Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh…what? Apparently this is from a kiddy bible.
You’d think he was offering them cheeseburgers.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Priorities all wrong. Priorities fucked up. Priorities baaaaaaaad.
No. Don’t do that. Instead denounce the torture of Raif Badawi. Denounce the mass murders by Boko Haram. Denounce the massacre in Paris. Denounce the murders of many thousands of Muslims by Islamist fanatics. Denounce cruelty and torture and oppression everywhere. Denounce crimes against the living.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Another Facebook group supporting Raif Badawi.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Udo Schuklenk has been working on the Canadian right to die issue for years. He has some first thoughts on the ruling.
Unless you have lived under a rock during these last few years you will know that I spent a significant amount of my time arguing in favour of the decriminalisation of assisted dying in the country, no least in a report of an expert panel the Royal Society of Canada asked me to chair, on end-of-life decision-making in Canada. In addition I wrote a large number of newspaper columns on the issue and gave oodles of TV interviews and what-not to advance that cause.
He and Eric and I met up for lunch at CFI-Ottawa’s Eschaton a couple of years ago. That was memorable.
The SCC came down with this unanimous decision, defining thus who would be able to receive assistance in dying: a ‘competent adult person who (1) clearly consents to the termination of life and (2) has a grievous and irremediable medical condition (including an illness, disease or disability) that causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual in the circumstances of his or her condition.’
This is pretty much what we recommended in our report. What I find particularly important about these criteria is that the Justices rejected a threshold requiring that patients must be in a terminal condition, or near the end of life. The current legislation, on this count, in Quebec, will have to be re-written. At the last minute opponents of Quebec’s legislation added this threshold, and, thanks to the SCC decision, it will have to be taken out of Quebec’s legislation again as it would unjustly deprive people of access to assisted dying who are not close to the end of their lives.
Yes. A disease can be intolerable without being close to the end. Knowing there’s an exit door can make it more tolerable. Thank you SCC.
Udo then generously explains how the opponents of assisted dying went wrong.
Turns out, Supreme Court Justices are a bit smarter than DiManno and Kay, who have shown themselves clueless about the issue at hand throughout their years of campaigning in their newspaper columns against assisted dying. The judges looked at the actual evidence and ‘rejected the argument that adoption of a regulatory regime would initiate a descent down a slippery slope into homicide.’
The other vacuous agitprop campaign tool deployed by this camp was their ever-growing concern for ‘the vulnerable’. Given that they didn’t want assisted dying available to anyone, they were careful never to define ‘vulnerable’. Turns out, they and their government ally, the Attorney General, really meant everyone. Vulnerability ceases then to be a useful threshold criterion for anything. The Attorney General eventually said, on the Court record, that ‘every person ispotentially vulnerable.’ The Supreme Court called curtains on this rhetoric, too. It states point blank, ‘We do not agree.’ –
Aggressive lying and fudging of the issues apparently takes you only that far when it comes to Canada’s Supreme Court Justices.
Canada’s. The US’s? Not so applicable.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Big news from Canada via the Beeb –
Canada’s Supreme Court has ruled that doctors may help patients who have severe and incurable medical conditions to die, overturning a 1993 ban.
In a unanimous decision, the court said the law impinged on Canadians’ rights.
The case was brought by a civil rights group on behalf of two women, Kay Carter and Gloria Taylor, with degenerative diseases. Both have since died.
Wow. Eric MacDonald has been campaigning on this issue for years.
The government has to write a new law within a year or the law will be struck down.
Assisted suicide is legal in several European countries and a few US states.
In Canada is it illegal to counsel, aid or abet a suicide, and the offence carries up to 14 years in prison.
Which is why Eric got a visit from the police after he accompanied his wife Elizabeth to Zurich. They didn’t prosecute him though…but they could have. The worst is, she died earlier than she needed to because she was determined to do it while she still could.
In the ruling, the justices wrote they “did not agree that the existential formulation of the right to life requires an absolute prohibition on assistance in dying, or that individuals cannot ‘waive’ their right to life”.
The court limited doctor-assisted suicide to patients who are consenting adults, who have a incurable but not necessarily terminal disease that causes “enduring and intolerable suffering”.
