Difficulties with understanding
Hmmm.
Ardent ally just cannot understand it.
She made it about her? Really? I missed that – I didn’t think it was about her at all, but rather about reality.
Let’s see it again.
No, I was right – it’s not about her at all. It’s about this subject a lot of us have been talking about – are women women, or is it actually men who are women. It’s not about her; she doesn’t even use the first-person pronoun except in the hashtag.
I guess by “made it about her” Comerford means she said it while famous. Ok but then does he object when “Caitlyn” Jenner says things? Does he object when Jenner appears on the cover of Vanity Fair in a bathing suit age 66? I bet he doesn’t.
And then this business of “a great ruling for trans people” – what about the women whose rights are being taken away? Why does that part not give him any pause?
And then, “the abject cruelty” – it’s not cruelty to say that men are not women. It just isn’t.
Talk about making something “all about you” — does this gentleman not realize that controversial court cases are going to have two sides? That controversies mean that good news for one side mean bad news for the other? That’s the way it works. Republicans were not only happy when Trump was elected, they knew enough to not be flabbergasted when Democrats shat all over their good news day.
Instead, it’s as if JK Rowling inexplicably complained about a little girl being rescued from a well. I will never understand the abject cruelty of that.
“Made it all about her” means “stated her opinion, and she’s famous, so that attracted attention.” In other words, bad person needs to go away.