|
I don't think the government is going to get away with just ignoring a second wave. As dumb as this country people do seem worried about covid. They're too stupid to actually keep themselves safe but it does worry them. When NHS workers are telling any reporter they can find that everything has gone to poo poo again there's going to be no way to stop the backlash. People like the NHS. The workers are everywhere and they are going to be telling people that everything is hosed. This isn't like the US where the hospital is just another business. If the NHS openly declares war on Boris then lollll. All we can do now is keep ourselves and anyone you like safe.
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
Communist Thoughts posted:those two are just psychotic monsters like the rest of the tories. the one who looks like a corpse eating ghoul has had no compunction about outright lying about matters of public health and does so at every briefing he's in whitty, vallance, harries and this powis guy are all happy to stand on a stage, waffle on about the R number and how careful we need to be and then let the politician next to them announce a bunch of not careful poo poo, and there's no possible excuse for that, but the SAGE members are also allowing their existence to be used as cover for stuff that they must know will kill people, and I think it's possible that some of them might legitimately think that they need to keep advising the government out of a sense of civic duty, which is slightly more justifiable I think however they're wrong and allowing the government to have a body of scientific advisors also allows them to pretend they're following scientific advice when they're not, e.g. quote:Weeks before lockdown in March, a Sage meeting on 25 February discussed the importance of perceived fairness in reducing the chance of disorder, saying public compliance was “likely to be enhanced [by] a sense of collectivism”, and that “flash points tend to happen where there is a perceived lack of equity”. quote:One Sage meeting on 16 March, a week before full lockdown, said there was “clear evidence to support additional social distancing measures be introduced as soon as possible”. A “significant increase in testing and the availability of near real-time data flows” was needed to understand the spread of the virus, the scientists said. It was possible that there were already up to 10,000 new cases a day in the UK. quote:Just two days later the next Sage meeting said evidence “now supports implementing school closures on a national level as soon as practicable to prevent NHS intensive care capacity being exceeded”, warning that the UK appeared to be a few weeks behind Italy in the pandemic curve. The advice added: “If the interventions are required, it would be better to act early.” I don't think much, if any, of their advice has been good or timely, but I can see how you could believe that you as a relatively anonymous senior academic should stay on the body advising the government in a public health emergency and not be a bad person, even if you're wrong and should instead immediately resign until the government stops announcing things contrary to even their own stupid strategy actually standing on stage with Johnson/sunak/Hancock etc while they kill people is another matter entirely because you're actively endorsing the finished policies e: maybe this is a distinction without a difference, idk XMNN fucked around with this message at 18:28 on May 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:19
|
|
|
GC Rowling.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:21
|
|
|
Pure creased at that JKR tweet, never seen anything so on brand in my life
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:26
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:I don't think the government is going to get away with just ignoring a second wave. As dumb as this country people do seem worried about covid. They're too stupid to actually keep themselves safe but it does worry them. I'm not so optimistic. The government and media are already pivoting the blame on the public. These flat angle lens shots of people "crowding" the beaches are just the start. Cumgate may well play into the government's hands, because it argues that the onus was always on you, the individual, to exercise your judgement in applying the rules, even those that were apparently unambiguous ("stay home"). Just do a risk assessment about as thorough as one of Mac's ocular patdowns, and you're golden. Dominic Cummings probably hasn't killed anyone he came into direct contact with, so his decision to gently caress off to Durham was OK ex post facto. But the corollary is that if the deaths spike again, it's YOUR fault.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:33
|
|
|
Angepain posted:is there something cursed about being a scottish woman named Joan. Joanna Cherry, Joan McAlpine and Joanne Rowling... i'm just asking questions It’s just the female version of the “big map of John” where some guy made an infographic map of the most common male name for councillors , and it was just “John” for England Scotland, and David for Wales
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:42
|
|
|
