16 Reasons RBG Was The F*cking GOAT

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has carved out a permanent place in all of our hearts, for so many reasons, not least of which was her lifelong championing of women’s rights. She was a living, breathing testament to the power of grit, tenacity, and compassion. Here are just a few reasons she truly was the ultimate GOAT, the greatest of all time.

1. She was the first person, male or female, to serve as editor at both the Harvard and Columbia law reviews.

It was rare enough in the 1950s that a woman even be granted entry into either of these prestigious universities. Yale and Princeton still did not admit women at the time. So, that Ruth Bader Ginsburg served on each of these famous student-run journals of legal scholarship is a testament to her brilliance, determination, and general badassery.

2. When people told her she couldn’t do something because she was a woman, she went ahead and did it anyway.

Ginsburg didn’t take no for an answer. She not only fought for herself, but she cleared a path for other women too. While she was at Harvard, the dean asked Ginsburg to justify her presence at the school since she’d taken a man’s place. Later, when one of her professors recommended her to serve as a clerk for supreme court justice Felix Frankfurter, Frankfurter said he wasn’t “ready” to hire a woman.

At the time, each of these instances were perfectly legal. Not only did Ginsburg scrape and claw to push past every “no” for herself, but it is largely due to her work that the sexism she personally experienced is no longer legal. Regardless of anyone’s politics, women in the United States owe her a massive debt of gratitude.

3. RBG had a voracious, competitive appetite for academic excellence, and wasn’t afraid to own it.

She graduated first in her class from Columbia Law School. According to the ACLU, Ginsburg said she didn’t originally attend law school expecting to champion women’s rights. She said she went to law school for “personal, selfish reasons. I thought I could do a lawyer’s job better than any other.” Well, she wasn’t wrong.

4. Again and again, RBG came up against sexism in her career, and she stood up to it every time.

While at Cornell, one of her professors offered her the answers for an exam in exchange for sex. At the 2018 Sundance Film Festival, where the documentary RBG premiered, she relayed her reaction: “I went to his office and I said, ‘How dare you! How dare you do this!’ and that was the end of that.”
Ginsburg often had to fight for entry and then had to fight once again for equal pay. At Rutgers Law School, where she was only the second female law professor, Ginsburg and other female employees filed a complaint under the brand new Equal Pay Act of 1963, and they won.

5. RBG co-founded the very first women’s rights law journal, the Women’s Rights Law Reporter.

At Rutgers, Ginsburg had begun teaching seminars on women and the law. Her students’ interest in the subject furthered her own, and with Elizabeth Langer, she founded and became a faculty advisor to the first journal on women’s rights, which continues to be published today at Rutgers Law School.

6. RBG co-founded the Women’s Rights Project at the ACLU.

Ginsburg was a founding director of the Women’s Rights Project, created in 1972, an ongoing project that even to this day fights discrimination against women.

7. RBG became the first tenured female law professor at Columbia.

In 1972, the same year she was founding the Women’s Rights Project, Ginsburg became the first female tenured Columbia Law School professor.

8. RBG fought for all women, regardless of socioeconomic class.

While teaching at Columbia, Ginsburg learned that the school was laying off female maids but not male janitors. She complained, an injunction was filed against Columbia and supported by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and eventually, as Ginsburg told NPR in 2018, “Columbia decided they didn’t really have to lay off anyone.”

9. RBG won five out of six cases that she argued before the Supreme Court, setting precedent after precedent for defending women’s rights.

Katherine Franke, Columbia Law School professor and Director of the Center for Gender and Sexuality Law, said of Ginsburg, “RBG’s signature approach to combating sexism was bringing lawsuits on behalf of men who were being treated unequally because of their sex. Her thinking was that male judges would appreciate the injustice in a case where men were the victims, and in winning those cases she was building the scaffolding for addressing the sexism women suffered.”

In Duren v. Missouri, Ginsburg argued that a male convict’s right to “a jury chosen from a fair cross-section of his community was violated because it didn’t include women, whose jury duty was voluntary.” By protecting men from sexism, Ginsburg was quietly laying the groundwork for precedence that would protect women from sexism too. She truly was a legal genius.

10. RBG was the first female Jewish Supreme Court justice.

In 1993, President Bill Clinton nominated Ginsburg to the Supreme Court. Ginsburg was only the second female justice ever to serve (Sandra Day O’Connor was the first), the first Jewish person to serve since 1969, and the first female Jewish Supreme Court justice in history.

11. RBG delivered a brilliant burn like nobody’s business.

“When I’m sometimes asked ‘When will there be enough [women on the Supreme Court]?’ and I say ‘When there are nine,’ people are shocked. But there’d been nine men, and nobody’s ever raised a question about that.” — The Notorious RBG

12. RBG’s dissents were absolutely epic.

In Supreme Court-speak, a dissent is an opinion that goes against the majority. Ginsburg became famous for her powerful dissents, which she would read aloud and which were written in normal everyday language rather than unintelligible legalese. “I like to think most of my dissents will be the law someday,” Ginsburg said in 2015 at a conversation at the University of Michigan.

