Media now seeming to have immense difficulty with the answer "It is too early to know very much."
The pandemic has demonstrated that the Media has immense difficulty with everything. One suspects that if they fall out of bed, a significant number would miss the floor.
Mr. Boy, there's a world of difference between sexual orientation and kinks, which vary from "gosh, feet" all the way to "I want to literally carve my name into your back with a knife".
People who are into stuff absolutely across the line (paedophilia, necrophilia etc) should be shamed to deter the odds on them grouping up with others and creating a support network for such behaviour, and to encourage them to seek help or just restrain themselves.
Shaming someone for being into S&M is daft (and counterproductive if they're into humiliation), but some things are unacceptable and pretending otherwise is damned silly.
Why is necrophilia 'absolutely across the line'? If I am willing to let my body (post death) be used for others amusement, why should that be prohibited?
One reason is because you don't want to encourage a demand for corpses.
In Edinburgh in the early C19 there was a huge demand for recently demised people for the medical fraternity to dissect. Some chaps called Burke and Hare couldn't be bothered to wait for people to die and then dig them up. They decided to short-circuit the process, murder people, and deliver the nice fresh corpses to the medics.
One lived in the same house as my g-g-grandfather ...
Surely it's better to have demand for bodies for sex to be legal and tracked?
“A woman accused of indecent exposure, masturbating in public and using a sex toy in a public place, will stand trial early next year.
Chloe Thompson, of Borough Road, Middlesbrough, appeared at Teesside Magistrates' Court on Wednesday after denying the offences.
She is charged with committing a public nuisance by indecently exposing her penis to other members of the public, whilst masturbating from a property window.”
I am guessing the boringly statistical one that there are many orders of magnitude more devious predatory heterosexual male shits in the world than there are women trapped in mens' bodies, and that anyone defending this arse's utterly ludicrous claim to be a woman with a penis is enabling predatory heterosexual male shittery under cover of particularly ill thought out wokery.
And severely damaging the cause of genuine trans women btw.
Well I'm certainly not defending that claim. There will be men who change gender for nefarious reasons. But would this group not be a tiny minority compared to those who are genuine? I'd think so.
But what I'm trying to understand is, what does this story make people want to do -
Make it even harder than now to change gender? Have a blanket ban on male born people using female spaces? Other stuff?
Otherwise it just reads as "oh yuck, pervert in a dress".
My answers:
1. The existing GRA requirements are sufficient. There should be no change to them. 2. Unless a person has received a medical diagnosis of dysphoria they should not be treated as anything other than their sex. 3. Male sex offenders - to be clear all sex offenders with a male body - should not be housed in womens' prisons. Have a special wing for them in a male prison. 4. Existing practices - in prisons and elsewhere - which effectively are permitting self-ID even though this is not legal and even though those with a GRC have exactly the same legal rights as everyone else under the 2010 Equality Act should be stopped. 5. Data in censuses / in courts / collected by the police should be based on sex so that it is accurate. 6. The practice of forcing rape victims in court to call their attacker "she" if the latter insist or of punishing female prisoners for calling a man a man should be stopped.
Whether these are genuinely dysphoric people or those simply taking advantage of soft-headed officialdom, is hard to say. The fact that so many are sex offenders makes me sceptical that this is a genuine increase in a medical condition.
Ok, thanks.
1. Fair enough. I support a quicker easier process with self-ID at the heart of it but at least let's not go backwards. 2. Not sure about this. Don't you need to live in your changed gender for a period as part of the process? Also if you make the medical diagnosis key and at the same time have a slow painful process to get it, that is imo the state being needlessly cruel to a minority who already face prejudice. 3. I agree on that specific point. 4. I think prisons do a risk analysis, case by case and that most trans prisoners are in a prison of their sex (pun not intended). In England, I mean. Don't know about Scotland. 5. Or both? Is sex more accurate for these purposes iyo than gender? Does it make much difference anyway given the relative numbers? 6. That does sound ridiculous.
Could we booster dose everyone by Christmas? We've got all the necessary doses, I think.
I can't think of anything else we could do that would help as much.
Yes, I think there's somewhere around 30m doses of Pfizer and Moderna in the country plus what's due in the next couple of weeks. 30m gets us to 46m third doses, realistically we're only going to do about 40m anyway.