Wo – that “not necessarily terminal” makes it an even bigger deal. There’s an issue with stipulating that the disease has to be terminal, given that some non-terminal diseases can be such misery.
The justices also argued the total ban on doctor-assisted suicide “deprives some individuals of life, as it has the effect of forcing some individuals to take their own lives prematurely, for fear that they would be incapable of doing so when they reached the point where suffering was intolerable”.
Bingo. Exactly. That’s why Eric’s wife Elizabeth insisted on going to Zurich prematurely. The reality of the Oregon and Washington laws has been that fewer people than expected get doctor-assisted suicide: once it’s available, the urgency goes away.
This issue may be like abortion in the US: it may be better to have it decided by legislators than by courts. Then again it may be like segregation: it may be better to have the high court firmly strike down the underlying principle.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Muhammed Syed explains about it.
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=wuYaMhRGrtM
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Via the Humanistisk Ungdom page (Norway’s Humanist Youth) – a sizable collection of people on a cold snowy day protest in front of the Saudi embassy in Oslo.
A Google translatation with some adaptations –
For the fifth time we stand together with Amnesty International outside the Saudi embassy and demonstrate for Raif Badawi .
He is sentenced to prison and 1,000 lashes – for a blog post.
This time, we were suddenly chased 10 meters away from the embassy, behind a hedge, entirely without justification or explanation of who gave the order.
We didn’t give up though, and continued to shout: #Free Raif Badawi! #Stop the flogging!
Go there to see a 9 second video of them doing it, with a pan from them to the embassy.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Originally a comment by Anne Fenwick on FGM in the US.
It is frustrating that neither society nor the statistics seem good at separating 1) women who arrive as immigrants having undergone FGM in their previous countries; 2) their daughters who may be considered at risk; 3) those daughters who actually undergo FGM in a western country or ‘on vacation’. I’m glad this article seemed to get the problem – though I do wonder about their choice of age range, I think we would use a different one in the UK.
What seems to be important is that the arrival of a large number of women in category 1 is going to necessitate a response. In the first place, they’re going to have specific health care needs which the country isn’t used to meeting. I do wonder how that’s going to work out in the US (not that the UK has distinguished itself recently, or anything). It frustrates me when people complain about the necessity of dealing with this as though it was a terrible imposition. That strikes me as practically victim-blaming.
Then there’s the information campaign to make sure the girls in category 2 don’t end up in category 3. That’s very important, because the next stage should be a last resort, after every effort has been expended here. And lastly, the criminal justice stage for people who do put girls into category 3. I just wish people would stop mentally jumping through the first two stages as though they didn’t exist.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Pope sweety says it’s ok for adults to hit children, provided it’s done with dignity.
Pope Francis has backed parents who smack their children, providing the child’s “dignity” is maintained.
He made the remarks during his weekly general audience at the Vatican, which was devoted to the role of fathers in the family.
How does an adult hit a child while maintaining the child’s dignity? Is it that the adult doesn’t abort the child in the process?
The Pope said: “One time, I heard a father in a meeting with married couples say ‘I sometimes have to smack my children a bit, but never in the face so as to not humiliate them.’
“How beautiful,” he added. “He knows the sense of dignity. He has to punish them but does it justly and moves on.”
Oh that is beautiful. It’s simply gorgeous. He hits them on their gleaming little buttocks, so as not to humiliate them.
Pope sweety is still a pope.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Nina Strochlic at the Daily Beast reports that FGM numbers in the US have skyrocketed despite strong federal and state laws against it.
In 1997, the CDC estimated that 168,000 girls and women were at risk or had undergone FGM—at the time of the last national census in 1990. A few years later, in 2000, the African Women’s Center upped the number at 227,000.
But according to estimates released on Friday, there currently are around 507,000 girls living in the U.S. who are either at risk of being cut or who have already been cut. That’s more than triple the figure from the very first nationwide count.
These are estimates, not counts.
