Here Comes The Left

[Bronzeage]

You're both going too far, just in opposite directions.

In developed countries it comes down to whether there are signs of life. But that is something that we can at best imperfectly measure. There is no magical instant of death to record whether it happened inside or outside. But in some places they do not count it as a live birth if survival is unquestionably impossible. And I suspect the punishment crowd drives up the rate. I'm thinking of a local case, way too premature to have a chance. The doctor did the humane thing and put it in a room and closed the door. A nurse went ape over that. You have to try to save it! The way the country is going the doctors are going to try on cases that would properly be classified as stillbirths.

I think that was an episode of Call the Midwife.

Infant mortality is directly related to prenatal care, or rather the lack of it. This is something socialist countries sort of take for granted. They look at the US and see people and politicians who claim life is sacred, but don't seem to want to do the simple things that preserve it.

A lack of prenatal care is unlikely to cause a prompt fatality, and thus has little effect on stillbirth vs infant mortality.

As with basically every such issue the people who stand to benefit from the issue will make it appear bigger than it is. And the people harmed by it will make it appear smaller than it is.

I'm not sure who benefits from greater infant mortality, however the count is made, but things like high blood pressure and impaired kidney function have a direct effect on the viability of a new born. After been responsible for two pregnancies in which these were severe complications, I can say prenatal care is critical care made the difference. Both these problems have barely discernable symptoms until it's too late.

 

[Toni]

I’m not googling names you bring up.

I am surprised you don't remember them. Crystal Mangum is the Duke Lacrosse false accuser. She faced no consequences for that, and later on she went on to murder her boyfriend and served only 15 years or so for that. Had she faced consequences for the false rape accusation, maybe her boyfriend would be alive today.
Jackie Coakley is the false accuser in the UVA case that was the subject of the infamous "A Rape on Campus" Rolling Stone article. The case was discussed in this thread.

Actually you are mistaken: I do not automatically believe everyone who alleges inappropriate sexual behavior. I’ve expressed strong doubts about accusations that seemed obviously false on this forum and in real life.

Which ones for example? I know you believe Ramirez re Kavanaugh, even though she admitted that she wasn't sure the alleged penis belonged to Kav until she spoke to her lawyer.

That said: my default is to believe accusers but to verify and to see if the accusation makes sense or is even possible.

Default should be an open mind, without believing either side a priori. If you start believing the accuser by default, you will continue believing the accuser if there is no evidence for nor against the accusation. Example, CBF. There is no evidence for her claim, and there is nothing disproving it. As such, we should not believe that it happened. No evidence is no evidence.

You start by disbelieving any female accuser.
What do you think the chances are that Donald Trump actually raped anyone?

This video made me think of you:

 

[Toni]

You're both going too far, just in opposite directions.

In developed countries it comes down to whether there are signs of life. But that is something that we can at best imperfectly measure. There is no magical instant of death to record whether it happened inside or outside. But in some places they do not count it as a live birth if survival is unquestionably impossible. And I suspect the punishment crowd drives up the rate. I'm thinking of a local case, way too premature to have a chance. The doctor did the humane thing and put it in a room and closed the door. A nurse went ape over that. You have to try to save it! The way the country is going the doctors are going to try on cases that would properly be classified as stillbirths.

I think that was an episode of Call the Midwife.

Infant mortality is directly related to prenatal care, or rather the lack of it. This is something socialist countries sort of take for granted. They look at the US and see people and politicians who claim life is sacred, but don't seem to want to do the simple things that preserve it.

A lack of prenatal care is unlikely to cause a prompt fatality, and thus has little effect on stillbirth vs infant mortality.

As with basically every such issue the people who stand to benefit from the issue will make it appear bigger than it is. And the people harmed by it will make it appear smaller than it is.

I'm not sure who benefits from greater infant mortality, however the count is made, but things like high blood pressure and impaired kidney function have a direct effect on the viability of a new born. After been responsible for two pregnancies in which these were severe complications, I can say prenatal care is critical care made the difference. Both these problems have barely discernable symptoms until it's too late.