XMNN posted:sorry my post wasn't very clear. i agree with that but i also do think that SAGE are guilty too by this point and should be locked up along with the rest of parliament, most of the media, the NHS and PHE execs etc Regarde Aduck posted:I don't think the government is going to get away with just ignoring a second wave. As dumb as this country people do seem worried about covid. They're too stupid to actually keep themselves safe but it does worry them. the NHS won't declare open war on the government because the higher ups of the NHS are guilty too and also tories themselves and part of the government if you just mean all the nurses and doctors declare war on the tories well thats happened like 3 times before to no effect i think the worst consequence possible for the government is bojo resigns and we get Gove/sunak/patel/raab in the public have NO input into anything that happens, only the government, the powerful and the media. none of whom want to actually topple the government, they will just shuffle around the deckchairs. even if they have to shuffle them over to starmer, labour is no alternative anymore Communist Thoughts fucked around with this message at 18:48 on May 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:43
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:I know, I have failed the thread and all horny perverts Perhaps this is simply evidence of your inherent connection to the noosphere of filth?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:55
|
|
|
Jel Shaker posted:It’s just the female version of the “big map of John” where some guy made an infographic map of the most common male name for councillors , and it was just “John” for England Scotland, and David for Wales 
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:57
|
|
|
I always knew david cameron was in the pig's head but now I've seen the photo. So has john, by his expression.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 18:59
|
|
|
While I don't agree with her stance on Transgender people and I do think she is a TERF, Rowling is right that the Tweet is defamatory. If the author wanted to make the post that Rowling had lost touch with a young audience or that her political views should be shielded from young readers, then it should have been worded differently. As it stands, that posts makes Rowling sound like a nounce, and good luck trying to defend that accusation in court.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 19:33
|
|
|
If she's a terf she literally supports child abuse, just because she and the lovely liberal law would believe differently doesn't make it right.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 19:37
|
|
|
The Question IRL posted:While I don't agree with her stance on Transgender people and I do think she is a TERF, Rowling is right that the Tweet is defamatory. No, the post says that she can't be trusted around kids & nonces aren't the only ones you'd say that about. For example, I'd not support leaving my imaginary kids with a racist. Or any other kind of bigot, such as a TERF I'm not arguing she couldn't win a defamation suit, because our defamation laws are loving insane.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 19:44
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:No, the post says that she can't be trusted around kids & nonces aren't the only ones you'd say that about. For example, I'd not support leaving my imaginary kids with a racist. Or any other kind of bigot, such as a TERF I think most people when hearing "X can't be trusted around children" come to the same conclusion which is not "ah, X must be a racist"
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 19:57
|
|
|
in the context of a free book, though?
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 19:59
|
|
|
so trump has just declared that they will be treating Hong Kong the same as the rest of China in every respect, wonder if Johnson will say anything
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/milkgapes/status/1266433966023852033?s=19
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:03
|
|
|
Guess he's wishing his bishop well.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
baka kaba posted:in the context of a free book, though? I guess I can only speak for myself, but not knowing anything about JK Rowling's personal beliefs or that she was a terf my initial reaction to that tweet was disbelief that she could be a nonce, although I did wonder what else it could mean before reading her reply. A phrase like "can't be trusted around children" just seems to carry a fairly specific implication to me although I did read the comment before the bit about the free book
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:07
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:The article doesn't really give any details about... well anything to be honest. It's pretty easy to find via Google. The Fawcett society have even worked out draft legislation. Basically it would give everyone (not just women) the right to ask their employer for certain information about all employees working in "comparable" roles. That includes pay, bonuses, hours worked, and any legitimate reasons for differences. Data would go back six years, it could only be used for purposes of pursuing an equal pay claim, and it could only legally be shared with a lawyer, a trade union rep, or the other "comparable" employees. It all sounds decent if relatively tame. The Spectator already has an article up condemning Starmer for supporting it. CancerCakes posted:If hospitals have been discharging covid suspected patients directly into care homes surely that makes them complicit, and also the people who actually discharged them? Sounds like you're trying to blame clinicians there buddy, so no, we are not complicit in infecting care homes. The only question doctors answer when a patient is discharged is "is this person medically fit to be discharged?". I.E, do they need to