@professorgerm's banner p

professorgerm

clutching my imitation pearls

2 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 12 12:41:49 UTC

				

User ID: 1157

professorgerm

clutching my imitation pearls

2 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 12 12:41:49 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1157

I'm not really sure it is.

Ehh... it's hard to avoid that conclusion, I think, given the options and statistics in other countries. Having a kid with Downs, and especially making it "a thing" on social media, is a statement.

Like, yeah, pro-choice people aren't going to Hitler-rant about final solutions or anything, but they might offer termination 15 times or make some... less than carefully worded comments about just how late you can abort a kid with deformities.

Or at least I think the pro-choice advocacy position here is that they too wish they could push a button to make them all better.

I'm not entirely sure they do, given certain progressive opinions regarding disability (the Deaf community and people being opposed to cures for autism come to mind), but that's a weird side effect of big-tent progressivism.

Alternatively, they do have a button they can push, but that's an Anakin/Padme meme.

This seems to be a pretty good review paper on the topic, and the average is somewhere upwards of 2/3 of prenatal Down's diagnoses end in abortion, but the range varies by location and time.

One interesting tidbit is that the rate was going down pre-Dobbs:

This hospital-based study from the University of South Carolina found that termination rates decreased from 78.6% (22 of 28) in 1972–1996 to 33.3% (3 of 9) in 1997–2000. Many of the remaining studies had overlapping study periods and clinical and geographic heterogeneity that precluded evaluation of temporal trends. However, the three population-based California studies, which presented data on mutually exclusive populations from different time periods, demonstrated a statistically significant decrease in termination rates over time, from 88.3% (1989–1991) to 72.2% (1995–2000) to 61.4% (2005–2007) (χ2 test for trend = 37.196, df = 2, p < 0.0001).

I'm curious about the causality there and any complicating factors to the analysis.

Iceland's rate is famously close to 100%, and The Beeb suggests the British rate is around 90%.

The study is at best extremely poorly designed, but generated a convenient image that feels true regarding the actual nature of liberal emotivism rather than what liberals claim about their cares.

where the participants were simply asked to click on the rung that includes everything they care about.

Not just rung! Despite being, in theory, cohesive layers, people only clicked near the numbers.

Why is there no circle numbered 0 and labeled "myself only"?

The people that designed the study were idiots.

the Post's reporting is that the order was to kill everybody

The Post's reporting is that an unnamed source claims the order was to kill everybody. If we're going to nitpick, do it right.

On one hand, Hegseth was picked because he looks like a made for TV movie secdef, not for competence. On the other I trust the average journalist less far than I could throw them. I find it believable that he said something that stupid but I'm not going out of my way to trust unnamed sources in a biased context, either.

Not really, and IMO the old-guard movement is a shell of itself. I certainly wouldn't count any of Scott's other commentariat-zones as 'rationalist,' either.

stated reason is that the state failed to prove that defendant actually drove the vehicle.

It's kind of amazing police don't go postal on judges more often.

I was able to get at the judge’s order by following these instructions.

Irritating. When they said the attorney reviewed it for them I assumed it wasn't a (complicated but possible to obtain) public document.

Except a 55 page order that outlines the facts of the case in excruciating detail, accompanied by the relevant analysis.

Local news sites tend to be better about actually linking useful stuff but it's such a pain in the bahonkus to get to the actual case, maybe that's why they chose laziness instead.

The brother was managing the business and hired a consultant who produced documents that were submitted to Medicaid showing inflated hours for legitimate clients as well as hours billed to fictitious clients.

Having a sibling or two is a great way to avoid court, if you're a little bit clever.

I'm familiar with a case of identical triplets that, when one was called to court, a different one would go, be all "no that was my brother you've got the wrong guy," then the case would be dismissed/delayed/etc. IIRC they got to the point of doing fingerprint verifications as they entered the court to ensure they actually had the correct brother.

Yes, his texts would have gotten him banned on the Motte.

I should probably be glad we have higher standards than the Virginia electorate, but mostly it makes me disappointed in humanity.

Well, you can say you hate him

A nice consolation prize.

no, you can't openly wish death on him

Cheering after the fact should tragedy occur to such an innocent and praiseworthy individual, a la Kirk and approximately every internet forum to the left of The Motte?

On the "judges get to do what they want, actual justice gets to suck it" front and related to the thread you dislike below, a Hennepin County judge overturned a jury's verdict in one of the Somali fraud cases. The judge doesn't seem to have released any information beyond the overturn and acquittal, here's news agency commentary:

Defense attorney Joe Tamburino, who is not affiliated with the case, reviewed the decision and analyzed it for KARE 11 News. He says Judge West ruled that the state's case "relied heavily on circumstantial evidence," and that she believed the state didn't rule out other "reasonable inferences."

To my non-lawyery ear this sounds a lot like "vibes" and the jury should've known better nudge nudge wink wink.

crocodile tears

I was aware this term existed but I've seen it several times the last couple days. Frequency illusion or did a software update go out about how to discuss these things?

at least unless you're willing to have an equal amount of concern when rich white people do it.

Okay, I'll bite that bullet and say all fraud is bad, and everyone involved should have the book thrown at them.

deal with this flavor of criticism

Would that flavor be "doesn't trust the NY Post" (fair, ish) or "thinks all immigrants are fully above reproach" (the Tim Walz special)?

