luonneton-blog

[luonneton-blog]

Keira is one of countless Greenlandic women in Denmark who have been separated from their children after undergoing highly controversial “parenting competency” tests (known as forældrekompetenceundersøgelse or FKU) used by social services to assess whether parents are suitable to care for their children. In common with many of these cases, Zammi was placed with Danish foster parents. Keira fears Zammi will lose her language and identity as a result. For years, parenting competency tests have been criticised by campaigners and human rights bodies that say they are culturally unsuitable for people from Inuit backgrounds, and therefore discriminatory.

Generally, the tests are used if a child is believed to be struggling with challenges in behaviour, feelings or thoughts – and will form one part of a social worker’s investigations, says clinical psychologist Isak C Nellemann, who used to perform FKU for the Danish state, and now helps advise families and lawyers in cases like Keira’s. But, often, he says, simply being Greenlandic will be enough to get the attention of social workers.

The tests cover attachment, personality traits, cognitive abilities and psychopathology, and take about 15-20 hours. It is almost impossible to pass them, says Nellemann; even he and his colleagues have failed to do so. Questions can include “What is glass made of?” and “What is the name of the big staircase in Rome?” Nellemann argues that the tests are culturally specific and a poor way to measure innate intelligence. “There is a lot of stigmatisation of people from Greenland,” he says. “We don’t know why we should use these tests for parenting.” [...]

Until 1953, Greenland was ruled by Denmark as a colony. Now the territory is part of the Danish kingdom, with Copenhagen controlling its foreign and security policy. In recent years, there have been multiple scandals about historic and more recent population-control practices that have been described by many in Greenland, including the former prime minister, as a genocide. These include the IUD scandal, in which 4,500 women and girls were fitted with contraception without their knowledge or consent between 1966 and 1970. Many of the details have only recently come to light.

Keira, who has three children, all of whom have been removed from her, was subjected to an FKU test in 2014 that is understood to have contributed to the removal of Zoe, who was then nine, and Keira’s son, Nolan, who was just eight months old and breastfeeding; he is now 11. Nolan, whom Keira sees twice a week, now lives with his father. Keira was given another test last year that contributed to the removal of Zammi. When she was given the most recent test, she says she was told it was to see if she was “civilised enough”. The two assessments, 10 years apart, were made by the same Danish-speaking psychologist, who was also Keira’s therapist. Keira’s first language is Kalaallisut (West Greenlandic). She is not fluent in Danish.

[luonneton-blog]

The entire Discworld fandom on the 25th of May.

[luonneton-blog]

that post that's like. "americans sincerely trying to argue that they're UNIQUELY incapable of learning things about other countries and cultures is still a form of american exceptionalism." I think about that a lot.

[luonneton-blog]

"you don't get it, the usa is a fascist country full of government propaganda, and our rights as women and queer people are constantly attacked!! you have no idea what that's like!!" i'm hungarian 👍

[luonneton-blog]

Residents of Tallinn apparently are all cannabis georg who smoke *checks notes* 48 480 blunts a day (per person), according to Helsingin Uutiset

[luonneton-blog]

academic dishonesty is not something you can spin as moral lol i do not want to share a career field let alone a social sphere with a bunch of chatgpt using ass bitches

[luonneton-blog]

Maybe the real cut to the public service was Peter Dutton's job all along

[luonneton-blog]

"Do you ever dream of land?" The whale asks the tuna.

"No." Says the tuna, "Do you?"

"I have never seen it." Says the whale, "but deep in my body, I remember it."

"Why do you care," says the tuna, "if you will never see it."

"There are bones in my body built to walk through the forests and the mountains." Says the whale.

"They will disappear." Says the tuna, "one day, your body will forget the forests and the mountains."

"Maybe I don't want to forget," Says the whale, "The forests were once my home."

"I have seen the forests." Whispers the salmon, almost to itself.

"Tell me what you have seen," says the whale.

"The forests spawned me." Says the salmon. "They sent me to the ocean to grow. When I am fat with the bounty of the ocean, I will bring it home."

"Why would the forests seek the bounty of the oceans?" Asks the whale. "They have bounty of their own."

"You forget," says the salmon, "That the oceans were once their home."

[luonneton-blog]

The nature of academic sociology is that I am constantly beefing with dead frenchmen

[luonneton-blog]

And also, Death of the Author is one of many different approaches to literary analysis- it is not the only one, and it is not inherently better than other forms!

Within the Death of the Author framework, your analysis is expected to be entirely divorced from the authorial intent and context. In some specific circumstances, this can be useful- but authorial intent and context is really really important for understanding why the author makes the choices they make.

Artistic choices are not made in a vacuum- both the author and the reader are products of their circumstances. This is undeniable.

When we ignore the intent, the ideologies, the context which underlies the creation of the text, we make ourselves the ideal targets of propaganda. No need to question why the author chose to associate a villain with certain traits, a hero with others- that’s just The Text, as it is. The interpretation is purely subjective- while the subconscious assumptions are assimilated.

bat at hornets nest maybe but "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" refers to low income communities needing to choose between survival vs being eco friendly. not you continuing to watch the harry potter movies

[luonneton-blog]

bat at hornets nest maybe but "there is no ethical consumption under capitalism" refers to low income communities needing to choose between survival vs being eco friendly. not you continuing to watch the harry potter movies

[luonneton-blog]

The way I see it, whether or not the Federation deals with Section 31 is the dividing line between Utopianism and becoming something along the lines of the Borg- Section 31 believe that the ideals of the Federation- post-scarcity egalitarianism, total cooperation between all species, cultural melting pot, peace etc are worthy goals- but they don’t hold themselves to those same standards, as they are defined by a machiavellian Ends Justify The Means ideology in which they believe they can achieve the Federation’s utopian end-goal by undercutting the rights of the individual and of minority groups in the Federation. In other words- “We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us.”

