[wuhan - coronavirus]

This is not good

G7 summit was ‘super spreading’ event for Cornwall as cases rocket 2,450%

Young, unvaccinated hospitality staff are falling ill. Fortunately, so far not many serious cases with it being younger people, but it’s also early, and we know hospitalizations lag behind cases by a couple weeks. 

[“How to Save the World in 3 Easy Steps”]

3 hours ago, Wheres Toto said:

Doesn't she have you on ignore?  Is copying someone's post and sharing it that way allowed?  I think that's the only way she'll see it. 

Not sure if it’s allowed or not. I would expect someone could copy and repost it as their own with no issue if I said I didn’t mind, and I don’t. What I shares were excerpts from another site, not my own words anyway. I thought from her post that she had viewed mine, since she talked about attacking the source, but maybe that was just because she could tell from replies that that was what my post was about. 

[“How to Save the World in 3 Easy Steps”]

10 minutes ago, Plum said:

I have a pretty open mind with this and am at least willing to listen. 

I’d be willing to read, but videos and podcasts don’t mesh with my life right now. I can read something much more quickly and can do it in fits and spurts, and with kids around. 

[“How to Save the World in 3 Easy Steps”]

1 hour ago, Pen said:

What is your issue with the “source”?

or is this knee jerk because I posted it? 
 

that’s ironically what the video itself says people do when they have nothing to argue on a content basis. Criticize the “source”. 
 

Did you read my post to know what my issue is with the source? It’s the second post in the thread. I absolutely will not click on a link that I know goes to a website that monetizes white nationalism and hate speech. I don’t care who posts it, I’m not clicking and supporting it. 

[wuhan - coronavirus]

17 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

And from yesterday

England is one of the first countries to provide detailed information about COVID-19 reinfection:

- 15,893 possible cases
- 478 probable cases
- 53 confirmed cases

This takes the global tally to 149 confirmed cases and 71,931 suspected cases

Any idea who so few confirmed? Is that because most people didn’t have a test when they had their initial illness, so it’s unknown if that illness was Covid or not? It seems surprising to see confirmed cases so low, when it seems like everyone knows some anecdote of someone who had it more than once. 

[Juneteenth National Holiday]

10 minutes ago, DoraBora said:

Maybe the people who were invited to the White House ceremony wanted to be able to attend events in their home districts today.  Juneteenth has been a state holiday in Texas for years, but there's a lot more happening this year.

Good point. 

[Juneteenth National Holiday]

2 hours ago, Penelope said:

I’m in favor of it. My only criticism is that it seemed to come out of nowhere so that no one apparently had time to prepare to either close or plan additional celebrations or whatever. 
 

I thought it might have made more sense for the announcement of it to have waited two days to be made on Juneteenth, as a celebratory thing. It would have made sense and been cause for celebration and wouldn’t have caused confusion about what to do this year, while also not ignoring it this year. But, there may be reasons I’m not aware of that wouldn’t have been practical.

[C/o trans people as young children]

10 minutes ago, Katy said:

And contrary to popular belief, trans kids transition and de-transition all the time. That’s why a decent surgeon waits years before doing anything. 

To the first, yes, that is true. To the second, there seem to be an awful lot of non-decent plastic surgeons in the US right now then. For young kids, I agree it would likely be unusual to find a surgeon who would operate. For older teens, it can be pretty easy and doesn’t take years. My dc had no trouble having several to choose from, six months after transitioning socially. 

[C/o trans people as young children]

5 minutes ago, Catwoman said:

One question I have been meaning to ask -- Has this child had psychological counseling to try to determine why he wants to be a girl? Could he have experienced some kind of trauma or abuse that he thinks wouldn't happen to him if he wasn't a boy? Such a young child having fantasies of doing something so horrifically violent as cutting off his own p*nis seems worthy of some serious counseling.

I feel like there are so many avenues to be explored before starting to treat the child as a female.

I did wonder this, and also wondered if there could be an issue causing pain or discomfort. Those would be good avenues to explore to make sure that’s not causing him a problem.

[C/o trans people as young children]

48 minutes ago, Katy said:

In short, I think lying is a sin and being transgender is not. I also break other Old Testament laws like eating shellfish, mixing fabrics, and I put meat and cheese in the same nachos last night!  I know, it’s a controversial moral stance. Ok, obvious sarcasm over. 

If this was new I wouldn’t encourage a change, but this has been going on for as long as the child was verbal. It’s not a phase. It may very well be the way they were born.  I don’t see it as any different than a child who was born gay.  And while I know that not every gay person identified as such from a very young age, I definitely grew up with a couple very feminine boys who I knew were gay before they announced it to anyone. You could definitely tell from preschool.  

