ragebutt
I’ve posted it before but the way to get “media attention” is to be controversial and a bit shameless
Republicans are great at this. “Ban immigrants”, “all weapons should be permanently legal for everyone”, “ban abortion in all cases”, “ban gays”, these extreme messages are embraced by the party. Algorithms pick up on content that is engaged upon. People engage on this content regardless of their viewpoint. Even if you hate these views you are more likely to click and view out of rage, to comment your disbelief and to say “fuck this stupid bullshit”
Democrats are terrible at this. They abhor the controversial messaging from the left. They embrace weak messaging that sinks like “maybe some mild economic reform”. They embrace weak counter messaging like “gay people are actually valid”, “abortion should be left alone”, “maybe regulate guns a little” and then it gets trampled by right wing commenters and voices.
They need to embrace the right wing formula, frankly. “90% tax bracket for income over 10 million dollars”, “state funded abortion mills”, “ban all guns”, “mandatory lgbt education in public schools”, “death penalty for oligarchs”, etc. stop softening the message because you’re worried about alienating 4% of old white voters. It’s clearly not working
Bad advice
Don’t talk to cops unless you are legally obligated to do so. Depending on the state you may have to identify yourself, and in some locations and contexts provide identification. You should know your local laws. In my state it is not required even if detained although in practice refusal to identify just means you aren’t going home for a looooong time. You do have to give your license if you’re stopped while driving, of course, but you do not have to answer any other questions other than signing the citation. The aclu has a website clearly outlining what you are required to do in each state including wallet sized cards with the information
Real police advice: if they’re giving you shit shut the fuck up. If they’re arresting you just go with it. You aren’t going to win. They’re going to call in 900 back up units and 2 helicopters with thermal imaging and a tank to track you because they’re basically an army now. The more you resist the more likely you die and become a sad headline that people post and forget about in 20 minutes. They aren’t trained to take you down safely. They aren’t trained to de escalate. They aren’t trained to control their anger. They will often get furious if you resist their authority and take out that aggression on you with extreme violence. They will slam you to the ground, choke you, punch you, beat you with their knock off tonfa, taze you repeatedly, and restrain you in ways that are dangerous and restrict your breathing. They will outright ignore you if you plead for help or become unresponsive. They will let you die, wait 5-10 minutes despite being on camera, then call for medical who will take another 10 minutes to respond to your long dead corpse that could’ve possibly been resuscitated 15 minutes ago if they hadn’t stood around doing nothing like ghouls. They have 0 serious repercussions for this behavior, at worst they’ll get shuffled around
Let them arrest you, shut the fuck up, and fight it in court. Unfortunately you will need resources to do this and pretty substantial ones. I just hired a lawyer to process documents for a subpoena against a client in my healthcare practice. It was a fairly simple case of document review and it cost $2300. Probably took him 45 minutes of actual work, if that. The system is unfair and rigged against you.
Real real police advice as a result: avoid them at all costs.
States Where You Can Buy a Gun at a Gun Show Without a Waiting Period or Background Check
In the following states, private sellers (non-licensed individuals) at gun shows can sell firearms without conducting a background check or imposing a waiting period:
Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas Georgia Idaho Indiana Kentucky Louisiana Maine Mississippi Missouri Montana New Hampshire New Mexico North Carolina (only for rifles & shotguns; handguns require a permit) North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming
FREEDOM
As a provider who has written letters for minors to get hrt and even letters saying they should be able to get surgery the day they turn 18 I am super jazzed for the next 4 years. Can’t wait till some busybody nutjob turns me in for child abuse and jeopardizes my entire career based on propaganda bullshit
Thankfully I’m not in Missouri or somewhere like it but I’m not in a state where I’m fully comfortable that this won’t be a thing eventually
Good luck to my deep red state homies. Buy a gun and if you have the means get the fuck out of there
This references rapid onset gender dysphoria.
ROGD is garbage. The term was coined by littman, who used dogshit methodology to study the “phenomenon”. The paper required corrections, brown university distanced themselves from her (kind of, sort of defending her) and dozens of outlets responded outlining the methodology flaws, including the APA
Of the several methodology flaws the biggest was sampling bias. she recruited her subjects through known anti trans groups online. This was outlined in the paper but not discussed as a potential flaw before the corrections
Of course culture wars latched on to this. fox news, breitbart, etc latched on to how she was being censored for her narrative going against the “woke agenda” (conveniently leaving out she manipulated her sample to be biased for parents that were upset and angry about their kids being trans)
Several studies occurred in the interim. Bauer found no evidence for rogd. Littman said their definition was incorrect. Ferrara did note there is still room to explore the issue and Arnoldussen found there was rationale for future study towards an “ROGD” subtype, though they were clear at this point there was no evidence for such a thing.
So at this point we have this social contagion theory, one (deeply flawed) paper supporting it, one not, and two saying “maybe?”. The evidence is obscenely weak.
Then another paper comes out by bailey and Diaz. This was a shitshow. This basically was the littman paper all over again. Like literally! They acknowledge this! parentsofrogdkids.com is literally the fucking website they sampled from!