From the Washington Post. "Yes, kink belongs at Pride. And I want my kids to see it. Children need to know that they can make their own ways in the world"
"When our children grew tired of marching, we plopped onto a nearby curb. Just as we got settled, our elementary-schooler pointed in the direction of oncoming floats, raising an eyebrow at a bare-chested man in dark sunglasses whose black suspenders clipped into a leather thong. The man paused to be spanked playfully by a partner with a flog. “What are they doing?” my curious kid asked as our toddler cheered them on. The pair was the first of a few dozen kinksters who danced down the street, laughing together as they twirled their whips and batons, some leading companions by leashes. At the time, my children were too young to understand the nuance of the situation, but I told them the truth: That these folks were members of our community celebrating who they are and what they like to do."
I've never taken my kids to Pride, mainly because I've never been to Pride myself. My eldest daughter, who is 15, has gone with friends and enjoyed it, and I think it was good that she went. We did take our kids to a child friendly drag show at the Edinburgh fringe once. It was fun and they enjoyed it. I think it's important for them to know that not everyone is a boring heterosexual like their parents. I hope my kids grow up to have healthy sex lives based on consent and love. Beyond that I don't care. In general I think shame is a harmful emotion and isn't something I want to instill in my children. If that makes me woke then fine. I'm always happy to be described as woke anyway, I don't view it as an insult.
“Child friendly drag” or “Panto” as it is known in the UK.
I see that Dr Campbell’s latest YouTube video is on the emerging evidence of heart disease side effects to the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.
In a US sample of 566 people already being seen for preventative cardiac care, estimated risk of heart attack increases from 11% over next five years to, after the second mrna vaccination, 25%. Campbell describes this increase as ‘massive’ and suggests that if similar changes apply to the wider population we will see a lot more heart attacks in coming years. However he points out that the sample has only been monitored for two and a half months post-vaccination so far, and it is possible the increased risk is temporary.
The research paper he is reviewing concludes “we conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of the cardiac muscle, and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.
Dr C says that the paper’s author is a well regarded cardiac specialist in California, but one with a high social media profile whose findings aren’t always accepted by the wider medical community. Who has a grocery online business as a sideline.
Nevertheless Campbell concludes there is enough scientific evidence in the paper to require a response from the JCVI in the UK and CDC in the US. He calls for more urgent research.
This is either nothing, or the lead edge of something big.
Nu in Belgium. First case confirmed. We are back to travel restrictions aren't we?
It's almost certainly too late for that.
But they will happen. Airline shares collapsed this morning
I fear this could be it for much of the travel industry. It won't endure another year - or more - of fuckery-fuckery
Travel as we knew it may be gone forever
I really think you need to have a G&T and relax. What's going to happen is going to happen whether or not we want it to.
Who knows, maybe this is the endgame for COVID, a very, very transmissive but ultimately non-deadly version. There's so many unknowns right now and panicking is probably just going to make your own mental state worse.
Sailor Roo is the best source for all things Covid on the web/twitter in my opinion.
Chise DNAPetri dishMicrobeSyringeSoon with rightwards arrow above MFF @sailorrooscout If there is one thing I am going to tell you today it is to IGNORE the media and the clickbait headlines on this new variant. There is NO plausible scenario this will take us back to square one and there is a lot of misinformation currently circulating. Working on a thread now.
Could we booster dose everyone by Christmas? We've got all the necessary doses, I think.
I can't think of anything else we could do that would help as much.
Yes, I think there's somewhere around 30m doses of Pfizer and Moderna in the country plus what's due in the next couple of weeks. 30m gets us to 46m third doses, realistically we're only going to do about 40m anyway.
We are currently doing boosters at an average of 0.6%+ of the total UK population over 12 per day. Say 4.5% a week. We are currently on 28.5%.....
Things could really "interesting" for the vax refusers if nu really does have a very high R rate but does not evade the vax too much.
If the early reports are correct the new variant will go through the unvaccinated like a hot knife through butter, and to be fair the vaccinated won't be much better off, but the unvaccinated will almost certainly be at much greater risk of serious illness and death. If people haven't gotten the message about vaccination by now it will be too late for them shortly.
