I hear you. But she doesn’t buffer her language, at least not that the article mentions, on either side to make it sound more academic. It’s clear to more than just me that she said something wrong. And didn’t say enough right.
Except you have mischaracterized what she said. So it’s not clear whether you have an axe to grind and are being deliberately misleading, or if you just blindly follow people who do.
She was dropped by her agency, had others explain to her what she said was hurtful, and ultimately she apologized. She got it wrong. Any mischaracterization here is simply irrelevant. I can see where she got it wrong; there are other ways to state what she said. I don’t know why this is so hard to understand.
I hear you. But she doesn’t buffer her language, at least not that the article mentions, on either side to make it sound more academic. It’s clear to more than just me that she said something wrong. And didn’t say enough right.
Except you have mischaracterized what she said. So it’s not clear whether you have an axe to grind and are being deliberately misleading, or if you just blindly follow people who do.
She was dropped by her agency, had others explain to her what she said was hurtful, and ultimately she apologized. She got it wrong. Any mischaracterization here is simply irrelevant. I can see where she got it wrong; there are other ways to state what she said. I don’t know why this is so hard to understand.