@OracleOutlook's banner p

OracleOutlook

Fiat justitia ruat caelum

2 followers   follows 2 users  
joined 2022 September 05 01:56:25 UTC 

				
User ID: 359


				
				
				

			

		

	














	


		


			



	

		

			

			

				

					

						

							
						

						

							
							

								
OracleOutlook


								

								

								
								
								

								
							
					
 
				


				
Fiat justitia ruat caelum

				
				
				

				

					2 followers  

					follows 2 users  

					joined 2022 September 05 01:56:25 UTC
				


				
					

					
No bio...

				

				

				

				

				

					

					

					
					
					

					
User ID: 359


					
					
					
				

			


					

						
					



		

	

 











			
			

			
			

			




	


		

			
‎

			

				
				

					Hour
					Day
					Week
					Month
					Year
					
				

			


			
‎

			

	
	

	 Hot Bump Bottom New Old Controversial Comments
	



		

	






	

		
		

		
		
	

	

  







		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 30, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
This reminds me of another recent tragic event.  A new mother in Italy fell asleep while nursing her baby.  She had been left alone in her hospital room with no one allowed to visit or help.  While asleep, she crushed and killed her newborn.


This tragic event has lead to a large number of Italian mothers talking about how they had been in similar dangerous situations.  When they asked for help from medical staff, they were told that other mothers are able to take care of their newborns after childbirth, the mothers need to stop being lazy.  This was after major abdominal surgery (C-sections), medical complications of blood loss, etc.


Pregnancy and the post natal period is really hard on a woman.  The hormone changes are immense.  Mom Genes is a good book to read on the topic, but to give it the personal angle:


The first night we brought my first baby back from the hospital, I remember her staying awake all night, eating.  I couldn't put her down.  I had trouble getting out of bed.  I sat there in the long hours of the night, my husband asleep next to me, and sobbed as quietly as I could manage.  I didn't want to be a bother and wake him.  I didn't know how I could live another moment without sleep.  I had just gone through a physically exhausting and torturous experience.  I had torn myself while giving birth to the point they had to cauterize my clitoral hood.  I needed rest and healing.  I was mommy now and had to do it alone, like all the pioneer women before me.  I felt like I had made a huge mistake.  My husband needed to rest.  He had stayed up at the hospital the night before.  I wasn't ready to be a mom.  I didn't want to be a bother.


In the morning my husband took the baby away from me and we settled into sleeping in shifts.  Nursing meant that I never got more than a couple hours of sleep at a time, but eventually I began to heal.


There was a moment several months later when my daughter choked while drinking milk and I just kind of sat there, staring at her.  "She's not breathing," I said aloud, emotionless.  I didn't move her into a better position or do anything.  My husband came over and held her on his arm, whacked her back like the baby heimlech.  She cleared her passage and started eating again like nothing was wrong.  My husband thought I panicked and froze.  I can't actually remember what I was thinking at the time, but afterwards I connected the event with my thoughts and emotions on the second day of her life - that I wasn't ready for a kid, that I should have waited for a better time.


The next time my daughter choked while nursing I held her on my forearm, jaw between my finger and thumb, and firmly wacked her on her back with my other forearm, just like I learned in lifeguard training a decade prior.  I didn't freeze.  I didn't ponder deep thoughts.  I was her mother and her only defense against a harsh biology that wants infants dead.


My second child was much easier the first three months, though I became depressed the second three months (a depression that went away by eating fermented food.  What's up with that?).  My third child also went well and I was actually filled with immense energy the two weeks after his birth. Then I noticed that I had lost both all religious feeling and all belief in the legibility of the universe, rationality itself.  Both senses came back around his first birthday.


The point isn't that the Boston woman was correct to kill her kids, or does not face some sort of culpability for killing her kids.  My point is that the post partum period is weird and has unpredictable effects on a mother's brain.  We can probably find better ways to make not killing kids attractive to psychotic mothers.  Does society have a responsibility to do so?  I don't know.  I don't think that the threat of being locked up in prison is enough incentive to someone whose mind is already in their own circle of hell.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 26, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
You aren't the first person to discover that homeless people appreciate being looked in the eye and spoken to like they are human beings.  In fact, I was trained to do that from a Catholic Charity - that even if I don't have any cash lying around I can still help make someone's day if I have just 10 minutes to spare.  In fact, Catholic charities are making those individual connections and treating the undesirables like human beings all the time, in a way that does not often happen at a governmental level.  I don't believe that it's 100% sufficient - there needs to be a safeguard to protect people who live far away from charities or who have personalities that conflict with the charities.  But you are knocking Christians for something they are constantly doing and something that just occurred to you.


