LOL. So presumptuous. And yes, it is.
-
-
OK kids, your article actually makes sense. And I’m certainly no ideologue. Someone asked you a question about sources and you refused
-
To answer. No one took issue with the content of the article, just for the fact that no one would engage with the question being asked
-
That's not true. We were asked if any trans people were consulted in the writing of it and said 'no.'https://twitter.com/HPluckrose/status/950111590766039040 …
-
Except your answer keeps changing. At one point it was no. More recently it was That it’s untrue to say you didn’t consult with any sources.
-
No, it wasn't. James pointed out that some people assumed he'd not listened to any trans people when no-one had even asked him. You only need to read it to see what it is - our own ethical argument.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Instead, we wrote an argument for an ethical & rational approach to trans rights and inclusion in response to the unethical & irrational polarised ones we hear all the time. That was quite clear but it's also not allowed.
- 1 more reply
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.