[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

 Tsundoku, on 14 January 2022 - 03:47 AM, said:

Why TF would anyone wear a balaclava for any reason except that it's cold AF outside, or they're about to rob a convenience store?

Or play ninjas ...

Faaaarshun ...

It has been cold AF recently in much of the US. But the trend precedes that....

Also useful for war in Ukraine (very contemporary):

'It is an item that has always been associated with battle. Originally worn by British soldiers during the Crimean war to protect them from the bitter weather in modern-day Ukraine, they became associated in the 20th century with elite military forces such as the SAS. Beyoncé carries all those meanings with her when she wears one, transforming into her masculine alter-ego King B.

Beyoncé's re-popularising of the item had dove-tailed nicely into the rise of warcore. The trend from a couple of years ago of wearing, amongst your layers, utilitarian clothing worn during times of war (such as faux-kevlar vests, "fishing" gilets and even harnesses).'

https://www.theguard...at-does-it-mean


'These masks take their name from the Ukrainian port town of Balaclava[...] [...] the UK army arrived with nothing but their worn-out summer uniform. [...] British women began knitting full-face hats for their men and shipping them out [...]

The knitted headgear has since become symbolic of the eastern European militia after being used by pro-Russian separatist demonstrators to avoid surveillance. To many, they read as markers of threatening, anti-conformist behavior, but in recent years, more whimsical connections have been made, with candy-colored and bunny-eared versions easily found.



[...] the balaclava bubble likely started around this time in 2018 [...] Vetements, co-founded by Georgian designer Demna [...] released a collection accessorized with militant balaclavas [...]

[...] "eastern European style with a 20-year delay[...] equal parts menacing and grandma-like, the result of rebuilding flea market garments from other periods into something new."

[...] it ticks multiple boxes, from the "approachable trend" of DIY knitwear, to looking either "apocalyptic" or "glamorous," depending on how it's styled, she said in a video on the app. It's also highly functional in lieu of a winter hat and scarf'

https://www.cnn.com/...ture/index.html

None of those look remotely like hijab to me, though they're sort of like naqib maybe? Guess they're not the ones being referred to as too hijab-like?...

Here's one of the offending balaclava:



vs a hijab:

[Maark Abbott]

Uh...

[QuickTidal]

BK, WTF man?

[Aptorian]

Hey BK.

Maybe keep all these "funny pictures" to the political comedy thread instead of the discusson board.

Also maybe just keep them to yourself when you're skirting bigotry.

[Tiste Simeon]

Oh dang did I miss some drama?

[Aptorian]

Nah, BK just went on a random picture posting binge across a handful of threads for no discernible reason.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

 Aptorian, on 24 May 2022 - 07:56 PM, said:

Nah, BK just went on a random picture posting binge across a handful of threads for no discernible reason.

Started up shortly after Trump's 'Civil War' (re-)post---coincidence?... Perhaps. (Memewar equivalent of 'lone wolves' / stochastic terrorism? 'Unleash the hounds lone wolves'?) Republican identity politics either way....

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 24 May 2022 - 08:29 PM

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'Juneteenth Isn't for Everyone (and It Shouldn't Be)

It's a day to remember the plight and emancipation of the Texas freedmen. The U.S. should get its own national Emancipation Day.

[...] Calling it "America's Freedom Day" and turning it into another opportunity for those to take a day off or host a cookout has cheapened its meaning. Now living in Philadelphia, I have heard people refer to Juneteenth as the "Black Fourth of July," which only infuriates Texas natives like myself—who know better.

This is what happens when corporate interests overshadow collective understanding. To Black people who are just finding out about Juneteenth, to liken it to the celebrations of White America is to strip our enslaved ancestors down to a pissing match. The goal was to remember their legacy in that particular part of the nation[...] Today, anyone who dares criticize similar initiatives, including those led by other Black people not from Texas, are misguidedly called "gatekeepers" or suppressors of the culture.

[...] When I see organizations incorporate pan-African red, green, and black colors when attempting to celebrate Juneteenth, I can't help but call out the fact that red, white, and blue are the correct colors to recognize this day. When people declare it as the official emancipation day for all Black Americans, it's important for me to note that not all Black Americans were freed on the same day, and several states have their own Emancipation Days that recognize when Black people became freedmen in that particular region.