I don't distrust welfare because it gives money to the undeserving.  I am worried that we create perverse incentives for single mothers.  I am worried that it increases the percent of people who could have been working but now have time to spend on criminality and drugs/escapism.  I would support the Freedom Dividend, or Fair Tax, or whatever welfare plan that helps prevent that incentive structure.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				The Motte Postmortem : slatestarcodex
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Assuming the question wasn't rhetorical...


Liberals and to a certain degree Americans have a belief in free speech.  Not just as a God-given right, but as a principle that creates the most public good.


Good ideas will win out over time, reasonable people will be able to identify bad ideas, poke holes, and most people will go along with the good ideas.  Truth has nothing to fear from its enemies.


So what does it mean when there is a forum dedicated to the principles of free and civil discussion... and it doesn't converge on what you know to be true?  When your beliefs that are widely held on highly-censored forums become difficult to defend on a free-discussion forum?


It is easier to believe there must be some other fatal flaw with TheMotte than it is to believe that there is something wrong with your beliefs.  It must be dog-pilling, witches, some other phenomena.  But what if there isn't anything flawed about TheMotte, it's either your beliefs or the principle of free discussion that is flawed?  That would be a hard pill to swallow and I can see TheMotte's existence bothering people on a subconscious level.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of August 14, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I bake my neighbors cookies and so far one of my neighbors has even returned the plate (along with a bottle of wine.)


Two doors down there is a single dad with two kids around the same age as mine.  Across the street is a couple with three kids, slightly older.  Next door on one side is a retiree who lost her cat when she moved in.  On the other side is another family with small kids.


I have a play structure in my backyard which makes my house a good place to invite kids over.  Excuses are easy to find if I'm willing to put in the effort.


Suburbia can be a soulless hell.   I need to cross a highway to get to any commercial space - restaurant, grocery store, other kind of shop.  But I know right off the bat that most of my neighbors are homeowners, have jobs that can pay for houses and cars, have kids and the responsibilities that go with that, can follow the most basic rules of the HOA (I don't like there is an HOA, but recognize it as a filter.)  As a baseline they are more trustworthy than anyone I pass on the street.  I am putting in the work to cultivate those relationships but I believe it is worthwhile.


I remember growing up in suburbia, I rode my bike in the neighborhood with the other kids.  I would go to other kids' homes and knock on their front door and ask, "Is Heather home?"  I would kick the ball in my backyard over the fence and have to go to the street one over and knock on a stranger's door and ask if I could retrieve my ball.  My parent's mostly watched me through the kitchen window - I had a great deal of independence even by the time I was five years old.


My mom met with friends almost every day, either at a McDonalds with a play place, a park, or someone's home.


The change, as far as I perceive it, happened around 9/11. Same neighborhood, same kids, same families, but people stopped visiting as much.  I wasn't allowed to go out by myself as much.  A layer of optimism was stripped away.


I guess that's why I think it is mostly an attitude thing, not anything inherent to the suburbs.  And why I stubbornly believe I can create a community if I keep pressing my neighbors to interact with me.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 29, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I love America.  I love George Washington.  I love Thomas Jefferson.  I love Betsy Ross.  I love our stupid national anthem with notes that most people can't reach.  I love the Constitution, and the Liberty Bell, and our National Parks.  I love the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence, and the Federalist Papers.  I love our aircraft carriers and our war planes.  I love the Grand Canyon and the Bald Eagle.  I love supermarkets and farmer's markets.  I love our long and fraught journey to secure each citizen the greatest freedoms enjoyed by man on Earth.


I love them in the same way I love my parents, who I didn't choose and aren't necessarily the best, but they raised me as best as they were able.  To say that one country is the same as another to me would be to say that one random couple is the same as my parents to me.


Is this something only people raised in America feel, or does anyone else feel that way about their homeland?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Wellness Wednesday for January 31, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I've mentioned on here a few times that our family has an Au Pair and I work from home most days.  This happy arrangement is going to come to an end and I'm of mixed feelings.


