"I'm not sure where your hostility is coming from. You seem more interested in discussing the structure of my comments than the meat of them."

Not at all. I'm the one trying to push past loaded analogies that beg the question and non-arguments to try and get us to something productive. That's all.

I think you're far too quick in dismissing the first point. Yes, prejudice can be novel and still harmful, but even then what seems "novel" doesn't come out of a vacuum. It is actually one of the better ways to tell an allegation of prejudice is misdirected (take "reverse racism," for instance) to look and see what underlies it. If there is nothing, no history of harm or marginalization, odds are good that the claim of prejudice is being misused.

You've already said so much to show that your case holds little water. If the context makes all the difference, then the phrase can't be inherently ageist. Take your own example. It's racist to discount someone or their opinion because of their race. But is it racist to respond in kind when you're making the point that what someone's saying is racist? That their ignorance could just as well be used against them? No, I don't agree that it is. Because then you'd be forced to argue that there *is* something inherently racist in the use of a term like "black," which could itself be called a form of prejudice.

You say that isn't the extent of it with "OK Boomer." I'll grant that some people do use the phrase abusively, but that isn't the extent of it, either. Furthermore, you're just kind of asserting that it's used to dismiss some political, economic, or moral views without stopping to consider that perhaps some of these views are seen as discriminatory against younger generations and that is why they're getting pushback on them. So then it would still be part of the context I've already mentioned. Without knowing what you're referencing, it's not possible to say one way or the other, but there's also always bad actors regardless of the way something in pop culture is meant. If you want to try and illustrate why "OK Boomer" is ageist in the vast majority of ways that people use the phrase, don't let me stop you. You just haven't made a good case for that yet.

And yes, I know you're not arguing it's illegal. You called it a protected class, though, which does have a specific definition as a legal term, hence my remarks there.