Murder is bad because the sky is orange

You: "Murder is bad because the sky is blue."
Me: "What you just said is wrong."
You: "Why do you think murder is good?"
Me: ...

You: "Murder is bad because the sky is orange."
Me: "The sky is not orange."
You: "Why do you think murder is good?"
Me: ...

These two examples represent a fundamental failure of communication that I'm trying to figure out how to address when and where it happens, without confusing people further. It took me a long time to figure out that a lot of people can't tell the difference between me contradicting their argument or premise and me contradicting their conclusion. Since that dawned on me, I've only ever managed to successfully navigate this conversational space by accident. Starting from "Murder is bad because the sky is [blue/orange]", how do I get to a position where you understand the following things:

1) I agree with you that the sky is blue / I disagree with you that the sky is orange.

2) I agree with you that murder is bad.

3) The statements I have made that do not include the word "murder" are not about murder

Anecdotally, I can report that simply breaking the statement apart into those components does not have the desired effect. If anything, using more words in such a straightforward way makes things worse. Actually naming the logical fallacy being employed, more so. So, I am looking for different words to use.

Not every insult is misogynistic. "geek"

It really bothers me when someone tries to frame *every* discussion about men or women being oppressed or insulted as being based in misogyny. I get it, misogyny is a problem. It's a bigger problem than any of the other problems in question. It's big enough that it has side effects that some people might misrecognize as misandry. But it's not the only problem. Not everything is about misogyny, and I don't need to have experienced misogyny for that conclusion or my reasoning in reaching it to be sound.

Most of the ways you can insult a man for being un-masculine also imply that he is being feminine. If being feminine is an insult, that's misogynistic. Most of the ways you can insult a woman for being un-feminine also imply that she is being masculine. If a woman not conforming to her gender roles is an insult, that's misogynistic. There's a whole argument to be had about whether misogyny is to blame for every possible insult of that sort, where someone of one gender behaves similarly to the common perception of the other gender. For the sake of this post I'll agree that it is; every such insult is rooted in misogyny. But those insults only make up *most* of the insults that can be levied at someone just for being farther from the social perception of their gender. Try on this counter-example:

"Geek". This word is commonly used as an insult in school-age settings, although it's gotten a lot less insulting in the last 20 years. Applied to men, it often includes connotations of not engaging in "masculine" pursuits. Geeks don't like sports, etc. Applied to women, it often includes connotations of not engaging in "feminine" pursuits. Geeks don't like fashion, etc. However, unlike the majority of cases, where being farther from feminine makes you more masculine, and vice versa, in this case you can be farther from both at the same time. Like the political spectrum, it's not one-dimensional, no matter how common that perception is. Libertarianism can mean being farther from the left without being right, and farther from the right without being left; Geeks can be farther from masculine and feminine at the same time.

I would welcome more examples in comments, or discussion of the phenomena mentioned above. If you're guilty of the generalization I've pointed out here, I hope you'll make it less often after reading this. If you want to try to convince me that "geek" being an insult is somehow rooted in misogyny... good luck.