How long would you wait for a routine appointment with a doctor who's running late? The caveat: There's a pandemic; the waiting room is so full people can't stay six feet apart; and the room is poorly ventilated. (As you're guessing, this is not a hypothetical question.)
The further caveat:
You called in advance to ask if she was running late. You said asked if, given the pandemic, she would kindly send you a text, if so, so that you don't wait in the crowded waiting room. You receive no text.
The further caveat:
The further caveat: Someone in the waiting room is coughing.
The further caveat: The ICUs in France are now 94% full and the B116 variant is running amok.
The further caveat: After 15 minutes, you knock on her door and say--politely--
that to comply with the health ministry social distancing guidelines, you will wait outside. She nods says she will come get you when she's ready.
The further caveat: You discover it is raining. You didn't bring an umbrella.
She doesn't arrive. The minutes tick past.
The situation: You definitely need to see a doctor. Something's not right. But it isn't life-threatening. (I hope.)
How long would you wait before saying, "Screw it?"
I'm just curious to know what you think is "a normal wait," "a vexing wait," and "an "I'd leave" wait.
Where's the line between, "Doctors are busy and important people and we don't always know how long our patients will need," and "That's just rude, even if her patient was having a heart attack in her office, she could have sent you a text?"
Would you agree that a doctor who's indifferent to the infectious potential of her waiting room is probably the kind of doctor who doesn't wash her hands, sterilize her instruments, or count the sponges?
What's the magic time limit between, "Well I'm not going to be a prima donna, I can stand here in the rain a while longer," and "Screw this. If she can't manage her schedule--or figure out how to send me a text--she'd probably forget to count the sponges?"
Oh, one more relevant caveat: France is under a curfew. Had I waited longer, I would have been out after the curfew. You are, technically, allowed to be out for doctors' appointments. But I didn't have the right kind of permission slip.
Here, I'll make it simple:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Here, I think, is the main point, now that I've slept on it. There is an adult world. There is a children's world. The adult world is characterized by restraint, impulse control, a developed sense of the emotions and needs of others, and by sophisticated and educated taste.
Adults prefer quiet, order, and conversation to noise, chaos, and screaming. Adults dine, rather than eating like animals. Adults are sexual and cynical, not innocent.
Children are hilarious, exuberant, innocent, full of wonder--and monstrously narcissistic.
A kid finds chasing a pigeon all afternoon *delightful.*
Chasing a pigeon all afternoon would properly strike any adult as completely dumb.
I usually avoid commenting on American child-rearing strategies because the rejoinder is obvious and entirely correct: "Claire, go raise a child yourself before you lecture us." But this article seems dead-accurate to me. theatlantic.com/family/archive…
I sure see a lot of American parents making themselves needlessly miserable--and their kids unbearable--by using the strategies she discusses. It's true and it's obvious, if you've lived elsewhere and seen how parents in other countries do it, that it doesn't have to be this way.
I don't think I've ever seen a French kid have a tantrum in public. I watch what the parents here do, and I'm not sure I fully understand it, but it looks pretty much like what she describes. They're much more low-energy and low-involvement.
C'est absolument faux. Étude après étude, dans le monde réel, montre que la vaccination avec Pfizer-BioNTech ou AstraZeneca entraîne entraîne une diminution *massive* des hospitalisations et des décès: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
Même une seule dose de l'un ou l'autre vaccin est efficace de 85% à 94% pour réduire les hospitalisations. Dans l’étude ci-joint--une parmi tant d’autres--ils ont comparé les données de près de 600 000 personnes vaccinées à un groupe de taille similaire-
-ne l'ayant pas reçu. Après deux doses, le vaccin était efficace à 92% pour prévenir l'infection et, parmi ceux qui ont été infectés, 92% efficace pour protéger contre les symptômes, et 92% efficace pour protéger contre des maladies graves.
Are you aware that your behavior makes it more likely that other people will die? Does this concern you? Or do you think, "That idea triggers me, so I won't think about it?"
Don't reply with some airy argument about "Death comes for us all," or "We all kill each other every day if you think about it, innit?" Very specifically: If you become a vector for this disease, you could kill many people--much loved by their families--in a super-spreader event.
Old, fat, sick people, perhaps, but also maybe some people who just got unlucky. Would you want someone else to be that careless about the life of someone you love? To speed blind drunk down the freeway right when your daughter is driving home, say?
I don't think this is the fundamental profile. I think the fundamental profile--and it underscores all three types, and even the fourth type, "just stupid as a sack of hammers" is "People enamored of death." The real message of the anti-vax movement is Thanatos.
The real message of the anti-vax movement is that Freud was right: There is a death drive. It is as powerful, in human affairs, as Eros, the life drive. We underestimate its potency to shape human events at our peril.
Freud wrote this watching the rise of the Nazis.
But we can see the same drive at work today. We really can. There's no adult, in the modern world, who's *genuinely* confused about the efficacy of masks and vaccines. Truly there isn't. It's all a pose. If you were that stupid, you'd be unable to tie your own shoes.
Above all, it's terribly sad. The NYT is in the hands of people who are both stupid and vicious. The idea that they would even for a moment take seriously the complaints of these pampered, self-righteous little shits is depressing.
Pampered, ignorant, spoiled children, callow and ignorant of life, are now running the cultural show. The adults--who are supposed to teach them and set limits on behavior like this--are instead cowed by them, turning them into petty tyrants.
Obviously this is terrible for both the children and the adults. But it's terrible above all for our culture. These girls will be weak women, uneducated, incapable of thinking straight.