[...] it must also mean not letting corporations or grifters hijack the history and origins of our culture. Not everything is for everyone, and that's OK. There's a way to appreciate something without appropriating it. [...]

It's high time that we let Black Texans, and their descendants who have maintained respective celebrations outside of the state, have Juneteenth for themselves. This is not "America's Freedom Day," but theirs. [...]

If there's something that can be learned from all of this it's that not all Black people, customs, and histories reside within a monolith—and that's not a bad thing.'

Juneteenth Isn't for Everyone (and It Shouldn't Be)

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'Interviewer: I want to ask about cultural shifts related to the two movies you won Oscars for.

Tom Hanks: Timely movies, at the time, that you might not be able to make now.

Interviewer: There's no way a straight actor would be cast in "Philadelphia" today and "Forrest Gump" would be dead in the water.

TH: Gary Sinise would not have been able to play Lieutenant Dan because he has legs?

Interviewer: Not that. I'm positive that its premise alone would mean that "Forrest Gump" would be mocked and picked apart on social media before anyone even had a chance to see it.

Tom Hanks: [...] let's address "could a straight man do what I did in 'Philadelphia' now?" No, and rightly so. The whole point of "Philadelphia" was don't be afraid. One of the reasons people weren't afraid of that movie is that I was playing a gay man. We're beyond that now, and I don't think people would accept the inauthenticity of a straight guy playing a gay guy. It's not a crime, it's not boohoo, that someone would say we are going to demand more of a movie in the modern realm of authenticity. Do I sound like I'm preaching?"'

Tom Hanks Explains It All - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

... so much for 'acting'?...

No mention of whether Forrest Gump would have to be played by someone who is... 'for the Global Down Syndrome Foundation, we [...] talk about our community as "differently-abled."'

Words Can Hurt | Global Down Syndrome Foundation

[Tsundoku]

There goes Daniel Day Lewis playing Christy Brown for starters.
Is Bendict Cumberbatch gay - shouldn't have played Alan Turing then.

I would have thought acting would get more of a free pass in order to get a story told though. And more practically - get more bums on seats with name recognition.

[Macros]

I though acting was the job.

You're literally pretending to be something or someone you are not?

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'Most popular' article 'across the Guardian' right now:

'The book that tore publishing apart: "Harm has been done, and now everyone's afraid"

[...] Clanchy was much admired for her work [...] teaching children from diverse backgrounds to write poetry[...] A celebration of multicultural school life, coupled with candid reflections on her own flaws, Some Kids was lauded by reviewers and won the Orwell prize for political writing, with judges praising a "brilliantly honest writer" whose reflections were "moving, funny and full of love".

[...] "centred on this white middle-class woman's harmful, judgmental and bigoted views on race, class and body image", using "racist stereotypes" to describe pupils. The author, she said, wrote of their "chocolate skin" and "almond eyes".

Clanchy hit back[...] claiming "someone made up a racist quote and said it was in my book" and urging her followers to challenge reviews she said had caused threats against her. Literary giants, including the 75-year-old children's author (and president of the Society of Authors) Philip Pullman, rose to her defence. Yet it quickly emerged that those phrases (although not, as we will later hear from Clanchy, everything attributed to her) were in the book.'


Did she actually claim those specific phrases weren't in the book? Or did she intend to refer to the other phrases that weren't?


'[...] insisting she genuinely didn't use some phrases falsely attributed to her, like "slanty-eyed" and "Jewish nose" (although she did write "Ashkenazi nose").'

'[..] Rajesh was upset by the "general lack of kindness" in Clanchy's often very physical descriptions of children; the "butch-looking" Pakistani girl with her "distinct moustache"; the Essex boy with the "Ashkenazi nose" who surprises her by denying he has Jewish roots; the white girls from council estates whom she deems not pretty, or destined to end up fat like their mothers. The text is peppered with references to children's "Somali height", "Cypriot bosoms", or one star pupil's "Mongolian ferocity". But something about it also stirred painful memories from Rajesh's own schooldays.

"I had teachers like her," [...] "I had teachers who did absolutely put me to one side as being the small child with the furry eyebrows or the 'tache and they made you feel like outsiders – without necessarily meaning to do it, but they did. And it didn't matter how well meaning they were, it did make you feel small and it troubled you later in life."