Most who weren't already immune will have acquired natural immunity. Choose that or boosters for life. Or you could start looking up the actual medical evidence from doctors who think for themselves and take one of the other treatments or preventatives
This discourse between medics. who believe in evidence-based medicine is being censored by bodies belonging to the, er, 'Trusted News Initiative'. If you have a TNI you don't have free speech, you have another USSR.
Could we booster dose everyone by Christmas? We've got all the necessary doses, I think.
I can't think of anything else we could do that would help as much.
Yes, I think there's somewhere around 30m doses of Pfizer and Moderna in the country plus what's due in the next couple of weeks. 30m gets us to 46m third doses, realistically we're only going to do about 40m anyway.
We are currently doing boosters at an average of 0.6%+ of the total UK population over 12 per day. Say 4.5% a week. We are currently on 28.5%.....
That rate could easily be doubled IMO, we just need to throw the doors open and reduce the eligibility limit to 4.5 months.
Would the UK government allow French border police onto UK beaches to stop migrants from leaving the UK if the situation was reversed .
And people wonder why the French aren’t happy.
I seriously think that the French aren't happy because political posturing suits Mr Macron's current Election Campaign.
It's going to be interesting to see what happens (or doesn't happen) in the French Presidency of the EU.
They are having a fairly targeted effort to orientate a lot of things around the Glory of the Republic, which is what this latest Treaty with Italy looks like, too. I wonder how the new German governent will react to being triangulated.
I don't see much happening in anything until we have a new French Government.
Could we booster dose everyone by Christmas? We've got all the necessary doses, I think.
I can't think of anything else we could do that would help as much.
Vaccinate 12-15s properly (ie. offer 2nd doses to those who've had their first). Fast-track 5-11 approval and get going there, again with a proper 2-dose programme. That should reduce cases pretty quickly alongside the effect of boosters to protect older groups against severe illness.
Looks like Brussels will soon be on the red list then, just as well we no longer have any MEPs and their staff working there or free movement within the EU then
The massive antibody boost after the third jab should help us out a tonne, even if the antibody/antigen match is imperfect. Boosters for all 18+ and second doses for all 12-17 ought to be the rule now.
Nu in Belgium. First case confirmed. We are back to travel restrictions aren't we?
It's almost certainly too late for that.
But they will happen. Airline shares collapsed this morning
I fear this could be it for much of the travel industry. It won't endure another year - or more - of fuckery-fuckery
Travel as we knew it may be gone forever
I really think you need to have a G&T and relax. What's going to happen is going to happen whether or not we want it to.
Who knows, maybe this is the endgame for COVID, a very, very transmissive but ultimately non-deadly version. There's so many unknowns right now and panicking is probably just going to make your own mental state worse.
What is this idea that I'm not relaxed? Seriously?
I'm sitting here calmly sipping tea and digesting my lovely sushi. I am also speculating what the Nunu Voodoo might do to WHO, I'm not getting all woo-woo on you
“A woman accused of indecent exposure, masturbating in public and using a sex toy in a public place, will stand trial early next year.
Chloe Thompson, of Borough Road, Middlesbrough, appeared at Teesside Magistrates' Court on Wednesday after denying the offences.
She is charged with committing a public nuisance by indecently exposing her penis to other members of the public, whilst masturbating from a property window.”
I am guessing the boringly statistical one that there are many orders of magnitude more devious predatory heterosexual male shits in the world than there are women trapped in mens' bodies, and that anyone defending this arse's utterly ludicrous claim to be a woman with a penis is enabling predatory heterosexual male shittery under cover of particularly ill thought out wokery.
And severely damaging the cause of genuine trans women btw.
Well I'm certainly not defending that claim. There will be men who change gender for nefarious reasons. But would this group not be a tiny minority compared to those who are genuine? I'd think so.
But what I'm trying to understand is, what does this story make people want to do -
Make it even harder than now to change gender? Have a blanket ban on male born people using female spaces? Other stuff?
Otherwise it just reads as "oh yuck, pervert in a dress".
Pervert in a dress sums him up.
Right. So we could all agree this sounds a bad news person and move on. But it's being offered (I think) as evidence to support a particular point of view about transgender people and how they should be treated and I was trying to explore that a bit.
