I'm not surprised that the word disingenuous is on your mind, because that's the perfect description for the article. You know in your heart how daft that comparison is, but your editor wanted it out there for tactical reasons.
I gave you a screenshot. It says "it's not precisely eugenics". Are you... obsessed with the word analogy? Weird.
-
-
Not sure what could be more specific than "it's not precisely eugenics" lmao
-
It doesn't "very specifically say it's an analogy that is useful but not perfect and shouldn't be mistaken for saying they're one and the same", it says "it's not precisely eugenics" in one place, while calling it eugenics in others.
- Show replies
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.