"He can't seem to comprehend that other people have different experiences and goals than him and why they'd come to a different conclusion."

"islamaphobia"

"He basically curses off his audience every week if they don't laugh at a terrible joke right away."

If you disagree with Tucker's politics that's fine, but he gives his sparring partners plenty of time to make their usually ridiculous points. He does interrupt, but only after they've gotten their initial point across.

It doesn't read "to educate people about racism and microaggressions" does it? That indicates that every other race either knows these things already or cannot possibly participate in racist behavior.

"created to educate white people about racism and microaggressions."

You're complaining about Applebee's restaurants. To me, I think even they are too expensive.

I think the author of this article is struggling to separate TV from reality. This season was clearly based on a world where Hillary Clinton won, right wing media was fired up and many Republicans internally were trying to sabotage her Presidency. All of which could have happened.

I think for the show to succeed in today's generation and landscape it needs to shorten its season and combine digital efforts with the weekly TV series.

I'm sure a lot of wrestlers do have input, but there's a difference between coming up with your finisher's name and completely developing a character different from what you've been doing for the last 20 years, filming most of the content at your home and having your family be unpaid members of these digital shorts.

But that's the problem with turning Roman "heel". The crowd will start cheering him. It will be ROH crowd reaction to The Bullet Club/Elite.

Not really the same situation. WWE has a bunch of writers and road agents/"producers" who come up with gimmicks, names, attire, catchphrases etc.

Thank you, Defenestrator for the responses and the insight.

I agree with that, but what about culture?

But we're not screening anyone to see if they meet said criteria before allowing them to transition. I'll trust what you're saying is accurate and cede on the specifics of that you either know more or researched more than me, but you're also downplaying the societal aspect of how people develop.

As another user pointed out there is medical research validating people may feel one way or another, but there's nothing we can directly pinpoint that says this person is a man trapped inside a woman's body or vice versa. We can't pinpoint a wavelength in the brain that tells us that.

It comes down to what matters to you. I wouldn't ask anyone to add more weight to a subject than they feel inclined.

I go on just about every website from News Views to Breitbart as I like to read and hear the opinions of people on all sides.

I don't think either of us want to revisit all of the comments and allegations that came up in the election. It's clear Donald Trump falls somewhere between just a sleazy dude and an actual rapist. Where he lands on the spectrum one way or another comes down to who you ask and how much of what came out is true.

Criticizing women who voted for Trump is just another knock on the gender and a step backwards, not forward.