Why is he being referred to as "She" if it is as simple as "pervert in a dress"?
I was musing on the classic 1942 film Casablanca the other day. There are several plot strands but perhaps the most interesting is the "letters of transit" stolen by the Peter Lorre character and hidden by Bogarts character Rick, who later passes them on. These stolen documents permit the bearer free travel to neutral Portugal, and then onwards to the USA.
Is Rick the most celebrated "People Trafficker" in movie history? And should the Lazlos had to claim asylum in Portugal rather than the USA?
Casablanca (in the film at least) was indeed full of people traffickers. They are not portrayed as noble but as vultures, exploiting the vulnerable. Remember the scene with the Bulgarian couple and the roulette game? Captain Renault was not a nice person.
Certainly Rick was depicted as noble, and the refugees vulnerable.
What do we think happened to those vulnerable would be refugees without the letters of transit?
There were only two letters of transit in the film. The rest of the refugees had to make other arraignments, such as midnight trips on fishing boats with several thousand francs in cash.
The police chief was signing papers of some form to allow travel in return for money and sexual favours*.
*aka rape.
Those were exit visas. The “Letters of Transit” were special because they couldn’t be revoked.
The massive antibody boost after the third jab should help us out a tonne, even if the antibody/antigen match is imperfect. Boosters for all 18+ and second doses for all 12-17 ought to be the rule now.
The first batches of Molnupiravir should be arriving soon as well.
Mr. Boy, there's a world of difference between sexual orientation and kinks, which vary from "gosh, feet" all the way to "I want to literally carve my name into your back with a knife".
People who are into stuff absolutely across the line (paedophilia, necrophilia etc) should be shamed to deter the odds on them grouping up with others and creating a support network for such behaviour, and to encourage them to seek help or just restrain themselves.
Shaming someone for being into S&M is daft (and counterproductive if they're into humiliation), but some things are unacceptable and pretending otherwise is damned silly.
Necrophilia is dead wrong.
Bestiality should make you sheepish.
And if you are into necrophilia, bestiality and flagellation, you are really flogging a dead horse.
“A woman accused of indecent exposure, masturbating in public and using a sex toy in a public place, will stand trial early next year.
Chloe Thompson, of Borough Road, Middlesbrough, appeared at Teesside Magistrates' Court on Wednesday after denying the offences.
She is charged with committing a public nuisance by indecently exposing her penis to other members of the public, whilst masturbating from a property window.”
I am guessing the boringly statistical one that there are many orders of magnitude more devious predatory heterosexual male shits in the world than there are women trapped in mens' bodies, and that anyone defending this arse's utterly ludicrous claim to be a woman with a penis is enabling predatory heterosexual male shittery under cover of particularly ill thought out wokery.
And severely damaging the cause of genuine trans women btw.
Well I'm certainly not defending that claim. There will be men who change gender for nefarious reasons. But would this group not be a tiny minority compared to those who are genuine? I'd think so.
But what I'm trying to understand is, what does this story make people want to do -
Make it even harder than now to change gender? Have a blanket ban on male born people using female spaces? Other stuff?
Otherwise it just reads as "oh yuck, pervert in a dress".
You couldn't have this more back to front if you tried with both hands for a week. Does it do the cause of the genuinely trans more good if we say This is an example of trans woman, or This is indeed a pervert in a dress? Which it is, unless you dispute the charges/convictions, or contend that the guy only wore skirts?
look at it in gambling terms. There are 12 trans women among the 500 women in Scotland's prisons. have a think about what spread bets you'd be comfortable with on the genuine vs taking the piss ratio among them.
How have I got it back to front? I said 3 things. (1) I can't diagnose whether this person is genuinely trans or not. (2) There will be men who change gender for dubious reasons. (3) Such cases will imo be a tiny minority cf those who are genuine.
Then I asked what this case is making people want to change about how transgender people are treated.
But, ok, to develop your prison point. You are saying that all trans women convicted of a crime should go to a male prison because the odds are that a fair proportion of them are fakes, men masquerading as women in order to prey on women - Is that right?
I am just pointing out what the probabilities are, especially among prisoners who start transitioning after they end up in the nick.