remain in hospital for treatment or observation or another reason vital to their health? Note, their health, not the health of people they live with. There's endless pressure on you to discharge patients quickly at the best of times, if you can't provide a medical reason why a patient needs to spend another night in hospital you'll quickly start having to answer very difficult questions and senior managers will quickly get involved. Plus, the whole debate about sending them to care homes has ignored the fact that keeping them in hospital wasn't a great idea either. If you've been to hospital recently you'll know we have a very limited number of isolation rooms. Most of our capacity is open wards. So what were we meant to do with hundreds of suspected or confirmed cases that don't actually need any treatment? We aren't a quarantine service. You're talking about sticking Covid patients in open bays for days and days, that's not exactly great for infection control either. Is it really better than nursing homes where each resident has their own room? It's also not good for the patients either. Every day in hospital means a higher chance of catching a hospital-acquired infection. So you're asking doctors to actually harm the otherwise-healthy patient in front of them in order to protect others. How are we meant to sell that to the patient, or to hospital management, when the government guidance EXPLICITLY says to discharge them? If you tried, and someone got C. diff because of your personally-imposed hospital lockdown, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on. So no, contrary to what Boris said it isn't doctors fault care homes got infected. The answer to preventing infection in care homes was probably "more PPE, more testing, more training, more staff, and also dedicated facilities that Covid patients can be discharged to". It was not "just keep them in hospital". Yes, in extremis that might have been better on a large scale than what actually happened, but doctors really had no power to go against the guidance like that, nor would we ever do so in large enough numbers to matter.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:16
|
|
|
jabby posted:Plus, the whole debate about sending them to care homes has ignored the fact that keeping them in hospital wasn't a great idea either. If you've been to hospital recently you'll know we have a very limited number of isolation rooms. Most of our capacity is open wards. So what were we meant to do with hundreds of suspected or confirmed cases that don't actually need any treatment? We aren't a quarantine service. Would all the currently empty beds in the Nightingale hospital be a sensible halfway house for quarantine? Or does that have most of the downsides of an extended hospital stay? I'm thinking the odds of acquiring a hospital infection are lower in somewhere with no surgeries etc and where everyone has the same illness? Edit: zhar posted:A phrase like "can't be trusted around children" just seems to carry a fairly specific implication to me I got the exact same implication, which I'm sure was intended by the OP.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
I take the point that people will assume "not trusted around children" means nonce but honestly I find it difficult to care that much about it bearing in mind what TERFs say about trans women specifically. Also have you seen how TERFs talk about trans boys (and I do mean boys)? I haven't seen JKR in any kids menchies but she's happy enough aligning with a movement that does that a lot. Like... a lot.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:25
|
|
|
Easiest excuse was “I’m not the only person with access to my social media, it was one of my assistants”. Lying is common nature for these guys, but who likes a porn tweet - that’s what reddit is for.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:26
|
|
|
Gonna need to be testing his eyesight a whole lot more now.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:30
|
|
|
Ava Koxxx and Danny D, natch
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:32
|
|
|
jabby posted:It's pretty easy to find via Google. The Fawcett society have even worked out draft legislation. Sounds a lot more... foisting the responsibility off to individuals than I would like, if you're gonna make that law I would prefer it came with like, a government department that was deliberately trying to use the same info to find claims and press them rather than expecting workers to do it themselves. But it doesn't seem like a bad proposal I guess.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:33
|
|
|
Slightly surprised at Gove expressing interest in human porn.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
Given tweeting ‘why is Lord McAlpine trending? *innocent face*’ was considered sufficient to be libel, yeah, that tweet about Rowling is just as likely to be.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:40
|
|
|
Looks like the first policeman in the US has been charged, although it's unclear to me how you can simultaneously be charged with both murder and manslaughter. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52854025 Other interesting things to come out of the article: - A knee on the neck is a restraint technique in the police handbook and a permitted use of force, as long as no direct pressure is applied to the airway - The post mortem did not find evidence of "traumatic asphyxia or strangulation". - A combination of underlying heart conditions, potential intoxicants in his system and being restrained all likely contributed to his death
