shape
carat
color
clarity

Hello 1984

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
54,241
“It's a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
― George Orwell, 1984
:knockout:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/16/health/cdc-banned-words/index.html

(CNN) Officials at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the very agency tasked with saving and protecting the lives of the most vulnerable, are now under order by the Trump administration to stop using words including "vulnerable" in 2018 budget documents, according to The Washington Post.

In a 90-minute briefing on Thursday, policy analysts at the nation's leading public health institute were presented with the menu of seven banned words, an analyst told the paper. On the list: "diversity," "fetus," "transgender," "vulnerable," "entitlement," "science-based" and "evidence-based."



Alternative word choices reportedly were presented in some cases. For instance, in lieu of "evidence-based" or "science-based," an analyst might say, "CDC bases its recommendations on science in consideration with community standards and wishes," the source said. But those working on the Zika virus's effect on developing fetuses may be at a loss for appropriate -- or acceptable -- words.


The reaction in the room was "incredulous," the longtime CDC analyst told the Post. "It was very much, 'Are you serious? Are you kidding?'"
As news of the word ban spreads at the CDC, the analyst expects growing backlash.

"Our subject matter experts will not lay down quietly," the unnamed source said. "This hasn't trickled down to them yet."



Health and Human Services spokesman Matt Lloyd disputed the report in a statement to CNN.

"The assertion that HHS has 'banned words' is a complete mischaracterization of discussions regarding the budget formulation process," Lloyd said. "HHS will continue to use the best scientific evidence available to improve the health of all Americans. HHS also strongly encourages the use of outcome and evidence data in program evaluations and budget decisions."

Others, outside the agency, are already responding with their own choice words.

"To pretend and insist that transgender people do not exist, and to allow this lie to infect public health research and prevention is irrational and very dangerous," Mara Keisling, executive director of the National Center for Transgender Equality, said in a written statement.

"The Trump administration is full of dangerous science deniers who have no business near American public health systems like the CDC," she continued. "They are actually going to kill Americans if they do not stop."
Calling the order "reckless" and "unimaginably dangerous," Dana Singiser, vice president of public policy and government affairs for Planned Parenthood Federation of America, also weighed in.

"You cannot fight against the Zika virus, or improve women's and fetal health, if you are unable to use the word 'fetus.' You must be able to talk about science and evidence if you are to research cures for infectious diseases such as Ebola," Singiser said. "You must be able to acknowledge the humanity of transgender people in order to address their health care needs. You cannot erase health inequities faced by people of color simply by forbidding the use of the words 'vulnerable' or 'diversity'."
"Here's a word that's still allowed," added Rush Holt, chief executive officer of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. "Ridiculous."
The Office of Management and Budget did not immediately respond to CNN's request for comment.



This might be one of the scariest things so far from the current administration though there are so many I am losing count.
It won't be long until intellectuals are jailed and the books start burning. :cry2:
#waronfacts
 

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
54,241
freespeechcalvinandhobbes.jpg
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,349
WTF happened to my country? :cry2:
 

whitewave

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
12,330
That's weird. Who ordered it and why?
 

lyra

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
5,252
I don't think I'm smart enough to figure this one out. I mean, this stuff rarely makes sense, but what is the GAIN in this?
 

azstonie

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 1, 2014
Messages
3,769
WTF happened to my country? :cry2:

Here is what happened: Birth control got readily available and reliable in the 1950s and 1960s and so on. So intelligent people capable of planning started having 1, maybe 2 children. Stupid people kept having lots of children and with about 60 years of THAT, we are in a position where the Stupid now vastly outnumber the Intelligent/Careful/Planners.
 

stracci2000

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 26, 2007
Messages
8,455
Here is what happened: Birth control got readily available and reliable in the 1950s and 1960s and so on. So intelligent people capable of planning started having 1, maybe 2 children. Stupid people kept having lots of children and with about 60 years of THAT, we are in a position where the Stupid now vastly outnumber the Intelligent/Careful/Planners.
OMG------I think you're right:cry:
 

Maria D

Brilliant_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 24, 2003
Messages
1,948
I don't think I'm smart enough to figure this one out. I mean, this stuff rarely makes sense, but what is the GAIN in this?

From the CNN article:
"Alternative word choices reportedly were presented in some cases. For instance, in lieu of "evidence-based" or "science-based," an analyst might say, "CDC bases its recommendations on science in consideration with community standards and wishes," the source said. But those working on the Zika virus's effect on developing fetuses may be at a loss for appropriate -- or acceptable -- words."

