Hi, Harry. I appreciate your thoughtful response.
I consider name-calling part of ad hominem.
“I believe X because of Y”
is substantially different than:
“Snowflake losers who don’t believe X believe Z.”
Is this a strawman? Is the implication that only snowflake losers don’t believe X? Or is this a narrowly defined set: snowflake losers [who are a subset of people who don’t believe X] — terms snowflake and loser to be defined?
What it accomplishes as an insult is to associate “snowflake” and “loser” with the people who don’t believe X.
Ad hominem, reverse appeal to authority, whatever: the logical fallacy is that you are attacking the person and not the idea.
That’s not the basis of rational argument.