Here is a quote from Wikipedia about Godwin’s Law, linked here:
Godwin’s law (also known as Godwin’s Rule of Nazi Analogies or Godwin’s Law of Nazi Analogies) is an argument made by Mike Godwin in 1990 that has become an Internet adage. It states: “As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1.” In other words, Godwin observed that, given enough time, in any online discussion—regardless of topic or scope—someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler and the Nazis.
Godwin’s Law is funny, and it may also be too much of a limitation to be a true “Law,” because something like the Nazis could happen again, and we’d hate to be unable to raise an alarm bell about it, because we had to follow the “law.” Nevertheless, it is a useful tool for learning good rhetoric. Anyway, I want to propose another law that should advance the cause of good rhetoric.
It seems that any online discussion about Wall Street malfeasance, nasty financiers, greedy hedge fund managers, Grover Norquist or unscrupulous bankers will eventually devolve into some commentator accusing the unwholsome individual of having a small penis. I think that is the equivalent of saying that every male that is under six feet tall has anger management problems, or every female with small breasts beats her children. Maybe ‘small penis’ is a fine insult and I just don’t get it, but I’m proposing my law regardless.
The law is that any discussion about a nasty man will eventually reach a point where someone suggests that the man has a small penis, and at this point the conversation has lost usefulness.