[angry-hacker]

And Huff constantly publishes stories telling gender doesn't exist. All the scientists beg to differ.

Look mate I'm not interested in arguing who is more wrong. The fact is both sides have bias and talk about things that for whatever reason they find most important. And usually it bothers other side of the political spectrum so it's like a never ending loop from both sides.

[int_19h]

> And Huff constantly publishes stories telling gender doesn't exist. All the scientists beg to differ.

I'm decidedly not a fan of HuffPo, but this is a massive distortion. No-one is disputing that biological sex exists, and that's what science supports. The matter of gender, and various associated concepts such as gender roles and norms, is completely different - and there is plenty of research to support the idea that a lot of entrenched gender stereotypes are largely or purely a social construct.

[DanBC]

>The fact is both sides have bias

No one is denying this. People are saying there's a significant difference between bias that influences the ways facts are portrayed, and bias that causes facts to be invented.

[popmystack]

>And Huff constantly publishes stories telling gender doesn't exist.

They definitely don't do this. It seems like you have a significant misunderstanding of the literature being discussed.

>Look mate I'm not interested in arguing who is more wrong.

No, it's about who is wrong _more often_ and who reports fake stories _more often_. When the standard for one set of sources is consistently absurdly low then you can't just pretend all sources are equal. Again, it's a false equivalency.

[talmand]

So your standard for trustworthy news is an outlet that is wrong "less often" than their competition you likely already dislike?