First, for those who don't know, there is a program in the State Department that is designed to connect families with young women across the world who would be interested in taking care of children in exchange for living in America for a year.  The host family has to provide a separate room and pay a weekly stipend.  It's a "cultural program."  As part of it they are supposed to take a couple college courses every year.  There is a lot of abuse, but I pay my Au Pair more than the minimum, don't ask her to do more than just keep the kids alive, and buy her whatever she asks for that seems reasonable.


When interviewing Au Pairs (it's a lot like an online dating service, with profile pages and matches) I always asked, "What are you hoping to get out of becoming an Au Pair?  What benefit are you looking for?"  The answer was almost always, "More experience speaking English."  This seems reasonable, as a good American accent probably gives people a huge advantage in business.


Anyways, the State Department is reviewing the Au Pair program, and has proposed a series of rules that will break it for most families.  I don't want to count every toothbrush I buy her, or make sure that she only eats $10.88 worth of food every day.  Regardless of what is financially feasible, I'm not going to do it.  There's just no way to live with someone in your house, monitor them to this extent, and then still trust them with your kids.


But then the question turns to, "Who is going to watch my kids?"  I have four kids, ranging from 10 months to 6 years.  There is a preschool we send one child to for 1/2 day socialization, and she likes it well enough.  I could send the others to their Summer Camp.  But the 10 month old would be too young, and daycare for a 1 year old is already booked up for a year.


Then there's the reality that I'm not giving my kids the attention I want to.  Work takes over too much.  I might technically be off work at 4:30, but someone puts a meeting on my calendar at 5, or I really need to finish these three five emails, and before I know it it's Dinner Time.  I have all these worksheets I want to do with my two oldest and practice penmanship (which they really struggle with.) I want to take my kids outside to play.  I want to go for walks.  But I also want to be held in esteem at work.  As long as work is there, I will put off my kids because kids can wait but work can't.  But that is a LIE.  Kids grow up, and toil is forever.


I don't want to send them off to a church preschool from 7 to 5, and then pick them up, feed them dinner, do homework, and kiss them good night.  That's not how I was raised.  That's not what I want for my family.


So I will likely become a stay at home Mom, once my Au Pair's contract ends.  I'm looking forward to taking my kids to parks, splash pads, libraries, festivals, and other public areas around my city.  My city is actually really family friendly.  I know it is hard work.  I took half a year off work when I had my second child.  I know it can be isolating.  But I have the example of my mother, who make lots of mom friends and seemed to have a blast when my siblings and I were young.  Thinking about  making this change fills me with excitement and hope.


The two downsides - and they are huge - is money and the Future.  Money is easy enough to explain - we will have less of it.  My husband makes enough for us to live on, if we had no debt we would have a good amount left over after all the mandatory bills (food, mortgage, utilities, etc.) Unfortunately, we have debt.  There are some student loans that are almost paid off and we are in a payment plan with the children's hospital after three of my children were hospitalized for a cumulative of 27 days, 10 of which were in the ICU.  With this debt, we are still able to make due, and live a good quality of life, but we would need to be careful to limit things like how much meat we buy, how many clothes we get the kids, etc.  Once the debt is paid off in a couple years, it's all fine.  But we will have to live frugally for a couple years, or risk falling into more debt.


The Future one is harder to explain, but I can't stay home with the kids forever.  By the time the youngest is 10, if not sooner, I need to go back into the labor force.   I think that is where my mother messed up.  She put her foot down on her identity as a homemaker, ended up not doing much during the school day, driving us around to sports in the afternoon (until I was able to drive, and then she had even less to do.)  The cognitive decline you see retirees experience, she seemed to get when she was 50.  She kept the public areas of the house clean, cooked dinner (badly), and otherwise watched Masterpiece Theater.  Shortly after I graduated college, my parents divorced.  Now she is a real estate agent with no sales and sometimes manages to convince her friends to pay above market rates to clean their house.


I see a few possibilities.  I have a Master's degree, and can probably get a certification and find work as a school teacher once the children are in school.  I don't have any particular interest in this.  I think of schools as enemy territory, so to speak.  It would be nice if I could instead home school my kids (I'm not going to leap straight into that, but it's a possibility now.)  Maybe I could teach at a Catholic School.  The benefit of being a school teacher is obvious, I would be off work most of the same days that my children would be.


