[condescendence]

You're missing a big part of the argument here:

>Go tell arachnophobic parents that you must put spiders on their child because society depends on it, and see how that goes

When children don't receive vaccines it is not just seen that they are endangering themselves, but other children aswell because of the possibility of spread/mutation (whether this is true or not it doesn't really matter, that's just a majority of public view at the moment).

So unlike the spider example, a direct vaccination example from a pro-vaxor's standpoint would be that NOT vaccinating everyone will put children in harm's way.

[cname]

If you read the whole article, it's pretty clear that he hasn't missed any aspect of "the argument".

From the article: "But vaccines only work when everyone buys in. Public health depends on anti-vaxxers confronting their greatest fears for the benefit of others."

[condescendence]

I'm pointing out the fact that this person is playing mental mind games to justify the SO's point because he is head over heals so to speak.

I read the full article, and your comment furthers my point. The author is playing on both sides of the fence. It's like my SO for example, I hate when people chew with their mouth open I find it a little disrespectful and yet she does it and I don't find it disturbing. My preferences and beliefs are strayed because of my love for her.

This is basically a blog post explaining how someone can have an affect on even the strongest of beliefs solely because of emotions....no matter how ridiculous. Powerful stuff.

[cname]

It doesn't sound like his beliefs were affected at all. In the end, she decided to get her kid vaccinated. He was playing the long game, and it sounds like it paid off. It seems to me that you're the one missing the point.