• 2 Posts
  • 68 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle


  • FYI, Sesame Street went public-private in 2016 when they signed a deal with HBO to fund new episodes which then were permitted to air on PBS several months later.

    In Dec 2024, HBO/Max called the deal off and effectively cancelled the show. Now they’re shopping for a new home and, with the threats of PBS funding cuts, the notion of returning to PBS is in question.

    So basically the showrunners of Sesame Street are at least partially responsible for the corner they painted themselves into here.








  • neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zonetoMemes@sopuli.xyzBasic courtesy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    3 months ago

    This is the way.

    Also, by taking a cart from the corral and bringing it in with you, you’re actively modeling a virtuous behavior you hope people emulate, which does more to correct the problem than whining online about it.

    But it does make me wonder about us sometimes. How did we get this way? How did “Fuck everybody else; got mine” become the default way Americans think? Am I the weird one for being raised to be thoughtful about these kinds of choices?

    I don’t claim to be perfect. I’ve had bad days when I take advantage that permissiveness-inconsiderateness that I see around me all the time, but I always know that it’s wrong, and that I’m doing an inconsiderate thing, but that my frustration affords me the grace to be selfish about this one thing.

    One of the Academy Award nominated short films this year is Instruments of a Beating Heart, about a class of Japanese first-grade students preparing to perform Ode to Joy for the new first year students that will take their places. It’s primarily about the struggle of one girl, but set against the backdrop of Japanese grade school life, student responsibility and expectation-setting for young humans experiencing their first non-familial social environments. It made me think “Well, at least these kids are going to be alright.”



  • I’ve been deeply frustrated by the progressive stance on trans people in professional sports.

    Anyone who began medical transitioning after puberty will have reasonably notable physical differences from cisgender people in their appropriately gendered sport. It’s similar to doping, but something their body was doing naturally with incorrect hormones that didn’t reflect their gender.

    I certainly don’t feel good about it, but I do think there is a very viable argument to disqualify those kinds of trans people (who medically transitioned after puberty) from competition. The debate becomes much more nuanced as you consider different sports where physical differences between gender matter less. Rugby, weightlifting; trans folks are out. Target shooting, chess, darts; no problem. It’s a debate to be had sport by sport, league by league. The whole issue should have been messaged that way from the beginning.

    Queer advocacy groups taking a broad “all or nothing” civil rights stance on this was a HUGE mistake. It’s an argument they were destined to lose, only affected a minuscule number of athletes, and wasted so much time and effort that could have been spent on other battles for trans rights. US Democrats take their cues on queer issues from those queer advocacy groups, so they rolled with it and got trampled.

    I really want to have a conversation with queer strategists and Democrat policy leaders to understand why this was the hill they decided to make trans rights die on.





  • To be fair, SB1 addresses medical function. Kids would be allowed to receive puberty blockers to address medical diagnosis of precocious puberty, but not to address gender dysphoria. The foundation of the state’s argument is that precocious puberty is a legitimate medical condition and gender dysphoria (which they repeatedly and dismissively refer to as “psychological stress”) is not.

    Never mind that neither lawmakers or “the democratic process” is qualified to, or should be in the business of, determining what is and is not a legitimate medical condition.


  • I listened to the oral arguments on U.S. v. Skrmetti this morning.

    I couldn’t express how deeply disappointed I was when Justice Kavanaugh verbally fretted about the “risks” of unintended outcomes as a result of the court’s ruling (either way) and the petitioners didn’t drill deeply into that concern.

    If the court strikes down Tennessee’s SB1 law banning gender affirming care for children, there is a risk that a child could receive puberty blockers and later regret it… AFTER specifically requesting it… AFTER getting the consent of their parents… AFTER receiving psychological assessments to ensure that they’re aware of the risks and effects… and AFTER finding a medical doctor or endocrinologist willing to prescribe the medication.

    If the court upholds the Tennessee law, there is a risk that EVERY child seeking gender affirming care in the state will be prevented from doing so, categorically, with ZERO recourse, regardless of their own wishes, the wishes of their parents, medical care team, and disregards the preponderance of non-biased research on the matter (the Cass Report doesn’t count, and the author even argues FOR puberty blockers) that points to overwhelming positive medical outcomes.

    These degrees of risk are NOWHERE CLOSE to being equivalent and it’s ridiculous to have allowed that reasoning to slide by unaddressed.