Conversation
Notices
-
@nerthos
Yeah... it seems that these people are blind to what they are becoming too. They are becoming the dictators. I don't know if 50 years is enough time... but I hope we can avert this. I don't want to live in a time where human culture is stifled like this... I want to be in a time where it is enriched.-
@sim The bosses know what they're becoming and they're doing it deliberately. The underlings buy into it. That doesn't make them any less guilty though.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 07:56:44 UTC from web-
@nerthos
Yeah... seems like it. But yes, if they are actively censoring, and there is nothing forcing their hand... I would consider the underlings guilty as well.
-
-
They know exactly what they are becoming, what they're doing. And no one inside that bubble cares, Marxism 2.0, like 1.0 before it, is totalitarian, and as Chris Hitchens realized in a dull horror, "the personal is political" suffocates the person. @sim @nerthos
-
@somercet @nerthos
Yeah... I think they even justify it. They think they are in the right here, how else could they continue on if they didn't? The personal is political does suffocate the individual...
If I have a dream for culture and the arts, it is that it is free to explore the big and small questions in life, to get us really thinking about whatever topic it is based on. To leave us awed by its beauty. The more that I learn about the past, with the golden eras of our past advancement... the more that I'd like to keep that alive, to see more people in revelry of it. There is much that is fascinating. If people are that bothered about their own representation... then they need to get out there, and add that story to the collection. No one else can represent them like they can.-
@sim TBH I'd prefer if they went the mastodon way and isolated themselves then proceeded to abuse eachother to oblivion.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 08:29:31 UTC from web-
@nerthos
Either way... the censorship has got to go. People should be free to be creative and inventive.-
@sim @nerthos
I'm kind of on the fence about this. We should be free to discuss anything, but that doesn't mean we have to accept every thing. Moreover, there are certain ideas that can be very idea if they proliferate. Take for example vaccination denialism - which is leading to the first outbreaks of genuine _plagues_ in the USA in a century, such as measles outbreaks.-
@maiyannah @sim Well, with this I agree. One of the reasons I want these groups to go away and abuse themselves to death is because they set a bad precendent that makes reasonable censorship impossible and poorly seen. Works that portray legitimately dangerous stuff to society positively SHOULD be handled with pliers, stuff like what you mentioned of vaccination denialism, pedophilia, adultery, the things that if peope start seeing positively would set our standard of life a few centuries back. That kind of work I believe should be flagged as such and only be allowed to mature and reasonable people that won't buy into it, much like you don't let first year students in a lab access potent acids and fuels.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 08:41:13 UTC from web-
-
@sim I put it on the list because it's a lead cause of family problems, and by extension marital and child abuse. Properly scorning it would severely reduce suicide, fights, and neglected children.
Not to mention how horrible it is morally.Thursday, 23-Feb-17 08:48:31 UTC from web-
@nerthos
Yeah, I can understand that. It's usually scorned in society too. I just can't depict the past realistically if I didn't have some depiction of it though. It can't be fully explored and understood, if people aren't free to explore these elements.-
@sim I don't have anything about talking about those things, just against encouraging them.
