All purpose news and politics thread part VII: News & Politics Total Landscaping

[zinderel]

Bloomberg reports:
6-week ceasefire will kick in if Hamas agrees to release vulnerable hostages including women, the ill, injured & elderly, US officials said today after the first US aid airdrops into Gaza.

Israel has essentially agreed to the deal and it's up to Hamas, they said.

Here’s hoping Hamas does the right thing for its people and doesn’t poke the bear in the living room.

Netanyahu had made it clear there would be no ceasefire until the hostages were released.
I have my doubts Hamas will do it. Imo their leaders want the world to vilify Israel more than they want Gaza to survive.

Absolutely agree. And Israel’s government seems perfectly happy to feed into - and strengthen - Hamas’ desired narrative, for some reason…

You Have Already Taken A Side On Israel-Palestine (Whether You Admit It Or Not)
by Caitlin Johnstone

I’m on the side that’s just dog tired of watching innocent people getting slaughtered every night over whose magic book of faerie tales is the ‘truth’…

[Jack Dracula]

Pretty much. Hamas has always known a fight against Israel isn't a fight they were ever going to win.

I think the result they were really hoping for was to draw other Muslim nations into a direct, coordinated conflict with Israel. I’m not sure how much more likely that becomes as the bombing of Gaza continues.

[The Cool Thatguy]

I think the result they were really hoping for was to draw other Muslim nations into a direct, coordinated conflict with Israel. I’m not sure how much more likely that becomes as the bombing of Gaza continues.

I'd be shocked if it happened.

No one really gave any f**ks about Syria killing their own people. Local leaders will only pay lip service to the Palestinians to distract from their own BS.

[aja_christopher]

I do not share Jonathon Haidt's optimistic assessment of "moral evolution". (yes, it is one thing for Russian scientists to domestic a breed of wild foxes inside of 30 years through careful breeding practices... but we don't enjoy that same level of control over human behavior... and if we did, it could only be done through the worst sort of tyranny). as it turns out these foxes are only sort-of domesticated!

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science...-terrible-pets

Human morality has been developing for more than 30 years — moreover foxes don’t generally seek to better themselves through education and learning.

The argument of nature vs. nurture is a valid one but humanity should not be judged by its worst elements, especially given the potential to learn from the past.

[Adam Allen]

This thread is dominated by left-wingers.

My standard on whether to take her seriously was if several stories came out showing serious problems in the hospital implying some kind of systemic failure.

The Times piece seemed to suggest that some of her concerns were valid.

I specifically said, "let's not dismiss..."

Is that the intent, then? I mean, I fully get that the thread is full of people further to the left than you, but that doesn't make everyone left-wingers. I'm pretty sure I am further left than many posters here ... by your standards, shouldn't this allow me to declare everyone is right-wing?

And are you reading your own links? Or just assuming I wouldn't? You didn't have "several stories" showing some kind of "systemic failure" in the hospital.

You got exactly one story from a respected news source, that at least treated her with kid gloves. That's it, though. No "several stories" with "serious problems".

Even all this time later, what is the biggest "systemic issue" you can try to pull out of the long-ass story, to try to suggest there was any validty to her claims? This bit:

But as demand rose, more patients arrived with complex mental health issues. The clinic’s staff often grappled with how best to help, documents show, bringing into sharp relief a tension in the field over whether some children’s gender distress is the root cause of their mental health problems, or possibly a transient consequence of them.

With its psychologists overbooked, the clinic relied on external therapists, some with little experience in gender issues, to evaluate the young patients’ readiness for hormonal medications. Doctors prescribed hormones to patients who had obtained such approvals, even adolescents whose medical histories raised red flags. Some of these patients later stopped identifying as transgender, and received little to no support from the clinic after doing so.

Unwanted outcomes and regrets happen in every branch of medicine, but several clinics around the world have reported challenges similar to those in St. Louis. Pediatric gender medicine is a nascent specialty, and few studies have tracked how patients fare in the long term, making it difficult for doctors to judge who is likely to benefit.

