The magazine also said in its mail that while the organisation encourages free expression and constructive political debate, it has a zero tolerance policy towards hate speech.
I have laid out compelling arguments based on the real world context of what’s happening, what her words are most likely to mean given that context, even explained which part was misunderstood and what the most rational explanation for that was.
I’ve done part or all of that at least a handful of times in replies throughout the comments of this post. I have also conceded that it might have been an ill-advised way of saying things because a public figure being less than 100% clear about a statement regarding anything contentious can and most often WILL open the door to misinterpretations, whether honest or wilfully manipulative.
That’s as close to “you are wrong, I am right” as a fiberglass canoe is to a shoddily made origami boat.
I have laid out compelling arguments based on the real world context of what’s happening, what her words are most likely to mean given that context, even explained which part was misunderstood and what the most rational explanation for that was.
I’ve done part or all of that at least a handful of times in replies throughout the comments of this post. I have also conceded that it might have been an ill-advised way of saying things because a public figure being less than 100% clear about a statement regarding anything contentious can and most often WILL open the door to misinterpretations, whether honest or wilfully manipulative.
That’s as close to “you are wrong, I am right” as a fiberglass canoe is to a shoddily made origami boat.