Rewriting other people's words is completely unacceptable IMO. Scholars should be judged what they said and did in their social and historical context. But you can't do that unless you tell the truth about what they actually said!
-
-
In short, I assume the speaker is just fine in of themselves with good to neutral intentions but that their ability to express them clearly is affected by the biases in (their) language that they haven't addressed (yet).
-
I only assume all this if of course I know nothing else. Of course in many conversations, you may discover more details about somebody which can bias your assumptions towards a more refined conclusions about what is being done and the angle.
-
Speaking of context (partial, assumed, etc.) the Ancient Greeks had really really much much worse taste than we think. Really garish. https://edition.cnn.com/style/article/gods-in-color-ancient-world-polychromy …
-
I love those. They remind me of Mexican religious statues.
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.

But a lot of language is by default sexist, cisheteronormative, racist, etc. so it's no surprise canned expressions are pretty awful.