bennyonesix wrote:That is what I don't understand.
A "strong bias against" but you "don't care"?
I'll assume you're serious.
What liberals get wrong about tolerance is that they think it means tolerating everything they already think is OK. That's not really tolerance. Tolerance is letting somebody else think/do/say things you may find personally objectionable, but are willing to put in the "it's a free country" box. Many liberals won't do that. Have a Republican governor give a college commencement and there will be protests.
For a minor example, when Brittney Spears back in the day married her childhood friend in Vegas for a day, then got divorced, that goes against what I think a marriage should be. I'd be pissed if my kid did that. But I'm not going to lobby to have that right legislated away or make angry posts on the Internet.
Similarly, I don't understand the transgender thing, and that may in part be a lack of interest in doing so. I don't know any out transgender people. I do know transgender kids get bullied a lot, and the suicide rates under the status quo treatment they receive are horrifying. I don't like the thought of kids feeling like they're unlovable and killing themselves.
Since the APA doesn't categorize this as a mental health condition, and people who transition tend to be happier, what the hell should I care about? AFAIK, Jenner doing so is the first time a well-known person has done this in the public eye. That is legitimately a major story, despite the reality TV angle. If widespread public tolerance of him/her gives some hope of acceptance to confused kids who might otherwise kill themselves, FFS let them have that. Who cares. Yes, it's going to be on the news. It's a major news story. But it's such a small percentage of the population that I can't imagine how this will ever impact me.
One of the downsides of the Internet is that it allows like-minded people to form communities, and sometimes those communities are stupid.