Even women receiving consistent good prenatal care suffer severe and life threatening complications. Including women who themselves are obstructions or nurses who work in obstetrics.

This is compounded if the mother is not white.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I made an appointment today for a dental exam. I have to be clear of any infections at least two weeks before my TAVR.
The receptionist said I had great insurance. The evil United Health care. A $3000 voucher I think should cover it. She seemed almost gleeful.
Maybe they will charge the max.

Paying out of pocket runs about 50% over what a dental insurer pays out, for needed care. I've never bothered with dental insurance. For what I would pay monthly for the insurance, at best it's a break even scenario. But in my mind, it's one less pain in the ass corporate entity to deal with.

I guess this is a bit off topic as the left have no teeth.

I actually had it for a while through my employer. I figured it cost a bit more than it paid out--but I could pay for it with pre-tax dollars. That made it a good deal.

 

[TSwizzle]

Even women receiving consistent good prenatal care suffer severe and life threatening complications. Including women who themselves are obstructions or nurses who work in obstetrics.

This is compounded if the mother is not white.

And why would that be?

 

[Toni]

Even women receiving consistent good prenatal care suffer severe and life threatening complications. Including women who themselves are obstructions or nurses who work in obstetrics.

This is compounded if the mother is not white.

And why would that be?

It’s well documented that women of color in the the US have worse outcomes in pregnancy, labor abd delivery even when controlling for education, socioeconomic status, preexisting medical conditions and access to health care.

It is well documented that women of any race face a larger disregard by medical workers of symptoms especially pain. Women face less recognition of heart attack symptoms for example because their symptoms may differ from those of men. Women were specifically excluded from many studies because it was supposed that their menstrual cycles would interfere with collecting reliable data. Historically, medically established norms were established using doctors and medical students who were readily available in hospitals and who were healthy, white and male. Now there is a greater push to include more diversity in the population sampled to capture data that better resembles the population, which, btw, is not comprised solely it mainly of healthy young white males.

What I’d Like Everyone to Know About Racism in Pregnancy Care

An ob-gyn discusses racial inequities in pregnancy care and what can be done about it.

www.acog.org

Research shows higher rates of maternal mortality, or death related to pregnancy and childbirth, among women of color. Rates of maternal mortality are 3 to 4 times higher in Black women and 2 to 3 times higher in American Indian and Alaska Native women than in White women.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/

There is growing evidence of gender disparities in medical evaluations, treatments, and outcomes. Still, little is known about the mechanisms that contribute to these disparities and what policies may affect these disparities.

Qualitative studies and survey evidence indicate that women are more likely to have their symptoms dismissed and more often told that their symptoms are due to emotional sources rather than physical sources

 

[TSwizzle]

Even women receiving consistent good prenatal care suffer severe and life threatening complications. Including women who themselves are obstructions or nurses who work in obstetrics.

This is compounded if the mother is not white.

And why would that be?

It’s well documented that women of color in the the US have worse outcomes in pregnancy, labor abd delivery even when controlling for education, socioeconomic status, preexisting medical conditions and access to health care.

Well documented you say? So is this down to genetics? They don’t have great jeans or something?

It is well documented that women of any race face a larger disregard by medical workers of symptoms especially pain.

Well documented you say?

Women face less recognition of heart attack symptoms for example because their symptoms may differ from those of men. Women were specifically excluded from many studies because it was supposed that their menstrual cycles would interfere with collecting reliable data. Historically, medically established norms were established using doctors and medical students who were readily available in hospitals and who were healthy, white and male. Now there is a greater push to include more diversity in the population sampled to capture data that better resembles the population, which, btw, is not comprised solely it mainly of healthy young white males.

sure, Jan.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Sure, Jan 6th was a right wing fascist coup attempt.

 

[Toni]

Even women receiving consistent good prenatal care suffer severe and life threatening complications. Including women who themselves are obstructions or nurses who work in obstetrics.

This is compounded if the mother is not white.

And why would that be?