I don’t think that sort of inborn sense is something that changes or something that is chosen. And I think it does a lot more harm to lie about it or shame a child about it than it does to be honest. And frankly in the area the OP lives this is acceptable.  They’re not in the Bible belt. If he becomes she and in a few years switches back no one will care. Shame and lying will create a lot more harm than open honest support. 

I’m totally confused where the sin and Old Testament references are coming from. Other than a couple people on the other thread, is anyone on this thread advising watchful waiting seem to be coming at it from a moral, sin perspective? I’m not seeing that at all. This isn’t a sin issue at all, it’s an issue of wanting to preserve the fullest life for a kid. This is not at all like affirming a child who was born gay. No medical procedures with significant side effects are required at all for someone to be gay. (I have a gay kid and didn’t so much as blink the first time they told me they had a new relationship with someone the same sex.) 

I honestly believe people mean well, but I think there’s such a rush for people to show that they are good, open minded liberals, that they’re not taking into account the significant potential for negative health effects on the actual kids involved. They may choose or need those treatments in the future, but It’s not like it’s as simple as getting a tattoo or something. I just really don’t think people are considering the children enough in the rush to take the “correct” position. People who actually work with these kids, on the other hand, are increasingly concerned about this rush to treatment.

[“How to Save the World in 3 Easy Steps”]

13 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

The earth is not flat, the moon landing was not fake, the President of the United States has not been replaced by a body double who is a perfect replica except for his earlobes, and it is not censorship or close-minded political bias to refuse to indulge people who insist on promoting nonsense.

Reminds me of a graphic I saw this morning:

 

 

[C/o trans people as young children]

17 minutes ago, Katy said:

I’ve been thinking about this…. I think in OP’s position I’d say something like, “While you can’t have surgery to change your penis until you’re an adult, if you want to be a girl you can decide to be one today.” And have a conversation with DH & child about which girl name we would have chosen, and settle on an appropriate girl name ASAP.

I think maybe a lot of people not very closely acquainted with the subject don’t realize there’s no bottom surgery that gives people very close approximation to the opposite sex. Some procedures are closer than others, but people unfortunately don’t end up functioning just like the opposite sex. So, I don’t think it’s great to give the idea to kids that it’s as easy as that. And I wouldn’t personally be quick to make changes that increased the chances that my child was going to need such major intervention when they grow up, and lose functionality and quite possibly fertility, when the chances are higher that they won’t need that if we do not do a full social transition as a child. That just seems the greatest kindness to the child and considering them as a future adult, and not just as a child. 

[“How to Save the World in 3 Easy Steps”]

6 minutes ago, Martha in GA said:

The lab leak thing had nothing to do with the website. My point was that, in the beginning, Facebook "fact checked" any post that suggested the virus leaked out of the Wuhan lab, until the idea that it might have leaked from the lab gained traction and then Facebook said it would no longer "fact check" those kinds of posts. So, in the same way, they are "fact checking" many other posts because the posts don't agree with what the fact checkers want you to believe or what they believe is true, but it doesn't make everything contrary to the official narrative not true.  Hmm, that was a convoluted sentence. Sorry.

I don’t know much about how Facebook went about fact checking and don’t use Facebook anyway. I think it confuses this particular thread though to respond to a valid fact check website based on how Facebook might or might not have done it. If people don’t have any way to evaluate what is and isn’t a reliable source then, well, that’s pretty much how we get to where we are right now.

[“How to Save the World in 3 Easy Steps”]

3 minutes ago, Martha in GA said:

This is problematic -- only one side of the argument is considered correct and everything else is considered a conspiracy theory. So, when the lab leak theory became more likely, the "fact checkers" decided they would stop the fact checking about this particular "conspiracy theory." The premise of the video linked by Pen is that those who do not line up with the mainstream narrative are being suppressed. I don't think the views of the participants in the video are spreading propaganda or hate.

I won’t click to give advertising dollars to such a repugnant site. The mediabiasfactcheck site is quite fair. For instance, if you look up both Fox News and CNN, you will see they have almost the same ratings, except in equal and opposite directions from the center. Both are considered to have mixed factual reporting, though the CNN website is rated higher factually than the TV version of CNN. They evaluate sources critically across the spectrum.
 