[...] She removed the contested phrases from the new version of Some Kids because they couldn't be read without resurrecting the row[...] not because she necessarily agrees they're offensive. The girl whose "almond eyes" she wrote about, from the persecuted Hazara ethnic group in Afghanistan, has since said publicly that she liked the description and sees it as part of her identity; Clanchy is adamant that Hazaras see their looks as part of the basis of their oppression. "It's a politicised, important phrase and to take it out and say it was a piece of colonialism is a ludicrous and false caricature." Similarly, she wrote about one boy's chocolate skin, she says, "because that's what that young person constantly used in their own work". It was, she adds, "as a kind of hidden tribute to that person. I didn't mean to upset anybody but I'm quite happy to remove that if it upset people."

But she's audibly exasperated with the sensitivity readers' response to what she regards as essentially factual statements, like her blunt assessment that children with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder (brain damage caused by mothers drinking in pregnancy) don't progress at school. "If we're going to object and say that because something is sad we mustn't say it – that's a fundamentally worrying thing about publishing."

Her greatest regret, apart from no longer being invited to teach other teachers, is that ex-pupils who publicly defended her have been "patronised and disbelieved".'

'[...] "My books have been depublished[...] I have lost my living. Everyone I know has suffered, all of my personal relationships have suffered. So I've suffered and I'm shamed and I'm unhappy a lot of the time – I don't know if that's cancelled enough? I'm not dead." She has been called a white supremacist, accused of "Nazi-adjacent thinking", and says that some "quite respectable people" mocked her bereavement online. "I think there is something about grieving that provokes rage – why should she have sympathy when we don't have sympathy?'"'

The book that tore publishing apart: 'Harm has been done, and now everyone's afraid' | Kate Clanchy | The Guardian


'Characters are People, Not Food | The YA Kitten


[...] You've surely noticed that these food-based descriptions are applied almost solely to people of color.'


Is that true?


'White people are described as being milky or peachy at times, but it doesn't carry the same weight as a (for instance) medium-skinned Honduran woman being catcalled in the street with "I'd like some of that honey!" in reference to her skin color. That's white privilege for you.

Where does the racism come in? Phrases like "chocolate bar" are racial slurs when black or biracial men and women are called that. It's also one of many products once made (and actually still made) using slave labor. Other such products include cocoa and coffee. Thank you, colonialism! You really sure you want to describe this black girl with "chocolate skin" and evoke that history of slavery and dehumanization, writer?

[...] And saying a character has almond eyes to denote they are Asian or otherwise aren't white fails too. You know which racial-ethnic group really tends to have almond eyes? White people.'


... is that 'almond-shaped' eyes or 'almond colored' eyes?


'[...] When POC characters are described in terms of foods slaves used to be forced to harvest like coffee and chocolate, it's reducing them to commodities valued only for their economic value. That [...] is racism and white privilege.'

Characters are People, Not Food | The YA Kitten


For chocolate, it's still going on:

'Many cocoa farmers in West Africa—source of around 70% of the world's cocoa—engage in human trafficking and child labor, including child slavery'

Supreme Court declines to hold chocolate giants accountable for child and slave labor | Oxfam (oxfamamerica.org)

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Wonder if the controversy over 'chocolate skin' and 'almond eyes' could have been avoided if she'd made it clear the children were describing themselves that way (or limited it to quotations of them)? Or would she have been pilloried for not correcting them? (Assuming she isn't just lying to defend herself....)

Likewise, if her description of the autistic students as 'jarring company' was not contextualized as a reaction she (or many non-neurodivergent people) found it difficult not to have, that also should have been corrected / more accurately (and ethically) contextualized....

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 18 June 2022 - 02:53 PM

[Malankazooie]

Watched the first episode of the new season of United Shades of America, W. Kamau Bell's show on CNN. Yikes, that could be problematic for some right there and would entail a full stop and a hardy nope. But yeah, I like it. The episode was titled "The Woke War." Great analogy by Bell, "woke has become the war on Christmas year round."

You can tell this episode was recorded about a year ago because it honed in on CRT. Which seems to have lost its lustre and has been usurped by trans people coming for your children.

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'[...] the work of Citizens for Sanity, a conservative group whose stated mission is to “defeat ‘wokeism’ and anti-critical thinking ideologies that have permeated every sector of our country.” The group has erected several billboards across the country with a similarly sarcastic tone, targeting a long list of progressive causes and candidates — from immigration and trans rights to Raphael Warnock, John Fetterman, and Bernie Sanders. Earlier this year, they put up a particularly egregious billboard in Austin that read: [... Translation from Spanish:] (“This November, we must defend pregnant Latinx men.”)

