|
Captain Monkey posted:hmmm bet we can figure out which one you are ranting about then, buddy. So ...you didn't read the article or several others where she'd done similar before? Because she'd done similar things before and did it again. I'm not mustache twirling I'm starting the fact that a lot of people fight to get their kids back, and then go right back to being awful. White people do it just as much or more than POC so I'm pretty sure you're just trolling. It's really great when parents can truly change and they do every day but this lady didn't and she knew what she was like and should have taken actions to stop herself from doing it again.
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 15:42 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 05:07 |
|
Captain Monkey posted:hmmm bet we can figure out which one you are ranting about then, buddy. This is an A+ post, I loving love how hot this post is
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 15:53 |
|
Stairs posted:So ...you didn't read the article or several others where she'd done similar before? Because she'd done similar things before and did it again. I'm not mustache twirling I'm starting the fact that a lot of people fight to get their kids back, and then go right back to being awful. White people do it just as much or more than POC so I'm pretty sure you're just trolling. It's really great when parents can truly change and they do every day but this lady didn't and she knew what she was like and should have taken actions to stop herself from doing it again. It's a bad scenario, bad things happened, and it's weird that you declare that 'she knew what she was like' in this very high and mighty way. An abuse victim repeated a pattern of abuse and hosed up. She panicked and tried to hide the evidence. You suggesting that she 'knew what she was like' is ignoring the very real fact that she, on some level, seemed to want the kid. We don't know the story, and you're rewriting it into something even worse than it is for no observable reason. Anyway - I'm not going to continue with you, you're refusing to acknowledge even the most basic parts of the article, you can win if its that important. Also, I shouldn't have suggested you were racist, that was just me being annoyed at the very lovely way you phrased your initial post. This feels very pointed at 'bad mothers who should know better!' which often has a racist/colonialist vibe to it. Mea culpa.
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 15:59 |
|
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 19:40 |
|
Captain Monkey posted:Anyway - I'm not going to continue with you, you're refusing to acknowledge even the most basic parts of the article, you can win if its that important. Also, I shouldn't have suggested you were racist, that was just me being annoyed at the very lovely way you phrased your initial post. This feels very pointed at 'bad mothers who should know better!' which often has a racist/colonialist vibe to it. Mea culpa. Jesus, just stop.
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 19:49 |
|
Captain Monkey posted:This feels very pointed at 'bad mothers who should know better!' which often has a racist/colonialist vibe to it. Mea culpa. Is that projecting? Are you projecting right now? "bad mothers who should know better" seems like a white trash thing to me which I guess is also racist.
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 20:30 |
|
Captain Monkey posted:hmmm bet we can figure out which one you are ranting about then, buddy. gently caress off
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 20:33 |
|
Know some people on CASA and the abuse often just comes from an irrational place, it’s important children’s services are strong and effectual, it isn’t going to wrk to focus on even the motivations of abusive family members; it can’t readily be addressed because it doesn’t follow obvious logic or even come from a place of predictable malice
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 20:45 |
|
Wow. Did that exchange really happen, or do I need to have my medications adjusted?
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 22:55 |
|
Veni Vidi Ameche! posted:Wow. Did that exchange really happen, or do I need to have my medications adjusted? por que no los dos
|
# ? Sep 6, 2018 23:33 |
|
Antivehicular posted:por que no los dos drat it, now I know I need to adjust something because I'm stuck on SAP.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 00:19 |
|
lmao this owns
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 00:38 |
|
Aleph Null posted:"bad mothers who should know better" seems like a white trash thing to me which I guess is also racist. It's definitely classist, but I'm pretty sure you can't be racist against white people, because we're traditionally the oppressors. Even in the extremist armed rebellions/race riots, it's usually more "taking the protests a little too far," vs. white peole's excuse of "Them [insert slur here] are subhumans takin' our jerbs."