Imagine you set up a stall with a big banner over it saying "£1,000 free money for everybody whose middle name is Cedric. Self-certification accepted." How many applications would you expect to come from people whose middle name really is Cedric?
Ok, let's say it can be true (per me) that only a tiny tiny minority of trans women are dangerous fakes but at the same time true (per you) that a non-trivial number of those who are already guilty of (in particular sex) crimes and then claim to be trans women are dangerous fakes. So, we need a system which ensures the latter are not housed in a female prison whilst not basing the whole policy on a general assumption that trans people who commit crimes are not trans or (worse) a general societal assumption that trans women are likely to be male perverts.
The easiest way to ensure that general societal assumption is made, is by failing to condemn nonsensical claims by male perverts to be trans, as the nonsense they are.
Ok, but I don't think I'm guilty of that. I don't deny it can happen and if it's happening here, with this case, I condemn it. But, look, here's the typical dynamic on here with this issue from where I'm sitting -
Somebody (eg isam in this case) posts a lurid story with a trans angle that has a 'trans = perverts' aura. Cyclefree (who is passionate and knowledgeable on the topic but is very firmly on one side of it) comes in on top of it with a 'butterfly on a wheel' post that seeks to knock the whole of the pro trans lobby into a cocked hat. Everyone nods and agrees. Hence the association of the lurid story and the anti trans argument is cemented (even if half the time she, cyclefree, hasn't actually directly made a connection).
Fine, and no big deal, this is still a top drawer internet forum, but it's never clear to me that many people actually take the time to really think about the issue. So I just wanted to see if we could explore it a bit more than is usually the case.
But anyway, nu nu nu, I guess, is of more interest right now.
Mr. Boy, there's a world of difference between sexual orientation and kinks, which vary from "gosh, feet" all the way to "I want to literally carve my name into your back with a knife".
People who are into stuff absolutely across the line (paedophilia, necrophilia etc) should be shamed to deter the odds on them grouping up with others and creating a support network for such behaviour, and to encourage them to seek help or just restrain themselves.
Shaming someone for being into S&M is daft (and counterproductive if they're into humiliation), but some things are unacceptable and pretending otherwise is damned silly.
Why is necrophilia 'absolutely across the line'? If I am willing to let my body (post death) be used for others amusement, why should that be prohibited?
How do you see matters of consent wrt necrophilia?
Would you require consent from relatives? Before death from the victim / recipient? Or do you consider that nobody owns a corpse, so you can do what you like with it, as you could with a clump of grass from the roadside?
(Do we have laws about what you can do to the body of a dead animal / pet, or is that based on respecting the value of the relationship between the pet and the owner?)
I was surprised at the vehemence of the reaction to the recent cases of abuse of bodies in morgues, and I could not tell quite who was doing the objecting - ordinary people, tabloid outrage buses, or some sort of establishment. Listening to the terminology of "abuse" and "victims" being used, and who it was being applied to, was quite an eye opener.
But there is not very much clear philosophical thinking about our relationships with the dead.
I have had a practice of going to visit the bodies of dead relatives for many years following a decision I made in my early 20s, but the general populace is still remarkably resistant to thinking about such questions.
In a society where many are happy killing an unborn child/fetus up until the moment of birth I'd hope for a bit more clarity of thought.
Arieh Kovler @ariehkovler Israel has identified four cases of the B.1.1.529 variant, all recent travellers. One case, a 32-year-old woman returning from South Africa, was triple vaccinated with Pfizer and had her 3rd dose just two months ago.
Is she sick, or just testing positive ? My vaxxed colleagues experience of Covid is that they could barely tell they had it.
Arieh Kovler @ariehkovler · 1h No reports yet if these people are suffering from any symptoms at all; all travelers are screened with PCR tests on arrival, which is how they were identified.
I'd guess this means NOT ill - otherwise they shouldn't travel.
Could we booster dose everyone by Christmas? We've got all the necessary doses, I think.
I can't think of anything else we could do that would help as much.
Yes, I think there's somewhere around 30m doses of Pfizer and Moderna in the country plus what's due in the next couple of weeks. 30m gets us to 46m third doses, realistically we're only going to do about 40m anyway.
