I erred by crediting the ABC in lieu of Ch 9. Apologies.

Cossombody:

You are talking about mythical stories. The one presented on 60 minutes is anything but mythical. These people will have surgery to change their gender. They are not just imagining it – it is a fact for them. Such surgery was not available in the era you are describing so it could hardly be ‘fascinating’ to people of that era.

Nor was there any such mental construct as a ‘sexuality’. This is a totally 20th century concept. People did not think about their ‘sexuality’.

This story appeals to those who do not have a firm sense of their own attitudes to sex. No one needs to understand how others respond to their sexual feelings unless they are unsure about their own responses. They want to check what others do with those feelings to see if it accords with what they do. People who are comfortable with the way they deal with their own sexual feelings do not need to understand themselves by trying to understand others – it is not really that complex.

denying biology seems to be a dogma of abc/regressives. 60 minutes is no different. And they are deluded enough to think they are the rational ones.

It is quite simple really;
Any combination of LGBDXYZ will NEVER propagate itself.
It is destined for extinction.
It can NEVER be "normal".

That is the start & end of it.

//Bluntly, is the taxpayer getting good value for money from the ABC when it prefers to beat up and sensationalise stories like this?//

* 60 Minutes is screened on channel 9.
* Channel 9 is privately owned.
* Taxpayers don't pay for channel 9.
* Advertising revenue pays for channel 9: that means they have to get people to watch their shows, which means they have to screen sensationalist current affairs stories.
* 60 Minutes has been 9's flagship current affairs program since as long as I've had a television (they're not as good as they're used to be), and with all of the press they got after the kidnapping scandal, how could anybody be unaware that 60 Minutes is NOT an ABC program?
* Unless they were just pretending to be unaware so they could have another round of the forum's favourite sport, ABC kicking.
* Actually watching the show would definitely give the game away: for one thing, you'd have to tune your TV to channel 9 instead of the ABC. They also have ads breaks mid-program, and probably a watermark during the program.
* So it's safe to assume leo didn't watch it: he just read about it somewhere and is apparently so ignorant of televisual scheduling that he assumed 60 Minutes is on the ABC, because obviously commercial channels never screen shite. In short, he is whingeing about NOTHING. And they call the left whiny...
* Bluntly, are we getting good value for money from OLO contributors when they prefer to beat up and sensationalise the ABC like this?

//I erred by crediting the ABC in lieu of Ch 9. Apologies.//

Bahahahaha! Most tokenistic apology ever. Because it rather changes things if it's a private broadcaster screening shite instead of the public broadcaster, doesn't it leo? Can't whinge about scheduling you don't pay for.

The ABC are always going to screen crap you don't like and make you grumble about 'rubbish like this not being worth the licence fee'. This is because everybody has different tastes, so of course it won't all appeal to you. Have you ever watched an epsiode of Compass? Most pointless, boring show ever. And we could do without all the Midsomer Murders. Or indeed, any Midsomer Murders. Truly appalling. But you know, I honestly can't remember the last time I watched a commercial station? ABC is all I watch these days. Yes, they screen a lot of crap. But less than the commercial channels, and I'm glad we still have them.

//It is destined for extinction.//

It's been around for thousands of years, Bazz. Any prediction as to when we might expect this extinction?