To demonstrate that a Mexican writer's memoirs are actually fiction (Cuevas), Yépez argues that the use of the "niño" is a dead give-away. We all know that "children" don't exist in real life, he argues; they are ideological constructs or mythological beasts like unicorns. Thus, whenever anyone writes, "when I was a child..." we know that we are dealing with a work of fiction. This article, or "critical fiction," purports to demonstrate the "vicious circle" between fiction and reality, and itself is based on a circular argument: since children don't really exist, any work that employs the device of the "child" must be a work of fantasy! Perfectly Borgesian.

I was convinced .... by the weaker version of this claim: that is, that any appeal to *childhood,* whether in general terms or specifically, to own's childhood, is an ideological or psychoanalytic projection. Just like any appeal to "national security" or "the western tradition" or "Judeo-christian ethics."