I have no idea how the lab leak thing pertains to this particular website, so I’ll leave that (well, actually, except to say that there’s a false narrative that nobody wants to look into whether this virus came from a lab leak, which simply isn’t true. People keep saying no one wants to investigate where this came from, but continuing to say it doesn’t make it any less false. It’s pretty mainstream for scientists to be wanting to investigate the source of the virus, but what there particularly is no foundation for, is the idea that this was purposely engineered and let loose by China as some kind of bio weapon.)

[“How to Save the World in 3 Easy Steps”]

57 minutes ago, Frances said:

I’m struggling to understand why this continues to be allowed. We’re not allowed to use the word QA*** in a post because it’s too political, but we are allowed to continually post conspiracy theories, disinformation, and random videos from very questionable sources. If it wasn’t for the fact that so much of this is part of mainstream culture now, I would say that it is a good way to stay informed about a fringe element. But sadly, a not insignificant chunk of our populace is drinking the same kool aid.

I’ve been cogitating since you posted this about what should be “allowed” here, since in general I’m not a fan of a lot of moderation in adult spaces. On the other hand, I also believe it’s totally up to whoever is hosting a space to decide how they want to run it, and I respect that and understand why we have moderation here. It probably does make for a more civil space. In this case though, it does seem like there would likely be some rule against spreading hate speech and/or harmful propaganda. The hate speech is the more cut and dried aspect, I suppose. Discussion of propaganda has been allowed throughout the pandemic, and  it’s hard to be able to discuss propaganda without also sharing it, so I see a bit more of a conundrum there.

[C/o trans people as young children]

1 minute ago, SanDiegoMom said:

There are multiple studies of varying sizes that show the desistance rates to be between 65 and 90 percent, with I think the majority saying around 80. Here is one: 

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.632784/full

Here is a blog post by James Cantor, who has compiled the rates from different studies:

http://www.sexologytoday.org/2016/01/do-trans-kids-stay-trans-when-they-grow_99.html

And a fuller amount of info at genderhq.org:

https://www.genderhq.org/trans-children-gender-dysphoria-desistance-gay

All of these studies will need to be updated and hopefully with bigger numbers, for the current cohort. The population transitioning now (besides being much larger) is way, way more heavily female and with mostly late onset rather than childhood onset. Unfortunately, it’s going to take quite a while to see how it all turns out.

[C/o trans people as young children]

49 minutes ago, Faith-manor said:

You use the word "most" here, but do not link any kind of study or evidence to promote your belief in the matter. Therefore, we are just relating our own personal experiences with this. Yours is no more valid than mine. You insist you know how he should be patented. Do you have a degree in psychology with an emphasis on psychosexual development? Are you a medical doctor? I said my "instinct" was that what they are doing is right, but then indicated that we arm chair coaches really do not KNOW what is right and have no meaningful advice to give. You persist and I find that concerning.

I don’t understand what is concerning. You have posted several times in this thread as well, and have less experience with this than Melissa or several of the other people posting. That doesn’t mean it’s not your prerogative to do so, and I don’t find it concerning that you are, but I don’t know why you would be disqualifying someone with more experience in the subject than you yourself have.
 

I think it’s important for people who are cavalier about suggesting gender changes with young children to realize that medicalizing a gender change down the road is not benign. While changing labels and names and presentation is, doing a full social transition early increases the chances for medicalization down the road, which again, is not benign. I can’t think of another condition where people would be so casual in suggesting a treatment for a child that dramatically increases the risk of sterility. In addition, there are many negative health side effects from cross sex hormones, so they’re not something to be taken lightly. These are heavy duty medical interventions. If a kid has the opportunity to develop into adulthood without those interventions, that should be the first choice. That’s the point of watchful waiting. If these things were reversible and didn’t have negative health effects, this would be a different conversation. 
 

eta: I missed a whole class of side effects from medicalization, and those are the sexual side effects. A lot of parents don’t really want to think about that when they’re dealing with their children, but those hormones and surgeries can have drastic impacts on the sexual function for trans people. Again, not saying that doesn’t mean those things aren’t still warranted for some people, but it’s another reason that people should be aware it’s not an outcome neutral decision to transition a child (incidentally, it’s common among people transitioning now to not do any “bottom surgery”,  because it’s just not fantastic at this point and many people are finding they’re more satisfied keeping what they were born with in that area).

[“How to Save the World in 3 Easy Steps”]

8 minutes ago, Wheres Toto said:

I find it very disturbing that someone would share something from such a grotesque source.  

I do as well. Same person used anti-Semitic tropes in objecting to Covid vaccines though, so while sad and disgusting to see such a source shared here, not totally surprising 😞. 