It's one thing to say "Hitler ordered his officers to euthanize the disabled" which is a factual, historical statement and informs the reader of this without influencing their opinion. It's another to say "Hitler rightfully brought up the severe tax that the disabled were on the state's resources to his officers, and for the sake of the country asked his officers to put them to death, thus increasing the quality of life of the general population" which makes an idiotic reader that would have otherwise said "that's bad" to think "huh maybe we should kill the disabled after all"Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:08:21 UTC from web-
@nerthos
Would you say that things are different in fiction? I think the rules are slightly different compared to giving factual statements about an event. Then again, this can fall under free speech... and it is something to reject or challenge rather than censor. If we started to censor things down to the lowest common denominator... I don't know what that would look like, and I'm not sure I want to go there.-
@sim I was just giving an example. It's pretty easy to tell when a work of fiction is trying to sell an ideology and when it's just putting it there as part of the story by making characters believe in that ideology.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:27:07 UTC from web-
@nerthos
Yeah... there are a few variables to it. Mind you, there is a cautionary tale that I think you are right to be concerned about... there are often abusive portrayals in relationships, and this gets encouraged as the ideal romance or love story. I think in part because people already hold those ideas as okay.-
@sim Relationships are one of the few topics that are genuinely complicated because outside the obvious, what is ok in them and what isn't come down to the personalities and morals of each partner, and what is disappointing or abusive to one might be relaxing and nice to someone else. It just comes down to picking someone with a matching personality and actual commitment.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:46:59 UTC from web-
@nerthos
I agree. I think they should be allowed in fiction... I would just caution against some of those portrayals with my opinion on it rather than censoring it.-
@sim Well that's what the +18 tags are for haha
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:55:54 UTC from web-
-
@sim Those should just be required to be mild.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 10:14:42 UTC from web-
@nerthos
Yeah. Mind you, it can still be mild and portray an unhealthy relationship which is propped up as a role model. Just take a look at the people who prop up Romeo and Juliet..-
@sim Haha, yeah. Then again that's in a big part the fault of schools that make such works mandatory reads. Schools tend to be terrible at picking books for the students to read. For example here in highschool students are expected to read a book called El Matadero to cover for local historical literature set in the 1800s, and this book is about political thugs overpowering a man and shoving a corn up his rear (long story short a political party here at the time had thugs that used that as a form of torture). Instead I'd suggest Milla Loncó which is about a kid in his early teens that moves to the frontier lands in ~1870 (at the time disputed between natives and the army) and recounts how life was there, both in the forts and among the natives. It's a much better read, meant for a more general public, and still covers the late 1800s period in the country.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 10:26:24 UTC from web-
@nerthos
Romeo and Juliet was a great romance, wasn't it? They hardly knew each other, and then went on to commit suicide because they couldn't be together. Yeah... it is faulty for what is chosen. On saying that, I do think Holes was a good read. Of Mice and Men was interesting too. It wasn't all bad here.-
@sim It's hit and miss really, but it should be reviewed to pick relevant texts that are enjoyable to read, so that students will pick a reading habit, rather than make them read unappealing or bad works that'll discourage them.
As for Romeo and Juliet, they're probably the most well known scene kids in literature.Thursday, 23-Feb-17 10:39:38 UTC from web-
@nerthos
Yeah. Although that can be hard to guess, and people are so different. I think that was encouraged when we were allowed a visit to the library... had personal reading time. Reading won't be for everyone, on saying that. It's funny, I don't think I ever read Romeo and Juliet... just saw a film on it. Probably because we had other Shakespeare works to read...-
@sim My favourite Shakespeare work is Henry V I think? can't remember the number.
But yes, personal reading time is a good option. It also works to offer a range of books to write an essay on when required.Thursday, 23-Feb-17 10:54:15 UTC from web-
@nerthos
I haven't read or seen that one. Sounds like I'm missing out. He has also covered Henry IV, John and Richard III. I do remember Much Ado About Nothing... which I did like.-
@sim This one is a decent adaptation if you want to get the gist of it without committing to the play http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0097499/
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 11:03:54 UTC from web-
-
@sim It's old enough that you can likely find it online without issues
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 11:09:52 UTC from web
-
-
The best Falstaff I've seen was the character Bob Pigeon in "My Own Private Idaho." @nerthos @sim
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0102494/
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@nerthos Well, context is also important too. If they're depicting, say, paedophilia or adultery as the BAD THINGS done by the antagonist of the story - they guy or guy as, you know, the BAD GUY in the story you're supposed to dislike, that would be fine - indeed it would be highly effective in that purpose because those acts are so rephrehensible.
