An ad hominem argument then? How sad.
"Gendered oppression" does not tautologically follow from having a vagina, no matter how much radfems insist it does. It's sad that I have to explain these basic concepts to you.
-
-
You don't backup your assertion with any evidence or rhetoric so you have explained exactly zero.
-
Do you know what 'tautologically' means? You not understanding my explanation doesn't negate its existence.
-
You offer no evidence. It's not possible to understand an argument that hasn't been presented.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.