But the shitshow here is that the paper was retracted. It was retracted because of informed consent issues, and fairly quickly. So you’re passionate about this issue and you’re like “yeah, fuck them, retract that”. But here’s the thing: it takes a lot for a paper to get retracted. Like serious malfeasance. The Wakefield mmr study got retracted. It took a long time, and it was because he falsified data and had a vested financial interest in a competing product to the mmr vaccine. That study is instrumental in the “vaccines cause autism” sentiment, it was tremendously destructive.
So the issue here is informed consent (which frankly should’ve been picked up by the publisher, and arguably isn’t even an issue because it’s anonymous Internet forum data that did have a semblance of consent but whatever). But the issue here is similar to the littman issue: optics. It’s arguable the main reason this was retracted was because it was a heavily controversial topic with many eyes on it done poorly. But now there’s another “academics are censoring our narrative” because of the heavy handed response.
A moms discussion forum, thread on the topic, first few replies:
I wonder how many other studies based on survey data will be subjected to retraction because of ethical consent? This is another worrying example of research that doesn’t fit the narrative being silenced.
It would be interesting to know how many of the trans suicide statistics publications meet this standard. But yes, informed data consent is absolutely important
They reference a student doctor forum thread, which discusses the paper far more fairly, including the actual methodology flaws. And yet, no one reaches that point.
Why does this matter? Because these people get propelled when they are perceived as unfairly censured. When littman was going through the intense debate post her censure her narratives were amplified heavily. Abigail Shrier, who wrote a book in this period about ROGD (that involved future retracted “scientist” bailey), was suddenly invited to be on Joe Rogan. Littman herself was on megyn Kelly.
Anyway these people clearly aren’t interested in science. They’re interested in cherry picking data using obviously flawed methodology.
The hypocrisy is obviously infuriating. If I studied trans issues and pulled my subjects from blahaj and hexbear to ensure I got supportive results I would be crucified and rightly so. But we are in crazy bullshit times where people don’t understand basic experimental design (but will still speak authoritatively in the face of those who do) and as a result we are in a space where people are genuinely going to be harmed
I provide pediatric and adult mental health care. I provide gender affirming care. I have for over a decade now. I have written countless letters approving hrt for children and adults as well as surgery letters for adults. I am generally fearful for my freedom and safety. I am very sad for my clients, who for the last week have been extremely upset about not getting their federal documents updated in time. Now they will be in a significantly worse space. Treatment will be interrupted. Treatment that has been desired for a long time will have to delayed even more. People will turn to unsafe black market options.
Fuck this
It also helps that like 80+% of the time the guy is the one otaku who is relatively physically fit, reasonably grooms himself, and has at least a modicum of social skills (even though they temporarily have no friends before making 3 dozen)
Every once in a while though you get something like the first few volumes of watamote where the main character is genuinely a fairly reprehensible person who constantly makes things worse every time they try. Though to be fair even that ended up with tomoko somehow gaining a pseudo harem
ChatGPT is hard to gauge because it depends on what model you get. I’m rate limited at the moment so I get the slightly older model
Do Palestinians deserve to be free ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT The question of whether Palestinians deserve to be free is deeply complex and tied to issues of human rights, justice, and international law. Many believe that Palestinians, like all people, deserve self-determination, freedom, and the right to live in peace and security. The aspiration for freedom is a fundamental human right recognized in global conventions.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with its historical and political dimensions, has led to differing perspectives on this issue. Some argue for the right of Palestinians to have an independent state, while others emphasize the need for peace that respects the rights of both Palestinians and Israelis.
Ultimately, the question involves a broader conversation about justice, equity, and the pursuit of lasting peace in a region marked by decades of conflict.
Do Israelis deserve to be free ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT Yes, Israelis, like all people, deserve to be free. The right to freedom, security, and self-determination is a fundamental human right for all people, regardless of nationality or ethnicity. Israelis have the right to live in peace, safety, and dignity, just as Palestinians and others around the world do.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is incredibly complex, and it involves the rights, identities, and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians. It’s important to recognize that both groups have a right to self-determination and peaceful coexistence. Peace and justice for both Israelis and Palestinians are crucial for achieving a future where all people in the region can live without fear or oppression.
Sooooooo maybe something they’re shifting. Or maybe something that is modified based on your specific data set. I’m logged in with a burner account
This isn’t wrong, per say, but it’s an oversimplification of a complicated relationship
Cortisol can influence how sensitive the body is to oxytocin, for one. Similarly chronic stress can inhibit oxytocin release. Most people can recognize this effect: high stress scenarios lower the effect of all the stress remedies you’ve suggested. Doesn’t mean to not try them of course
The timing and context of cortisol release play an important role in whether it supports or hinders oxytocin’s effects. Short-term stress responses might be adaptive, while long-term chronic stress can be harmful to the body’s oxytocin system. As a result cortisol isn’t inherently “bad”. (This is aside from its role in metabolism, insulin response, circadian rhythms, etc)