The surprising thing, looking into it, is that this seems to have been a bit of an open secret?

This article doesn't bring it up specifically, but it's been speculated the incredible increase in autism centers, and support costs is also related to Somali-organized fraud.

Isn't the point of disparate impact that it's an end-run around needing evidence of explicit discrimination?

"we'll charge him more because he's white" is explicit discrimination.

"We'll charge him more because he has good insurance, which is statistically correlated with whiteness" is disparate impact.

Everyone here (minus the lizardman constant) thinks vaccines work.

I find OP somewhat frustrating for those motte/bailey/tea leaf reasons, but the CDC had to change their definition of vaccine because the COVID vaccine turned out so mediocre.

I think this was more due to the arrogance of the average public health agent combined with a heaping serving of sunk cost fallacy than some planned maliciousness, but it wasn't exactly encouraging as a development.

In the real world, the mental health services do not work like that

Trans issues are a strange exception to all sorts of the usual bureaucracy/hangups/etc. One visit, 45 minutes-hour max, possibly even a virtual consult to get HRT through planned parenthood. Then there's the whole sports debacle, bathrooms, pronouns have kind of faded but they were fireable offense for many years, 'cotton ceiling' discourse... et cetera.

Most mental health services do not work like that. Western societies made an exception for one subset and nobody seems to know why.

edit

redhead

good taste

Mostly leaving aside the race factor, two possibilities:

A) she has high chipmunky cheeks, and I suspect that's an unfortunately polarizing feature that she can't do much about. Some people find it cute, some find it off-putting, maybe fewer opinions in the middle.

B) she seems to have decided against adapting her makeup to the podium lighting, and it gives her an almost plastic look. Every picture on Google Photos she's just so shiny. I wouldn't say hideous but a somewhat 'uncanny' feeling.

I agree her smile does her many favors, and in the photos where she doesn't have that shiny-plastic look, yeah, above the political average and the prettiest of the last several press secretaries. Surprises me a bit to skip over the redhead.

I may be a little overly defensive of that quiet little place, but I hardly associate it with Trace even if he started it. He and his cofounder more or less abandoned The Schism for an extended period after the launch, so I wouldn't necessarily call it one of his hangouts even though he did recruit occasionally. He spent much more time on Twitter and Substack, though now he's put both on hiatus.

He did get quite embittered about this place, and those exchanges were... disappointing.

So it goes.

starting an anti-motte subreddit back before this forum self exiled fully

He got mad about certain rude and catastrophic language being used and not pushed back against enough, particularly during/around the Kenosha self-defense event as the breaking point IIRC. It wasn't exactly anti-Motte as it was... more pointedly opinionated than the Motte, but early on it did attract people wanting to complain about the Motte, for a little while.

that subreddit had really some great posts interspersed with really intense egotripping personal drama that sometimes bled out to this refuge here

TheSchism still exists! Sort of. Quietly. And it was composed mostly of (ex-?) Mottezans so yes it did bleed back over on occassion.

I mentally flag rationalwiki drama as adjacent

Our dear T-dubs wrote a long piece about David Gerard, who was a prominent editor of regular Wikipedia and sysadmin of Rationalwiki.

Possibly some other rationalwiki and drama connections along the way?

for.... most things that aren't heavily politicized

Or not in English which may have a much higher rate of outright encyclopedia-formatted fiction.

Gotcha. Figured they wouldn't see my responses but didn't want to test in case it was broken. Thanks!

The description on the Blocked User page of the profile says "They cannot notify you or send you messages and their comments are hidden."

I noticed earlier a comment with a little red pawn next to it, and the hover text said "This user is blocking you." I could see the comment, it wasn't hidden, and I didn't do anything to uncollapse it or what have you. I can view the user's profile and indeed I've upvoted several of their comments, but I don't recall having other interactions.

So... Does blocking actually do anything here?

2011 White House Correspondents' Dinner

One of my favorite things about Trump is his ongoing refusal to go to the dinner. It's delightfully petty, but I also think it's good policy, that being so buddy-buddy with the press (like Obama was) actually is a bad thing for the office.

And French never even justifies his theory that the justice system we have today is peak justice

Like many people, French is stuck in the perception of his childhood and still runs high on the liberal's nostalgia for the Civil Rights movement. One could say he groans for a nation that never existed.

And, in a very human error, he overindexes on his personal experience of being insulted for adopting an African kid and ignores the broader context of crime disparities.

French makes Ahmari look like an absolute clown.

French is a good debater that despises conservatives that disagree with him and the South, and has absolutely no vision of how to deal with opposing ideologies that don't support viewpoint-neutrality.

I don't think the French strategy can lead to an overall 'victory'

The French strategy is at best a slow defeat but without even Tolkien's literary merit, which is why the post-Christian right hates him so much. It doesn't just not lead to an overall victory, the French strategy spends a decade in court just for Roberts to write into an opinion how Harvard can keep doing racial discrimination the 'right' way.

On balance, I like that David is principled. Given the choice of a dinner party guest, I'd choose him over much of the "dissident right," though to be fair I'd rather dine with a rabid badger than someone like Hanania. But I also think French is a much bigger asshole than most of his fans are willing to admit.