The other idea I'm entertaining is to start my own business.  I've been thinking up a small catalog of things I could crochet. Things that could only be done by hand, look unique, and would take me less than two hours a piece.  I could buy a stamping kit for 1k and sell personalized jewelry.  I could lean into the Mommy space, and sell "calming jars" and other kid trinkets.


The idea would be to do something for a few hours a week, just enough to keep a storefront and a tax ID.  If I actually turn a small profit I can use to buy a zoo membership or something, that would be a bonus.  As the kids get bigger, I can spend more time on it, eventually either actually making it a full time job, or pivoting back into being a wage worker.  It seems like it will be easier for me to get hired if I can say I started a small business, rather than I took time off work to care for small kids.


I'm open to any and all suggestions.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of August 21, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I think we're about 3-5 years out from a "the Science changed, idiot" with a side helping of blaming repressive conservative gender roles for the prevalence of transition between 2014-2025.  40 years from now kids will learn how the election of Republican Donald Trump coincided with a large surge in transitions, so obviously it was a Republican phenomenon.  Some internet pedants will conduct statistical analysis of congresspeople to demonstrate that the evidence is more blurry.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 6, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Here is a possibility: "Induced abortion by vacuum aspiration is associated with an increased risk of first-trimester miscarriage in the subsequent pregnancy.".  Furthermore, "women with previous history of two or three induced abortions were at risk of preterm birth, very preterm birth and low birth weight babies in the subsequent pregnancies. The risk of caesarean was found to be increased in women with previous two or three spontaneous abortions exposing the women to the morbidity associated with the C-section."


African American women are more likely to have multiple abortions.


If both these are true, I don't know what else we'd expect.  It also might explain why richer African American women have worse outcomes - do wealthier African Americans have more abortions than poorer African American women?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				To Escape the Body: A Review of Helen Joyce’s Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality, pt. 3 – How Transgenderism Harms Women And Children
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I’m not sure how to verify the numbers exactly (even Joyce admits we don’t have clear counts). The number is clearly greatly increasing, but it’s not clear if this just reflects that the right number of kids are getting them, or too many are. I will say that she’s correct on the broadening of who can get blockers. The Mayo Clinic, St. Louis Children’s Hospital, and Cleveland Clinic all say that you don’t have be trans, but just questioning your gender to get it.




I think the huge age and Assigned Sex at Birth tilt is indicative of something.  If the rise was a correction to the actual number of gender dysphoric people due to societal acceptance, I would predict that trans-identified individuals would rise equally across both sexes and all age groups. We see the opposite. It is highly tilted by sex and age.  In the past, the vast majority of transgendered individuals were AMAB.  Now most are AFAB.


UCLA Williams Institute released a report examining the number of trans-identified people over the past five years.  It buried the lede in its June 2022 report: in the same five-year period while trans-ID increased 100% among youth, trans-ID among adults 25 and over dropped 21%.


In 2016, total estimated population for transgender adults was 1,184,150.  By 2022 it was 938,200.  Growing social acceptance of trans-ID does not fully explain why we see more of it among children and less among adults. It could make sense if the trans-ID among adults remained the same or increased slightly compared to youth and young adults.  To have the percentage of adults decrease 21% at the same time as the percentage increased 100% among young people seems significant.


Using vague estimations for demonstrative effect: If only 1% of people 25+ are transgendered, but 10% of people 25 and under are, then either there are still 9% of people 25+ who are transgendered but are struggling to keep it under wraps or 9% of people under 25 did not have to transition to live comfortable lives. If it was the former I predict would mean we'd see at least some of those 9% of people transition as social norms make it easier to transition. But we don't see older people transition at significant rates, instead we see many detransition.


So we approach the other horn. Up to 9% of people under 25 could have lived decently comfortable cis lives, but instead transitioned because of some change in the environment. Is this a good outcome? There are many side effects to the drugs that transgendered people take, like increased risk of heart attack and stroke for females on testosterone. There's also baldness, which many transmen take Finasteride to counter, another drug with a whole host of issues. It is not an exaggeration to say that transitioning dramatically reduces quality of life. It is harder to find a romantic partner. Having biological kids might be impossible. Many medical issues and difficulty getting the correct treatment for their specific hormonal and chromosonal profile. Every transgendered person over 30 that I have asked has stated that they would not want anyone to have the transgendered experience if there was a way to prevent it (though they usually maintain that transitioning was the only option for their sanity.)