It’s well documented that women of color in the the US have worse outcomes in pregnancy, labor abd delivery even when controlling for education, socioeconomic status, preexisting medical conditions and access to health care.

Well documented you say? So is this down to genetics? They don’t have great jeans or something?

It is well documented that women of any race face a larger disregard by medical workers of symptoms especially pain.

Well documented you say?

Women face less recognition of heart attack symptoms for example because their symptoms may differ from those of men. Women were specifically excluded from many studies because it was supposed that their menstrual cycles would interfere with collecting reliable data. Historically, medically established norms were established using doctors and medical students who were readily available in hospitals and who were healthy, white and male. Now there is a greater push to include more diversity in the population sampled to capture data that better resembles the population, which, btw, is not comprised solely it mainly of healthy young white males.

sure, Jan.

I’m so sorry that your reading compression and the ability or willingness to read or to click on links has let you down. Again.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

For example, I think during to the most recent charge that Platner needs to step down due to the most recent charge of sexual assault. I read about the details this morning. The woman said that Platner was so drunk that he didn't remember what had happened the night before. The thing I don't understand is why, since he immediately feel asleep after sex, why didn't she call the police and report the rape. That's what I would have done.

That's what I think about all those accusations from years or decades ago. Like that EJC woman. She could have called the police when it supposedly happened, and not waited until she was trying to cash in on her misandrist book to make the accusation.

Would she have been believed? I doubt it.

But his response is damning.

I would not convict him based on her testimony, I would convict him based on his "defense" to her claims.

 

[TSwizzle]

Even women receiving consistent good prenatal care suffer severe and life threatening complications. Including women who themselves are obstructions or nurses who work in obstetrics.

This is compounded if the mother is not white.

And why would that be?

It’s well documented that women of color in the the US have worse outcomes in pregnancy, labor abd delivery even when controlling for education, socioeconomic status, preexisting medical conditions and access to health care.

Well documented you say? So is this down to genetics? They don’t have great jeans or something?

It is well documented that women of any race face a larger disregard by medical workers of symptoms especially pain.

Well documented you say?

Women face less recognition of heart attack symptoms for example because their symptoms may differ from those of men. Women were specifically excluded from many studies because it was supposed that their menstrual cycles would interfere with collecting reliable data. Historically, medically established norms were established using doctors and medical students who were readily available in hospitals and who were healthy, white and male. Now there is a greater push to include more diversity in the population sampled to capture data that better resembles the population, which, btw, is not comprised solely it mainly of healthy young white males.

sure, Jan.

I’m so sorry that your reading compression and the ability or willingness to read or to click on links has let you down. Again.

There is nothing wrong with my reading compression (sic) and I’m willing to read or click on links if provided.

 

[Derec]

Would she have been believed? I doubt it.

If it happened, she would have stood a much better chance. For one, he was just a real estate developer back then. Also, again if it happened, there would be a much greater chance of finding actual evidence. Video footage form Bergdorf's for example.

But his response is damning.
I would not convict him based on her testimony, I would convict him based on his "defense" to her claims.

Trump says a lot of outrageous things all the time. Just last night he followed up his threats against the Iran regime with "Praise Allah". That does not prove he converted to Islam. And neither do his statements about the Bergdorf case prove that what EJC said was true.
And she has her own believability and mental health issues. Like calling rape "sexy". Or claiming that she kept the dress she wore that day unwashed for all that time, over 20 years, and that she then wore it to the interview.
And the whole thing lacks verisimilitude. There are no sales associates or customers within shouting distance of the changing rooms in a fancy NYC department store? Really?

 

[Derec]

You start by disbelieving any female accuser.

Wrong. I start from a position of neutrality. But cases that tend to be discussed on here are not cases with strong evidence. They are the cases like Duke Lacrosse where many (including Duke professors/administration and Nancy DisGrace of CNN) jumped to conclusions not because of evidence but because of their prejudices about "white men" as perpetrators and "women of color" as victims. Many even persisted as more and more exculpatory evidence came out.
Or take the UVA rape hoax. I did not say anything about that case until Jackie Coakley's claims started to break apart. At that point, it became reasonable to actively disbelieve her, and yet, many on here and elsewhere continued to believe her.