But in a general context, the discussion of the acceptability of these things isn't something I trust, say, Salon, or Rowling, or the many talking heads out there, to do in a reasonable fashion. In the context of say, medical doctors debating the merits of a particular vaccine, for instance, that is more than acceptable to me, because they are experts with an informed opinion and an ethical obligation not to be dishonest about their representations.-
@nerthos Many of the evils the progressives inflict upon much of the first world presently come from people who aren't experts in anything but deliberately manipulating people towards a certain end that benefits no one but their masters - it's often harmful to _themselves_, but they think they will somehow be excluded or saved.
-
@maiyannah That was sort of my point. I said positive portrayals of those things, as in endorsing them and encouraging the reader to see such things in a nicer light. As for the latter part of your posts, it's why I said "allowed to mature and reasonable people", which includes experts in the area and anyone who's mature and learned enough to discern and not buy into it.
I wouldn't censor say, psychology magazines talking about the reasons behind pedophilia, just like I wouldn't censor gun magazines talking about reloading bullets just because an uninformed idiot could hurt himself doing it poorly.Thursday, 23-Feb-17 08:53:55 UTC from web-
@nerthos I suppose I am expanding the point for the nuance I see in it, because people otherwise see a blanket statement made and thing that means it's universally bad, and I think we agree there are reasonable exceptions even in the case where we think censorship is justified.
-
@maiyannah Oh, alright. Yeah, can't argue that at all.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:03:18 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
@maiyannah @nerthos
I think I was thinking more about fictional works. I don't think we have to accept all ideas, but we should let people create a space to explore the ideas they want to. As long as it doesn't violate other people. People will probably gossip regardless of whether there is art depicting vaccination denialism. Moreover, if you do censor... you'll create curiosity and people will wonder where the denialism has truth to it if it is being censored. You don't prove a man to be a liar by cutting his tongue out, people will wonder what you have to hide instead.-
@sim @nerthos Your rights end where my rights begin. I have a right to health and heartiness that you infringe when you do not accept vaccinations and advocate others not to do so.
-
@maiyannah @nerthos
Isn't the point of taking vaccines that you are immune to whatever it protects you against? How does someone else not taking it put you at risk if you're protected against it? I don't think I would want to touch every vaccine either, it needs to be proven to work... and I don't think I have a right to it since that involves someone else labouring to provide it. Seems that mostly vulnerable people or children are given them too.-
@sim @nerthos
I would need way more than 1000 characters to explain the medical science of vaccination and herd immunity, but let me try. The idiom "a chain is only as strong as the weakest link" is a mostly apt comparison here. Vaccination doesn't make you complete immune to anything. Nothing but actually contracting the plague or disease and surviving it can. Vaccination is a percentage resistance, effectively. The more people who have that resistance, the lesser chances of an outbreak, the lesser chances of an outbreak, the less chance you have to roll the proverbial dice about whether you will contract the disease or not if exposed to it. This is, for instance, why previously-immunised people are contracting measles in areas of the states where vaccines are cheaply or freely available but anti-vaccination sentiment is strong. Most vaccinations are considered essential medicines by most international health bodies - WHO, DWB, US DOH/CDC etc.-
@maiyannah @nerthos
Ah, so because it is more of an imitation, it doesn't have the same impact as contracting the actual disease and surviving? I think there are also mutations to consider... you can be immune to certain strains, but not to other ones. Pass it around enough, and it adapts. This happens a lot with colds/flus. I haven't seen anything offered there for me... it is usually offered to people that are vulnerable to the cold/flu. I remember having one vaccine for something that I forget what as a kid... and fearing the needle.-
@sim @nerthos The problem with colds and the flu, are that they aren't a single disease. They're actually 1000s of seperate diseases which all share very similar sympthoms so we group them together. The flu vaccine here for instance, is actually a vaccination for the 10 most common strains of the influenza here, but there's literally hundreds other, less common ones.
