M: [Non-text content: image_asset_pointer; content_type=image_asset_pointer; size_bytes=350397]
Scan the first comment and give it OCR. The fucking transcriber hit all the complex words, but screwed up with the first sentence in a way that I would not have expected. And there’s no way to edit these things only to delete them and re-create them.
G: Yep. The first comment reads:
Surrogacy isn’t a topic I have mistaken, but I have a high interest in language...
I think you touched on this necessary first step: people in contact with the professionally have to start carving up the massive monolith into manageable categories for discussion before political operators are able to take hold of the topic and equivocate.
“Altruistic” vs “Capitalist”, “Necessary” vs “Convenience”, whatever; just do it now. Hash out the language before it becomes equivocated political fodder.
And yeah, I see the particularly obnoxious transcription failure: “Surrogacy isn’t a topic I have mistaken”. Given the rest of the sentence, I strongly suspect you said something like “Surrogacy isn’t a topic I have much stake in” (or possibly “much of a stake in”), and the transcriber somehow turned “much stake in” → “mistaken.”
Which is especially funny because it then correctly nailed “monolith,” “political operators,” and “equivocate.”