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:43
|
|
|
Regarde Aduck posted:I don't think the government is going to get away with just ignoring a second wave. As dumb as this country people do seem worried about covid. They're too stupid to actually keep themselves safe but it does worry them. Until Guido discovers that the NHS worker once walked past a union office and is therefore a hard-left activist.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
Gyro Zeppeli posted:Gonna need to be testing his eyesight a whole lot more now.  Darth Walrus posted:Slightly surprised at Gove expressing interest in human porn. It's understandable, his interest is in human flesh, he just didn't quite grasp the nuances involved.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:48
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Looks like the first policeman in the US has been charged, although it's unclear to me how you can simultaneously be charged with both murder and manslaughter. It comes from English common law, but is not brought up here much because the explicit statement in the US happened after the end of hanging for most crimes in the UK. bionic vapour boy posted:Also have you seen how TERFs talk about trans boys (and I do mean boys)? Is it the whole mermaids stealing their daughters thing? e: although I see Glinner continues to care about the things that matter https://twitter.com/Glinner/status/1266307767331061760  https://twitter.com/KWierso/status/1266383738444738560
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 20:52
|
|
|
Trans men probably don't, on the whole, get it as bad as trans women for the reasons you suggest* but what they get is very specific, i.e., it's always either about infantilization or about how they're actually poor confused butch lesbians who have been ~tricked~ into transitioning (cf. that absolutely galaxy brained article a year or two back about how trans men are evidence of a genocide against butches). * To go a bit more into detail, if someone makes the underlying assumption that transitioning is "not real" or whatever, then given all the underlying assumptions of patriarchy and machismo, by definition you can't allow yourself to admit that you might be threatened by a trans man in the way terves claim women are by trans women. At the same time, there's a sort of low-lying assumption that well yeah of course women want to be men, being a man owns, why wouldn't anyone want the privilege and status that comes with that? Rarely in so many words of course, but you get the gist. In short the arguments used to attack trans women are inherently unable to attack trans men, which is transphobes often just ignore trans men entirely or try to claim they're actually women after all.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:02
|
|
|
Prince John posted:although it's unclear to me how you can simultaneously be charged with both murder and manslaughter. 1st degree murder - planned ahead, intended to kill 2nd degree murder - spur of the moment, decide to kill at that moment 3rd degree murder - accidentally, not intended, but you still punched or hit the person for example Manslaughter - accidental, not intended, but less direct. Like tripping and nudging another off a train platform under a train. However manslaughter can still be viewed as reckless and so can open up more options on what the final verdict will be. Basically they are keeping the options 'open' for the jury to decide on. If kneeling on a neck is intentional or not.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:03
|
|
|
happyhippy posted:1st degree murder - planned ahead, intended to kill By those definitions, 3rd degree you could definitely prove in a court of law, no chance a 2nd or 1st would ever get past a grand jury. And a third degree guilty verdict carries 25 years inside in Minnesota, and for a cop who killed a black man, that may as well be a life sentence
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:07
|
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:Trans men probably don't, on the whole, get it as bad as trans women for the reasons you suggest* but what they get is very specific, i.e., it's always either about infantilization or about how they're actually poor confused butch lesbians who have been ~tricked~ into transitioning (cf. that absolutely galaxy brained article a year or two back about how trans men are evidence of a genocide against butches). I don't know if it's something you would want or be willing to discuss, but I admit I often struggle to understand how people who want to go through FtM transition manage to construct a concept of masculinity. Because I've always sort of defined it by ignorance through privilege. There's a lot of stuff you just don't need to know and never learn because society is structured to facilitate and reward you not knowing or learning that stuff. Masculinity basically is being a horrible caveman that everyone goes around telling you is a good thing to be. In a similar way that upper class-ness is being a gigantic adult child and lauded for it. But people who are raised and present feminine don't have that experience because society doesn't treat them that way, so they have to learn how not to be horrible cavemen. And once you learn that it's kinda hard to... un-learn it? It's probably related to nearly all the men in my life being dead since I was a young child and me never developing relationships with men when I got older, and also most of the dead ones being assholes. But I'm so used to having basically the entire human experience being encapsulated in people who present feminine, that the idea of someone concsciously cultivating a concept of masculinity distinct from that is just... completely alien. What else is there to be? I wish I knew someone doing that that I could ask about it to understand their perspective but I don't think I do. It sounds bloody difficult though. I wish I knew what it looked like through other people's eyes. They must see something they want to be, to positively move towards, and I wish I had a concept of what that is. Cos it must be important to a lot of people. Including cis men, I guess. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 21:39 on May 29, 2020 |
