I wish opinion pages didn't feel the need to publish incoherent garbage in order to achieve balance. If a set of ideas on one side of an issue are evidence free, unsupportable, racist, trash ...maybe you just don't need to publish them.
I love opinion essays. I love writing them. I love reading them. I love the project of writing an argument in a narrow word count that is persuasive, but also true. That contains evidence, but is also iterative pushing you to the next essay, the next argument, the bigger source.
I want you to write, read, share, love, opinion essays. I want to write them a lot. I wish I could do it full time, or at least have a staff gig where I wrote weekly or whatever year for one outlet (even if the pay was only side hustle worthy).
I think sometimes about the books I might have written with a 2:2 load, grad students who speak/read all the right languages, all kinds of sabbaticals and releases. I thought once about applying for a @MellonFdn scholarship that I learned didn't apply to my little university.
I was sleeping so well before my son woke up for … maybe two minutes … at 3:30 am and now …
At least there are coffee, scones, peaches, and fish to be caught when the sun comes up.
I kissed my boy and he gave me the worlds most glorious smile before instantly going back to sleep. Then I lay in bed for an hour. And now here we are, just eating scones and listening to birds waking and looking for the first light in the sky.
Grandad did. A New England preacher, freedom rider, pacifist, gardener, fisherman. A baritone voice like sandpaper over stone. Good at cards. Ran for Congress during the Vietnam War on the Peace Party ticket. Lived long enough to hear McNamara admit he was wrong.
@thenation Bodily autonomy, classically, stops when your actions harm someone else. "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins," the adage, but I actually think swinging a fist at someone's face at all is pretty out of bounds. Threatening counts.
I do not want the state coercing people to have needles put into their bodies; but I think it's reasonable for the state to say that if you choose to be unvaccinated (without medical exemption - those are the folks who herd immunity shields), you are also choosing to stay home.
This is again such a reveal. On the one hand students protest a cop-owned coffee shop. On the other hand the state lawmaking apparatus forces curricular changes and institutes surveillance of what happens in the classroom.
I feel like a lotta smart people spend a lot of time spreading bullshit under the guise of refutation.
the fisking of that national review incel piece for example. There's nothing in there that requires serious engagement. It's not serious. It's just bullshit. The author knows it. You know it. Calling out its incoherence isn't really going to help. And it might hurt by spreading.
calling out incoherence in right wing writing feels good tho I give you that
I just want to note that not one of the autistic people who have been fighting this for years was quoted in the article. There are reasons for this in basic journalism practice when it comes to court decisions. Those practices are wrong.
In this piece the journalist quotes the school, summarizes the schools arguments, says the FDA gave no comment, and summarizes both the decision and the dissent. That’s the job of the reporter.
But it’s not enough.
If you’re reporting on electric shocks given to autistic people you should quote autistic people. If you don’t have time to call some leaders in the community, then orgs like ASAN put out statements. Quote them.