I can support transitioning as a major medical intervention that is preferable to suicide, despite the myriad of health complications.  But treating it as no big deal seems like it would be difficult to defend.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of September 12, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I don't mind there being Elves of Color or humans of color in the Amazon series. Elves came out of the far East before being drawn West? And then some elves stayed behind while others went on over the sea.  If there was a consistent racial difference between the elves that came over the sea and those that had stayed behind, I'd be ok with it.


Numenor was a massive empire centered around what would now be the Mediterranean and the crown was based on the Egyptian crown. So there's a lot of room for a cosmopolitan society there.  (Though there is a rule that only a man can inherit the crown, and the show breaks that.)


What bothers me is when people's ethnicity just does not make sense considering the historical context.


Like isolated Hobbit village. If they want to argue that hobbits used to all be darker but got lighter over thousands of years by the time of LOTR, I'd accept that. But if they have hobbit precursors that look like they are from every corner of the globe in a small isolated community that hasn't had any intermarriage for hundreds of years... that makes no sense.  Same with dwarves.  If they want to say that elves who have been in the same geographic regions and marriage stock for thousands of years have distinct ethnicities, that seems impossible too.


This is all to say, what will really bother me at the end of the day is a show that doesn't give the same consideration to history, language, and time that Tolkien imbued on his universe. If there isn't an explanation for everything that goes back tens of thousands of years, they did it wrong. If everyone acts like a modern American, with modern American values and motivations, they did it wrong.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Wellness Wednesday for November 2, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
My son got his 15 month well-child check today.  At the appointment everyone was really trying to upsell me the COVID Vaccine.  I had a conversation that went:


Dr: "Are you sure, just the regular 15 month vaccines?"


Me: "And the flu shot."


Dr: "The regular 15 month vaccines, COVID, and the flu shot?"


Me: 'Ye-no, no COVID.  Just the flu shot if that's possible."


Dr: "Yes, it's possible."


Then with the nurse administering the vaccines:


Nurse: "I noticed on the paper it said just the 15 month vaccines, would you like the flu shot as well?"


Me: "Yes, the flu shot."


Nurse: "COVID, too?"


Me: "No COVID."


Nurse administers 3 shots.  I get the paper home with my son's weight, height, and shots administered.  They list COVID as administered, no flu shot. My husband called them, he was put on hold then disconnected.


I'm sure the pediatrician thinks I'm crazy, but I don't think a boy less than 2 years of age gets a huge benefit from a Covid vaccine, he's already on an aggressive vaccine schedule, getting multiple vaccines every three months, and I really wanted him to have that flu shot.


There also needs to be a clearer way to consent to medications/procedures than a verbal conversation that apparently two separate people misunderstood. I'm still hoping he got the flu shot but the paper was marked wrong.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Wellness Wednesday for January 24, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I'm willing to bet that chart is used to diagnose hoarders, and it gives that much variation to trick people into being more comfortable saying, "I'm a six," because six is towards the middle and there are worse options. My grandparent's house had rooms that were between 5 and 10. My grandmother had Alzheimers and would purchase things for her 'baby' (all her children were grown adults) and stuff them in one of the vacated bedrooms until you couldn't enter the room, then start over again in a different bedroom.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of December 11, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Nobody seriously defends the superstitions of Christianity




The different bubbles that we are in fascinate me.  If someone asked me, I would say that Christianity has never been more or better defended before now.  In fact, I have heard a Catholic Bishop thank New Atheism for revitalizing Christian Apologetics.


The content coming out from Capturing Christianity, Jimmy Akin, and Bishop Barron is both sophisticated and unafraid to defend the foundational positions of Christianity, dive into thorny philosophical weeds, take atheistic arguments seriously, and approach topics from a scientific, rational perspective.


I can feel your disbelief across time and space, so let me give an example:  In his video on "Time Travel Prayer," Jimmy Akin explains the methodology of a study where patient records from prior years were randomly assigned to a prayer group or control group.  After praying for the patients in prayer group to have gotten better in the past, the researchers looked at the outcomes for the patients and found a statistically significant correlation between the prayer group and recovery.


Despite this result supporting his argument, he took the time in his show to talk about how studies can be done hundreds of times, with only the results that the researchers like getting published.  And that this practice can make even random chance look statistically significant on paper.  And that, though he has no evidence this happened in this case, it is important to keep in mind when papers shows weak significance around surprising things.