So first, importantly, the bit about "tension in the field" is commentary. The pondering about root cause or "transient consequence" is from the writer of the article. So cool they have an opinion, but they shouldn't try to speak for experts, which is how their wording kind of frames their personal opinion.

Besides that, the big "systemic issue" that you're claiming validates her whistleblower status is that ... therapists refer out?

Really? Because that is just a thing that happens normally, all the time, every day, for lots of reasons, in the field of mental health. Now, in this particular case, the story is saying the clinic referred to external therapists because they could not handle the demand. I mean, okay -- possible. That the external therapists would have less experience with gender issues than the ones working in the freaking gender clinic? Yeah, that would be expected.

As far as the doctors prescribing meds to patients whose medical histories had "red flags"? Yeah, they would not have been referred to therapists for medical evaluations. I mean, you do realize there are rules guiding licensed people, right? Like, you can't and won't perform things you are not qualified to do?

The therapists evaluated what they were qualified for, even if they were not super experienced in it. If the medical doctor then decided to prescribe medications, with awareness of the patient's medical history -- dunno, Mets, personally I'm inclined to trust those kids' doctors, over the vaguely insinuating tone of the article's writer?

Particularly because, again -- there are all kinds of laws and agencies involved that regulate the practice of medicine, and therapy, and everything involved in gender care. Mets, none of those people have been found guilty of legal or ethical wrongdoing. Not by any investigating agency or media or anyone, besides "whistleblower" Jamie Reed.

Look, if you want to say that you personally choose to believe her over all the other professionals involved -- because they are all in obedience or allegiance to some "agenda", no doubt -- just say that.

I don't know that that makes her a whistleblower, still. But if you want to believe her, okay. Just own that for what it is, I guess.

[Tendrin]

The Times? Spread transphobic allegations with misleading characterization and slanted opinions?

NOOOOOo, YOU DON'T SAY

So basically, nothing has come out that seriously validates anything Jamie Reed said, but Mets just Wants To Believe.

[Adam Allen]

Also, did the article's wording try to make it sound somehow shady, that patients who stopped coming to the clinic stopped getting services from the clinic?

How else is it supposed to work? You know, I work at a hospital, and we do everything we can for our patients while they're with us -- but we are an inpatient clinic, so of course we can't support people who are no longer our patients.

Yeah, of course case workers do as best they can to find/arrange any available services that can support in-home or in the community ... but hey, turns out mental health services are pretty limited. I mean, if you want to have a conversation about that problem, I'm all in.

"Pediatric gender medicine is a nascent specialty, and few studies have tracked how patients fare in the long term."

Right, so ... there are few long term studies on a new, specialized field? Honestly, how is the article trying to make that sound shady?

Even this article had nothing to support her, they just did everything they could to try.

[Tendrin]

Also, did the article's wording try to make it sound somehow shady, that patients who stopped coming to the clinic stopped getting services from the clinic?

How else is it supposed to work? You know, I work at a hospital, and we do everything we can for our patients while they're with us -- but we are an inpatient clinic, so of course we can't support people who are no longer our patients.

Yeah, of course case workers do as best they can to find/arrange any available services that can support in-home or in the community ... but hey, turns out mental health services are pretty limited. I mean, if you want to have a conversation about that problem, I'm all in.

"Pediatric gender medicine is a nascent specialty, and few studies have tracked how patients fare in the long term."

Right, so ... there are few long term studies on a new, specialized field? Honestly, how is the article trying to make that sound shady?

Even this article had nothing to support her, they just did everything they could to try.

Oh no! Adam Allen, we can't listen to you now! Youi've copped to being a part of Big Trans!

[Adam Allen]

Oh no! Adam Allen, we can't listen to you now! Youi've copped to being a part of Big Trans!

The jig is up!

