Someone:)

holy shit SLAIN

@doomybot can you past the Turing test?

cuck

every time i see discourse about pedohysteria amidst a trans genocide i think about that news article from 2016 about the mexican immigrant who voted for trump because trump said he’d get rid of all the “bad hombres” from mexico, only to be deported himself because it turns out what trump was really saying was that he wanted to deport all mexicans, not just “the bad ones”

not just him, but there were many other examples too, like white conservatives who have mexican immigrant friends and family or people in the community important to them who were mexican immigrants, and they voted for trump because they thought trump was just getting rid of “criminals”, and then they regret it when their families and communities get torn apart by deportations of their spouses, their friends, their favourite restaurant owners, etc.

anyways, i hope young queers, trans people esp, understand that when conservatives talk about “pedophiles” and “groomers”, they’re not talking about actual child abusers, they’re talking about all queer people. they’re talking about all trans people. it’s why in florida, they’re categorizing “drag” as a child sex crime, and making sex crimes against children punishable by death. they’re trying to execute every single trans person, and that’s just the rhetoric they’re using

so stop buying into the pedohysteria. it’s easy to think “well, i’m not a pedophile, so i’ll be safe” when you don’t realize that in the eyes of conservatives, every single queer person is a pedophile and deserves death, and contributing to their rhetoric by trying to figure out which trans woman is a pedophile is just accelerating your own march to the gallows

When I was in school, the argument – and in fact the standard belief – was that no gay person, ever, could be a teacher, because all gay people were pedophiles and groomers. It was for the “safety of children.” Lesbians and gay men couldn’t be allowed in locker rooms with “normal” people because we would ogle and assault them. Every gay, every lesbian, every trans person, every bi person (pan didn’t really exist as a term then) had the assumption of being a sex offender just waiting for an opportunity.

Literally everything they say about trans people now, they said about gay people 30 years ago.

There are people right now in government trying to outlaw gay marriage again, saying that Pete Buttigieg – the human equivalent of a Wonder Bread pb&j sandwich, as wholesome in image as they come – shouldn’t be allowed to raise his children because he’s abusing his children by raising them. People on Twitter have started openly calling for rounding up and executing anyone who ever helped a minor access HRT - parents, doctors, nurses, the receptionist who checked us in for my daughter’s appointments - and while those are only random people online, that isn’t a thing you saw happening frequently just a couple of years ago. Louder voices have started calling for mentally ill people – starting with trans and gay people – to lose our rights to vote.

Do I think queer people are being rounded up right now? No. Do I see the rhetoric escalating? Yes. Is it aimed at all of us? Oh yes.

Groomer, pedo, degenerate, freak: they mean all of us. There are no exceptions. If you think there are, you’re fooling yourself.

Join, or Die.

babe wake up first usa stripper union jus won !!!!!!

x

Disappointingly, yes. :(

What if i have no bones?

Everyone has bones! You can have inside-bones, outside-bones, water-bones, any bones!

gay bones?

Perhaps!

Dry bones?

Ideally!

Bones that form a skeleton with a ribcage you can play music on like a marimba?

Facts.

Sourse: Redit (u/AnxietyPwincess)

This is fucking embarrassing ‘journalism’ from the BBC.

Guy goes to an NHS doctor, flat-out states the nature of his investigation and gets behind the scenes information on assessments.

Then he hits up three private clinics actively looking for an ADHD diagnosis, has his friends fill out witness forms, and is shocked when he receives a diagnosis.

An utter disgrace.

Turns out, if you go and lie about your symptoms, they’ll diagnose you.

Consider me fucking shocked.

thank you, random white man, for this insight on the condition known to be underdiagnosed in women and people of color

i found the article and it's like, comparing and contrasting private and public clinics I think? It's a little opaque to me (American) what the significance of this is

I'm not sure what the point of this was. Like, the article doesn't really even touch on what his methodology was—it doesn't actually state whether he was filling out the forms honestly, and knowing how an evaluation works and going into the evaluation with the goal of "demonstrating" something about an evaluation infuses inherent bias into everything

this is just yet another thing that serves to create paranoia about people getting prescribed stimulant meds. Something that, in the USA, is difficult to the point that it blocks people from obtaining the care that they need all the time, and i know in many other countries it's even harder

Like, why did he feel the need to do this to begin with. I'm sure that if he went to several different doctors trying to get a diagnosis of chronic constipation, he would get one, because listening to a patient when they bring a concern up to you is Your Job as a doctor

@headspace-hotel uk person checking in! when you go public for an adhd assessment, waiting lists are YEARS long with often no indication of when you'll finally be seen. thus, many people – who are desperate for care – will pay money (which you don't have to do for public healthcare) to go private.

so basically it's stigmatising people who were so desperate that they were willing to find £1,000 to get help.