[...] “They’re quite thoughtfully thinking about making divisions in the community.” [...]

Citizens for Sanity was also behind an anti-immigration TV spot that aired during a recent playoff game [...] “openly racist … [depicting] a torrent of obviously Latino immigrants pouring over the border.”

Reactions to the billboard on social media were mixed, with several Twitter users taking umbrage at what they incorrectly assumed was a sincere message posted by a progressive group. [...]

[...] Debates within different Latino/a/x communities about how to refer to themselves are nothing new [...] The recent arrival of the term “Latinx” has renewed the debate, with some [...] decrying it as an unnecessary and confusing moniker imposed from without by mostly White radicals and academics. [...]

“We’re [Latin(o/a/x/etc.) people] already quite balkanized,” [...] “This is part of a larger strategy to add wood shit to that fire.”'

How a Right-Wing Group Is Weaponizing the “Latinx” Debate

'Citizens for Sanity'... and 'Very Stable Geniuses'?...

The concept of a transgender man getting pregnant really isn't hard to fathom....

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

Someone on AI Art Universe posted some photorealistic Midjourney images of Naruto... and got attacked for 'whitewashing' an 'Asian' manga/anime character.

Naruto (he's the one with blue eyes and blond hair):






The offending AI images:






'My sole intent was to entertain people with AI art, not to whitewash a blonde haired blue eyed character as a blonde haired blue eyed character.
[...] how many Asians are complaining about this post being whitewashed? My fiancée is Japanese "born and raised in Japan" and thinks y'all are insane for bickering about this post.'

'Ian Patrick Hill
Yo, that time a man used his wife as a shield to make a very unfunny racist visual during a time when nahtzees are being openly discussed.
If there ever was a male fragility award.....'

AI Art Universe

Edit: 'Kishimoto himself said in an interview that he imagined Naruto and Sakura to be Caucasian'

Why does everyone in Naruto appear to be white? - Naruto General - Heaven & Earth (narusaku.com)

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 12 December 2022 - 07:28 PM

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'Erika López Prater, an adjunct professor at Hamline University, said she knew many Muslims have deeply held religious beliefs that prohibit depictions of the Prophet Muhammad. So last semester for a global art history class, she took many precautions before showing a 14th-century painting of Islam's founder.

In the syllabus, she warned that images of holy figures, including the Prophet Muhammad [...] would be shown in the course. She asked students to contact her with any concerns, and she said no one did.

In class, she prepped students, telling them that in a few minutes, the painting would be displayed, in case anyone wanted to leave.

Then Dr. López Prater showed the image — and lost her teaching gig.

[...] After Dr. López Prater showed the image, a senior in the class complained to the administration. Other Muslim students, not in the course, supported the student, saying the class was an attack on their religion.

[...] In emails to students and faculty, [university officials] said that the incident was clearly Islamophobic. Hamline's president [...] co-signed an email that said respect for the Muslim students "should have superseded academic freedom." At a town hall, an invited Muslim speaker compared showing the images to teaching that Hitler was good.

[...] An Islamic art historian wrote an essay defending Dr. López Prater and started a petition demanding the university's board investigate the matter. [...] And Muslims themselves debated whether the action was Islamophobic.

[...] "As a Muslim and a Black person, I don't feel like I belong, and I don't think I'll ever belong in a community where they don't value me as a member, and they don't show the same respect that I show them."

[...]

The painting shown in Dr. López Prater's class is in one of the earliest Islamic illustrated histories of the world, [...]

Shown regularly in art history classes[...]

The image is "a masterpiece of Persian manuscript painting," [...]

[...] housed at the University of Edinburgh; similar paintings have been on display at places like the Metropolitan Museum of Art. And a sculpture of the prophet is at the Supreme Court. [...]

[...] studying Islamic art without the Compendium of Chronicles image "would be like not teaching Michaelangelo's David."

[...] The prohibition stems from the belief that an image of Muhammad could lead to worshiping the prophet rather than the god he served.

[...] Some Muslims distinguish between respectful depictions and mocking caricatures, while others do not subscribe to the restriction at all.

[...] Dr. López Prater said that no one in class raised concerns, and there was no disrespectful commentary.

