The thing these articles are doing (which sensationalist articles always do) is taking a few people’s opinions and spreading it across the entire blanket “they” of whatever opposite side the article references. It appeals to people because its easier for people to generalize the whole group than to point to a niche section.
This one in particular takes a few people who are interested in the secretary of the Navy and says they’re upset at the choice, which they might be, and spins it into “They’re all upset at what their leader did.”
You can find this rhetoric all over the political spectrum, whether it’s copium or relishing. Take it with a grain of salt.
You are not immune to propaganda.
To play some devils advocate here, this is still a very sensitive subject. Not because the kids don’t have a right to that care but because kids are kids, and things can change drastically for them as they grow. For every kid who genuinely needs that care, there is another who doesn’t but is searching to discover themselves. Some forms of affirming care are safer than others, but others can have drastic life long effects on growing people. Unfortunately there are also some parents that will force care (or lack thereof) on kids in one way or another.
I think that therapy and understanding should be promoted heavily for kids so they can identify and understand how they feel and why, but blanket statements are challenging because they can be very easily spun (ex. All the “the left wants to force drugs on kids” bullshit that gets spouted.)
Not saying that I’m right or that you’re wrong, but I think this is a discussion that still has to be opened/presented further for it to gain traction in the public eye.