Some readers love female spies very much, probably in indignation, and cite this article, the entire chapter involving female spies in the article is all killed, and even the first and second chapters are gone, what do people think of this article?

I checked again, there are no illegal words in the above article, and there is no description of details, just a specious way of writing, such an article is also cited, and there is really no way to reason.

Of course, if you associate it, then there is no way, when you see the feet, you will think of the thighs, and when you think of the thighs, you will associate a node hidden under the skirt, and then continue to associate it, it is indeed very serious, does this mean that the feet can't be written?

The author writes articles in accordance with the rules, does not deviate, does not touch the red line.

And it is normal for readers to have different perspectives, good and bad.

However, you can't associate that there is no deviance in the article, and you have to cite it, is this excessive?

Is it because you are a female spy that you are not angry?

Or maybe there's something else

It might be reasonable to cite * other chapters, and to include this article on female spies alone, I really doubt the motives

Is this a god-like thing?