There is a fine line between valid criticism of gender roles & sexism.
An example of the former would be, “Men are dangerous for women”. Of course not all men are dangerous, but it describes the experience of many women & how they have to navigate the world, to not be assaulted.
This one describes the dynamic of a relationship between individuals & assigns a thought pattern to one of those individuals, based on their gender.
Maybe I missed some nuances here & I would be glad to be enlightened, but this looks like plain sexism.
An integral is usually written like ∫ f(x) dx or alternatively as df(x)/dx. Please note that this is just a way to apply the operation ‘Integration’, like + applies the operation ‘Addition’. There is no real multiplication or division.
But sometimes you can take a shortcut and treat dx as a multiplied constant. This is technically not correct, but under the right circumstances lands you at the same solution as the proper way. This then looks like this ∫ f(y) dy/dx dx = ∫ f(y) dy
Another thing you can do is to move multiplicative constants from inside the Integral to in front of the Integral: ∫ 2f(x) dx = 2 ∫ f(x) dx. (That is always correct btw)
What anon did was combine those two things and basically write ∫ f(x) dx = dx ∫ f(x). Which is nonsensical, but given the above rules not easily disproven.
This is more or less the same tactic used by internet trolls just in a mathy way. Purposefully misinterpreting arguments and information, that cost the other party considerably more energy to discover and rebut. Hence the hate fuck.