ShazzieB
ShazzieB's JournalMy parents always objected stringently to emergency room trips for the reason.
We never had any health insurance, and "Wait and see how it feels by tomorrow" was my parents' approach to everything. We rarely even went to the doctor, and avoiding a trip to the ER in all but the most extreme circumstances was a recurring theme.
When i was 18 and my sister was 13, sis broke her arm. My mom called my dad at work, and sure enough, he tried to play the "wait and see" card. (Easy for him to say, because he wasn't there, listening to her screaming in pain. )
My mom wanted to take her to the ER, but she got off the phone wavering about what to do, because of my dad being against it. (Going against his wishes was NOT the done thing at our house.) I was able to convince her that it was the right thing to do, and off we went.
Sure enough, x-rays showed there was a fracture. It was just a hairline fracture, but it WAS a fracture. She got a cast, we went home, and Dad ended up paying the bill without letting out a peep. He never admitted being wrong about it (because Dad admitting he was ever wrong about anything wasn't the done thing at our house, either), but my sister got the medical care she needed, which was a win, as far as my mom and I were concerned.
Every time I hear about parents being adamantly opposed to ER trips, the insurance issue is the first thing I think of, because of the way my parents were.
Thanks so much for this link!
It is indeed a brilliant article, and I learned a lot from it. The part about his wanting to be in the movie business and his fascination with the movie "Sunset Boulevard" was all new to me, for example.
. But this is the part that really jumped out at me:
I didn't know that NBC killed his contract for The Apprentice over that comment about rapists coming over the border, but it explains so much. When he lost that show, he lost a major avenue for getting his narcissistic needs met, and what was left? Running for potus, and then being potus! When he lost in 2020, he really had nothing left. This really explains a lot to me about why he became desperate and unhinged enough to go to so much trouble trying to change the outcome.
I found this article to be fascinating, and I have no trouble believing that he's as broken and pathetic as the author describes him.
His "magic" is definitely gone and he knows it.
It's easy for us to scoff at the idea that he ever had any "magic." After all, it never worked on us. But there's no denying that he had something that worked on a lot of people. He never would have gotten past the primaries, much less won the general election otherwise.
It's fun to make snarky jokes and all, but there was a time when he was attracting large crowds to his rallies, enthusiastic crowds who hung on his every word and gave him the adoration that narcissists like him crave. That adoration was like a drug for him, while it lasted. But it's been gradually drying up, and it's at the point now where even he can't avoid being aware of it. And he wants it back! He NEEDS it back. As a narcissist, he needs that adoration the way addicts need their next fix, and for him it's not just a matter of finding a dealer and some cash. There are no dealers for his drug, and he is starting to panic.
I think it was a huge shock to him when the announcement of his 2024 election bid fell so flat. Along with whatever other reasons he has for running (like trying to avoid prosecution for his crimes), I think he saw it as a pathway to more stadiums full of adoring fans and more fixes of the drug he misses so much. But, aside from whatever few diehard loyalists he has left, the country reacted to the announcement with the equivalent of a giant shrug, and I think that just about killed him (not literally, but in an emotional sense.
As much as he likes to complain about "haters," the hardest thing for a narcissist to accept is not hate, but indifference. He's getting a ton of both these days, and I think he's finding it incredibly hard to deal with and responding with narcissistic rage.
What's your nominee for the worst holiday song ever?
I don't know if anyone else will be in the mood for this, but I'm feeling bah humbuggy, so here goes...
Is there a Christmas song you think is absolutely awful? I'm not talking a bad performance, but a song that makes you cringe because of the content, because it's so maudlin or in bad taste or... whatever. If there's a holiday song that makes you want to groan and roll your eyes, please tell us what it is and why. Videos welcome, but absolutely not required!
I'll start by nominating a song that is just way too damned depressing for me: "Please, Daddy, Don't Get Drunk This Christmas," as performed by John Denver (why, John, why?):
Those who got so "upset" about Zelensky's attire were anti-Zelensky and anti-Ukraine to begin with.
Haters will always look for something to criticize and clutch their pearls about. They will hunt high and low to find something, and when they can't find anything real, they'll take the pettiest thing imaginable and spin and twist until they blow it up into the Hugest Fucking Deal Ever. Just like they did when Obama were that tan suit. Exactly like that.
When I watched Zelensky's speech, what he was wearing literally did not even register with me at the time. I was too riveted by his words and his heroism to notice. When I heard about the criticism of his attire, I was like, "Wait, what?" Looked at a pic and was like, "Oh, for Pete's sake."
The people claiming to be upset about his clothes are all Putin boosters who don't want to give money to Ukraine and hate Zelensky on principle. It's not about about the sweatshirt. It never was about the sweatshirt. Fuck them and the clothes horse they rode in on.
The 11 Best Podcasts about Birds
Disclaimer: I have not listened to any of these podcasts, so I can't vouch for them personally.
Full list of podcasts with descriptions and and links is here: https://a-z-animals.com/blog/best-podcasts-about-birds/
28 Republicans Who Call Gay People 'Groomers' Just Voted Against a Bill Addressing Child Sex Abuse
Yet, on Wednesday, Greene and Boebart joined 26 other House Republicans to vote against the bipartisan Respect for Child Survivors Act, which overwhelmingly passed out of the House anyway and will address how the FBI has historically mishandled child sexual abuse cases. The bill will create specific teams within the FBI to support child victims and investigate child sexual abuse, trafficking, and child abuse content. Neither Greene nor Boebert have publicly offered explanations for their votes, and frankly, they dont have tothe gross hypocrisy of constantly lying that LGBTQ people pose a threat to children, all while declining to protect children from actual sexual predation, speaks for itself.
