I have a lemonade stand. You come up to buy some lemonade. I ask you "Do you like lemonade?" You reply yes. I take a cup of lemonade and put a handful of di

I have a lemonade stand. You come up to buy some lemonade. I ask you "Do you like lemonade?" You reply yes. I take a cup of lemonade and put a handful of dirt in it. I offer it to you. You refuse it, because you don't like the taste of dirt. Is it fair for me to challenge your original claim of liking lemonade? Likewise, if you maintain that you do in fact enjoy lemonade, are we just quibbling over semantics? Or is there a substantive reason why you refused to drink it? That's what the GP is claiming. When dealing with "feminists", he senses toxic and anti-intellectual attitudes. That's a substantive claim, not a semantic one.