You say that you read the article carefully, yet I have no idea how it's possible to come away with this take if you did.

Yes, I mentioned incidents involving the LGBT community when those incidents led to inappropriate things happening in schools. The masturbation assignment was completely unrelated to the LGBT community. Sexualised content on social media is unrelated to the LGBT community. Netflix's "Cuties" is unrelated to the LGBT community. The bathtub reading assignment was unrelated to the LGBT community.

That's 4 out of the 7 examples cited in the article. How am I being disproportionate?

One of the many inaccurate claims you made in your original reply was that I suggested that “trans women were spreading their legs in front of children,” when I said no such thing. I actually, correctly, said that drag queens were doing so. Again, I don’t see how you could have read the article carefully many times and not understood this.

And I didn't mention that the teacher with the ridiculous breasts was transgender at any point. Because I didn't think it was relevant and would obviously lead some people to generalise unfairly (in fact, I took issue with a comment on this article that did exactly that). The only reason I mentioned gender expression is that the school board cited that as justification for this obviously inapproprtate behaviour. I don't think giant prosthetic breasts are "gender expression." I think they’re fetishisation that is wholy inappropriate around children.

I have no wish to present the LGBT community in a bad light. That’s why I always go to great lengths to clarify that a criticism of a specific incident is not a criticism of the comunity in general. But I can’t, and won’t, ignore a problem or pretend that something is above criticism because the LGBT community is involved. I don’t do this with any community. Including the black community.

And while I have no comment on the various other ways you were offended, you don't get to be "offended" by my feelings about your leveraging of the black community. No, the situations are almost entirely non-analogous. That's not to claim that one was/is worse than the other, I'm not playing the oppression olympics, but you don't get to explain to me what is or is not like racism and expect no pushback when you're wrong.

For various reasons, some of this behaviour is tied to the LGBT community. And my entire point, what I actually spent a disproportionate amount of time doing in the article, is explaining that this is absolutely unfair to the LGBT community. I didn't say that it's LGBT people's "responsibility" to go to schools and educate people. Again, you claim that you read the article carefully, yet I absolutely didn't say this.

What I actually said was that if schools, organisations, whoever, want to teach children about the LGBT community (and they should), why not do so in a way that emphasises LGBT people's humanity over sexuality. Why didn't the people who hired a dildo-packing monkey or semi-naked drag queens, instead hire LGBT people to simply talk, as regular human beings, to children about the various ways people can fall in love?

I'm not being defensive, I'm being irritated. Because all of this is written clearly and carefully in the article. And while I honestly do my very best to be reasonable and balanced, I'm still a human being. So if you come into my comments assuming bad faith, very much appear to have not read the article (as demonstrated by your comments), and rather sanctimoniously tell me you're "disappointed in me," because of that inaccurate reading, you might not inspire my best, most receptive self.

You get to be disappointed, of course. But at least be disappointed by a fair, level-headed reading of what I wrote.