A damning depiction of this is in one of the abandoned ideas from the DS9 series 7 writing room- that Section 31 would attempt to undermine and eventually destroy the Bajoran religion, in order to push them into joining the Federation.

I simply cannot stand how current Star Trek treats Section 31 as some hypothetical moral quandary.

“What if we needed a secret extrajudicial organization to commit crimes to protect us?” We already had one, it was the Cold War CIA, and do you know what it did? It instigated holy wars. It installed dictators. It authorized kill squads to make goods just a little bit cheaper. You’re asking a question that has already been answered and the answer was “When you give people a lot of power, zero accountability, a mission statement of doing awful things for ‘the right reasons’, and a mentality that people are either sheep to be controlled or wolves to be slain, they do not protect anyone. They just kill and hurt and destroy, and even the people they claim to protect just suffer all the more for it.”.

Section 31 was created when CIA declassifications made clear what had been done in our name and with our money. That’s why in its native DS9, its primary purpose was to be rejected as a concept and defeated by our protagonists, why the Federation has to be saved from its rampant, thoughtless cruelty. Section 31 is not a sci fi concept. It is not a “what if?”. It is an allegory for a very real organization and ideology that has harmed billions of people, that will take decades to root out and further decades, possibly even centuries, to heal from. It is evil, it was modeled on evil, and the impulse to defend or lighten it is not a politically neutral one. It has no place in the Star Trek future, just as it’s real world equivalents have no place in our society, and anyone who says otherwise is deceiving you or themselves.

Portraying Section 31 as morally grey or worse, necessary, is a lie. It is repackaged military propaganda used to justify and whitewash its real world equivalents by creating a fantasy where such an organization is anything but evil, to make it easier to sell that same fantasy in real life. I can accept and even enjoy moral quandaries and flawed characters in Star Trek. I will not accept being lied to.

[luonneton-blog]

[luonneton-blog]

behold. A dire wolf

[luonneton-blog]

Ma kardan, et eesti oleks ameerika järgmine sihtmärk. Iga päev ma näen uudisteartikleid inglise keeles- patroneerivad asjad nagu “Mis on, see väike maakene, kust EU kõrge esindaja pärit on?”

Ja nad ütlevad nii palju ilma kontekstita, ilma ajaloota- “Oh, nii huvitav, seal on palju venelasi! Oh, kahju, vaesed kallid on kurvad, sest eestlased ei räägi nendega vene keeles :(“

Ja kommentaarides on sadu ühendriigilased, kes mõtlevad “Noh! Ma lugesin esimest lõiku, ja nüüd olen suurim ekspert maailmas :) :)”

Pool on Trumpi-fänn fašistid, kes arvad, et Kaja Kallas on barrikaad Ameerika Firsti ideoloogia vastu, ja tema maa peaks anastatud olla.

Teine pool on suuremad hüpokriitid maailmas- inimesed, kes arvad, et Putin on vasak-kangelane- nad nimetavad ennast “Anti-Colonial” ja “Leftist”, aga nad usuvad, et Nõukogude Liit oli utoopia igaühele, et Venemaa on sotsialist- ja et iga põlisrahvas vene impeeriumis on ebapuhtad degenereerunud natsid. (Nad ei märka irooniat, et see idee kaasasündinud ideoloogiast on ju. V ä g a natsiline)

[luonneton-blog]

I genuinely think we are seeing a mass radicalisation movement across all sides of the political spectrum- but not a consistent one. Every day I’m seeing people who are *ostensibly* leftists radicalise themselves into ultra-far-right political positions, with absolutely no sense of critical self-awareness.

This is not horseshoe theory- none of the problems are in any way related to their politics being “too left wing”- it is hypocrisy, pure and simple. It comes from people seeing “Leftist” as an identity, rather than a set of ideals and actions. I would go so far as to say that it’s exactly the same thing that happened to the Bolsheviks, to the Chinese Communist Party, et cetera.

People going “Well I *know* that I’m a Leftist, so any action I do is inherently a Leftist one” without interrogating it.

As someone who has spent several years researching the ways in which Calvinist theology forms a breeding ground for Fascism, I’ve gotta say. It’s the Same Fucking Thing

What the hell is the deal with the hypocrisy and dehumanisation in so many ostensibly progressive groups?

It really feels like you follow a leftist who fights for the human rights, dignity, and self-determination of Palestinians, Arabs, Indigenous Americans, Black people- but not Eastern Europeans, Indigenous Russians, or persecuted minorities in Asia, because “Uhhhhhh they’re inherently evil”

And then you follow a leftist who fights for the latter group, and then they go “Uhhhh but Palestinians of course are inherently evil”

Hear me out, how about don’t be a fucking hypocrite! Dignity and human rights are for everyone, you don’t get to pick and choose!

[luonneton-blog]

What the hell is the deal with the hypocrisy and dehumanisation in so many ostensibly progressive groups?

It really feels like you follow a leftist who fights for the human rights, dignity, and self-determination of Palestinians, Arabs, Indigenous Americans, Black people- but not Eastern Europeans, Indigenous Russians, or persecuted minorities in Asia, because “Uhhhhhh they’re inherently evil”

And then you follow a leftist who fights for the latter group, and then they go “Uhhhh but Palestinians of course are inherently evil”

Hear me out, how about don’t be a fucking hypocrite! Dignity and human rights are for everyone, you don’t get to pick and choose!