Sounds a lot like how a rationalist would approach a topic, no?  I highly recommend checking out Jimmy Akin's Mysterious world - most of the topics are not religious in nature but they are a lot of fun. He has pretty soundly debunked the Loch Ness Monster, Loretto Staircase, and a number of odd things.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				USA Election Day 2022 Megathread
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
It's already happened - with a registered Democrat arrested for trying to interfere with a voting machine.




But it heightened concerns among election officials and security experts that conspiracy theories related to the 2020 presidential election could inspire some voters to meddle with - or even attempt to sabotage - election equipment.




But it's ok!  Even when it's registered Democrats doing the meddling, it's the fault of the Republicans for their conspiracy theories of Democratic meddling.




Election officials in Colorado use locks and tamper-evident seals on voting equipment, so it becomes apparent if someone has tried to access it. Trigger alerts make machines inoperable if someone tries to tamper with them, which is what happened in Pueblo, according to Ortiz and the Colorado Secretary of State's office.




That is good.  This means that people can't hack election infrastructure without detection and we have nothing to worry about.  Hopefully no one will make any claims to the contrary.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Wellness Wednesday for April 17, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
When I was a teenager I found a community of fanfic writers who I adored.  They had their own shared canon and one of them was a Powerhouse of writing.  Spitting out chapters longer than some books, filled with classical and pop-culture references, philosophical musings, good-vs-evil clashes, tense heroism, etc.


I would check their bio pages every day.  Eventually they got a forum and I lurked there too.  I watched them talk amongst each other and I wanted so badly to be their friend.  A couple of problems:


They were clearly adults, and I very much was not.    My parents forbade me from reading fanfiction.  Obviously I ignored this directive, but I wasn't able to make an account because my parents also managed my email address.


But it would not be an exaggeration to state that this group of fanfic writers had a strong impact on my outlook today.  These fanfics formed me the same way the Aeneid formed generations before me.


And more than that, I wanted to be one of them. I wanted to be their friend so badly.  They were the coolest people ever.


By the time I was an adult and could sign up for an account, they had slowed down publishing.  I re-read the corpus of work, commented on chapters, joined the forum, but I was an interloper, an outsider.  I never could explain to them just how much they meant to me.  I tried not to be weird, but I think I was probably very weird from their perspective.


Around the time I created an account, fewer chapters were published.  Eventually it was all gone.  No more posts on the forum, no more chapters published.  They all knew each other outside the forum. Maybe they moved to discord.


Ten years later, I still have dreams where I find them, they welcome my presence, and we become online BFFs.


My husband thinks it's not weird that I had a fandom interest that defined my adolescence, but the damaging part was that I thought I could be one of them.  The biggest Star Trek fan never harbored delusions that they would one day be friends with Gene Roddenberry, but through the magic of the Internet and semi-public spaces I had a sense of intimacy with these people who had no idea I existed.  To some extent the Internet is mostly lurkers and I am certainly not the only kid who lurked on their forum.


I think people call this a Parasocial relationship, and it is one of the dangers of the Internet that was never explained to me as a kid.  I knew not to share my real name or address.  I knew not to talk with strangers.  I didn't know not to lurk and pine for a friendship I would never form.


I think I came out of it mostly unscathed except for the occasional twinge of sadness or embarrassment.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 19, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


Also isn't this problem solved if people just... Not cede territory to the crazy. How is the evaporative cooling so strong here?




Seattle adjusted for Covid hard.  So for two months, it was immoral to walk around outside.  And then for two years it became immoral to walk around outside without a mask.  And going for a walk with a mask gets uncomfortable.  So by the time people felt like they could go outside again, the streets were already, percentage-wise, more homeless than not.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 20, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
You can't escape from the problem of low-effort posting by stroking everyone's ego.  (I don't think most people on this board are actually all that smart, we just have diverse interests and collectively can come up with some interesting conversations.)  This is not the board that is going to enforce Liberal Orthodoxy and provide apologetics for why something on the Internet is Problematic.


If you read something that seems incorrect to you, but you are having trouble putting your finger on it, then explain what exactly (with your own words) you think is most convincing about the article and then give reasons why you think it might be wrong.  (link to the article, do not copy/paste it.)  Maybe it does not correlate with your personal experience.  Maybe if you accept the argument you need to throw out some other component of your mental model of the world.