This fresh data comes from a new report issued Friday by the nonprofit Population Reference Bureau, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit. It was culled from the U.S. Census’ 2013 American Community Survey. The PRB then crunched the numbers from immigration communities and compared them with the prevalence of FGM in the countries where those people hail from. Working under the assumption that first- or second-generation Americans either have experienced FGM or will at the same rate as their homeland counterparts, the PRB narrowed the focus to teens from 15 to 19, presumably most at risk, and women up to 49, a percentage of whom already have undergone the procedure. New York City and Washington, D.C. have the highest concentration, with more than 50,000 girls at risk in each city. Minneapolis, with its large Somali population, is third.
So basically what the PRB is reporting is an increase in immigration from countries where FGM is prevalent, with a reasonable guess that many girls in those families will have had or are likely to have FGM. Maybe the guess is a little too pessimistic – maybe more immigrants than they think are dropping that particular home custom.
(Speaking of immigration…I was in a bargain grocery store a few days ago, in a suburb of Seattle with a high immigrant population. A girl of about 10, with I assume her father, asked me about a bottle of yellow liquid in her hand – “What’s this?” They looked perhaps Somali. I looked at it and said “It’s for cleaning” at the same time she added, “Is it for cooking?” Alarmed by her question, I gestured at the shelves and said “This whole area is for cleaning stuff, definitely don’t eat it.” She nodded and I bumbled off, then a minute later it dawned on me – yellow liquid – they’re looking for cooking oil. So I tried to find them again to show them where the food items were, but I couldn’t. It haunted me a bit. I’d be pretty at sea trying to find cooking oil in a store where all the labels were in Arabic or Bengali. Then again the daughter is there and there were lots of people around to ask.) (I hope she gets her reward, and is allowed to keep her junk intact.)
If this data seems ambiguous—“may have undergone” or “at risk of undergoing”—that’s because it is. Getting solid numbers on how frequently FGM is actually practiced in the U.S. has been virtually impossible. There is little information on what actually goes on in these insular immigrant communities, and with felony charges facing anyone who admits to orchestrating the cutting, it seems unlikely that many people would answer surveys truthfully.
Which of course is one reason some people oppose criminalization. It’s complicated.
The people most in the know—local teachers and healthcare providers—must be involved to paint an accurate picture of FGM in the United States. They’re also the ones with the best footing to stanch the practice.
Post fliers in those bargain grocery stores – and the nearby check-cashing places and quick loan shark places and the like.
Estimating according to country isn’t very accurate, because rates can vary hugely within countries.
This is why activists are pushing government agencies to create a bottom-up approach to information gathering, so that the federal level can better evaluate on-the-ground needs.
Sharing these numbers with residents of these immigrant communities also could be a first step to quashing the practice. The communities may not even be aware that the practice in many of their home countries actually is on the decline, says Feldman-Jacobs. From Benin to Iraq, from Liberia to the Central African Republic, the rate of FGM has dropped by as much as half among young girls in the past 20 years.
It’s actually a hopeful story, overall.
Part of the impetus behind the federal effort is a 25-year-old activist named Jaha Dukureh, who, along with advocacy group Equality Now, filed a petition last May asking the government to carry out a new study. Her story, as it was told to me at the time, and an examination of the underground FGM crisis in America, can be found here.
Good job, Daily Beast.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
The New Statesman said something interesting in a piece on January 15th on why protesting the flogging of Raif matters.
Under recent Saudi law, anything from “calling for atheist thought” to “inciting protests” or organizing petitions is now punishable as an act of terrorism.
Despite the crackdown at home, however, Saudi Arabia is angling to present itself as a supporter of free expression abroad.
Oh is it. Is it really.
Not that we didn’t know that – what else were they doing turning up in Paris on January 11th? What else were they doing joining that protest march?
But still. Having it spelled out is clarifying. If the Staggers is right about that, then that’s how we have leverage. If those evil bastards really are angling to present themselves as not 100% evil bastards – then they’ll have to act like not 100% evil bastards, won’t they. Then our yelling and shouting is going to trouble them, isn’t it.
Good.
Expect more yelling and shouting, Saudi dictators.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
For the fourth week, the Saudis have refrained from hitting Raif Badawi with a stick 50 times.
Saudi Arabia has again delayed a planned flogging of a blogger, according to a report from Amnesty International.