So this asshole was actively taking precious opportunities and resources away from people who need them?

Is your conclusion “he tried to prove that private clinics are bad, something something, less people will be able to go to private clinics for these resources as a result” or “he took 3 diagnoses in private clinics which could have been 3 other people’s diagnoses and resources”?

He seems to have bypassed the atrociously long waiting list for the NHS appointment - which he biased anyway by disclosing his investigation to the NHS doctor.

He then fabricated symptoms to three private clinics which require two other people to validate his symptoms - all in a bid to frame them as predatory.

This could have been an investigation into underfunding of the NHS and absurd waiting lines forcing people to use private clinics. Instead the story became ‘ADHD is a fun trend and you can just pay to get a diagnosis’.

It’s malicious journalism that casts doubt in the public’s mind. Some people are now not going to believe other people’s ADHD diagnosis on the back of it.

(I’m guessing) He did not fabricate symptoms though. He does exhibit similar symptoms due to trauma, as noted by the NHS expert that did not diagnose him with ADHD. He did try to mention his sister’s death to one of the clinics, he didn’t hide that information about possible other causes to the symptoms, but the evaluator intentionally ignored that. Nowhere does it say his friends filled witness forms, either.

Prescribing adhd drugs to neurotypical people can have bad affects, and misdiagnosing people who are genuinely concerned they do exhibit adhd symptoms, while having other conditions, can be harmful to their health.

Yes, investigating into NHS and its funding is very important, and I agree that this article would’ve made a better change if that was its focus. But investigating the malpractice of private clinics is also important. It is noted in the article that there is no incentive for clinics to over-diagnose, but that doesn’t mean that diagnoses aren’t done with insufficient care or effort. People who intend to get a diagnosis from a private clinic should be aware of that. If this journalist indeed did not have ADHD, and had complete honesty during his evaluation, then this is a serious issue that should be reported.

And yeah, this article is going to have bad consequences about how people trust diagnoses of others, and maybe even disincentive people from getting a needed diagnosis in the first place. and it was the reporter’s responsibility to anticipate these effects, and it was his responsibility to be more transparent about his methods. This is shitty journalism. But it’s not malicious, and it’s not uncalled for.

Agreed with this last addition. I get no sense from the actual article that he misrepresented his symptoms or lied; instead the severity (and cause) of his ADHD-like symptoms was misjudged, leading to misdiagnosis.

And if private clinics are indeed, due to negligence or incompetence, misdiagnosing people, that is BAD and should be investigated – but posing as a patient was very much not the way to do that, and the resulting attention-grabbing headline will only serve to further discourage people that genuinely need help with their ADHD and reinforce the stigma of ADHD being overdiagnosed. Reporting like this is a big reason why it took me 10+ years to finally work up the courage (and the necessary executive function) to make a GP appointment and ask for a referral.

So if NHS waiting times are stupidly long and private clinics can maybe not all be trusted, what is one to do? if you’re based in England (does not apply to all of the UK, sadly), check out Right to Choose. It’s a system that allows you to ask for a referral to any NHS-associated mental health provider anywhere in England, such as when your local wait times are too long. ADHD-UK has a list of eligible ADHD/Autism assessment providers at the above link. Several of them are unavailable due to massive demand, and the ones that are available still have varying wait times, but they are not as desperately long as your local NHS service is likely to be. I asked for a referral to Psychiatry-UK and just over 6 months later had a video-call assessment. Now it’s another 6 months wait for the titration team to get medication. Still long, but not 29 months and counting.