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 00:51 |
Chillbro Baggins posted:It's definitely classist, but I'm pretty sure you can't be racist against white people, because we're traditionally the oppressors. Even in the extremist armed rebellions/race riots, it's usually more "taking the protests a little too far," vs. white peole's excuse of "Them [insert slur here] are subhumans takin' our jerbs." The idea of racism requiring power is a very recent one that isn’t fully accepted and usually used to handwave away non-white people being prejudiced, especially against other non-white races.
|
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 01:01 |
|
Chillbro Baggins posted:It's definitely classist, but I'm pretty sure you can't be racist against white people, because we're traditionally the oppressors. Even in the extremist armed rebellions/race riots, it's usually more "taking the protests a little too far," vs. white peole's excuse of "Them [insert slur here] are subhumans takin' our jerbs." Racism is racism.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 01:23 |
|
There's also a theory that much of the language around the white underclass (white trash, hicks, inbred, etc.) is a consequence of white supremacy. White people who don't succeed disprove the innate superiority of white people. White supremacy can't let that flaw in its logic lie, so there must be something wrong with these people -- their whiteness becomes suspect. They're innately broken somehow. Early public health provided cover for this by developing the idea that poor, white communities are rife with immorality, inbreeding, deformity, and biologically-based intellectual handicaps, and that's remained the general characterization of impoverished and especially rural white people.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 02:20 |
|
"White trash" is both classist and racist. It's classist because it implies that poor/uneducated/socially marginalized white people are "trash". It's racist because the formulation implies that non-white people are automatically trash (you don't hear people say "black trash" or "Asian trash" or whatever in complementary distribution). Also, everything just said above about classism and eugenics and how utterly full of poo poo all that nonsense was. gently caress Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr, and his hideous opinion in Buck v. Bell ("Three generations of imbeciles are enough") and all the shitbags who made policy out of that. AlbieQuirky has a new favorite as of 02:36 on Sep 7, 2018 |
# ? Sep 7, 2018 02:34 |
|
I'm questioning your rank, Captain Monkey. We may need to bust you down.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 03:30 |
|
JGdmn posted:I'm questioning your rank, Captain Monkey. Public Monkey (not Private, because I want that guy where I can see him.)
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 03:47 |
|
Quick snippet on a horrible way to die - a container of concrete fell and submerged two workers, killing one.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 04:18 |
|
White trash is definitely racist by both old and new definitions. White trash is specifically noting people who are white skinned but do not fit into the cultural or power dynamics of the ruling class and thus are othered from other whites because "white" has no actual physical basis, and only means that the ruling class has identified you as white.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 05:32 |
|
Terrible Opinions posted:White trash is definitely racist by both old and new definitions. White trash is specifically noting people who are white skinned but do not fit into the cultural or power dynamics of the ruling class and thus are othered from other whites because "white" has no actual physical basis, and only means that the ruling class has identified you as white. I’ve noticed that this thread is forever alternating between 2 phases Phase 1: content that someone might want to read Phase 2: tons of posts about stupid poo poo nobody but a dipshit would care to read The person who posted before you tried to return it to phase one but you kept rolling with phase two. Please shut the gently caress up
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 06:06 |
|
That was extremely sad about the concrete killing the workers, but the mystery of the purple orange was pretty unnerving
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 07:11 |
|
i'm racist against white people
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 10:52 |
|
i despise them and will not rest until they're all dead
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 10:53 |
|
A CRUNK BIRD posted:I’ve noticed that this thread is forever alternating between 2 phases I don't even disagree but it was 2 sentences. Just ignore it
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 10:56 |
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/justice-story-new-yorker-prison-term-landed-guinness-book-world-records-article-1.1004749 Paul Geidel Jr. served the longest ever prison sentence for a released inmate. He was going to be released after 15 years for murdering an old man at the hotel he worked in for his money, but was declared legally insane and put in a psychiatric ward. He was returned to general population...and stayed there. From the time he was 17, Geidel lived his entire life in prison. He even refused release for 6 years, as the prison had become his home and he would never survive the real world. After finally being released, he went straight to a nursing home before dying at the age of 93 without ever spending a day of his adult life as a free adult.