Wtf is "recommendations on science in consideration with community standards and wishes" supposed to mean? Are we to get science-backed recommendations or ones which "the community" deems appropriate? Scary.

I imagine fetus will be replaced with unborn child and eventually just child.
 

Matata

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 10, 2003
Messages
9,071
And "woman" will be replaced with "child-carrier".
Nah. That still connotes humanity. I think they'd prefer "uterus" or "vessel".
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083
Nah. That still connotes humanity. I think they'd prefer "uterus" or "vessel".

Units of production. Oh, no, wait, that was a Japanese politician who said that while bemoaning how Japanese women are choosing to not marry and procreate, since Japanese men are apparently even worse jerks than many American men.

I've tried many times to find that piece again, but alas. No joy. It was quite a kerfuffle though, with the guy trying to walk his comments back a bit when faced with the outrage of Japanese women at being called "units of production".
 

kenny

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 30, 2005
Messages
33,349
Here is what happened: Birth control got readily available and reliable in the 1950s and 1960s and so on. So intelligent people capable of planning started having 1, maybe 2 children. Stupid people kept having lots of children and with about 60 years of THAT, we are in a position where the Stupid now vastly outnumber the Intelligent/Careful/Planners.

Brilliant! :clap:
That had not occurred to me, but I think that's it.

Evolution.
Rather, devolution ... ironic survival of the un-fittest. :nono:
 
Last edited:

azstonie

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 1, 2014
Messages
3,769
My viewpoint is a terrible and shameful one. I arrived at it after quite a few years of teaching, seeing lots of families and parents detailing the how and why of their children. There were several intelligent 3 or 4+ kids/families , but honestly, not many. Any mom or dad here on PS who has a good number of kiddos is most certainly in that minority of intelligent!
 

sonnyjane

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
2,476
My viewpoint is a terrible and shameful one. I arrived at it after quite a few years of teaching, seeing lots of families and parents detailing the how and why of their children. There were several intelligent 3 or 4+ kids/families , but honestly, not many. Any mom or dad here on PS who has a good number of kiddos is most certainly in that minority of intelligent!

Not terrible or shameful. Many in academia agree with you. For example, I once attended a conference and the keynote speaker, a conservation biologist, suggested exactly that.
 

arkieb1

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
9,786
My viewpoint is a terrible and shameful one. I arrived at it after quite a few years of teaching, seeing lots of families and parents detailing the how and why of their children. There were several intelligent 3 or 4+ kids/families , but honestly, not many. Any mom or dad here on PS who has a good number of kiddos is most certainly in that minority of intelligent!

I used to be a teacher too, observed exactly the same thing here in my part of the world by in large the most academic people had two children on average sometimes 3, and I lost count of the people that had 4, 5 or more children to several different fathers, some of the children had no idea who their fathers were.

There are theories from geneticists on the same thing, but many of them argue you only need a small % of really smart people in society or there would be no one to do the mundane jobs we require.
 

Calliecake

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 7, 2014
Messages
9,257
Missy, This is scary.

Just wait @azstonie The Trump conception rule is trying to allow any business to cite religious and moral objection and opt out of federal requirement that they cover contraception as part of employee health plans. I believe a Federal Judge temporarily blocked this a few days ago.

Did you happen to see the clip yesterday where lifetime appointment Federal District Court Judge nominee Matthew Spencer Petersen was questioned during a Judiciary Commitee Hearing. He had never tried a case in a courtroom and was unable to answer basic legal questions. It was embarrassing to watch. I think it's safe to assume he won't get the nomination. @missy, Did Greg happen to see this?
 

yennyfire

Ideal_Rock
Trade
Joined
Jun 6, 2010
Messages
6,873
I'd say that there are no words, but clearly we can't afford to ban anymore words at this point in time!
 

mochiko42

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
2,663
The US is starting to become more and more like my country (China) rather than the other way around. It's a pity. Better enjoy and protect your freedom while you still have it!

The latest from this side of the Pacific ocean..

Chinese authorities are collecting DNA samples, fingerprints and other biometric data from every resident in a far western region, Human Rights Watch has said.

Officials are also building a database of iris scans and blood types of everyone aged between 12 and 65 in Xinjiang, adding to controls in a place some experts have called an “open-air prison”.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/13/chinese-authorities-collecting-dna-residents-xinjiang
 

MaisOuiMadame

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
3,451
Every aspiring tyrant is trying to back up his ideology or movement with an ideology-based reinterpretation of certain expressions. Many of them inhuman and contemptly euphemistic.