The Twitter account of the organization’s press office said Raif Badawi was spared a flogging today for reasons not yet known.
Not being able to get away with it without a lot of yelling and shouting, would be one big reason. The embassies would prefer a quiet life.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Greg Epstein later did another series of tweets in order to make clear his attitude to feminism and its more acrimonious opponents.
I’ll start with this one.
Greg Epstein @gregmepstein · 4 hours ago
This Sunday, the organization I direct– the @HarvardHumanist @HumanistHub will present an award to feminist media critic Anita Sarkeesian.Ms. Sarkeesian and other online feminist leaders have been the target of an extraordinary amount of harassment by anti-feminists, MRA’s etc.
I want to address those individuals, and anyone else with questions about why we chose this awardee.
Feminism is a core Humanist value. This isn’t something I decided-it’s the consensus view over ~100 years of a “good without God” movement
Mkay? Can we stop wrangling about that? Feminism is a core humanist value. A sexist humanism is an oxymoron. If it’s sexist it’s not humanist, just as it’s not humanist if it’s racist or homophobic or xenophobic.
K? Done?
I’m proud to be a feminist and a humanist. I’m proud to direct an org that promotes both, building community of/atheists, agnostics, & allies
When I say “allies”, I mean we have a lot of good religious people who participate, knowing that what we do is not theistic, but enjoying it
So, if you’re an “ally”, please know I’m speaking *today* especially to members of my own community– fellow atheists/humanists/etc.
I recently saw @voxdotcom: A ’14 survey of the Men’s Rights subreddit found 94% of them identified as “atheist” or “religiously indifferent”
Here’s@voxdotcom article describing these “MRA’s” & how they’ve behaved twds Ms. Sarkeesian & her peers. Not well. http://www.vox.com/2015/2/5/7942623/mens-rights-movement …
It’s a huge problem. Atheists have just as much LEGAL right as anyone to not be feminists-but I’m not safe in my community if women aren’t.
If you have disagreements w/our awardee’s ideas-by all means. No artist/thinker/critic was ever right every time. Not me, not her, not you.
If you behave obnoxiously: harassing/shouting/threatening- you remove yourself from the community of reason. If we block you-you earned it.
.@Twitter only now admits it sucks dealing w/misogynist abuse. http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/05/twitter-ceo-we-suck-dealing-with-trolls-abuse … Atheists have had to protect their own community.
I’m just getting into the dialogue here but many in our community have led. & Blocked. @amandamarcotte @pzmyers & so many more…Thank you.
.@mirandachale 1 man I banned’s profile: “fully licensed misogynist.” In just 2 days I’ve seen awful behavior feminist women deal w/daily.
.@UniversityWatc1 block bigots≠turning on men. It’s pro-men to be feminist. Read Iron John. Join a men’s group-I did. Good luck. Blocked
.@BackToTheBlade Our awardee tirelessly promotes humanist & feminist values in an $50B+/year industry. Don’t respect it? Ok. But– blocked.
So that’s most of how that went.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Here’s a “doctor” who should be struck off.
“I’m not going to sacrifice the well-being of my child. My child is pure,” Dr. Jack Wolfson said in the interview. “It’s not my responsibility to be protecting their child.”
Wolfson was responding to a public appeal for all parents to vaccinate their children from Arizona pediatrician Dr. Tim Sacks…
That’s the one we read about yesterday.
Wolfson dismissed his fellow doctor’s appeal to anti-vaxxers.
“As far as I’m concerned, it’s very likely that her leukemia is from vaccinations in the first place,” Wolfson said.
The CNN interviewer asked Wolfson repeatedly if he could live with himself if his unvaccinated child got other children, like Sacks’ daughter, fatally sick.
“I could live with myself easily. It’s an unfortunate thing that people die, but people die. And I’m not going to put my child at risk to save another child,” he said.
That’s a disgusting human being right there.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Mary Wisniewski at Reuters tells us there’s a measles outbreak in Chicago.
Five babies at a suburban Chicago daycare center have been diagnosed with measles, adding to a growing outbreak of the disease across the United States, Illinois health officials said on Thursday.