|
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 14:40 |
|
If you're dissatisfied, you can also provide some unnerving content. This is a transcript of an interview with the writer of Imbeciles: The Supreme Court, American Eugenics, And The Sterilization Of Carrie Buck. https://www.npr.org/2017/03/24/521360544/the-supreme-court-ruling-that-led-to-70-000-forced-sterilizations quote:So the eugenicists were partly behind the 1924 Immigration Law. There were laws that prevented people from marrying if they were deemed hereditarily unworthy. There were laws that allowed people considered feebleminded to be isolated in institutions in the U.S. What was the logic behind institutionalizing people who were deemed feebleminded? quote:And, you know, when you think about what we want the Supreme Court to be, what the founders wanted the Supreme Court to be, it was supposed to be our temple of justice, the place that people could go when all the other parts of our society, all the other parts of the government were not treating them right. So Carrie Buck, this poor woman who has been raped, who has been wrongly designated feebleminded, who has had her baby taken from her, who is being held as a prisoner in his horrible colony, goes to the U.S. Supreme Court. And we all know what the court should've done. quote:...the justice who wrote the decision later said, yeah, we wanted to keep Buck v. Bell in place. And it is still being used. In 2001, a sterilization was upheld by a U.S. Court of Appeals - one step below the Supreme Court - citing Buck v. Bell. So it's still there and it's still being used. And, you know, honestly, we're living in strange times now. I think we all see that every time we, you know, turn on the news or pick up the newspaper. As an aside, they also talk about the origins of moron, idiot, and imbecile.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 14:50 |
|
Eugenics always sounded like an idea a grade school kid came up with after learning about genetics. "We could just use all the good genes!"
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 15:04 |
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Eugenics always sounded like an idea a grade school kid came up with after learning about genetics. It's one of those things that's fine in theory because, you know, genetic diseases exist. It'd be awesome if we could do something like, say, completely eliminate type 1 diabetes caused by a genetic defect that turns your pancreas off. In practice it leads to Nazis.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 15:07 |
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:It's one of those things that's fine in theory because, you know, genetic diseases exist. It'd be awesome if we could do something like, say, completely eliminate type 1 diabetes caused by a genetic defect that turns your pancreas off. https://twitter.com/2p2TrollCat/status/351121282689024000
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 15:09 |
|
Just to pluck out the heart of that last quote... Buck v. Bell is still the law of the land.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 15:17 |
|
POOL IS CLOSED posted:If you're dissatisfied, you can also provide some unnerving content. At issue wasn't the sterilization. Margaret Vaughn underwent tubal ligation. Vaughn subsequently sued the social workers who persuaded her to undergo the procedure for due process violations (they took her existing kids away from her and told her that if she underwent ligation they'd give them back quickly). The social workers claimed qualified immunity. The trial court rejected that. The social workers appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the lower court ruling. This line makes it sound like a court ordered her to be sterilized and she fought it and the appeals court said "No, you have to be sterilized because Buck v. Bell." In actuality, the courts ruled the social workers were not immune and had very probably violated Vaughn's due process rights. Here's the actual text where the court cites Buck v Bell: https://casetext.com/case/vaughn-v-ruoff quote:It is undisputed that Margaret was not given any procedural protections before the sterilization occurred. Ruoff argues that even without procedural protections, the sterilization was justified. It is true that involuntary sterilization is not always unconstitutional if it is a narrowly tailored means to achieve a compelling government interest. See Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200, 207-08, 47 S.Ct. 584, 71 L.Ed. 1000 (rejecting due process and equal protection challenges to compelled sterilization of mentally handicapped woman). It is also true that the mentally handicapped, depending on their circumstances, may be subjected to various degrees of government intrusion that would be unjustified if directed at other segments of society. See Cleburne, 473 U.S. at 442-47, 105 S.Ct. 3249; Buck, 274 U.S. at 207-08, 47 S.Ct. 584. It does not follow, however, that the State can dispense with procedural