The fallacy therefore fails to assess the claim on its merit. The first criterion of a good argument is that the premises must have bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim in question. Origins/Virtue/Genetic accounts of an issue may be true, and they may help illuminate the reasons why the issue has assumed its present form, but they are irrelevant to its merits.
From a second source:
Fallacy of Origins, Fallacy of Virtue (aka Genetic Fallacy): if an argument or arguer has some particular origin, the argument must be right (or wrong). The idea is that things from that origin, or that social class, have virtue or lack virtue. (Being poor or being rich may be held out as being virtuous.) Therefore, the actual details of the argument can be overlooked, since correctness can be decided without any need to listen or think.How about an example:
yes screw the feminists.
And the world has been and is ruled by men, for good, bad or ill it is a fact, it will likely stay that way... tough if anyone doesn’t like it, facts are facts and you cannot change biology - From This Comment
What is most interesting about the Fallacy of Origins/Virtue is in the past this was the domain of racists and fundamentalist religionists. This fallacy is relatively common, yet strangely it is most common amongst the irrational fantasy based senior citizens. An endless parade of this particular logical fallacy is often the basis of the very argument made from that perspective.
Critical, logical, rational thinking requires a clear understanding of reality at it’s [its] base, political religionists often build the base of arguments on logical fallacies, it is all too often the only way to promote and present popular yet irrational and illogical political fantasies.
The parallels in delusional thinking traditionalists and religious apologists is striking and often shocking.