Officials are investigating the cluster of measles cases at KinderCare Learning Center in Palatine, said a statement from the Illinois and Cook County health departments. All the children are under 1 year old and would not have been subject to routine measles vaccination, which begins at 12 months.
Infants. With measles. Thanks, anti-vaxxers.
Public health officials have reported that more than 100 people across the United States have been infected with measles, many of them traced to an outbreak that began at the Disneyland theme park in Anaheim, California, in December.
“These cases underscore the need for everyone who is eligible for the vaccine to ensure that they have been vaccinated,” Dr. Nirav Shah, director of the Illinois Department of Public Health, said in a statement. “There are certain individuals who, because of their age or clinical condition, cannot be vaccinated.”
A local news station here in Seattle reported last night that there’s a Waldorf school where 38 point something percent of the students are not vaccinated.
On the advice of health officials, the KinderCare center is excluding until Feb. 24 unvaccinated children and staff who may have been exposed to the virus, according to a statement from Knowledge Universe, KinderCare’s parent company. The center was given a “deep clean” on Wednesday night, the statement said.
Let’s go back to the good old days when there were no vaccines and diseases kept the population in check.
Measles was declared eliminated in the United States in 2000 after decades of intensive childhood vaccine efforts.
Oops.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
It’s Thursday again. In a few hours it will be Friday morning in Saudi-family Arabia.
Via Ensaf’s wall – Copenhagen today:
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Check out Greg Epstein on Twitter.
A couple of days ago, the crowd of anti-feminist atheists on Twitter zoomed in on him because…Anita Sarkeesian is Harvard Humanist of the Year. She will accept the award at an event next Sunday.
Well you know that can’t be allowed. So the shouting began.
Chas Stewart @BirdTerrifier Feb 3
.@gregmepstein baby, darling… Why are you watering down humanism? Surely there were more deserving HotY recipients. How’s she a humanist?Greg Epstein @gregmepstein
.@BirdTerrifier Your tone is inappropriate & gives me just a tiny hint of the massive disrespect Anita addresses bravely, strongly. Blocked.Chas Stewart @BirdTerrifier Feb 3
@gregmepstein dude, inappropriate. Can’t nudge someone with a “baby, darling”? Why haven’t you all justified the pick? Whence humanism?Notung @SIN_Notung Feb 3
@BirdTerrifier if people disagree with the award, that just proves how RIGHT the award is!Chas Stewart @BirdTerrifier Feb 3
@SIN_Notung I might’ve run afoul of the civility pledge but baby darling said to a man is different than to a woman.Astrokid NJ @AstrokidNJ Feb 4
@gregmepstein Dear @BirdTerrifier she’s a humanist just like past great feminists. Didn’t you get the memo from AHA?http://americanhumanist.org/feminist
That’s just one thread. There were a bunch. Greg Epstein now has some idea what the harassment is like.
Greg Epstein @gregmepstein
.@BlueBallSkeptic what we’re thinking awarding Anita? Feminism=central to humanism; she=brave/important; & you=blocked if only f/your handleJacques Cuze @JacquesCuze Feb 3
@_sinisterBen the real problem is that @twitter is a shit UI with too few controls. @Aneris23 @Shermertronsinister @_sinisterBen Feb 3
@JacquesCuze @twitter @Aneris23 @Shermertron and a lot of children shouting obscenities then crying for their moms when responded to.Shermertron @Shermertron Feb 3
@_sinisterBen @JacquesCuze @gregmepstein @Aneris23 @BirdTerrifier Hey, it’s not as though he is a prominent Humanist (TM) with power…Etc etc etc
It’s revealing, isn’t it.
Greg Epstein @gregmepstein · Feb 3
Heard there’re a lot of sexist atheists online but am privileged not to have to think of y’all much. Guess we’ll see how misguided you are.
