Straw Man
Distorting someone's argument to make it easier to attack.
What it means
A straw man argument is when someone misrepresents another person's position - subtly or blatantly - in order to make it easier to attack. Instead of engaging with what was actually said, they construct a weaker, distorted version of the argument (the "straw man") and knock that down instead. It looks like they've won the argument, but they've actually argued against something nobody said.
This is one of the most common logical fallacies in everyday debate, and it works because it's often hard to spot in real time. The distortion can be subtle - a slight exaggeration, a shift in emphasis, a missing qualifier. By the time you've said "that's not what I meant," the conversation has moved on and the damage is done.
Straw man arguments thrive in political discourse, social media, and any context where people are more interested in winning than understanding. They're a sign that someone either can't or won't engage with the actual argument - which is useful information in itself.
In the real world
Someone says: "I think we should have more regulation on social media platforms to protect children." Their opponent responds: "So you want the government to control what everyone can say online?" That's a straw man. The original argument was about child safety regulation - it's been inflated into an argument about government censorship, which is much easier to attack and much harder to defend.
The thought to hold onto
If someone's response to your argument sounds nothing like what you actually said, they've built a straw man. Name it.