protections, coerce an individual into sterilization, and then after the fact argue that it was justified. If it did, it would invite conduct, like that alleged in this case, that is ripe for abuse and error. See Buck, 274 U.S. at 206, 47 S.Ct. 584 (noting that Virginia's sterilization law required the state to comply with its "very careful provisions by which the act protects the patients from possible abuse"). Even assuming Missouri had a compelling interest in preventing further births by Margaret, such a compelling interest does not justify dispensing with procedural protections. Sterilization results in the irreversible loss of one of a person's most fundamental rights, a loss that must be preceded by procedural protections. Ruoff's conduct violated Margaret's Due Process Clause right to be free from coerced sterilization without appropriate procedures. Saying "a sterilization was upheld" is a really misleading way of referring to this case. POOL IS CLOSED posted:Just to pluck out the heart of that last quote... That's plucking out the opposite of what actually happened, though.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 15:19 |
|
That's really interesting about Vaughn, thank you. Her experience is another unnerving tale in its own right and it's fair to say that quotation is misleading. This part of the decision you quoted, though, doesn't seem to contradict that the Buck v. Bell decision hasn't been struck down: quote:It is true that involuntary sterilization is not always unconstitutional if it is a narrowly tailored means to achieve a compelling government interest. See Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200, 207-08, 47 S.Ct. 584, 71 L.Ed. 1000 (rejecting due process and equal protection challenges to compelled sterilization of mentally handicapped women). And the next citation says the state must follow some procedure to protect its citizens from abuse, but again that doesn't contradict that Bell v. Buck hasn't been overturned. quote:It does not follow, however, that the State can dispense with procedural protections, coerce an individual into sterilization, and then after the fact argue that it was justified. If it did, it would invite conduct, like that alleged in this case, that is ripe for abuse and error. See Buck, 274 U.S. at 206, 47 S.Ct. 584 (noting that Virginia's sterilization law required the state to comply with its "very careful provisions by which the act protects the patients from possible abuse"). Clearly states, including Virginia, who had these "very careful provisions" still abused patients and violated their rights, and compulsory sterilization remains "ripe for abuse and error," and it appears the SCOTUS hasn't deemed compulsory sterilization unconstitutional at this point. All the decision said was that the state has to respect due process, which... isn't convincing.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 15:35 |
|
Sensationalizing
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 15:48 |
|
POOL IS CLOSED posted:That's really interesting about Vaughn, thank you. Her experience is another unnerving tale in its own right and it's fair to say that quotation is misleading. I didn't intend to say it had been struck down. It hasn't. I said it wasn't being cited to "uphold" a sterilization.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 15:58 |
|
Phanatic posted:I didn't intend to say it had been struck down. It hasn't. I said it wasn't being cited to "uphold" a sterilization. Fair! I misunderstood your post.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 16:08 |
|
Solice Kirsk posted:Eugenics always sounded like an idea a grade school kid came up with after learning about genetics. There was that thread on HackerNews earlier this year where they were all talking about how disease and infirmity were going to disappear because CRISPR. Follow on comments revealed an engineers understanding of genetics - just edit out all the "bad" genes and replace them with "good ones". If in any doubt, replace them with typical ones from the population.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 17:13 |
|
Like these guys? https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/553511/ That's Josiah Zayner, who sells diy CRISPR kits, saying he regrets popularizing "biohacking" with dumb stunts. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/05/aaron-traywick-death-ascendance-biomedical/559745/ Aaron Traywick was the CEO of Ascendance Biomedical, and objected himself with an experimental herpes vaccine. His deal was trying to skirt drug development and testing regulations. He died during a sensory deprivation tank spa treatment.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 18:00 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 05:07 |
|
chitoryu12 posted:http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/justice-story-new-yorker-prison-term-landed-guinness-book-world-records-article-1.1004749 Jesse Pomeroy spent 41 years in solitary confinement.
|
# ? Sep 7, 2018 18:07 |