This is now a pinned tweet:
Greg Epstein @gregmepstein · Feb 3
Am blocking atheist men behaving badly/like sexists. Don’t mean you’re evil-just what your behavior deserves. I wish you strength to change
With a long long string of retorts – a sample –
DC in Detroit @DC_in_Detroit 18 hours ago
@gregmepstein @D4M10N I wonder how many of those bad-behaving atheist men were actually women.Black Trident TV @BlackTridentTV 14 hours ago
@uberfeminist @gregmepstein @UniversityWatc1 Sarkeesian is feminist. Doesn’t feminism literally stand in direct opposition to humanism?A Man in Green #982 @BackToTheBlade 14 hours ago
@UniversityWatc1 @gregmepstein Anita is a humanist for calling hundreds of thousands of people Sexist Misogynists? Harvard Trash. #GamerGateAndrew BLeh @AndrewBLeh 14 hours ago
@BackToTheBlade @UniversityWatc1 @gregmepstein anita has done more to scare women away from gaming than anyoneUniversity Watch @UniversityWatc1 13 hours ago
@BackToTheBlade @gregmepstein Yep, @femfreq is about CENSORSHIP & DEMONISATION. She doesn’t even play games.Miranda Celeste Hale @mirandachale 13 hours ago
.@gregmepstein This is ridiculously condescending. The men in question aren’t misogynists. They just disagree with you. See the difference?Mindgamer @denouc 13 hours ago
@mirandachale Fundamentalists call those who disagree with them “sinners”. Feminists call them “misogynist”. Cult mentality. @gregmepsteinJake Follain @JFollain 12 hours ago
@mirandachale @gregmepstein He’s apparently convinced that sexism against men doesn’t exist, because of Anita’s made up definition of sexismdBetty @ddbetty 9 minutes ago
@gregmepstein @gregladen After 9 years old, it takes gut level emotional experience to change. Power wedgie may help them focus.
All of which goes to show, there is no sexism and no misogyny and we made the whole thing up!
Or something.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
Hot news – the pope will address Congress.
Pope Francis will become the first leader of the Catholic church to address the United States Congress.
Francis will stop off in the Capitol on Sept. 24 during his week-long tour of the U.S., and speak to a joint session of Congress. House Speaker John Boehner announced the news in a Thursday morning tweet.
Why. Why will he do that. Why will the pope address Congress.
Why? Why was he invited?
Congress is the government. It’s a secular government. The pope is the head of a religious institution, and a very wicked reactionary woman-hating child-raping lawbreaking religious institution at that. Why invite him to talk to a major branch of government? Why break the long precedent of not inviting popes to address Congress?
This pisses me off. I don’t want our government sucking up to the Catholic church. It does that way too much as it is.
Down with the pope.
Update to add (on Harald’s excellent advice):
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHRDfut2Vx0
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
The BBC reports on the Verge’s publication of Costolo’s admission that Twitter sucks at preventing harassment. That’s good, because it puts Costolo and Twitter that much more on the spot. Yes, Twitter, you suck at preventing harassment. Yes, Mr Costolo, Twitter sucks at preventing harassment.
Twitter’s chief executive Dick Costolo has admitted that the company “sucks” when it comes to dealing with abuse and trolling on the service.
In a memo to staff, leaked to tech news website the Verge, he said that bullying behaviour on the network was driving users away.
He promised tougher action to deal with abusers.
A series of high-profile users have quit Twitter in recent months, citing online abuse.
And you know what else? Low-profile users have also quit Twitter because of abuse. So have medium-profile users and people at all points in between. It almost seems as if the only people who don’t quit Twitter are the ones who are there to abuse people.
Unfortunately the BBC article then goes on to answer the question “What can be done to stop trolling?” and two of its four answers reveal that it doesn’t know what it’s talking about.
- Users could ignore the post – the troll’s goal is to get a reaction and some say by responding you are “feeding the troll”
- Some have suggested a new system that allows those who are being trolled to choose not to be shown accounts that are less than 30 days old, as a lot of trolling is done from a new account
Getting a reaction is not the troll’s only goal – and there’s more to all this than mere trolling. Many of the abusers on Twitter are intent on damaging and silencing the people they target – destroying their reputations, getting people to believe lies about them, degrading and shaming them. It’s systematic and sustained, and merely concealing it from the target does nothing whatsoever about that.
(This is a syndicated post. Read the original at FreeThoughtBlogs.)
