I hope I don’t sound rude but it really sounds like you only consider WaPo trustworthy when it’s convenient for you.

That's not quite what they're saying. They're saying WaPo is also subject to censorship and coercion, so their word holds more weight when it's a topic where they might be penalised for publishing. If you don't think there are any Chinese sources that can publish things critical of China, then you can still follow carl_marks_1312's methodology in part by finding articles from sources with a free press but geopolitically aligned with China.

Sorry, I don’t understand how that makes this any less trustworthy?

To us, Adrian Zenz automatically means you can dismiss the evidence. The person you're talking to went in with that assumption, and then was lambasting you for not noticing such an obvious and glaring problem with the article. So that's where the disconnect comes from. Of course without that assumption the comment doesn't make sense.

Zenz is a garbage person, but more importantly he's not reliable. He's verifiably been caught lying several times. The tweet you commented on is out of context. I don't know what the context is, it probably doesn't change what's being said, but without reading the context I can't know if it's a justifiable thing to say. Perhaps it was. Perhaps he was explaining Nazi mentality without trying to justify it. It doesn't matter. Zenz is a bad source because he's a liar primarily. He uses bad science and statistics, he makes wild inferences, he pretends not to notice mistakes that he must've noticed, etc. He only ever cites circular sources. That is to say media reports of his own publishings.

being a Nazi sympathizer does not automatically invalidate one's opinions on other topics

I'll fight you on that especially when the "other topics" are "opposing Communist states."

It is entirely possible that the UN decided to overlook their crimes due to pressure from China.

UN is a China Puppet? GTFO. The Peoples Republic of China wanted to join the UN in the 1950s but wasn't granted membership until 1971 despite being the government representing over a fifth (22%) of the population of the planet.

You were thinking that I gobbled up and regurgitated all the US propaganda and that this is just a conspiracy theory

China is not committing genocide in Xinjiang camps the only one saying they are is a nazi sympathiser. If you are saying it it is only because you have not recognized that it is propaganda spread to delegitimize a communist government and rehabilitate fascism.

Besides, I am pretty sure that when women are given more education, they decide not to have so many children either by using condoms or having less sex rather than getting IUDs.

This is peak "I have never discussed contraception with a woman." If you are going to choose between having less sex and fucking any time the mood takes you what will you choose? If you can choose between having to insist your partner wear a condom or just not having to worry about it what would you choose? No offense if you are asexual or whatever but this is like pure male virgin ignorance.

Yes, no problem.

Here's a screenshot