There is no "twisting". There are just words and what they mean in the Sutta, as opposed to when traditions beg the question as to what they mean, so as to bolster the scaffolding of their own world views.
For example, in this topic, we have explored the many differences between salayatana and the indriyāni in the Sutta. It has become apparent that when we talk about salayatana, most people actually understand them as being something closer to indriyāni. That misunderstanding, originating from external sources and retrofitted back over the top of the Suttas, causes the internal meanings to be plastered over by puthujjana-ism.
And here's another example. I don't think it means what you think it means, so you make accusations that I'm to blame for someone not sharing your view. You get animated when it is pointed out that words like "womb" aren't in there, and you are striving to affirm them despite their literal absence. Interesting, but not my doing, as much as you like to shift accusations of "twisting" words onto retrofuturist.
And no matter how many times you are told, you cling tenaciously to your views about my views. Such pointless clinging.
All the best.
Metta,
Paul.