That was possibly social media’s greatest fiasco. It at least was the funniest and most entertaining one. Not only because of the ridiculous reason for how it was formed, not only for the legion of horrendous professional victim-pseudo celebrities it created, but the fact the “villains”, the gamers, were both a) Correct and b) won the fight. It was hilarious. To blame video games and their users for anything after ten thousand years of civilized violence is absurd to say the least. When the pushback happened, some true social media comics came out to shine: ...let’s not forget South Park’s brilliant and hilarious nineteenth season was based around the stir that gamergate created. People slung shit at each other for two years straight over an argument that was over in ten seconds. It especially brought out the absolute WORST in liberals.
See, I think video games do have an impact on a vulnerable person's psyche, and I say that as someone who has been a life-long gamer, and particularly into very violent games. Its not the primary cause or even the catalyst, but I just dont buy that the impact of a medium thats consumed for many hours per day is 0%. When you have games like Modern Warfare 2 where one mission is specifically to commit a mass shooting in an airport, I think the gaming community needs to be honest with themselves a little bit. No shit. And it all started around a game called "Depression Quest." Lawl. Obviously sending threats to someone over absolutely nothing is absurd, but I never got the rush to defend someone who is fucking journalists for good game reviews. But also, what do the gamers give a fuck if theyre never going to play that game anyway (or even if they were)? What a bizarre period that was.
As a counterpoint to this, medication has not only saved my life, but the lives of people I care a great deal about. There are two problems that I can see. One, there is and continues to be a huge stigma with mental illness, and by extension, mental health. Nobody cares if you see a doctor for heartburn, but if you mention you saw a therapist because you punched your 4th hole through a wall, suddenly you're a danger to society. The ironic thing is that by seeing a therapist to address your issues, you are making yourself less of a danger to society. The second thing is the lack of resources that are available. For example, the therapists that are covered by my insurance are so overloaded that I could only see them once a month, if I was lucky. Therapy is a process that requires a lot of contact between patient and doctor. You can't only see someone once a month and expect to get results. If Medicare for All was a thing, maybe I wouldn't need to wait for an in-network therapist to see me for 45 minutes once a month. Maybe I could see a therapist that might have a lighter caseload that doesn't accept my current insurance now.
I agree, I really do, but I think this comes with some caveats. - Some mentally ill people are really, really fucking weird, and quite unpleasant to be around. Part of the stigma isn't just ignorance or misconception. Crazy people can be extremely difficult to deal with. No one is obligated to want to be around them in their free time, and if you've ever had to work with someone that is truly nuts you know how disruptive it can be. I realize this is pretty fucking harsh, but it's true. That said, I've had people tell me they had severe anxiety, or some other condition and I honestly wouldn't have known unless they brought it up. It's kind of peculiar, because I don't think people like that would have fallen under the category of 'mentally ill' 20 years ago. - Telling people you're in therapy is telling them you have something wrong with you (usually). People are going to judge you for that just like anything else; your appearance, the way you talk, your dating history, etc. I agree that's it's shitty, but I'm just pointing out that this is never going away completely. - Our record in treating mental health is spotty at best. We've locked people up in wards who have no business being there. We've administered lobotomies under the guise of 'treatment'. Even today we often dope people to the gills because we have no idea how else to deal with someone whose mental illness is that severe. At the other end we prescribe pharmaceuticals to people who don't need them, and rampantly so. Abuse of stimulants and SSRIs in the field of psychiatry is widespread. I've seen from my own experiences how much some psychologists suck. My parents sent me to see a guy when I was a teenager because I was depressed. Dude was a complete jackass, insisting on a number of theories about my relationship with my friends that weren't remotely true. Thankfully, my parents were reasonable and I stopped seeing him pretty quickly. A girl I went to school with also saw him and he got her locked up in rehab because she admitted she had taken ecstasy a couple of times. I knew her fairly well, and other than smoking weed somewhat regularly she barely ever touched other drugs. Dude was an idiot and a total asshole,, and I'm sure experiences dealing with mental health care providers like him aren't all that uncommon. Thinking someone is a danger to society just because they're in therapy isn't very common, but if you tell them you have anger problems to the point that you're regularly punching holes in your wall they would be stupid not to be apprehensive about your temperament. I think you can, but it really depends on what your condition is, and how serious it is. Regardless, yeah, there's going to be a substantial drop in quality of treatment when therapists are that overbooked.
