrity) who is deemed to have acted or spoken in an unacceptable manner."    Are you saying in the above paragraph you are not shunning Ben Shapiro (and calling him names) for saying things you find unacceptable?  

I am sure Ben Shapiro feels as strongly about these issues as you do.  But you apparently feel that your views are morally superior and his positions are so unacceptable that people who hold them should be shunned.  

(By the way, to the extent he tries to cancel your viewpoint [rather than engaging in fair debate about the issue], he would be guilty of the same thing.)

First of all, you used the word "cancel" before I even posted my opinion on Ben Shapiro. Second, Wikipedia is not a reliable source. This is my OPINION and we are on a website forum. I am not trying to "cancel" him I've never met him and I'm not a part of any organization that has any power to cancel him. I just don't agree with Ben Shapiro! You are jumping to ridiculous conclusions that I want him canceled which I never said and I don't believe he should be canceled. I can shun Ben Shapiro all I want and he can shun me all he wants. It's not canceling. If Ben Shapiro says my logic is flawed or my opinions are stupid I wouldn't take that as him "canceling me". I don't mean to come across as aggressive and I enjoy talking to people like you on this forum but I just want to point out that I'm not trying to engage in cancel culture. My paragraph about Shapiro was in no way trying to cancel him.

Ben Shapiro was asked by a college student what makes boy scouts for boys only and why girls who enjoy that sort of activity that boy scouts offer shouldn't be allowed to join. He replied saying the name "boy" is why it's for boys only. He went on to say the name boy is in the title. This video was from a while back. He received huge applauses. Everyone said he "owned the woke lib sjw". But I agree with Dr. Bennett with his policeman analogy and that one word can't just dictate the policies regarding who can join. Even though it says boy it should factor in a broad interpretation of what defines "a boy" and also the activities provided. Why can't a girl who likes camping in the cold of winter and making fires not be able to join? In girl scouts they rarely if ever do winter camping except for a couple of tough troops (not my moms troop lol). So I just feel they should define people who join the scouts on their interests and abilities because some girls are able to do the things boyscouts do and want to do it. Putting a label and sticking with it is hindering girls ability to fulfill their potential. 

If we're strict about it, isn't that true? A female can't be a "policeman". That doesn't imply they can't be a police  officer , they'd just be considered a police woman instead.

With the new gender rules, I am not sure what is what anymore :)

[To Bo Bennett, PhD]

Dr. Bennett, I am not using the modern gender identity rules when I use this argument. I am using just men and women in this case, not by any identities or transgender. Just wanted to make it clear to everyone that this is about men and women, not identities. But I do believe in gender identity in a cultural sense but not a legal sense. A man who identifies as a woman should not under any circumstances be allowed to serve in a women's prison if they break the law and for medical reasons also they should be defined as their birth. But I do think people like Katelyn Jenner are women at this point because of the surgery and the estrogen levels. But without surgery or high estrogen levels, I don't believe in a legal sense that gender identity should come into play. If I identified as a woman and assaulted a biological woman that should be the same as a male striking a woman. Now I don't see the problem referring to people with gender identities as Miss or Mr but I just think that's polite. 

It certainly is fluid, and no, that's not a misogynist slur. The words actress and comedienne have been retired too. I don't know exactly why. I never found them to be particularly sexist, but, hey, the times they-are-a changin'. 

But the whole point is that words such as policeman should not be strictly interpreted. It should be a police officer! BUT If they continue to keep the word man it should be used broadly just as boys in boy scouts should be. It should not be a strict interpretation. Because then you have people like Shapiro who will rally up the crowd and say that the world man is in there, therefore, it's for men only. Yes, it's true that women can't be a policeman.

The point is that there is a relationship between name and organisational procedure, but it's the wrong way round in Shapiro's case.

Organisation only admits boys -->  Boy  Scouts (the admission process justifies the name, not the other way round)

For the police, both men and women are admitted --> police officer . Police man and police woman are only used to be gender-specific (so in effect, they are strictly interpreted).