site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 1, 2025

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Does anyone know how to get confirmation / denial from the police or prosecutors as a random nobody from another country? We might be getting a update on the Braveheart incident.

Highly sophisticated Twitter anons are now claiming that Fatos Ali Dumana has been charged with assaulting a minor:

  • Police Scotland originally claimed that CCTV footage went missing but it proved that only Lola Moir had committed a crime by being in possession of dangerous weapons
  • It is now claimed that this is a lie and there is proof that Police Scotland attempted to cover up the crime of Fatos and his sister assaulting the little girls
  • Attached is the screenshot of the hospital record proving that Ruby Moir sustained a serious head injury (concussion) as a result of the assault by Fatos Ali Dumana and his sister

Now, this isn't new information per se, as @FistfullOfCrows pointed out "it has been alleged". I can't find the link to where I first saw the allegation, but I've seen it, and remained skeptical thinking "shouldn't there be a medical report"? Lo, and behold, there seems to be one attached to the above tweet.

Ok, it's still trivial to fake something like this, it would be nice to get some sort of confirmation from a disinterested source.... oh, look (Turn off javascript to read. I tried archiving it, but they seem to have countermeasures) a local newspaper is saying that """Two further people""", """a man and a woman""", have been charged as a result of the incident. No names are named (funny how you can dox a little girl, but somehow adults are a step to far), so who knows, maybe it's the girl's parents that are being charged, but with all the other irregularities around the incident, and the newspaper's cageyness around the names of the suspects I wouldn't bet on it.

So... does anyone know how to go about confirming / denying this? @self_made_human, you're in Scotland, would you be willing to make some phone calls?

EDIT:

I look at a lot of medical records for work, and what was posted is the evidentiary equivalent of damning with faint praise; unless there's more that isn't shown here, it's evidence that there was no injury. First, the entire time from sign-in to discharge was about 90 minutes, which has to be some kind of record. In the US the average wait time is 2 1/2 hours, and that includes people who are seen immediately. Maybe the NHS is better about this than the hospitals where I live, but given their reputation and the fact that this was 8 pm on a Saturday... it seems a bit of a stretch. And there's no indication that this girl was treated or even examined. Just a note of head injury and that she was discharged home without followup. Again, I don't know, maybe the NHS just doesn't bother to document anything, but in the US I'd expect a brief narrative of how the injury happened plus physical exam findings plus a diagnosis and any instructions they were given at discharge. Here, even the stuff that looks like it should be filled in is left blank.

My own take, made with the full admission that I have no special knowledge of the situation and am not a doctor and with the caveat that the records I look that are the ones the hospital has and not necessarily the ones the patient would automatically be given upon discharge,is that they went to the ER and complained of a head injury to the triage nurse, got tired of waiting, and left. Maybe @self_made_human can shed some light on what standard practices are considering that he might be a doctor at the same hospital and would at least be familiar with Scottish medical records, but assuming they're substantially similar to American records, I'm not seeing much here.

Maybe @self_made_human can shed some light on what standard practices are considering that he might be a doctor at the same hospital and would at least be familiar with Scottish medical records, but assuming they're substantially similar to American records, I'm not seeing much here.

Does a bear shit in the woods? Nah, they're shitting at the same gay pub I am, at the time of writing this missive.

Anyway. The NHS:

There are places where wait times can exceed 12 hours. Up in Scotland, 4-8 is my best bet for anything we don't think is going to immediately kill you.

It really depends on the particulars. We do a lot of documentation in the NHS, my life is 90% documentation, 10% checking up on whether they're going to die before my boss talks to them. It is not impossible for someone to be swiftly dismissed if they appear grossly unharmed, but this was likely at Ninewells, the main hospital in Dundee. It has a certain reputation, I remember someone telling me that there was a period where it was without electricity for the better part of a week, let alone the abysmal wait times. But if they can triage someone as insignificant, they will. Looks great when it comes to KPIs.

Documentation would take maybe 30 minutes at worst, if it was a few scratches and the patient was young, healthy and more eager to get back home. The main delay would be egregiously long waiting times, then a quick physical and history taking. Even if the documentation was profuse, it might not be counted, as we often spend hours finish up even if the patient has, for all purposes, been discharged and told they're free to go home.

So what's diagnosis, doctor? "Long wait times" makes it sound like could be fake, "documentation would take 30 minutes max, and might not even be counted" sounds like it could be plausible. What does it add up to?

It adds up to a whopping "I don't know" and a "I'm touched you guys think I'm the right person to ask". I'm probably better than anyone else on this site, but that really doesn't mean all that much.

The NHS, and its ERs/A&Es are a fucking mess. But if they can tell that your issues don't warrant admission, or anything more than a Tylenol and a kiss on the forehead, they might let you out early, depending on how cute you look. People come to the A&E with frivolous complaints all the time, they also come here when they're dying. It's a toss up, and I'm out for a piss-up so take my words with a grain of salt.