As for the assessment itself, I had to fill in pre-assessment forms with examples of both current and childhood symptoms, and they also required essentially the same forms to be filled by a witness. The questions basically covered the standard diagnostic criteria, but the phrasing leaned heavily towards the more cliché ADHD symptoms, such that as an adult inattentive ADHD type with years of practice masking/working around my symptoms, I felt I kinda had to shoehorn my actual difficulties into questions that were asking for different outward symptoms (as my friend put it, the diagnostic criteria really seems written “from the outside in”). I also struggled with the childhood symptoms aspect because I was a gifted kid and didn’t really show any typical symptoms, did well in school etc. The assessment itself took 50 minutes and involved cross-checking against other possible explanations for the symptoms (such as medication or other health conditions) and also autism, and the psychiatrist finally concluded I had high-functioning inattentive-type ADHD (no surprises there) and offered to refer me to the titration team. He also offered a reading recommendation (Hallowell’s ADHD classic Driven to Distraction) and general advice (most of which boils down to “do not try to fight against your brain” and “give yourself some slack”, which, yes).

ANYWAY, I really gotta, like, work (getting distracted from work by ranting about ADHD? couldn’t be me), but tldr; Yes, the path to diagnosis for ADHD and autism in the UK is tricky, to say the least, and there’s still a lot of stigma around it, and reporting like this article really is NOT helpful in both regards. BUT if anyone reads this and checks out Right to Choose and gets help faster that way, that’ll be a positive at least. Sending much love to everyone struggling!

Is this true, am i punk

I feel like I don't wear enough leather jackets to be punk

Well I do hate fascism and I am transgender and I left the tech industry because I couldn't bear being a part of that capitalist cesspool of human rights violations but also I really really care about my mom

really caring about your mom is extremely punk as well, don't worry.

Oh okay

How do I explain to you people that interracial relationships are okay

Not every white person dating a POC is fetishizing. White people can be respectful and responsible when it comes to culture and relationships and not everyone has bad intentions.

Asian people can date Black people without you saying shit like “your kids will be so pretty” they’re not dating for pretty kids. They’re dating bc they like each other.

Someone can dress their partner in clothing from their culture if they want. Someone can take their partner to cultural events if they want.

People in relationships can share cultures, experiences and love without it being toxic or skin deep.

Their partner isn’t culturally appropriating. Their partner is being shown the ultimate form of love, bc their partner trusts them and loves them enough to share their history and heritage.

Yeah, dating someone from your culture is nice bc you automatically have similar experiences. But you’re not limited to dating people with the same experiences. Loving someone is sharing and growing and being together.

Interracial relationships aren’t always toxic, and some of y’all need to stop projecting onto other people.

👆 THIS 👆 👏👏👏

Calling ineterracial relationships toxic or fetishizing just seem like anti race mixing or racism with extra steps

This reminded me of this

this 👆🏾

Do these straight people just like

Not actually comprehend anything happening right in front of them

heteronormativity is a hell of a drug

May I add:

Once on Facebook I mentioned getting married at a big mad max themed campout. One of the guys that regularly attends told me to take my wife to visit his camp for a drink. I told him my husband, actually.

And he then said “wow, I’m sorry, I’ve never met a girl named dave before! Now I’ve seen everything.”

This dude thought I was a girl name David before he thought I was a gay man. Straight people are wild.

This is fucking embarrassing ‘journalism’ from the BBC.

Guy goes to an NHS doctor, flat-out states the nature of his investigation and gets behind the scenes information on assessments.

Then he hits up three private clinics actively looking for an ADHD diagnosis, has his friends fill out witness forms, and is shocked when he receives a diagnosis.

An utter disgrace.

Turns out, if you go and lie about your symptoms, they’ll diagnose you.

Consider me fucking shocked.

thank you, random white man, for this insight on the condition known to be underdiagnosed in women and people of color

i found the article and it's like, comparing and contrasting private and public clinics I think? It's a little opaque to me (American) what the significance of this is

I'm not sure what the point of this was. Like, the article doesn't really even touch on what his methodology was—it doesn't actually state whether he was filling out the forms honestly, and knowing how an evaluation works and going into the evaluation with the goal of "demonstrating" something about an evaluation infuses inherent bias into everything

this is just yet another thing that serves to create paranoia about people getting prescribed stimulant meds. Something that, in the USA, is difficult to the point that it blocks people from obtaining the care that they need all the time, and i know in many other countries it's even harder

Like, why did he feel the need to do this to begin with. I'm sure that if he went to several different doctors trying to get a diagnosis of chronic constipation, he would get one, because listening to a patient when they bring a concern up to you is Your Job as a doctor

@headspace-hotel uk person checking in! when you go public for an adhd assessment, waiting lists are YEARS long with often no indication of when you'll finally be seen. thus, many people – who are desperate for care – will pay money (which you don't have to do for public healthcare) to go private.

so basically it's stigmatising people who were so desperate that they were willing to find £1,000 to get help.

