dude is clearly a lil too radical on this point. but there is a hint of truth in there. gawker is not to be trusted, ever. they are about hits and clicks, hence why they brought up dee barnes this close to the film opening. if not, they would have championed her before the hype arrived. dee barnes has every right to say what she wants, what happened was messed up and she can speak on it any which way. but i’ll never c/s gawker and its legendary fukkery. thats a webiste that outed a closeted gay dude just for the lolz and clicks. no morals whatseoevr. they bout as credible as TMZ.
The hype of the movie and the movie itself is what sparked conversations about the real life events that took place, Dee Barnes is naturally a part of that conversation and omitting what happened to her from the movie is exactly why this discussion is being had in the first place.