Or, if you cannot give a reason for it being wrong, defend it.  Steelman it as best you can.  That is the only way to get a strong rebuttal.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of August 21, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I don't think what you are saying contradicts each other.  A la "The Last Psychiatrist," having incorrect beliefs and assumptions about your own skills and relationship with the world is what craters self esteem.  Fewer kids testing themselves on dangerous playground equipment created a rise in anxiety disorders and people who cannot perform risk management.




No one knows what Liriope and Cephisus did, but whatever they did, it worked: he didn't even recognize his own reflection.  That's a man who doesn't know himself. That's a man who never had to look at himself from the outside.






How do you make a child know himself?  You surround him with mirrors. "This is what everyone else sees when you do what you do.  This is who everyone thinks you are."






You cause him to be tested: this is the kind of person you are, you are good at this but not that. This other person is better than you at this, but not better than you at that.  These are the limits by which you are defined.   Narcissus was never allowed to meet real danger, glory, struggle, honor, success, failure; only artificial versions manipulated by his parents.   He was never allowed to ask, "am I a coward?  Am I a fool?"  To ensure his boring longevity his parents wouldn't have wanted a definite answer in either direction.




I would expect such a person to have very low self esteem once they are grown.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 10, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Regarding the second example, it's been widely accepted that actors are an exception to any kind of visual discrimination and that many roles require picking someone who just has the right vibe and look (which includes their race and gender.)  When casting a family/clan/isolated society, people usually pick actors who look the most alike.


Imagine that there is a long running series that needs to record a flashback for their main black female lead.  If we used the usual standards for hiring, where race and sex don't matter, the series might cast a Asian male.  Casting black hobbits in a predominantly white insulated society is as jarring to me as that.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of December 4, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
The SEC has proposed a new type of company, a Natural Asset Company (NAC.)  As the main proponents, Intrinsic Exchange Group, state:




By taking a NAC public through an IPO, the market transaction will succeed in converting the long-understood – but to-date unpriced – value of nature into financial capital. This monetization event will generate the funding needed to manage, restore, and grow healthy ecosystems around the world and bring us closer to achieving a truly sustainable, circular economy.




While there are also criterion for farmland and mixed use lands to qualify, it sounds like they expect the public to buy shares of land to pay the owners to not develop it in certain ways.  I'm not sure how popular this idea will become.  Carbon credits are a thing so there might be some buy-in from the public.


Margaret Byfield at Real Clear Markets takes a dimmer view of NACs:




The best comparison would be using the air we breathe as a cryptocurrency of sorts. And, these natural assets that collectively belong to all of us would now belong to corporations run by what many would call environmental special interests.




Based on just this first sentence, I'm not sure she knows what a cryptocurrency is.  Maybe she means it will be subject to a speculative bubble.  However, the consequence that most concerns her is that other countries could own stakes in our Natural Parks:




Another feature of these new companies is that the land belonging to sovereign nations and private landowners alike can be subject to the control of NACs. Sovereign nations, such as the United States Government, can provide their lands to private investors, including those outside the United States. China, for example, may be able to invest in an NAC and effectively be a stakeholder in our national parks. Russia could assume control of lands currently leased to produce oil and place them off limits for future natural resource development.




Both supporters and critics seem to think that an NAC will be big deal.  The IEG believes that, "The financing gap for biodiversity is estimated between US$598-824 billion per year, for climate change about US$5 trillion dollars per year, and for the transition to a more sustainable, resilient, and equitable economy, orders of magnitude larger."


But I have a hard time conceptualizing how a NAC will tap into all that wealth and power.  What is the expected impact for the average Joe and for international politics? Will I no longer be able to "breathe the free air," as real life starts to resemble the Lorax movie?  Will foreign countries strategically buy land and prevent Americans from accessing resources?


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Quality Contributions Report for April 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
I am a Catholic and the moment the Pope claims to have the ability to make something the Church has taught was inherently immoral "not a sin" is the moment I stop being Catholic. Because at that point it's all made up. (Please no zingers here about how it's all made up anyway, I am not going to try to prove Catholicism on TheMotte.) The Pope is one of the last absolute monarchs in the world, but he is absolutely beholden to the dogma of his predecessors. He maintains power to the extent he convinces Catholics that he is genuine.


Now, the Pope has the ability to make something not inherently immoral a sin. For example he could say all Catholics must abstain from wearing pink. But it wouldn't become inherently immoral to wear pink. He would be saying, as a matter of obedience to the Church, he's asking us to abstain from the color pink. (To increase our self-discipline or as reparation for our sins or whatever.)