We are currently doing boosters at an average of 0.6%+ of the total UK population over 12 per day. Say 4.5% a week. We are currently on 28.5%.....
That rate could easily be doubled IMO, we just need to throw the doors open and reduce the eligibility limit to 4.5 months.
ATM we are giving a bit over 350,000 3rd jabs a day, which approximately matches the 400,000 second jabs that we were giving a day 6 months ago in late may. however 5 months ago, that is late June, that was down to 160,000 second doses a day, meaning we will soon be able to do more that '2 days worth in a day' if that makes séance, and in so doing bring the gap down from 6 months to 5 months. looking at then numbers and assuming around 90% of people take the booster, I think could happen over the next 5 weeks ish, after that reducing to 4 months would be easy, if it was advisable.
And the point, as I explained earlier, is that if any of those 285 were granted asylum in the country they were sent to they could immediately return to the UK as a matter of right. That is why so little use was made of it. It was an administrative procedure, not a restriction on substantive rights.
Edit, it is also why I am more than a bit suspicious about the claims that many other EU countries grant asylum much more frequently than the UK. I dare say that they did but, before Brexit, where did they actually end up? Given our complete failure to monitor the flows of people to and from the EU which meant that we ended up giving out 6m rights to remain, we simply do not know the answer to that but I have my suspicions.
The same draws that have these refugees in little boats, the English language, the ready availability of work, the non contributory benefits system, a sense of decency and tolerance, even Man United, god help us, all applied then too.
A couple of the interesting points made in the debate - partly it has to be said to deflect blame the UK way, have been
1 - Work is easier to get in the UK. Undocumented, as we do not have strong systems. 2 - There is a larger pool of illegals in the UK. True, for example 2-3 x as large as France. 3 - Insufficient returns / expulsions. Also true, and we have a charity industry trying to frustrate this process.
If we are to get on top of this, a key plank of the solution will be appropriate ID cards.
I suspect that as too often Boris will have his head up his own backside listening to his own bullshit to get ahead, however. Add that to the Foreign Office 'be neutral' syndrome, and I am not sure we will get far.
However - we have consistently seen that having large covid waves does not mean everyone has had it. India springs to mind. Has there been antibody surveys in SA to show that they have high protection levels? I suspect not.
I see that Dr Campbell’s latest YouTube video is on the emerging evidence of heart disease side effects to the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines.
In a US sample of 566 people already being seen for preventative cardiac care, estimated risk of heart attack increases from 11% over next five years to, after the second mrna vaccination, 25%. Campbell describes this increase as ‘massive’ and suggests that if similar changes apply to the wider population we will see a lot more heart attacks in coming years. However he points out that the sample has only been monitored for two and a half months post-vaccination so far, and it is possible the increased risk is temporary.
The research paper he is reviewing concludes “we conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of the cardiac muscle, and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.
Dr C says that the paper’s author is a well regarded cardiac specialist in California, but one with a high social media profile whose findings aren’t always accepted by the wider medical community. Who has a grocery online business as a sideline.
Nevertheless Campbell concludes there is enough scientific evidence in the paper to require a response from the JCVI in the UK and CDC in the US. He calls for more urgent research.
This is either nothing, or the lead edge of something big.
I got heart palpitations for several months after getting COVID. Whenever people say there are after effects for the vaccines I always think it's probably because they are mimicking the immune reaction from actually getting COVID. But in a less severe way.
It's actually nuts when people say you shouldn't get the vaccine because (a) there's a tiny number of people with vaccine complications and (b) most people with COVID are fine. A complete lack of intelligence in being able to apply the same standard to two things.
And the point, as I explained earlier, is that if any of those 285 were granted asylum in the country they were sent to they could immediately return to the UK as a matter of right. That is why so little use was made of it. It was an administrative procedure, not a restriction on substantive rights.
Edit, it is also why I am more than a bit suspicious about the claims that many other EU countries grant asylum much more frequently than the UK. I dare say that they did but, before Brexit, where did they actually end up? Given our complete failure to monitor the flows of people to and from the EU which meant that we ended up giving out 6m rights to remain, we simply do not know the answer to that but I have my suspicions.
The same draws that have these refugees in little boats, the English language, the ready availability of work, the non contributory benefits system, a sense of decency and tolerance, even Man United, god help us, all applied then too.
