no lol i would never span

yeah i'm not sure if the citations are listed incorrectly or if theyre backing up their assertions using only marginally related articles which do not actually explicitly reinforce their point 🤷

also dislike how "obesity" is always the first thing on the list of health stuff they want to solve but eh what can you do

yeah there are some citation problems in this article. the study that they cited for "Studies have also associated rough-and-tumble play with better problem-solving scores in boys" is a... meta-analysis on studies about time spent outdoors and its correlation with myopia. (which is incidentally a bit amusing to me because well we already know that)

tentatively, i agree with their conclusions, but the paragraph about "watchwords" reducing the confidence of children and their interest in play is totally unfounded based on the article that they cite, which is just a proposed experimental protocol! based on that and the article's tone in general, i do get the impression that the authors aren't quite impartially weighing up the risks and benefits of risky/unstructured play in the way that i would hope to see in an academic article

this is fascinating but i thought this was spam. best diet ruined me

before i read this, gonna say that my grandpa died feb 2020 and no one could enter china for the funeral that we couldn't even hold anyway

even if it’s a hosted blog still kind of surprised to see this as an “editor’s pick” on forbes tbh but i suppose i can’t complain lol

like, it kinda hurts to be told to have some grace about being misgendered (we're giving concessions for fucking what exactly) but like. for instance, even though i don't actually come across this problem (my native language doesn't have gendered pronouns, and i don't talk to people anyway), it's still really easy for me to put myself in the Struggling Cis Ally spot. genuinely i would write stories plural about trans characters and mess up their pronouns. gender's fucking stupid.

thus, i guess what i would do is to have a boilerplate response for both honest mistake mess-ups and "okay sigh we're indulging in your fantasy but urrgh" kinda mess-ups (doing mental calculus to figure out whether a person is one or the other would just be psychologically unaffordable). about this i'm reminded of sarah z's recent queerbaiting video. about how the ostensibly same kind of anger actually wrongly hurts "easy" targets more severely than the capital that subsumed it. so then, kindness towards people making honest mistakes probably goes a longer way than aggression towards an assumed bad actor.

the enlightened centrist argument would probably be not to assume anything about people. but if you do assume, i guess err towards kindness. unless it's someone you have personal grievances with, in which case they're ontologically evil

woah!

Seen you around there!

cool place with some cool folks btw

i'm amused you call it his bunker given his discord is called the goblin bunker lol

i don't remember if this article was posted here but i feel like it intersects well on how the public sector subsidises energy projects without further thought into impact

Yeah. I feel that plenty of progressives neglect the role of the state and international institutions that aren't multinational corporations in environmental predicament. In a sense this is a conservative reform, but merely stopping subsidies (except those funding restoration work) for forestry would be a clear improvement since it would remove marginal forestland from production, that is, no-one will bother maintaining roads for logging access. It would also decrease clear cutting since a lot of the labor tasks only useful for clear cutting are presently subsidized by governments. Now a near total ban on clear cutting would be pretty awesome, all things considered, but a lot of trouble has to do with what public sector enthusiastically encourages rather than merely fails to curtail in the private sector. This doubly so when public bodies own natural resources, like oil and forests.

i don't disagree! i read the 'wood as not sustainable building material' article posted here only recently and there are more factors at play than i previously thought

I think that's reductive. NGOs, states and basic normies were all pretty into afforestration as a strategy, when we degrowth permie environmentalists were already into simply cutting down fewer forests and lengthening the cutting cycle; agroforestry, coppicing and pollarding; wetland and grassland restoration; and beaver ponds and other water cycle restoration; biocarbon as soil amendment. Like beaver ponds soak up 2-3 times as much carbon per area as a boreal forest does, but they do a lot more besides.

It's a complicated set of interests even on the site of capitalists, imho. Extractive industries especially in forestry and mining and landowners in general on the one hand and other capitalists probably don't exactly have the same interests on this topic.

i find i agree with you, especially with the outsize influence his blog held/holds. the underlying point about successful suicide rates linked with gun ownership is something that stays on my mind though

i dont want to be overly cold about a story where a man commits suicide but i want to emphasise that at the end of the day, this guy who crafted his identity about being a emotionally stoic defender of his family completely succumbed to his emotions and left his daughters without a father and his wife without a husband in what sounds like a time of financial stress. he never used his guns to protect his family or community. it was all just an affectation in order to distance himself from the "pink" people he resented so much

the org the writer collaborated with has a good primer on how to speak with survivors of gun violence (speaking as someone's who lost a loved one to gun violence)

i remember reading about this!! when the london eye first opened. i think my cousins went

Personal gun ownership (ie me owning a gun) freaks me out for the reasons in this article.

Like... probably I wouldn't I suppose? But the call to the void is much more frightening when the void is right there.

It's too much for me, that's the primary reason I don't own a gun

My deepest respect towards these innovators.

that uae minister on the same side as corporations

something that's real and something corporations will take as fact are often completely unrelated