And many of them have very different vectors of actual infection, and ways they infect the body, just to complicate things - it's just the end result, the sympthoms we display, are the same.-
-
@sim @maiyannah Whenever there's an outbreak of an uncommon strain, labs just produce a vaccine for that specific disease and ship it, so it's mostly a matter of trying to quarantine the infection until that moment.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:28:59 UTC from web-
@nerthos @sim The problem here in Canada is because outside of the major cities our population is so distributed, its difficult to distribute a new vaccine everywheres.
This is also why we generally don't get outbreaks outside of major cities, though, because it's also harder for the diseases to be transmitted for the same reason.
-
-
-
-
@sim Well, flu shots are often not mandatory, but are offered for free to risk groups like children and the elderly. You can still however go to a pharmacy and buy a shot, which they'll often administer right there with a nurse, if you're worried about it.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:15:49 UTC from web
-
-
-
@sim A vaccine works by building a resistance to a strain of disease by exposing the body to a severely weakened sample of that disease. Like learning to defend yourself from knives while wearing padding and with a rubber knife. Your body recognizes the threat and creates defenses without being in real risk. This severely strenghtens immune response to the disease, but it doesn't always make you completely immune, that only happens with certain diseases that you can't contract twice. With others your immune system can be still overwhelmed. It's often given to vulnerable people and children because they're the ones most likely to be unable to fend the disease proper just with their base immune system.
If people don't take the vaccines, then the exposition to disease you have to deal with is much, much higher. Like how a lead suit will protect you from a few rads but you'll still die if you sit on a plutonium brick.Thursday, 23-Feb-17 08:59:19 UTC from web-
@nerthos
If someone takes a vaccine with a weak version of the disease... is it possible to spread that to others around them? Like if it is a cold/flu?-
@sim @nerthos How a vaccination is made, is they take a certain amount of the disease, bred in a laboratory, and then kill it, place it in a suspension to carry it in a needle, and inject it into your bloodstream, which exposes your body to it so it builds up a resistance, while having a very low risk for actual side effects.
-
@maiyannah @nerthos
Ah, perhaps it was a different cold that we caught. Not long ago, someone here had a vaccine taken, and then caught a cold and it passed to us all. So I wondered if it was possible for a vaccine cold to be passed on, or whether it was just a different thing.-
@sim @nerthos Well also keep in mind, as I said, they can still "carry" the disease, and just not be affected by it themselves. So if they were vaccinated and you were not, they might have the cold and not be affected by it, and pass it on to you, who is affected by it, because you aren't vaccinated.
In your case however, it's likely they were vaccinated for one "cold" and then promptly caught another "cold". -
@sim The person probably had the vaccine, which caused their immune system to focus on that, and caught another strain during that time when their immune system was busy with it. It's why generally vaccines aren't applied to people who are already sick.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:36:12 UTC from web-
@nerthos
Yeah... it is also the problem with socialising in other circles, or going out in public. You're more likely to be subjected to various different colds that are passing around. If your body is already busy, that means extra work.-
@sim That's why kids are so much more likely to catch diseases than adults in general, schools bunch together kids of a lot of areas and they pass disease.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:50:02 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
@maiyannah @nerthos @sim the immune system works by recognizing the exterior shape of the pathogen, so if you can disable the DNA/RNA but keep the shape of a virus then you have a vaccine.
-
@sim No, generally the vaccine version of the disease is weakened to a point that it can't normally spread, and at times it's even a dead sample of the disease, thus not being able to create new bacteria.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:21:25 UTC from web -
Polio vaccine is weakened, live poliomyelitis, given orally. This created immunity in the intestine, which is how you get polio. And yes, it can give you polio, but this is very rare. Yes, it would be transmissible while active, but only 1% of children actually are crippled by polio.