A couple of the interesting points made in the debate - partly it has to be said to deflect blame the UK way, have been
1 - Work is easier to get in the UK. Undocumented, as we do not have strong systems. 2 - There is a larger pool of illegals in the UK. True, for example 2-3 x as large as France. 3 - Insufficient returns / expulsions. Also true, and we have a charity industry trying to frustrate this process.
If we are to get on top of this, a key plank of the solution will be appropriate ID cards.
I suspect that as too often Boris will have his head up his own backside listening to his own bullshit to get ahead, however. Add that to the Foreign Office 'be neutral' syndrome, and I am not sure we will get far.
What do ID cards achieve that passports/driving licenses don't?
And the point, as I explained earlier, is that if any of those 285 were granted asylum in the country they were sent to they could immediately return to the UK as a matter of right. That is why so little use was made of it. It was an administrative procedure, not a restriction on substantive rights.
Edit, it is also why I am more than a bit suspicious about the claims that many other EU countries grant asylum much more frequently than the UK. I dare say that they did but, before Brexit, where did they actually end up? Given our complete failure to monitor the flows of people to and from the EU which meant that we ended up giving out 6m rights to remain, we simply do not know the answer to that but I have my suspicions.
The same draws that have these refugees in little boats, the English language, the ready availability of work, the non contributory benefits system, a sense of decency and tolerance, even Man United, god help us, all applied then too.
A couple of the interesting points made in the debate - partly it has to be said to deflect blame the UK way, have been
1 - Work is easier to get in the UK. Undocumented, as we do not have strong systems. 2 - There is a larger pool of illegals in the UK. True, for example 2-3 x as large as France. 3 - Insufficient returns / expulsions. Also true, and we have a charity industry trying to frustrate this process.
If we are to get on top of this, a key plank of the solution will be appropriate ID cards.
I suspect that as too often Boris will have his head up his own backside listening to his own bullshit to get ahead, however. Add that to the Foreign Office 'be neutral' syndrome, and I am not sure we will get far.
What do ID cards achieve that passports/driving licenses don't?
And what evidence do we have that ID cards will reduce “pull” sufficiently to bring down overall numbers?
Comments
I can't think of anything else we could do that would help as much.
The pandemic has demonstrated that the Media has immense difficulty with everything. One suspects that if they fall out of bed, a significant number would miss the floor.
1. Fair enough. I support a quicker easier process with self-ID at the heart of it but at least let's not go backwards.
2. Not sure about this. Don't you need to live in your changed gender for a period as part of the process? Also if you make the medical diagnosis key and at the same time have a slow painful process to get it, that is imo the state being needlessly cruel to a minority who already face prejudice.
3. I agree on that specific point.
4. I think prisons do a risk analysis, case by case and that most trans prisoners are in a prison of their sex (pun not intended). In England, I mean. Don't know about Scotland.
5. Or both? Is sex more accurate for these purposes iyo than gender? Does it make much difference anyway given the relative numbers?
6. That does sound ridiculous.
I fear this could be it for much of the travel industry. It won't endure another year - or more - of fuckery-fuckery
Travel as we knew it may be gone forever
https://twitter.com/kallmemeg/status/1464210413231517698?s=20
https://twitter.com/metoffice/status/1464187971230482443
In a US sample of 566 people already being seen for preventative cardiac care, estimated risk of heart attack increases from 11% over next five years to, after the second mrna vaccination, 25%. Campbell describes this increase as ‘massive’ and suggests that if similar changes apply to the wider population we will see a lot more heart attacks in coming years. However he points out that the sample has only been monitored for two and a half months post-vaccination so far, and it is possible the increased risk is temporary.
The research paper he is reviewing concludes “we conclude that the mRNA vacs dramatically increase inflammation on the endothelium and T cell infiltration of the cardiac muscle, and may account for the observations of increased thrombosis, cardiomyopathy, and other vascular events following vaccination.
Dr C says that the paper’s author is a well regarded cardiac specialist in California, but one with a high social media profile whose findings aren’t always accepted by the wider medical community. Who has a grocery online business as a sideline.
Nevertheless Campbell concludes there is enough scientific evidence in the paper to require a response from the JCVI in the UK and CDC in the US. He calls for more urgent research.