What do you think the chances are that Donald Trump actually raped anyone?

Relatively high in aggregate. But the chances of him having raped EJC in a Bergdorf changing room sometime in the mid-90s (EJC claims to not remember when it supposedly took place) are pretty low. You need evidence for a specific case, not just a general assessment of likelihood.

 

[Toni]

You start by disbelieving any female accuser.

Wrong. I start from a position of neutrality. But cases that tend to be discussed on here are not cases with strong evidence. They are the cases like Duke Lacrosse where many (including Duke professors/administration and Nancy DisGrace of CNN) jumped to conclusions not because of evidence but because of their prejudices about "white men" as perpetrators and "women of color" as victims. Many even persisted as more and more exculpatory evidence came out.
Or take the UVA rape hoax. I did not say anything about that case until Jackie Coakley's claims started to break apart. At that point, it became reasonable to actively disbelieve her, and yet, many on here and elsewhere continued to believe her.

What do you think the chances are that Donald Trump actually raped anyone?

Relatively high in aggregate. But the chances of him having raped EJC in a Bergdorf changing room sometime in the mid-90s (EJC claims to not remember when it supposedly took place) are pretty low. You need evidence for a specific case, not just a general assessment of likelihood.

She doesn’t know the date. Co temporarily she disclosed to friends who urged her not to report to the police because DJT was a BFD. She dud save her dress with semen stains and that info: she had the clothing she was wearing and her friends back her up as to her disclosure plus DJT’s habitual lying and bragging about things he likes to do that ARE indeed sexual assaults made her claims very credible to the jury

FWIW, I remember exactly what I was wearing and exactly where it happened the first time I was sexually assaulted, well over 50 years ago. I could not, however, tell you the date although I know the month and year. I never wore those clothes again. No semen stains but plenty of grass stains. The only surprising thing was that my mother never asked me about why I was t wearing that outfit, bought special for back to school.

I’m certain that in your life you have had some traumas, hopefully no sexual assaults. Those are awful and I sincerely hope you’ve never had that experience. But I do bet that you have had some traumas which happened on dates you aren’t sure of unless you had a specific reason to remember, such as the day of the Challenger tragedy or your 14th birthday, etc. I remember when all of my grandparents died but I’d have to look up the dates of their passing. I can remember a lot of e tenant upsetting events—when my father told me he was divorcing my mother, for example but I could not tell you what the date was or the day of the week ( probably a weekend). I remember the conversation and where we were but date??

Sexual assaults are traumatic enough that the victim truly does not always or usually remember a lot of details. Details may come back sporadically or not at all, Memories may be fragmented.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Re: Platnar. That’s unacceptably low bar. Plantar should withdraw and if he doesn’t he should be removed and replaced. Frankly I never voted for Clinton because of the allegations of sexual assault against him. I still believe them, just like I believed Anita Hill. I understand that people want to excuse him
because of PTSD. In my experience, time does not change people who are sexually coercive.

PTSD should not be an excuse, but you go in the other extreme and believe every female accuser. I am sure you also believed Crystal Mangum and Jackie Coakley.

I’m not googling names you bring up.

Crystal Mangum is the Duke rape case that turned out not to be--looked fishy from the start but there was a lot of believe the woman. I don't recognize the other one.

AFAIK, PTSD does not cause someone to commit sexual assault. It can and does cause anger issues ( and other issues) and cause disproportionate anger responses.

You're the one who brought up PTSD.

Someone who has been assaulted( sexually or otherwise) might over-react to perceived or real threats. I know this to be true from personal experience. It might cause someone to be anxious or fearful in situations that trigger a ( suppressed or not) memory of a traumatic event, even when there is no actual threat. Example: Service members who served in combat zones might react to a car backfiring or fireworks going off as though it were a rocket exploding or a gunshot.

I think the issue is perceiving something as an assault when there was not such.