I won't go into details, since I'm German and I really really don't want to open that discussion, making parallels between Trump and the 1930ies.
But there are a lot of expressions that were just normal descriptions before 1933. They were hijacked by the party and have been unspeakable for educated citizens ever since.
The reasons imho:
Marginalizing certain groups.
Making your despicable theories more acceptable for the non-hardcore followers by using euphemism.
Creating a feeling of belonging within your own group.
Practicality: in the early stages of your reign it's easier to recognize one another.
By using the new word and making sure everyone knows the real meaning, the ideology sinks in and gets subconsciously manifested.
Communist oppression did the same, btw.
I'm scared.
 

MaisOuiMadame

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
3,451
My viewpoint is a terrible and shameful one. I arrived at it after quite a few years of teaching, seeing lots of families and parents detailing the how and why of their children. There were several intelligent 3 or 4+ kids/families , but honestly, not many. Any mom or dad here on PS who has a good number of kiddos is most certainly in that minority of intelligent!

Thanks for coming back and clarifying azstonie. This was really nice, because the initial statement was somewhat hurtful for a mom of five.
 

OoohShiny

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Apr 25, 2014
Messages
8,225
The US is starting to become more and more like my country (China) rather than the other way around. It's a pity. Better enjoy and protect your freedom while you still have it!

The latest from this side of the Pacific ocean..

Chinese authorities are collecting DNA samples, fingerprints and other biometric data from every resident in a far western region, Human Rights Watch has said.

Officials are also building a database of iris scans and blood types of everyone aged between 12 and 65 in Xinjiang, adding to controls in a place some experts have called an “open-air prison”.


https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/13/chinese-authorities-collecting-dna-residents-xinjiang

It amazes me that people willingly post so much on Facebook, and so many pictures of themselves, when all they are doing is adding to the ease in which facial recognition can pick them out of a crowd from hundreds of yards away (which if they haven't quite perfected yet, is most certainly being worked on somewhere).

IIRC Facebook is even working on ways to identify people that are facing away from the camera!

The Labour government plans for a national DNA database in the UK were (thank goodness) cancelled when they lost a General Election, but I had many a discussion with people about how they think "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" :rolleyes: If I have nothing to hide, why do you need all my personal, unchanging, biometric details??

Meanwhile, HSBC bank has put in place Voice Recognition security for its customers, which you can opt out of, but only after they have, of course, already harvested the information. They rolled it out before telling their customers they were going to do it, sending a letter out in the third week of the month to say "From the 1st of the month, we will be using voice recognition software..." :rolleyes: and then even had the brazen cheek to send what was basically a phishing letter to customers, to panic those who hadn't phoned in, so that they did so and their data could be harvested.

Privacy will be a thing of the past soon, and kids will grow up assuming that everyone knowing everything about you before you've even met them is the standard modus operandi. Pardon my french, but **** that.


[/rant]
 
Last edited:

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
54,241
Units of production. Oh, no, wait, that was a Japanese politician who said that while bemoaning how Japanese women are choosing to not marry and procreate, since Japanese men are apparently even worse jerks than many American men.

I've tried many times to find that piece again, but alas. No joy. It was quite a kerfuffle though, with the guy trying to walk his comments back a bit when faced with the outrage of Japanese women at being called "units of production".

Is this similar to the piece you were searching for?

Japanese Women Shy From Dual Mommy Role.doc

http://www.dw.com/en/why-fewer-japanese-are-seeking-marriage/a-19349576

Japanese Women Shy From Dual Mommy Role
As Birthrate Keeps Dropping, Experts Worry About Growing Willingness to Do Without Children -- or Childish Husbands

By Blaine Harden
Washington Post Foreign Service
Thursday, August 28, 2008

TOKYO -- "I have never met a Japanese man who did not want me to be his mommy."

That is the reason, Takako Katayama says, that she has not married. At 37, she has carved out a comfortable life here in Tokyo, with her own apartment, a good job at a cable television network, and a network of family and friends.

She has not closed the door on marriage and children. When she meets girlfriends for dinner, they ask each other, "Where are the good guys?" But she refuses to settle for a man who works long hours, declines to share in child-rearing and sees marriage mainly as a way to acquire lifetime live-in help.

"I want a mature, equal-partner kind of marriage," she said. "Anyway, there are complete lives without a baby."