[The Vaccine Thread]

23 minutes ago, Joker2 said:

I have a cousin who had Covid early on, got the vaccine as soon as he was eligible, and just recovered from Covid a second time. 😳 The second time was way worse and the family was worried he wouldn’t make it. I’m guessing he is just unlucky and that he doesn’t seem to be developing an immunity to the virus at all? 

Sounds like for some his body isn’t mounting a proper immune response. Does he have any known immuno deficiency? I read a study the other day that the monoclonal antibodies are helpful for people who are not mounting their own immune response. 

[“How to Save the World in 3 Easy Steps”]

I always check the source before clicking on something unknown like that. Here’s the media bias fact check for bitchute:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/bitchute/
 

“

• Overall, we rate BitChute extreme right and Questionable based on the promotion of conspiracy theories, propaganda, hate speech, poor sourcing, fake news, and a lack of transparency. This source is not credible for accurate information and may be offensive to some (most).

Also:

‘According to the Southern Poverty Law Center “BitChute, is a low-rent YouTube clone that carries an array of hate-fueled material, including white nationalist podcasts, propaganda linked to a murderous neo-Nazi group and a parody song called “N—– Babies,” which chortles at the idea of slaughtering and then eating black infants.”’

Yeah. Not clicking. 

[C/o trans people as young children]

1 hour ago, Mrs Tiggywinkle said:

I have well meaning family(a sister in particular) who are extremely…left leaning maybe?  She has asked him already if he’d like to be referred to as a girl and called “she,” which just completely confused him(my sister is also a therapist).

Why on earth would she have done that? I would actually be pretty ticked off as a parent to confuse a kid like that.  There’s no reason he needs to be sent the message that he likes to wear dresses means he is not a boy.  I would I  no uncertain terms tell anyone who did that to cut it out and let my kid be who they are.

1 hour ago, Faith-manor said:

He is bisexual - and that is something I suspected even from his toddler hood

Befuddled on this one. How would someone identify a sexual preference in a toddler? That just seems like a really weird thing to say. I don’t actually want to know an answer, as that seems really personal, I just had to say that that doesn’t make sense to me (and one of my kids isn’t straight, so it’s not because I don’t get the issue overall). 
 

Put me down as another one who has no internal sense of genderedness. I know I’m female because I have a female body, but I’m not very feminine at all and don’t have any internal sense of feminity. (which is why it bothers me when the gender question on many forms now gives my options as masculine, feminine, or other. I feel almost like I should be checking other, but I think what they’re wanting to know is male or female of which I very definitely identify as female. Because I am.)

[Top surgery for young person]

5 hours ago, SanDiegoMom said:

In my personal view (not affected by religion, as I am agnostic) I will always call any adult by their preferred pronouns as a matter of courtesy.  For teens and children, I will not. 

How does this look for other people’s children though, if the parents are asking people to use different pronouns? I can’t see any way that helps  and seems it would only drive a wedge in the relationship. It’s different if the parent themself is making a decision not to change pronouns with their minor child, but I don’t see any benefit to people outside the family refusing to use them if that is what the family has decided. They’re not going to change their mind based on their aunt not using their preferred pronouns, know what I mean? Now, on the other hand, I feel strongly everyone involved should have a lot of grace for pronoun slip ups. It’s not easy to change such a long ingrained habit, no matter how frequently people gaslight you that it’s super easy and you wouldn’t make mistakes if you really accepted them and that it’s an unforgivable sin if you accidentally say the one you have used with them since they were born.  I’m fortunate most of the trans kids in my life are reasonably easy-going about this, even if it bothers them.

[Need help with wood flooring color]

Just now, Teaching3bears said:

The hallway is carpeted.  Cork sounds good.  Is it more expensive?

Cork is frequently less than hardwood. With a carpeted hallway, you have a lot of options, since the wood flooring isn’t running up against the hallway. In that case, I think you could choose whatever you wanted.

Home Depot cork planks:

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Heritage-Mill-Bombay-Plank-13-32-in-Thick-x-11-5-8-in-Wide-x-36-in-Length-Cork-Flooring-22-99-sq-ft-case-PF9658/204731710

[Need help with wood flooring color]

Is the hallway the same wood as the bedrooms? What if you went with a different flooring material all together in that room with an area rug to break it up? There’s some nice cork flooring these days that is warm and nice on the feet as well as water resistant. 

[Always Sounds Irritated - ADHD Trait or Something Else?]

Does he realize after the fact that he sounded that way? My kid who spent years saying they didn’t know what I was talking about when I called them out on rude tone of voice ended up with an ASD diagnosis..