[CaptainEurope]

Here’s hoping Hamas does the right thing for its people and doesn’t poke the bear in the living room.



Absolutely agree. And Israel’s government seems perfectly happy to feed into - and strengthen - Hamas’ desired narrative, for some reason…



I’m on the side that’s just dog tired of watching innocent people getting slaughtered every night over whose magic book of faerie tales is the ‘truth’…

This is largely a territorial war, but religion seems to intensify the hate and makes it easier to dehumanize the other side.

[Zelena]

This is largely a territorial war, but religion seems to intensify the hate and makes it easier to dehumanize the other side.

Religion feeds fanatics and persuades them that they got right… But above all, it’s a matter of hate and fear.

[Zelena]

Here’s hoping Hamas does the right thing for its people and doesn’t poke the bear in the living room.

I hope too…

I’m on the side that’s just dog tired of watching innocent people getting slaughtered every night over whose magic book of faerie tales is the ‘truth’…

I think I will always be on the side on civilians caught in conflicts and harassed by a greater force…

[zinderel]

I hope too…


I think I will always be on the side on civilians caught in conflicts and harassed by a greater force…

Then it sounds like we’re on the same side. I’m just admittedly more cynical about it changing in my lifetime.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

This is largely a territorial war, but religion seems to intensify the hate and makes it easier to dehumanize the other side.

Religion feeds fanatics and persuades them that they got right… But above all, it’s a matter of hate and fear.

The Middle East as a whole has been an unholy quagmire, literally going as far back as the Last Supper, if not further back than that, and religion has been a catalyst for all that madness. Two centuries from now when James T. Kirk is boldly going where no man has going before, chances are excellent absolutely nothing will have changed in that region, not as long as religion continues fanning the flames of hate and division.

[thwhtGuardian]

Katt Williams does not appear to be a Republican.

But saying that trans people are part of rituals to worship Bathompet would seem to be crazy enough to justify firing someone.

This thread is dominated by left-wingers.

We can consider who the posters supported in recent elections. It's not exactly an even match between Trump and Biden.

It makes sense for some companies to be left-wing spaces where disagreement is unwelcome. Mother Jones doesn't pretend to be unbiased. Neither does a politically progressive activist group.

But if you've got a product that appeals to a mass audience, that kind of gatekeeping is counterproductive.

My standard on whether to take her seriously was if several stories came out showing serious problems in the hospital implying some kind of systemic failure.

The Times piece seemed to suggest that some of her concerns were valid.
It's still a situation where left-wingers are making it easier to fire people who disagree with their views.

I fully understand the viewpoint that people on the left are good people, and should be able to fire the people they disagree with. But it's going to be hard to codify that in a way that doesn't make it easier for others to push out people on your side.

I was pretty clear that it's my preferred policy, not something that is currently the law.


I think in the long run, employees are more likely to benefit from greater transparency. The businesses benefit at their expense from opaqueness and a lack of accountability.

Obviously, people could be fired for things they would rather not disclose (IE- if they've been late too many times, and customers complain they smell like a brewery) so there can be an option for someone to waive why they were dismissed.
If the reason is something embarrassing to the company, the big-shots could also pay employees extra to agree to waive a right to a public explanation.

I don't think false allegations of sexual harassment are a bigger problem than actual sexual harassment, so that's something to keep in mind with workplace policies. When sexual harassers have an easier time lying, it hurts their future coworkers, who will be unaware of the danger they face of sexual assault.

There should be grater transparency in media, since these are the people exposing workplace problems (either in journalism or fiction) and helping people make sense of the world. Customers should know under what circumstances they would not be accepted as employees of sense-making institutions that want their money.

They absolutely do not benefit from your "transparency". More often than not in the past when it was legal it led to invasion of privacy, discrimination, denial of equal opportunities, and retaliation or blacklisting.

There is zero benefit for the employee.

I wish I could say I was surprised that you'd be anti-worker on this very basic level, but sadly it lines up with a lot of your other really bad takes.