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:22
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:I haven't much (I don't surf twitter for terves). It always seems like trans men got less of the bile than trans women, because trans women get the demonization of femininity from patriarchy and the demonization of the (assumed) penis from radfems, whereas trans men (while still facing social marginalization, it's not a competition) don't get those. Partly that, but also there is a really, really loving creepy obsession with trans boys bodies. Lots of "oh you shouldn't ruin your beautiful body" (by wearing a binder or even just like, dressing in a way to diminish your chest). Telling kids that their relationship with their own body should be defined by what other people find appealing. Feministly. Adult trans men get infantilised but it's like, noticably less pervy.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:23
|
|
|
Men are the worst. https://twitter.com/milkgapes/status/1266461088222269446?s=21
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:24
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Would all the currently empty beds in the Nightingale hospital be a sensible halfway house for quarantine? Or does that have most of the downsides of an extended hospital stay? I'm thinking the odds of acquiring a hospital infection are lower in somewhere with no surgeries etc and where everyone has the same illness? In short, yes. The Nightingales are a great example of something that most people supported at the time, but in hindsight were a bad idea and a waste of valuable resources. And the government should probably have known better, what with their access to far greater information and expertise. Basically back when Covid was ravaging Italy everyone thought the biggest bottleneck would be intensive care beds and ventilators. That's what was happening to them, or at least it was among the most high-profile problems they had, so that's what people thought would happen to us. A lot of people were looking at graphs of our ITU capacity and getting very nervous. Hence the Nightingales and the big drive to produce more vents. For whatever reason though it didn't pan out like that. We utilised a lot more than our usual ITU capacity, but hospitals largely coped well by laying on extra wards. And the Nightingales languished unused due to a combination of a lack of suitable patients (they had stupid strict admission criteria) and a lack of experienced staff to work in them. Why did it go that way? If I had to guess, it's because the NHS is extremely used to strictly rationing ITU capacity and only offering beds to those likely to recover. We don't consider ourselves to have an age cut-off like the one that shocked people when it was publicised in Italy, but in reality we simply don't send older people or those with chronic health problems to ITU. For better or worse, we never have. And Covid was no different, if you caught it and you were elderly, frail, or had cancer/heart failure/COPD/etc., then you simply stayed on a normal ward and either recovered or died. The question of whether we could have saved more people if we sent more to ITU is complicated, and the answer is likely to be "maybe, but probably not" considering our overall Covid mortality rate has been about 0.9% which is comparable to other countries. Certainly in places like Italy their fatality rate once patients went onto a ventilator was over 60%, heavily skewed towards those older or with co-morbidities. If you have a fatality rate in those patient groups approaching 80-90%, is that just poor patient selection? A trip to ITU involves a hell of a lot of suffering, if somebody is going to die anyway you absolutely don't want to put them through it. But, I'm rambling. My point was, the Nightingales should have been used as fever clinics, to isolate people with symptoms so they didn't infect their households, or temporary community hospitals to isolate people instead of discharging them. Could've done both.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 17:39 |
|
|
Ms Adequate posted:Trans men probably don't, on the whole, get it as bad as trans women for the reasons you suggest* but what they get is very specific, i.e., it's always either about infantilization or about how they're actually poor confused butch lesbians who have been ~tricked~ into transitioning (cf. that absolutely galaxy brained article a year or two back about how trans men are evidence of a genocide against butches). bionic vapour boy posted:Partly that, but also there is a really, really loving creepy obsession with trans boys bodies. Lots of "oh you shouldn't ruin your beautiful body" (by wearing a binder or even just like, dressing in a way to diminish your chest). Telling kids that their relationship with their own body should be defined by what other people find appealing. Feministly.
|
|
#
?
May 29, 2020 21:33
|
|