Damn, if only these women had also found the Wikipedia portal for logical fallacies, and also had concrete stats on workplace harassment, which is a personal, embarrassing, and highly political subject.

I'm not certain at what you're trying to get at here.

Can you elaborate?

ETA: I genuinely don't understand the parent comment.

The parent comment "debunked" my reasoning by citing logical fallacies.

There's a page on Wikipedia that lists all logical fallacies and links to their pages, it's often cited as one of the best / coolest pagest on Wikipedia (seriously, check it out.)

But recently a lot of people think they can win (or shut down) arguments (or pleas for equality) by leaning on these logical fallacies a little to hard. It's a lame and desperate move, as there's literally always something you can throw out when you can't defend your point anymore. It's become such a "thing" that you can counter "oh cool that you found that wikipedia portal". It's particularly frustrating since combating inequality (or any social issue) often requires more of an emotional / social intelligence and personal experiences / understanding, which are apparently not fair game to these Greybeard Grand Wizard Gatekeepers of Logic(tm)

And asking for concrete data/stats on an incredibly personal, often legal, and highly politicized systematic trend is obviously absurd, but a good way to dismiss an argument you find inconvenient and don't want to address.

Thank you.