This is either nothing, or the lead edge of something big.
Who knows, maybe this is the endgame for COVID, a very, very transmissive but ultimately non-deadly version. There's so many unknowns right now and panicking is probably just going to make your own mental state worse.
Chise DNAPetri dishMicrobeSyringeSoon with rightwards arrow above MFF
@sailorrooscout
If there is one thing I am going to tell you today it is to IGNORE the media and the clickbait headlines on this new variant. There is NO plausible scenario this will take us back to square one and there is a lot of misinformation currently circulating. Working on a thread now.
https://globalcovidsummit.org/author/physicians-and-medical-scientists
This discourse between medics. who believe in evidence-based medicine is being censored by bodies belonging to the, er, 'Trusted News Initiative'. If you have a TNI you don't have free speech, you have another USSR.
https://twitter.com/metoffice
It's going to be interesting to see what happens (or doesn't happen) in the French Presidency of the EU.
They are having a fairly targeted effort to orientate a lot of things around the Glory of the Republic, which is what this latest Treaty with Italy looks like, too. I wonder how the new German governent will react to being triangulated.
I don't see much happening in anything until we have a new French Government.
"We are particularly worried about the rise in cases in southern Africa. These are countries which SHOULD have high levels of natural immunity"
https://twitter.com/DailyMirror/status/1464187379015557126?s=20
They fear it can reinfect, and evade
Boosters for all 18+ and second doses for all 12-17 ought to be the rule now.
I'm sitting here calmly sipping tea and digesting my lovely sushi. I am also speculating what the Nunu Voodoo might do to WHO, I'm not getting all woo-woo on you
Somebody (eg isam in this case) posts a lurid story with a trans angle that has a 'trans = perverts' aura. Cyclefree (who is passionate and knowledgeable on the topic but is very firmly on one side of it) comes in on top of it with a 'butterfly on a wheel' post that seeks to knock the whole of the pro trans lobby into a cocked hat. Everyone nods and agrees. Hence the association of the lurid story and the anti trans argument is cemented (even if half the time she, cyclefree, hasn't actually directly made a connection).
Fine, and no big deal, this is still a top drawer internet forum, but it's never clear to me that many people actually take the time to really think about the issue. So I just wanted to see if we could explore it a bit more than is usually the case.
But anyway, nu nu nu, I guess, is of more interest right now.
Would you require consent from relatives? Before death from the victim / recipient? Or do you consider that nobody owns a corpse, so you can do what you like with it, as you could with a clump of grass from the roadside?
(Do we have laws about what you can do to the body of a dead animal / pet, or is that based on respecting the value of the relationship between the pet and the owner?)
I was surprised at the vehemence of the reaction to the recent cases of abuse of bodies in morgues, and I could not tell quite who was doing the objecting - ordinary people, tabloid outrage buses, or some sort of establishment. Listening to the terminology of "abuse" and "victims" being used, and who it was being applied to, was quite an eye opener.
But there is not very much clear philosophical thinking about our relationships with the dead.
I have had a practice of going to visit the bodies of dead relatives for many years following a decision I made in my early 20s, but the general populace is still remarkably resistant to thinking about such questions.
In a society where many are happy killing an unborn child/fetus up until the moment of birth I'd hope for a bit more clarity of thought.
https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/vaccinations
I suspect that is the governments plan, and probably what's going to happen. I just wish they would announce it so we could know and plan acordingly
1 - Work is easier to get in the UK. Undocumented, as we do not have strong systems.
2 - There is a larger pool of illegals in the UK. True, for example 2-3 x as large as France.
3 - Insufficient returns / expulsions. Also true, and we have a charity industry trying to frustrate this process.
If we are to get on top of this, a key plank of the solution will be appropriate ID cards.
I suspect that as too often Boris will have his head up his own backside listening to his own bullshit to get ahead, however. Add that to the Foreign Office 'be neutral' syndrome, and I am not sure we will get far.
It's actually nuts when people say you shouldn't get the vaccine because (a) there's a tiny number of people with vaccine complications and (b) most people with COVID are fine. A complete lack of intelligence in being able to apply the same standard to two things.
Pretty much none.