Therein lies a dismal prognosis for Japan and for many of the other prosperous nations of East Asia. In numbers that alarm their governments, Asian women are delaying marriage and postponing childbirth.

In Japan, the percentage of women who remain single into their 30s has more than doubled since 1980. The trend is similar in Taiwan, Singapore, South Korea, and the booming Chinese cities of Shanghai and Beijing.

Feminine foot-dragging on the way to the altar has been identified by demographers as perhaps the primary reason for the region's plunging birthrates. Of the 10 countries or territories at the bottom of a 2008 CIA ranking of global fertility rates, six, including Japan, Taiwan, Singapore and Hong Kong, are in the Asia-Pacific region. South Korea also ranks near the bottom.

"Women on Strike," a recent report on Japan's falling birthrate by the securities firm CLSA, noted that the number of children per married Japanese woman has held steady for three decades. "This suggests that the decrease in fertility is due almost entirely to an increase in women of reproductive age not getting married and not having children," the report said.

Regional leaders are waking up to the growing reluctance of working women to complicate their lives with children -- and with husbands who refuse to help raise them. A very high percentage of Japanese women eventually do marry, but by postponing it they narrow the window for bearing children.

"We need to organize our society so that women and families will be able to raise children while working," Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda said in an interview in May. "I think we still lack adequate efforts on that front."

This year, Fukuda's government is pushing a "work-life balance" program that addresses the country's famously punishing work ethic. It pressures companies to shoo workers (primarily men) out of the office at night. The intent is to improve the quality of family life and, in the process, make more babies.

The stakes are high here in the world's second-largest economy, which now has the world's highest proportion of people over 65 and lowest proportion of children under 15. According to a recent forecast, population loss will strip Japan of 70 percent of its workforce by 2050.

Like many other East Asian economies with a shrinking workforce, Japan desperately needs women to marry and have children while also continuing to work. But only about a third of women in Japan remain in the workforce after having a child, compared with about two-thirds of women in the United States.

Corporate discrimination against women, especially if they have children, remains rampant, despite laws that forbid it. Last year Japan ranked 91st in gender equality among 128 countries surveyed by the World Economic Forum.

Meanwhile, many Japanese men in their 30s continue to be consumed by their jobs. About one in four still works more than 60 hours a week. Just 0.5 percent of men take government-guaranteed parental leave. In Sweden, 17 percent do.

Most working women in Japan face a stark choice: the career track, in which they will acquire financial independence while remaining single and childless, or the family track, which makes them full-time mothers until they are in their mid- to late 40s.

Research on marriage in Japan shows that after a wedding, women have much less time of their own, while there is almost no change in the demands on men's time, said Yoshio Higuchi, a professor of workforce economics at Keio University in Tokyo. "The burden falls almost exclusively on women, and those single women who see that happening choose not to marry, for now, anyway," he said.

Higuchi said that in recent years, as single women have been sought after by a corporate Japan starved for young workers, they have gained more power and freedom in the workplace.

"For women, this has caused enormous change socially and mentally," he said. "Men, though, have not changed at all."

Katayama testifies to that. "Guys will allow a woman to express herself, but they do not want their position threatened," she said. "They want to stand above the girl."

Equally annoying, according to Katayama, is the rarely stated but almost universal expectation of Japanese men to be fed, clothed and picked up after. "I am willing to take care of and give comfort to a man whom I care about, but that does not mean I want to be his mother," she said.

Research here shows that after a divorce, men tend to feel unhappy and remarry quickly. Divorced women, though, are relatively happy and often delay remarriage.

Still, marriage remains almost universal in Japan. Only 4 percent of women older than 45 have never married. It is also exceedingly rare for women here to have children outside marriage (less than 2 percent of all births). The cultural taboo against single parenthood is far stronger than in the United States, where about 37 percent of births are outside wedlock. Cohabitation is also rare in Japan, and single women almost never adopt.

"I don't know why one would want a child so much," Katayama said. "In Japanese culture, the point is not to have children, but to have one's own children."

Social pressure on women to marry has clearly eased in Japan. But being an independent single woman still carries a stigma, even in Tokyo.

When Katayama bought her studio apartment in 2002, she did not tell many friends. "I knew that it would scare away guys," she said.

While "Sex and the City" is one of her all-time favorite TV shows, Katayama says she remains astonished at how its female characters brazenly prowl around for men. "There is still a foundation in us [Japanese women] that thinks hunting for a guy is not ladylike," she said.

