more notes on...

the reading:

It's not just the bad writing*, the lack of knowledge of subject matter** or the (possibly intentional) misuse of science, or even that I disagree. Mostly, it's that she both demonizes and appropriates me, as convenient to reach her (questionable) conclusions.



*I still maintain she makes some interesting observations, they're just sandwiched between dubious premises and questionable conclusions.Her step 2 has merit.

** A trans biologist who hasn't read Fausto- Sterling???