#retractions

A whole mess.

By which I mean a trusted outlet reporting a fake apology from a fake representative. (Linked article is a correction.)

This right after the Daily Mail was posting the "leaked" Travis Kelce doc. Journalism is in a scary state, y'all.

There’s a number of things that make it iffy. But the most obvious and easy to explain is as follows: 

Basically, in the scenario outlined in the ask, Spock is wearing a wig so he can pretend to be a woman in order to romance Kirk. And that scenario feeds directly into the idea that “gay men” will “disguise themselves” as women in order to “trick” straight men into sleeping with them. Which is one of the oldest transphobic stereotypes in the book. It’s the reason we have the “trans panic defense”. And it’s the reason behind a lot of the violence against trans women.  

I didn’t realize this until it was pointed out to me. I wasn’t even really thinking about gender when I shopped those awful wigs on. To me, what made this prompt funny (besides tacky shiny wigs) was like… an object permanence thing. Like how it’s funny that a baby can’t remember that you’re still there when you hide behind your hands during ‘peek-a-boo’. Or like that gag you see sometimes in old detective movies where a character sticks on a fake mustache and suddenly no one can recognize them. The idea that Kirk could look at someone who was clearly, obviously, Spock but like, just wearing something funny on his head, and think nope that’s a totally different person I have never seen before in my life had me in stitches.

One retracted study is hardly enough to prove Tegnell and other European health officials are right. But it is likely to fuel debate surrounding the ethics of forcing individuals to wear masks, which some argue is a violation of the Principle of Effectiveness, which states public health agencies are only allowed to recommend interventions they know are effective.

@anneapocalypse didn’t say this.

i said this. 😳