Polio is acquired from untreated human waste. At one time, probably everyone had polio, but the younger you got it, the less noticeable it was. The polio "epidemics" in the 1950s were probably *caused by* soap, hand washing and indoor plumbing. @sim @nerthos
-
-
-
@sim Furthermore, even if you WERE immune to the disease, if the rest haven't gotten the vaccine they'll fall ill, they'll have to skip work so day to day life would be affected, and they'll also collapse the healthcare system, so if you get sick with something else there won't be available doctors nor resources to treat you.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:00:37 UTC from web-
@nerthos @sim Yes, even if you are immune, you can still carry the disease, you just won't be negatively impacted by it - but the people around you can be. Now, if everyone is vaccinated, that's a moot point. But if they aren't ... well.
Moreover, some people CANNOT be vaccinated. Someone with an autoimmune disorder like me is unable to receive many vaccinations. So if the people around me aren't vaccinated, I can basically become a carrier for all manner of plague and disease that can negatively affect those around me - even if because my immune system is overactive, I never display negative effects personally.-
@maiyannah Actual Nurglite Maiya
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:12:14 UTC from web-
@nerthos I'm very polar with disease because of my immune condition. Either I tank something that's ridiculously lethal or I get laid up for weeks over something that most people easily shrug off.
I legitimately had measles as a teenager (its why the outbreak in the US sticks in my mind) and I was sick for two days in the hospital and that was it.
Most people who get sick with the measles are laid up for months and possibly die.
-
-
-
-
-
-
@sim @maiyannah Hence why I used the lab metaphor. If someone asks "what's this vial for" and you slap them and tell them they shouldn't look at it, someone's bound to grab it when you're not looking and end up in the hospital. If you instead tell them "it's a powerful acid that releases toxic fumes, you'll see it in class in third year" they'll leave it there and will discourage others from messing with it, knowing they could get hurt too.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 08:45:34 UTC from web-
@nerthos @maiyannah
Yeah, I think that is a good metaphor. Better to explain why it is wrong to touch it... or why you need to be more careful.-
@sim @nerthos I would link this to my own point about vaccination by saying we would be much more effective in defeating anti-vaccination sentiment by explaining what they are, how they work, what the risks actually are (because they do exist), and how to mitigate those risks, and what the actual chances of those risk factors are (because they are very slim) then merely doing what many "sceptics" do and laughing at these people and calling them stupid. This only makes these individuals more likely to stick to their position. If it was only their own health at risk I wouldn't care and would encourage them to make their own choices, but when the choice they make also affect others in meaningful ways with long-term consequences, they are no longer the only person who should have a say about it.
-
>What the risks actually are
HA! They refuse to admit the flu shot gives you the flu! By definition, your body learning to fight the disease means you have the symptoms of the disease. We're too busy protecting TG bathrooms, not for *transsexuals*, but for straight men who suddenly feel like a skirt that day! Please dream on, with your fantasy that we'll ever find the time to fight the anti-vaxxers! @maiyannah @nerthos @sim -
@maiyannah @nerthos
Yeah, it is much more effective to explain these things... and provide evidence if people ask about it. The education aspect of vaccines is probably the main problem that needs to be overcome. If people understood them before they heard anti-vaccine sentiments, then it would be less effective.-
-
@maiyannah @sim Everywhere really. Education fell really badly and in most places now only covers the very, very basic.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:16:40 UTC from web-
@nerthos @sim Censorship becomes less of a necessity when the population is more educated and reasonable, so the ideal solution here is to greatly improve the education standards.
In practice, since that takes a considerable amount of time even if everyone is willing - which many people aren't in the UK and the US because an ignorant population is easier to control - we end up having to rely upon imperfect solutions.
-
-
@maiyannah @nerthos @sim Having relatively recently (past few years) finished high school, yeah. It's garbage. If the stereotype is true, I must have had some of the worst education in the US thanks to being in rural Florida.
