I think the author of this article is trying too hard to take an isolated event and generalize its results towards all of America. First of all, what the heck is up with his/her definitions of judgement and discriminate?

> With political correctness reaching unprecedented levels, we as a society are claiming to not judge (make a considered decision or come to a sensible conclusion) or discriminate (recognize a distinction; differentiate).

I was under the impression that not judging people (in the context of racism/sexism/*-ism) has a much more specific meaning more akin to not stereotyping. Same for the word discrimination; in this context those two words do not mean the same thing as:

> “discernment,” defined as “the ability to judge well.” Would we want to exclaim “I have no discernment!”?

The author is ignoring the contextual usage of two of the words in the title in order to draw sweeping generalizations about people. He/she claims that because we have accepted transgender people, America can no longer distinguish "admirable character" from "moral decay".

And let's remind ourselves about who the author is complaining about when he/she lashes out at the

> the faceless mob of social media

> the faceless social media mob, along with the mainstream media, both of which have no judgement or discrimination (read: discernment)

I think it goes without saying that these people do not have social justice as their highest priority. The "social media mob" is probably more concerned with finding people to attack in order to feel better about themselves. The backdrop for their attacks, the setting, if you will, is a current event. Transgender issues are only a means for these idiots to justify their endless hate. Similarly, the "mainstream media" has to go with whatever will get them viewers. Whatever side they take is for that purpose alone. When money comes into play, as it must for mainstream media, then journalistic ethics and the truth both become shoved to the side.

This quote in particular proves that the author is talking about extremists, basically. His analogy to Party members in 1984 is hilarious - what could possibly be more extreme than the authorities in 1984?

> The faceless social media mob, along with the mainstream media, both of which have no judgement or discrimination (read: discernment) unleashed hate upon him in eerily similar fashion to the way Party members participated in Two Minutes of Hate in Orwell’s “1984”.

This article in a nutshell is the author drawing sweeping generalizations about all of America based on the actions of an extremist minority and using semantics (which ignore the context that the usage of particular words are grounded in) to describe those generalizations.

Just for the record, do I think giving that particular transgender person an award over that particular soldier is okay? Well, based only on what the article says, it seems a bit stupid. Perhaps Mr. Berg is at least partially correct, although I don't think he realizes exactly how important transgenderism is to one's identity. But is really saying what the author thinks he's saying?

> More importantly, [Berg] discerned that we, as a nation, are cheapening the meaning of bravery in a way that is utterly offensive to the truly brave.

I don't think so.

Besides, we as a nation do honor our soldiers every day and recognize their courage. Unfortunately, I can't say the same thing for people of color or people who aren't heterosexual.