If he commanded someone to do something inherently immoral under this framework they would be obligated to disobey and no sin would be incurred. We are only obligated to obey just laws.


It sounds complicated when I write it out but I hope the underlying principle makes sense. The Pope is subject to the divine law, but can impose an additional ecclesiastical law on adherents.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of January 23, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
Nancy Pelosi not being at home seems to have thrown DePape off, once unbalanced maybe Paul Pelosi was trying a friendly, non-threatening angle with DePape?  "Yes, your desire to break my wife's kneecaps sounds reasonable, what a nice young man you are.  Here, can I pour you a drink?  Let me regale you with a story from when I was a young 40-something like yourself.  You don't need to hurt me, I'm helping you out."  Just running the time until security/police get there.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of October 10, 2022
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					
When a society does not have medically-assisted euthanasia, the implied goals of the society are to improve people's situations so that they don't want to kill themselves.  The goal will not succeed for everyone.  But there's less of a, "Don't like it? Then quit" attitude.


Countries with ubiquitous medically-assisted euthanasia seem to have determined that in a lot of situations people should just quit instead of receive support or help.  For example in Canada people are being euthanized because they are disabled and are not receiving the financial support they need, or they are unable to see loved ones due to Covid precautions.  Patients have recorded hospital staff pushing assisted-suicide against their express wishes.


These people might be making the rational best decision for themselves at the individual level, but society might be failing them overall.  When society gives itself the out of, "They can always just kill themselves," there is less incentive for it to try to improve the lives of people with fixable, temporary problems.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of February 19, 2024
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


I mean law schools do




Maybe I don't want to ideologically concede all future lawyers (who also tend to become future lawmakers and judges).  I think society as a whole suffers from this DEI bottleneck, even if some people for now can get decent jobs as nurses or plumbers from going to a community college.


				

				

						

							

								
							

						


						
					

				
			


			

	


			
			
				

			
		

	






		

			
			
				Culture War Roundup for the week of November 6, 2023
			
		

	

	

	

		
			

			

				

			

		

			


				

					


children raised by two same-sex parents have equal or better life outcomes to straight parents




What evidence have you seen that makes this a matter of "fact" to you?  From my understanding, the studies that show this are about as high a quality as studies on trans-youth medicine, relying on parental-reports of well-being and slanted samples.


Meanwhile, studies on heterosexual couples show that mothers and fathers parent differently and children living with unrelated adults suffer from increased stress measured by cortisol levels.




Children living with nonrelatives,  stepfathers  and  half-siblings  (stepfather  has  children  by  the  stepchild’s mother), or single parents without kin support had higher average levels of cortisol than children living with both parents, single mothers with kin support, or grandparents.  A  further  test  of  this  hypothesis  is  provided  by  comparison  of step- and genetic children residing in the same households. Stepchildren had higher average cortisol levels than their half-siblings residing in the same household who were genetic offspring of both parents (Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, page 565.)




Parents and Stepparents even abuse and murder children in different ways:




Stepparents commit filicide at higher rates than do genetic parents. According to M. Daly and M. I. Wilson (1994), motivational differences generate differences in the methods by which stepparents and genetic parents kill a child. Using Canadian and British national-level  databases,  Daly  and  Wilson  (1994)  found  that  stepfathers  were  more  likely  than genetic  fathers  to  commit  filicide  by  beating  and  bludgeoning, arguably  revealing  step-parental  feelings  of  bitterness  and  resentment  not  present  to  the  same  degree  in  genetic fathers. Genetic fathers, in contrast, were more likely than stepfathers to commit filicide by shooting or asphyxiation, methods which often produce a relatively quick and painless death.  We  sought  to  replicate  and  extend  these  findings  using  a  United  States  national-level  database  of  over  400,000  homicides.  Results  replicate  those  of  Daly  and  Wilson(1994) for genetic fathers and stepfathers. In addition, we identified similar differences in the  methods  by  which  stepmothers  and  genetic  mothers  committed  filicide.




Given this, my prior would be that a kid raised in a Same Sex household, where they are by default unrelated to at least one parent, would have poorer outcomes than kids raised by straight parents (where a larger percentage are raised by two related parents.)  What have you seen that makes you confident otherwise?