Our "Health class" was a once every couple weeks short "test" in PE. We only ever talked about it or had the books the day of the "test", and that was because all you were supposed to do was basically copy the answers in your own words and BINGO. INSTANT A! After that, you went and played dodgeball or whatever the game was for the day. Did I mention that this was only for Freshman year with no other opportunities to take a class for that stuff if you wanted to?-
@camoceltic This is common practice, and not only in the USA. PE class is the best example of this: it should be a comprehensive course on human anatomy and health across the entire duration of basic education, covering human muscles, bones, nutrition, exercise, and how to prevent common strains, and it ends up being years of just playing sports and dodging balls.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:33:47 UTC from web-
@nerthos @camoceltic This was true even in my time but we did actually have class sessions back in my day that were mixed in with the actual game days, FWIW.
-
@maiyannah @camoceltic When I had it (finished highschool in 2010) theory classes were given in rain days when outside sports were not an option, but very few teachers actually focused on teaching anything useful.
I remember one that was particularly good though, but I had him only on the last year. The guy really cared about PE and health and sports and all that, and could do whatever he wanted as he was the most senior professor in the field within the school (school had at least a dozen PE teachers) and was about to retire, so he gave genuinely good classes as no one could tell him "keep it down so you don't make us look bad"Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:41:35 UTC from web
-
-
-
@camoceltic @maiyannah @nerthos
I don't recall having any tests in PE. It was basically just playing whatever sport of the week it was... usually encouraged to warm up beforehand though. There might have been something but I don't recall now. Maybe it's because I didn't take it for GCSE.-
@sim @maiyannah @camoceltic My average PE class was stretching and warm up then the day's game. Grading was based on basic tests like long jump, 100m sprint, 1k marathon, pushups and so on. It was decent in covering basic sports stuff but awful at actual health.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:44:40 UTC from web-
@nerthos @maiyannah @camoceltic
Yeah... that sounds like PE to me. It wasn't about actual health... probably more about getting us exercising.-
@sim It was kind of annoying mostly because I don't like to run, so it didn't cover any sports I found entertaining (cycling, swimming, archery, swordfighting, and so on. Only kinda interesting thing was javelin once) and I wouldn't get the best grades because of it despite being physically fit. I'd deliberately slow down in the marathon tests or warmup just because I found it annoying, even though I could do the 100m sprint, pushups and long jump decently.
I think the issue here comes from the fact that most PE teachers think the assignement is about sports, and no one actually corrects them. They teach you how to sport correctly but nothing else.Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:54:54 UTC from web-
@nerthos
We did swimming a few times early on, but not having a swimming pool probably put an end to that. Otherwise the things you would like weren't covered. Or it was very rare. I think we had one time where there was martial arts... had some guys come in to teach us. It may also depend on what the PE teachers are trained to cover... but yeah, it was mostly sports. I liked my PE teachers, but I think the way it is structured didn't leave room to really teach about physical education.-
@sim I had swimming for a bit in elementary school, but that required a trip to a sports club and about two hours between travel, changing, showers and so on.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 10:14:11 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
@maiyannah @nerthos @sim ultimately people are refusing vaccinations because they have lost faith and trust in institutions. it sucks but it's downstream of the problem and the only thing that can fix it.
-
@moonman @nerthos @sim thus, measles, and other previously "eradicated" plagues are back.
They didn't disappear - we just had whole countries of people that had vaccinated resistance to it. Most of them were probably happily carrying it until now, when it saw it's chance and escaped, cackling like the Joker all the while. -
@moonman Well it's true that many institutions can't be trusted at all nowadays, but the solution is not to revert medicine to the XVIII century.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:14:08 UTC from web-
-
@moonman True. But hey you know that USA deals with mistrust like nep deals with server issues.
Thursday, 23-Feb-17 09:20:16 UTC from web
-
-
-
-
@maiyannah I've heard this sentiment phrased as "You have the right to your opinion, you don't have the right to an unchallenged opinion"
-
-
-
-
-