 

[Toni]

Re: Platnar. That’s unacceptably low bar. Plantar should withdraw and if he doesn’t he should be removed and replaced. Frankly I never voted for Clinton because of the allegations of sexual assault against him. I still believe them, just like I believed Anita Hill. I understand that people want to excuse him
because of PTSD. In my experience, time does not change people who are sexually coercive.

PTSD should not be an excuse, but you go in the other extreme and believe every female accuser. I am sure you also believed Crystal Mangum and Jackie Coakley.

I’m not googling names you bring up.

Crystal Mangum is the Duke rape case that turned out not to be--looked fishy from the start but there was a lot of believe the woman. I don't recognize the other one.

AFAIK, PTSD does not cause someone to commit sexual assault. It can and does cause anger issues ( and other issues) and cause disproportionate anger responses.

You're the one who brought up PTSD.

Someone who has been assaulted( sexually or otherwise) might over-react to perceived or real threats. I know this to be true from personal experience. It might cause someone to be anxious or fearful in situations that trigger a ( suppressed or not) memory of a traumatic event, even when there is no actual threat. Example: Service members who served in combat zones might react to a car backfiring or fireworks going off as though it were a rocket exploding or a gunshot.

I think the issue is perceiving something as an assault when there was not such.

I think the issue is not perceiving the issue is assault when it is.

Men have vastly different criteria with respect to their own thoughts, feelings, actions and perceptions compared with the criteria they use when evaluating women's thoughts, actions, feelings and perceptions. Men as a whole do not experience as much empathy as do women. Men are infantilized in this way, to believe that we women must accommodate whatever their needs are, with relation to sex or their fragile egos. And women do this, in part, to avoid greater physical harm. We minimize and excuse when we really should not because as it happens, it's never just that one time or that one person. Nope it's a pattern of behavior.

Did I mention PTSD? I believe I did with respect to my own experiences and with respect to whether or not PTSD causes someone to be sexually violent. It is well known that victims of PTSD often do lash out at perceptions of threats, even when there is actually no threat.

It is NOT known that victims of PTSD act out sexually because of PTSD and attack other people because of their traumatic experiences in combat. BTW, all combat is traumatic.

If women acted out violently as a result of their PTSD from sexual assault by men, there would be many fewer men.

 

[Elixir]

I think the issue is perceiving something as an assault when there was not such.

I think you’re talking about a psychotic lack of empathy. If a woman feels uncomfortable, there are subtle but unmistakeable signals. I know from experience.
Signals from women who feel threatened have to be far more overt, but I don’t go there so I can’t be sure.
But if a man forces himself upon her, there’s no goddam way I’m going to believe he didn’t know it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Which ones for example? I know you believe Ramirez re Kavanaugh, even though she admitted that she wasn't sure the alleged penis belonged to Kav until she spoke to her lawyer.

Doesn't really matter--she didn't convince me he's guilty. He did.

That said: my default is to believe accusers but to verify and to see if the accusation makes sense or is even possible.

Default should be an open mind, without believing either side a priori. If you start believing the accuser by default, you will continue believing the accuser if there is no evidence for nor against the accusation. Example, CBF. There is no evidence for her claim, and there is nothing disproving it. As such, we should not believe that it happened. No evidence is no evidence.

Which is why we have such a mess with liability lawsuits. Clearly harmed plaintiff, no data on whether the defendant actually did it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

For girls and women, it is in our best interests to give at least some credence to girls and women who say that so and so was ‘a bit rough’ or ‘really really insistent.’

Being insistent is not a crime. Being "a bit rough" is not necessarily a crime either, depending on the definition of "rough" and what was communicated by the woman at the time. Everybody likes a different level of roughness, and it can also vary by mood, so it's important to have good communication when having sex - and that goes for both men and women.

"Being a bit rough" is not a defense to a rape allegation. It's basically a confession.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

For girls and women, it is in our best interests to give at least some credence to girls and women who say that so and so was ‘a bit rough’ or ‘really really insistent.’

Everybody likes a different level of roughness...

[Citation needed].