So this asshole was actively taking precious opportunities and resources away from people who need them?

Is your conclusion “he tried to prove that private clinics are bad, something something, less people will be able to go to private clinics for these resources as a result” or “he took 3 diagnoses in private clinics which could have been 3 other people’s diagnoses and resources”?

He seems to have bypassed the atrociously long waiting list for the NHS appointment - which he biased anyway by disclosing his investigation to the NHS doctor.

He then fabricated symptoms to three private clinics which require two other people to validate his symptoms - all in a bid to frame them as predatory.

This could have been an investigation into underfunding of the NHS and absurd waiting lines forcing people to use private clinics. Instead the story became ‘ADHD is a fun trend and you can just pay to get a diagnosis’.

It’s malicious journalism that casts doubt in the public’s mind. Some people are now not going to believe other people’s ADHD diagnosis on the back of it.

(I’m guessing) He did not fabricate symptoms though. He does exhibit similar symptoms due to trauma, as noted by the NHS expert that did not diagnose him with ADHD. He did try to mention his sister’s death to one of the clinics, he didn’t hide that information about possible other causes to the symptoms, but the evaluator intentionally ignored that. Nowhere does it say his friends filled witness forms, either.

Prescribing adhd drugs to neurotypical people can have bad affects, and misdiagnosing people who are genuinely concerned they do exhibit adhd symptoms, while having other conditions, can be harmful to their health.

Yes, investigating into NHS and its funding is very important, and I agree that this article would’ve made a better change if that was its focus. But investigating the malpractice of private clinics is also important. It is noted in the article that there is no incentive for clinics to over-diagnose, but that doesn’t mean that diagnoses aren’t done with insufficient care or effort. People who intend to get a diagnosis from a private clinic should be aware of that. If this journalist indeed did not have ADHD, and had complete honesty during his evaluation, then this is a serious issue that should be reported.

And yeah, this article is going to have bad consequences about how people trust diagnoses of others, and maybe even disincentive people from getting a needed diagnosis in the first place. and it was the reporter’s responsibility to anticipate these effects, and it was his responsibility to be more transparent about his methods. This is shitty journalism. But it’s not malicious, and it’s not uncalled for.

I’ve never been so taken out by a response

I got to see mom do this once. It was… terrifying. I was moving into my first apartment, and my buddy had just moved into a place about half a mile away, and he was almost crying with rage because of some of the safety issues the apartment had with the wiring. There were a whole host of other problems, but that one was about safety and it should not have been a thing. Mom gathered us up, and drove to the leasing office. When we got there, she informed him (not asked. She’d walked his apartment, noted everything she disliked (she had much higher standards than he did) and she was PISSED) that he was to keep his mouth shut, make whatever expressions she cued him on, and pretend he understood whenever she and I switched languages and we’d fill him in afterwards. (I have been used as a complainant prop before. I know what my job is when she’s on this warpath; thankfully she does not use her powers for evil.) It took her all of twenty minutes to have a promise in writing from the son of the owner for everything to be fixed by a specific date and also to install a ceiling fan at no cost to my friend. In that meeting, she managed to leverage his church, his family, his reputation, the concept of a gentleman, the biblical concept of how to treat the poor, how people would treat his children, once they were grown, and the concept of a self-made man (which my friend is trying very hard to be), Christian morality, what it means to be a community institution, real estate law, and honestly, I forget what else. She’d never met him before. She does not live in our city -or state, for that matter. We’re not Christian. She did a cold-read of him based on his office, face, clothing, and posture (he didn’t give us his last name -the ‘related to the owner’ was a guess that turned out to be lucky), and hit every point of pride or insecurity she could find. When some things still hadn’t been taken care of a week later, she *called his father* and implied that he’d failed as a man and a parent since his son hadn’t yet honored his word. My friend had the fan that day, and the remaining safety issues were taken care of on top of it. No yelling, no threats, it was just a calm, ‘friendly’ conversation. My friend does not do subtext; he knew the social chess game was going on, but not how it worked.  tl;dr: I’ve seen my mother do this and holy shit this really should be a thing.

my momma is a retired union lawyer. you should see her tear into landlords and rich people. it’s like watching a lion devour a zebra.