After the class ended, Ms. Wedatalla, a business major and president of the university's Muslim Student Association, stuck around to voice her discomfort.

[...] Dr. López Prater sent an email to her department head, Allison Baker, about the encounter; she thought that Ms. Wedatalla might complain.

[...]

"It sounded like you did everything right," Ms. Baker said. "I believe in academic freedom so you have my support."

[...]

Ms. Wedatalla said images of Prophet Muhammad should never be displayed, and that Dr. López Prater gave a trigger warning precisely because she knew such images were offensive to many Muslims. The lecture was so disturbing, she said, that she could no longer see herself in that course.

[...] Dr. López Prater was summoned to a video meeting with the dean of the college of liberal arts, Marcela Kostihova.

Dr. Kostihova compared showing the image to using a racial epithet for Black people[...]

[...]

At the [...] forum, which was attended by several dozen students, faculty and administrators, Ms. Wedatalla described, often through tears, how she felt seeing the image.

"Who do I call at 8 a.m.," she asked, when "you see someone disrespecting and offending your religion?"

[...]

"When you say 'trust Muslims on Islamophobia,'" Dr. Berkson asked, "what does one do when the Islamic community itself is divided on an issue? Because there are many Muslim scholars and experts and art historians who do not believe that this was Islamophobic."

Mr. Hussein responded that there were marginal and extremist voices on any issue. "You can teach a whole class about why Hitler was good,"'

A Hamline Adjunct Showed a Painting of the Prophet Muhammad. She Lost Her Job. - The New York Times (nytimes.com)

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

That article didn't address whether there could have been anything else in the lecture that the student found Islamophobic. Luckily there's a video:

'In the video of the class, the professor gives a content warning and describes the nature of the depictions to be shown and reflects on their controversial nature for more than two minutes before advancing to the slides in question.

[...] "I am showing you this image for a reason. And that is that there is this common thinking that Islam completely forbids, outright, any figurative depictions or any depictions of holy personages. While many Islamic cultures do strongly frown on this practice, I would like to remind you there is no one, monothetic Islamic culture," [...]

In the [...] email to Wedatalla, the professor stated that they "[let] the class know ahead of time" what would be shown and to give students time to turn off their video.

"I did not try to surprise students with this image, and I did my best to provide students with an 'out,'" the professor wrote in the email.

"I also described every subsequent slide I showed with language to indicate when I was no longer showing an image of the Prophet Muhammad. I am sorry that despite my attempt to prevent a negative reaction, you still viewed and were troubled by this image."'

WHO BELONGS? – The Oracle (hamlineoracle.com)

So apparently beyond the simple fact of showing the image (after again saying students in the online class did not have to view it) there was nothing insensitive in the lecture or the email. And after reading a bunch of nonpartisan articles on this and many comments I haven't seen anything about what she said when the student talked to her about it after class being deemed offensive.

Some comments on the New York Times article:

'I've worked in academia for 25 years, 15 of those years as a full time professor. I have watched as the culture has shifted from the values of academic freedom, open inquiry, and free debate to the one and only value that colleges now hold above all others: don't offend anyone. Ever.'


'If warnings were given, it was discussed openly and no one objected, why was the [...] teacher fired? Because it has nothing to do with the student actually taking offense. It has to do with the opportunity to create a spectacle of victimhood and to indulge the thrill of denunciation. That is what much of academic life is now.'

I'm not so sure about that---other comments point out that students often don't read the syllabus or pay close attention when taking online classes. It's possible that the student wasn't paying attention until the image popped up on the screen. OTOH I do wonder whether the business student may be trying to go into the 'business' of claiming to be offended and putting on a show of victimhood, weeping and going on about how she was traumatized by the showing of the image, etc.---or at least enjoying the attention and the power it provides. But it also seem likely that she's encountered actual Islamophobia in school and elsewhere and that she was channeling those emotions into her reaction.

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 08 January 2023 - 10:21 PM

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'The usual defenders of academic freedom [...] have raced to López Prater’s side. Most encouraging, though, is the range of allies she has found in Muslim groups. Last week, the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) supported her unequivocally. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which in the past has focused on its irritation at perceived slights against Islam, likewise called on Hamline to reconsider its position.

Who will save Muslims from their saviors? Miller’s administration pronounced the class “Islamophobic,” and said that such atrocities should prompt the community to “listen rather than debate the merits of or extent of that harm.” [...]

