If this is true it is peak insanity.
Anyone can claim anything caused distress. You can receive an *unlimited fine* for someone claiming you caused them distress.
This post caused me distress. The poster should be fined out of existence.
@peterboghossian As usual the government fiddles while the country burns.
I’m afraid the calibre of politicians is appalling these days.
We’re stuffed.
@languagetalk@BGatesIsaPyscho Are THEY ready, have they stocked piled gas and fuel?
Isn’t it their job to look after the people?
Seems not as they’ve sold everything off and reduced storage capacity for things like gas over the last 40 years.
@BBCPM I personally wouldn’t mind but I’m not a fan of any religion that treats women as unequally as Islam does. And wearing a hijab is a sign that they adhere to a male dominated culture.
What next, burkas?
@ionank@HeartlandsTrib It was a long time ago but someone on tv said Gaddafi is the cork in the North Africa bottle. If you kill him they’ll flood out. Seems they were right.
🚨New genders just dropped: Sistergirl and Brotherboy
A new peer-reviewed paper claims that we must redefine sex, sexuality, and gender in order to "decolonize" health and "unsettl[e] Western biomedical norms" in service of the "LGBTQA+SB" community,
From what I can tell, a Sistergirl is just a man who takes on the role and identity of a woman, and a Brotherboy is a woman who takes on the role and identity of a man. Nothing too unique going on here.
The paper gives no specifics on how sex, sexuality, or gender should be redefined, but claims that "colonial influence manifests in data collection through adherence to a medical norm of male/female bodies."
So "male" and "female" seem to be on the chopping block.
The authors describe themselves as "a queer Yamatji person, a Wiradjuri trans fulla, a Wakka Wakka Brotherboy, a trans Ngarrindjeri man, a queer Gunditjmara woman and a trans Murri."
🚨 NEW: For the @WSJ, @Hartz_PhD and I expose the ideological takeover of the American Psychological Association.
The APA is facing the possible loss of its federal accreditation authority following allegations of widespread antisemitism.
But while the APA's antisemitism problem is serious, it's only a symptom of a much deeper ideological rot.
The organization has become so captured by radical left-wing political activism that its commitment to scientific objectivity competence is now in serious doubt.
We examined the program for this year's major APA Division 39 conference, which drew nearly 800 attendees and held 90 panels over four days.
By our count, roughly 70 of the 90 panels were overtly political, and always left-wing. Topics included abolishing the family, queer anarchist psychoanalysis, dismantling gender assessment guidelines, and white supremacy. One session even concluded with a drag show.
There was at least some hope that the threat of losing federal accreditation might prompt some institutional soul-searching. It didn't.
Instead, APA members just elected Candice Hargons as their next president. Her campaign identifies "systemic intersectional oppression" as the profession's "common enemy" and calls for rejecting the traditional scientific notions of objectivity.
Psychologists wield enormous influence over vulnerable patients, and the people seeking treatment deserve the peace of mind knowing that the care they're receiving care is evidence based and not tainted radical politics.
We believe most would agree that federal accreditation should actually mean something. If the APA cannot distinguish its scientific mission from its political activism, the Education Department should reconsider whether it deserves the government's endorsement as an authority over psychological training.
Read our full essay in the Wall Street Journal below:
🔗https://t.co/bmL1dCkyIx