*snip*
What really can be said at this point? Long before their votes on this bill, Boebert and Greenes obsession with groomers and child sexual predation were disingenuous, exclusively focused on a nonexistent threat posed by LGBTQ adults just living openly. Time and again, their claims, made with zero basis, have yielded violent consequences. Last month, an LGBTQ nightclub in Colorado became the site of a mass shooting amid an evening drag performance. For months, bomb threats have plagued an openly gay California assembly member, Scott Wiener, and Boston Childrens Hospital for providing gender-affirming care. In a statement earlier this month, Wiener specifically blamed Greene for wielding her sizable online platform to direct slurs and hate at him.
*snip*
For all the terror and violence that Greene, Boebert, and their ilk have unleashed on LGBTQ communitiessupposedly in defense of childrenwith their Wednesday vote on the Respect for Child Survivors Act, their real priorities are clear.
0https://jezebel.com/28-republicans-who-call-gay-people-groomers-just-voted-1849923129
The full roll call is here, if you want to see who all voted against the bill: https://clerk.house.gov/Votes/2022534
Interestingly, both Jim Jordan and Matt Gaetz voted "Yea" on this bill. I will refrain from making any bad jokes about stopped clocks or blind pigs finding truffles.
The future of IVF is in jeopardy
Ultimately, I turned to adoption to become a parent and became an advocate supporting people who build their families in many different ways, including through fertility treatment. Following the Supreme Courts July decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Womens Health Organization ending federally recognized abortion rights, proven medical treatments like IVF become the collateral damage of the battle to dismantle reproductive freedom. That is why our organization unequivocally supports the Right to Build Families Act in Congress, introduced by Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) along with Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Rep. Susan Wild (D-Pa.). This national legislation is urgently required to protect IVF across the country, as the end of Roe v. Wade has painfully laid bare a patchwork of reproductive freedoms defined by state borders.
Even without overt state laws prohibiting IVF procedures, the Supreme Courts Dobbs decision is having a chilling effect on people seeking IVF in certain states as providers and patients fear legal ramifications of state abortion laws. We cannot allow state legislatures to pass laws that will block their constituents dreams of becoming parents. This bill guarantees that IVF will remain an option for all Americans, regardless of state reproductive policies.
Medical professionals and would-be parents are perplexed by new laws restricting reproductive freedoms, while certain state legislatures are gearing up to enact new laws that would effectively make IVF impossible through fetal personhood legislation. The IVF process involves creating multiple embryos in the hopes that at least one can result in the birth of a baby. But if a state defines a fertilized egg as a person, then allowing any harm to come to that microscopic embryo could be potentially considered manslaughter or even murder. The Dobbs decision has opened the floodgates for restrictions and by extension might inhibit standard procedures like embryo freezing. I faced agonizing decisions on what to do with the embryos created during IVF treatment would-be parents enduring that choice dont need the added worry of possible criminal charges.
Read more: https://thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/3778055-the-future-of-ivf-is-in-jeopardy/
Same here.
See the second pic from the right in my signature line, below. No, that's not me, but those women speak for me and, it sounds like, for you.
I think the people who work in those fake "clinics" actually believe most of what they're saying. When someone who is already anti-abortion hears that stuff, confirmation bias kicks in, and it doesn't even occur to them to question or verify.
I once found myself in a conversation with a woman representing one of those groups (quite by accident; I did NOT seek it out), and when I tried to tell her abortion does not increase the risk of breast cancer, she flatly refused to believe me. In her mind, she "knew" the "facts," and there was no way she could believe she was wrong about any of it. I know a brick wall when I see one and noped on out of there at that point, but the experience showed me something about how those people think that I will never forget.
I'm sure they knew "it was out there."
Or at least Meghan knew. Harry may well have been taken by surprise, as white people often are shocked when we come face to face with racism. We know it exists, but we can nonetheless be quite comfortably insulated by our white privilege until and unless we are directly affected by it. And being a royal, I imagine Harry was even more insulated by privilege than most "regular" white folks (like me) would be.
As a poc, Meghan has of course dealt with racism her entire life, but I think the intensity and sheer viciousness of what she's been subjected to since her relationship with Harry went public probably took even her by surprise. As a royal, he is automatically subjected to a level of public scrutiny and judgment that I personally can't even imagine, and his marrying an American would have probably brought on a firestorm of public disapproval, regardless of any other factors involved. Add to that the fact that she's a poc, and that firestorm got jacked up by an order of magnitude.
In short, what they have had to deal with is, imo, something beyond just plain old, garden variety racism. I don't find it at all surprising that neither of them was able to anticipate the full extent of what they were going to be confronted with. He had no experience with having someone he cares about being the target of such ugly, virulent hatred, and she had no experience with being a member of the royal family or the massive public expectations that entails. I don't think anyone on the outside of that situation is in a position to make pronouncements about what they "should" have expected or been prepared for.
Lastly, making pronouncements of that sort smacks of "blaming the victims" and of the "just world" theory that says people bring their problems on themselves and therefore "get what they deserve," both of which, quite frankly, seem excessively judgmental and unkind to me.
Profile Information
Name: SharonGender: Female
Hometown: Chicago area, IL
Home country: USA
Member since: Tue Mar 26, 2013, 04:18 AM
Number of posts: 16,370