leoj,

You are right.

1) It was a false comparison and another diversion.

2) It was voyeurism and my consuming interests.

3) I do have very narrow priorities.

4) The ABC should serve the "broader community."

5) It was not a "Modern Family," but a confused one.

There you go.

I can't argue with your logic. I'll leave this discussion to
others who can. For me it is definitely too hard.

Cheers.

Sixty Minutes is lacklustre and predictable.

Time for it to be put to rest.

The ABC is composure watching for you jole so why the criticism. All tv,s have an off button. You need one yourself.

These 'stories' are pornography for voyeurs. Stories about another person's sexuality is voyeuristic. We do not need to know these things unless we are contemplating a sex change and if we do need to know then we would get our information from medical experts.

The sexuality of a person is only relevant to that person and to anyone they want to have sex with. Sexuality is a private issue and those who need to parade their sexuality are insecure exhibitionists. So here we have a story where exhibitionists meet the neurotic needs of voyeurs. The tabloid media appeal to this and it says a lot about the producers of stories like this. They are hanging their own neurosis out for everyone to see. They are using their audience to test their own personal attitudes to sex and relationships and looking for support for their own insecurities.

This program sounds like a left whinger's wet dream.

The odds that
the mother changes to be a man,
and the son changes to be a daughter,
and the original straight dad is happy to now be married to a bloke,
is so remote that adding in an alien to the mix would not make it any less believable.

Humans have been fascinated by these stories for ever. Until recently (ie 1950s), if your grew up with the slightest classical education (Greek and Roman mythology, Latin at school) you would have been engrossed with them as a teenager. Strange families? Just look at the Greek and Roman gods! But every culture has had their version. Theses stories go back to the basics of human thought: Who are we? What is male? What is female? How do we live together?

What the media is doing today is recycling these eternal human stories in modern garb, either through 'true life' examples as the one described here, or as fictional themes (the early Dr Who series did an exceptional job of recasting the old myths and legends). Of course, they've been recycled many times in the past, in literature, theatre and art; the modern media are just doing the same but adding a new version 'real life'.

A couple of favourites:
Leda and the Swan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leda_and_the_Swan
Tiresias https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiresias

Tiresias was transformed into a woman for seven years, then back to a man. Then, 'Tiresias was drawn into an argument between Hera and her husband Zeus, on the theme of who has more pleasure in sex: the man, as Hera claimed; or, as Zeus claimed, the woman, as Tiresias had experienced both. Tiresias replied, "Of ten parts a man enjoys one only." Hera instantly struck him blind for his impiety. Zeus could do nothing to stop her or reverse her curse, but in recompense he did give Tiresias the gift of foresight and a lifespan of seven lives.'

Mind you, I never understood why Hera got mad at him for saying, effectively, that women enjoy sex nine times as much as men. Perhaps she didn't want men to learn this?

In summary, the evidence of human culture over millennia and across the world suggests that views like those of Phanto are mistaken: the sexuality of others has and always will be both fascinating and relevant to humans. We understand ourselves by trying to understand others.