In defending López Prater, CAIR and MPAC [... say that ] it matters, morally, whether the giver of offense intends to offend, and whether the offended party has good cause to take offense. People take offense for good reasons and for bad ones, and the mere statement I am offended is worthless without a sound articulation of the cause for offense.

These distinctions are intuitive even to small children. But the instinct to treat Muslims like toddlers, incapable of dealing with unwelcome developments, and therefore in need of protection at all times, is powerful in some quarters.'

Hamline University and the Assumed Fragility of Muslims


'The kind of argument put forward by the Oracle (and, more troublingly, by the university’s president) is that any claim of harm or trauma should simply have the power to shut down all conversation or inquiry. And it’s a particularly powerful and insidious argument, especially coming, as it often does, not only after a stand-alone claim of harm, but after a demand that said harm result in a penalty for the person who did the allegedly harmful thing. It positions disagreeing with both a claim and a demand for action as perpetuating that harm. There is no way to respond other than to say, “Yes, you’re right, I am listening.”

[...] even if a person is being entirely genuine, giving any claim of any harm the total power to shut down inquiry and conversation, and the total power to allow the claimant to set the terms of recompense, is a very, very bad and destructive idea.

[...]

We are in a particular cultural moment where claims of harm and trauma are being taken much more seriously than ever before, especially within liberal and progressive institutions. For the most part, this is a good thing. But there has also been more than a bit of over-correction. It has become clear that claims of harm and trauma can be used to demand change—to get someone fired, to make someone a social pariah, even to put someone in jail. That isn’t always bad—[...] But it’s not the claim of harm and trauma in and of itself that justifies punishment; it’s the whole story, the context, the actual wrongdoing, and not just the feelings of the person who says they were wronged. [...]

Unfortunately, the party line at Hamline seems to be that asking those questions—questions that are integral and necessary for truth-finding and anything resembling justice—is itself a harmful act.'

Firing at Hamline University: Liberals need to understand what went wrong here.

From a comment on the NYT article:

'An academic friend of mine told me recently a student at Kenyon College said, "you can’t give trigger warnings because they are triggering." My friend's opinion is this trend is profoundly anti intellectual.'

[Azath Vitr (D'ivers]

'BBC Newsnight reporter's investigation into the Tavistock's gender identity clinic for children makes disturbing reading

[...] based [...] on more than 100 hours of interviews with Gids' clinicians, former patients, and other experts, many of whom are quoted by name. It comes with 59 pages of notes, plentiful well-scrutinised statistics, and it is scrupulous and fair-minded. Several of her interviewees say they are happy either with the treatment they received at Gids, or with its practices – and she, in turn, is content to let them speak.

Such a book cannot easily be dismissed. To do so, a person would not only have to be wilfully ignorant, they would also [...] need to be appallingly unkind. This is the story of the hurt caused to potentially hundreds of children since 2011[...] To shrug in the face of that story – to refuse to listen to the young transgender people whose treatment caused, among other things, severe depression, sexual dysfunction, osteoporosis and stunted growth, and whose many other problems were simply ignored – requires a callousness that would be far beyond my imagination were it not for the fact that, thanks to social media, I already know such stony-heartedness to be out there.

[...] Such drugs do have severe side effects [...] as Gids' own research suggested, they do not appear to lead to any improvement in children's psychological wellbeing.

[...] Again and again, we watch as a child's background, however disordered, and her mental health, however fragile, are ignored by teams now interested only in gender.

The statistics are horrifying. [...] The mother of one boy whose OCD was so severe he would leave his bedroom only to shower (he did this five times a day) suspected that his notions about gender had little to do with his distress. However, from the moment he was referred to the Tavistock, he was treated as if he were female and promised an endocrinology appointment.

[...] As Barnes makes perfectly clear, this isn't a culture war story. This is a medical scandal, the full consequences of which may only be understood in many years' time.

[...] Barnes is rightly reluctant to ascribe the Gids culture primarily to ideology, but nevertheless, many of the clinicians she interviewed used the same word to describe it: mad.'

Time to Think by Hannah Barnes review – what went wrong at Gids? | Society books | The Guardian

... but anything even remotely critical of the misapplications of gender-affirming care for children is treated as inherently 'transphobic' and beyond the pale by many on social media....

This post has been edited by Azath Vitr (D'ivers: 19 February 2023 - 01:05 PM