[appreciatorBus]

> Genspect, which is also a biased source on the subject:

Organization that supports position <x> supports position <x>.

If Genspect can be discarded as being a biased source, then so can WPATH and every other org supporting gender ideology.

Given the fraught nature of the debate, Wikipedia seems like a poor source for determining the bias of players in the debate - the most passionate debaters have plenty of time to just edit Wikipedia.

[Ralfp]

Can you explain what „gender ideology” is supposed to mean?

The primary issue with Genspect is poor scientific rigour applied to their publications, as I have shown above. Pretty much „if it fits our platform, we will spread it”.

[appreciatorBus]

WPATH : if it fits our platform, we will spread it.