Katayama is well informed about Japan's declining population and the catastrophic implications for the economy. She knows there is a national childbirth crisis. Still, she said, until she finds a man who wants a wife, not just a mommy, there is nothing she can do to help.

Special correspondent Akiko Yamamoto contributed to this report.

Here are some other interesting pieces on Japan and procreation fyi.
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/07/japan-mystery-low-birth-rate/534291/

https://www.economist.com/news/asia...se-want-be-married-are-finding-it-hard-i-dont

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/man-bemoans-selfish-women-not-having-enough-kids/
 

ksinger

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
5,083

Well, it was certainly the issue that prompted the politician to make the comment, yes. I've been periodically reading about their hand-wringing at the choices of their women, for quite a few years now.

And I can barely read Douchehat. My impression from reading him years ago, is that he's a sanctimonious jerk. That piece certainly doesn't change my mind. :rolleyes:
 

azstonie

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jul 1, 2014
Messages
3,769
Thanks for coming back and clarifying azstonie. This was really nice, because the initial statement was somewhat hurtful for a mom of five.

Kipari, I bet you have a wonderful family. You are an intelligent person, I've read many posts from You here. You probably get slammed for having 5 children as much as I got slammed for having none;)) back in my childbearing years.

I taught one family, 6 kids (I was a band director), all boys. Their mom told me #2-6 were her attempts for a girl. All 6 of those boys were super high energy and strong willed. The mom sure looked tired. I have to say they were very smart boys, at least 1 with a genius-level IQ.
 

sonnyjane

Ideal_Rock
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
2,476
I taught one family, 6 kids (I was a band director), all boys. Their mom told me #2-6 were her attempts for a girl.

That's how my DH ended up as the oldest of four boys....
 

MaisOuiMadame

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jan 9, 2015
Messages
3,451
You probably get slammed for having 5 children as much as I got slammed for having none;)) back in my childbearing years.

Thank you Azstonie!

And yes , it's true. People have this strange need to comment for too many or not enough children in their eyes.

Fun side effect: this made my very sweet mom toughen up a lot - I have 5 kids, my sister chose to have none at all... so she gets flak from both camps and has given some quite remarkable and witty answers over the years...
 

missy

Super_Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
Jun 8, 2008
Messages
54,241
Thank you Azstonie!

And yes , it's true. People have this strange need to comment for too many or not enough children in their eyes.

Fun side effect: this made my very sweet mom toughen up a lot - I have 5 kids, my sister chose to have none at all... so she gets flak from both camps and has given some quite remarkable and witty answers over the years...

So true. Why do others need to comment? From either side. How many times have I received comments (mainly from acquaintances as if they have the right to critique my choices lol) from people about when are you having kids? Why aren't you going to have kids? Etc. LOL I occasionally *still* get the are you going to have kids comments from people who obviously don't know me (and know I am way past the age of childbearing in any culture) because I look a bit younger than my chronological age.

I don't feel the need to explain myself at all. So I don't bother and haven't wasted my breath re the kid issue for the past 20 years. But when I was in my twenties and thirties I would attempt to explain my reasons and truly it was just a waste of energy. People are judgmental both ways and fortunately I am at the stage in my life I don't give a fiddle dee dee what others think of me.:whistle:

Perhaps if more people made the *right* choice for them there would be more cared for and loved children in this world brought up in healthy environments and they would grow into responsible, capable and well adjusted individuals. Perhaps this would be the key to making this world a better place. Bringing into it only children who are wanted and will be adored and cherished and loved and nurtured. Just a thought.::)
 

arkieb1

Ideal_Rock
Premium
Joined
May 11, 2012
Messages
9,786
Any comments made were not meant to offend anyone here. People can have as many children as they want 0 or 10, I really don't mind. My sister in law has 5 kids and 4 of them have exceptionally high IQs. My best friend has 6 children. I'd hazard a guess that Azstonie and I are not generally commenting upon normal families we are commenting on the many dysfunctional ones out there some are small, many more are large. As a teacher you get to see a hell of a lot of very nasty things, like children that get raped and beaten on a regular basis, those that are locked out of home and live on the streets on a regular basis, those that don't get fed or get clean clothing and basic things we all take for granted every day and so on, so when I make general statements by in large it is in reference to some of those things that I have observed.

Sadly most of you take care of your pets better than some of these people take care of their kids. Anyway back to the topic, I thought the US was supposed to be the land of free speech. Yet another way Trump is brainwashing the above mentioned stupid people.
 
Be a part of the community Get 3 HCA Results
Top