[syzarian]

I was responding to your response of dude, come on. That response said much about your frame of mind. You didn’t know about the research article that weakfish linked to when you made it. It appears you had no context or knowledge on the topic of this deity or its followers’ beliefs. It appears it was a knee jerk response assuming the reporter was engaged in some wokist propaganda.

An intellectually honest response to the link supplied by weakfish would be to question why defender of gender fluidity is the right description while acknowledging that this is new information and that your initial response was wrong. That the description defender of gender fluidity might have some merit to it but you remain skeptical and would like to learn more about why people use this description.