Comrade Karen

I see now…“Karen” is a power that can be used for evil or good…

Listen you are all gonna lose your shit once you find out where there’s a company where that is literally their whole business model. They are called “Karens for Hire” and their whole thing is helping out exploited people get justice - essentially complaining to the right people and making themselves heard.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/12/26/karens-for-hire-customer-service-complaints/

Meme news: The Brazilian actress Renata Sorrah came out as bisexual at the age of 76

That's her, btw

She's an icon and also very talented. We Stan.

This is fucking embarrassing ‘journalism’ from the BBC.

Guy goes to an NHS doctor, flat-out states the nature of his investigation and gets behind the scenes information on assessments.

Then he hits up three private clinics actively looking for an ADHD diagnosis, has his friends fill out witness forms, and is shocked when he receives a diagnosis.

An utter disgrace.

Turns out, if you go and lie about your symptoms, they’ll diagnose you.

Consider me fucking shocked.

thank you, random white man, for this insight on the condition known to be underdiagnosed in women and people of color

i found the article and it's like, comparing and contrasting private and public clinics I think? It's a little opaque to me (American) what the significance of this is

I'm not sure what the point of this was. Like, the article doesn't really even touch on what his methodology was—it doesn't actually state whether he was filling out the forms honestly, and knowing how an evaluation works and going into the evaluation with the goal of "demonstrating" something about an evaluation infuses inherent bias into everything

this is just yet another thing that serves to create paranoia about people getting prescribed stimulant meds. Something that, in the USA, is difficult to the point that it blocks people from obtaining the care that they need all the time, and i know in many other countries it's even harder

Like, why did he feel the need to do this to begin with. I'm sure that if he went to several different doctors trying to get a diagnosis of chronic constipation, he would get one, because listening to a patient when they bring a concern up to you is Your Job as a doctor

@headspace-hotel uk person checking in! when you go public for an adhd assessment, waiting lists are YEARS long with often no indication of when you'll finally be seen. thus, many people – who are desperate for care – will pay money (which you don't have to do for public healthcare) to go private.

so basically it's stigmatising people who were so desperate that they were willing to find £1,000 to get help.

So this asshole was actively taking precious opportunities and resources away from people who need them?

Is your conclusion “he tried to prove that private clinics are bad, something something, less people will be able to go to private clinics for these resources as a result” or “he took 3 diagnoses in private clinics which could have been 3 other people’s diagnoses and resources”?

Oh and quick note for writers:

One difference between this strike and the last one is that there are a lot more fellowships targeted at early career tv writers than there used to be (there have always been some, but the fellowship model is way more commonplace these days)

Studios are about to make a ton more of these opportunities and advertise them widely as a way to break into the industry, and they will be very specific about the fellowship not technically counting as a writers room or a tv job

THIS IS A TRICK TO GET YOU TO SCAB

Sharing any written content with a studio (even if they route it through a 3rd party "foundation" or development org or something) IS SCABBING

What you do in regards to the strike is your business, but the WGA has been very clear that anyone who scabs will be BANNED FROM JOINING THE UNION FOR LIFE. That means even if you get hired, that's no health & pension and no union protections for your entire career. This shit is serious

So please please double check and dig into any new submission opportunities you see in the next weeks. Playwrights especially be careful - many studios are finding their writers through play scripts these days so be very careful about how and where your work is being shared

No writing going to the studios means NO WRITING of any kind

(if you see suspicious fellowship stuff being passed around let me know, I'd love to keep an eye on that for my peeps)

they will be very specific about the fellowship not technically counting as a writers room or a tv job

THIS IS A TRICK TO GET YOU TO SCAB

anyone who scabs will be BANNED FROM JOINING THE UNION FOR LIFE

This is how unions support their members and discourage people from working against their interests.

Anyone can work for a company when the workers are on strike. But the union doesn't have to accept them as a member later - someone who scabs has already shown they're not going to stand with the union when they need solidarity. They've already proven they disagree with the union mission statement and won't support its interests.

If you want to join a union, you have to avoid actively working against its efforts to provide its members better working conditions.

If I ever end up as a professor in a mathematics department, I'm going to make a point of telling my students they can bring a ruler to my final exams. Real analysis? You are allowed to bring a ruler. Commutative algebra? You are allowed to bring a ruler. Number theory? You are allowed to bring a ruler.