Yeah yeah yeah, another tweet mocking the President's stupidity from this week. ...except it was tweeted in 2017.
https://news.google.com/articles/CB...LWRpc2FzdGVycy_SAQA?hl=en-US&gl=US&ceid=US:en FEMA is unprepared, because they staff a bunch of small disasters. Why? Because the costs are often wildly over-inflated. What happens to that money? Well.... https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/27/politics/fema-immigration-enforcement-dorian/index.html There's some fuckery afoot here, and it's pretty dirty, if not overtly criminal.
Where do some of these people get the idea in their pin heads that an entire nation wants them running shit? “I’m the mayor of an Indiana city that you’ve never fucking heard of unless you live in Indiana. My city’s council is in shambles. My police force is running amok while whining about scrutiny. My own citizens come to my campaign rallies states over to heckle me. Elect me as your next POTUS.”
Well, the current VP is from Indiana, and isn't widely loved.... Also, I think this is as wide open an election as you're going to get. If you get a head of steam, shoot your shot. This isn't like last time, where the candidate was "due her turn".
He'll never come out and formally say it, but I really thing Buttigieg is putting himself out there more as a potential VP candidate for when one of the top 3 (Biden, Warren, Sanders) ultimately lock up the nomination. He ticks off a bunch of the boxes that none of those candidates can directly cover and is a clear direct opposite to Pence other than where they're from. Former military service, from the midwest/rust belt area, gay. I don't think the last one is a demo that republicans need help with, but the first two are certainly areas where gains will need to be had compared to the last election.
I think I've said it before, but I would absolutely love for this to happen just so we can see the VP debates. Buttigieg: *responds to moderator's question by saying how his military service makes him qualified to answer the question but that's now what he's here to talk about* Pence: *looks around angrily* .... QUEER!!!!
At least booty master has some government experience. Yang has the worst resume of a presidential candidate I've ever seen. He ran a small testing company that was quickly gobbled up by a larger testing company and that's about it. Gee, handed out a few standardized tests? Sounds like you're ready to be president, sir! He's been slowly but steadily inching his way up the polls. Still not a real contender, but why is anyone voting him at all? Oh right, all the free money he'll be giving out. I'd like to see them interview the people voting for him. "Do you actually believe that if he wins you're going to waking up in the morning to a big fat check in the mail and that despite being poor as dirt you're never going to have financial problems again?" "Yes! Yes! Yes!"
Learn to run a city before you run a country. Because from just about everything I read in the news about South Bend, the mayor thing isn’t going well for him. And that’s what he should be focusing on.
We're in a different era. Two of the major candidates are Senators with no executive experience, and our current President never learned to run a business much less a city. If executive experience mattered, it would have been Inslee vs Hickenlooper the whole way (not that I would have minded, if I'm being honest).
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2019/10/james-mattis-trump/596665/ I might just read that book.
Man, I liked Mattis, but if that article really sums up why he left then good riddance. That's the exact mentality that gets us embroiled in these never ending middle east conflicts. Trump did exactly what I wanted him to. He knocked ISIS down and promptly got the fuck out. Liberal criticism about Trump and the military has been beyond bizarre. They have constantly been bitching that he's both too aggressive and not aggressive enough. They're often flip flopping on this every week. The middle eastern policy coming from the democratic party now is the most contradictory mess I've ever seen.
I mean, look at the state of Indiana and how it was run under Pence as Governor. Not exactly stellar, so the comparison doesn't really seem to matter to the majority of people. And at least recently from a historical perspective, the VP nominee has traditionally been about who best compliments the presidential candidate and fills in the most holes in their electability checklist, not their actual ability to govern.