The sources are there, gay erasure is happening. I can’t learn it for you.
Show me a source. Wikipedia is not a source. Show me 1 specific example of a law that is “gay erasure” please. That’s not too much to ask, surely?
Tell you what, go to that wiki, scroll down and take a gander at the part that says “reference” and let me know what you see? That’s not too much to ask, surely?
Show me a source. Wikipedia is not a source. Show me 1 specific example of a law that is “gay erasure” please. That’s not too much to ask, surely?
Tell you what, go to that wiki, scroll down and take a gander at the part that says “reference” and let me know what you see? That’s not too much to ask, surely?
Show me a source. Wikipedia is not a source. Show me 1 specific example of a law that is “gay erasure” please. That’s not too much to ask, surely?
Last chance then I’ll correctly assume that there are no sources on there that support the “gay erasure” argument.
Last chance then I’ll correctly assume that there are no sources on there that support the “gay erasure” argument.
It won’t be correct, plugging your ears, And closing your eyes isn’t “correctly assuming”
If you can’t provide a single piece of evidence to support your argument no matter how many times you’re asked, it’s correct to assume it doesn’t exist. Bye now :)
If you can’t be bothered to look at the evidence provided then, no its not correct to assume it doesn’t exist lol.