13. RBG was the first justice to officiate a same-sex marriage.

In 2013, Ginsburg officiated the wedding of Kennedy Center President Michael M. Kaiser to economist John Roberts in Washington, DC, making her the first Supreme Court member to officiate a same-sex marriage.

14. RBG did pushups and planks clear into her 80s.

20 pushups every day, and 30-second planks, to be precise. It was part of her daily routine, she said at a 2016 event at the Temple Emanu-El Skirball Center in New York City

15. RBG made being a Supreme Court Justice cool.

She is popularly known as “Notorious RBG.” Need we say more?

16. Even on her deathbed, Ruth Bader Ginsburg worried about the future of the United States of America.

While on her deathbed, she reportedly told her granddaughter that her “most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” She worried about our democracy as she was actively dying. The GOP can go ahead and stop claiming a monopoly on patriotism.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, of diminutive physical stature but with the heart of a giant, moved mountains of granite and sparked hope where hope seemed pointless. It is our responsibility, our duty, to continue her work in her stead. We cannot — and will not — let her down.

The post 16 Reasons RBG Was The F*cking GOAT appeared first on Scary Mommy.

93 Percent Of Black Lives Matter Protests Have Been Peaceful, Report Says

The report also showed that government authorities were more likely to intervene in BLM protests than in other demonstrations

Despite what Trump and members of his admin may think or say, nearly all Black Lives Matter protests this summer have been peaceful, a new report shows.

According to a report published Thursday by the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data project (ACLED) — a nonprofit organization that tracks political violence and instability — in partnership with Princeton University’s Bridging Divides Initiative, 93 percent of BLM protests have been “overwhelmingly peaceful.” More than 2,400 locations reported peaceful protests, while less than 220 reported “violent demonstrations,” defined as including “acts targeting other individuals, property, businesses, other rioting groups or armed actors.”

“There have been some violent demonstrations, and those tend to get a lot of media coverage,” Dr. Roudabeh Kishi, ACLED’s director of research & innovation, told the Guardian. “But if you were to look at all the demonstrations happening, it’s overwhelmingly peaceful.”

For the joint project — called the US Crisis Monitor — ACLED and Princeton researchers not only analyzed more than 7,750 demonstrations associated with the Black Lives Matter movement in more than 2,440 different locations across the United States between May 26 and Aug. 22, but they also documented more than 1,000 protests related to COVID-19, a third of which were linked to the reopening of schools and considered peaceful protests.

Government authorities were, however, more likely to intervene in Black Lives Matter protests than in other demonstrations. According to the report, “more than 9 percent — or nearly one in 10 — have been met with government intervention, compared to 3 percent of all other demonstrations.”

“These data reveal that the United States is in crisis,” the report states. “It faces a multitude of concurrent, overlapping risks — from police abuse and racial injustice, to pandemic-related unrest and beyond — all exacerbated by increasing polarization.”


Government officials were also more likely to intervene with force “such as firing less-lethal weapons like tear gas, rubber bullets, and pepper spray or beating demonstrators with batons.” In fact, authorities used force in more than 54 percent of the demonstrations they engaged in — a significant increase compared to last year. According to the report, “over 5 percent of all events linked to the BLM movement have been met with force by authorities, compared to under 1 percent of all other demonstrations.”

Journalists were also on the receiving end of attacks from government forces. Since May, ACLED recorded more than 100 separate incidents of government violence against journalists in at least 31 states and D.C. during demonstrations associated with the BLM movement.

As Time pointed out, ACLED also highlighted a recent Morning Consult poll in which 42 percent of respondents believe that “most protesters (associated with the BLM movement) are trying to incite violence or destroy property.” Of course, ACLED’s report shows otherwise.

The post 93 Percent Of Black Lives Matter Protests Have Been Peaceful, Report Says appeared first on Scary Mommy.

Man Dies From COVID-19 After Attending 400,000 Person Motorcycle Rally

More than 260 COVID-19 cases have been linked with the 10-day motorcycle rally in Sturgis, South Dakota

Last month, 400,000 motorcycle enthusiasts over the course of 10-days descended on the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in South Dakota and now more than 260 people have contracted COVID-19 as a result of the event and one man in his 60s just died.

The rally lasted from August 7 to August 16 and saw people drive in from all over the nation to congregate in the small town of Sturgis, South Dakota where the event took place both outside and inside bars, restaurants, and tattoo shops. Very few attendants wore masks throughout the course of the 10-day rally and now new COVID-19 outbreaks have been traced back to the event.

Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images

The Washington Post reported that there have been more than 260 COVID-19 cases across 11 states that have been directly linked with attendants of the motorcycle rally. Kris Ehresmann, infectious-disease director at the Minnesota Department of Health, just reported that a man in his 60s, with underlying conditions, was hospitalized in the ICU shortly after attending the rally and eventually died.

Since the rally ended two weeks ago, the Midwest and the Dakotas are seeing a spike in coronavirus cases, though that can also be attributed to other factors. However, the rally is believed to be the largest hosted gathering since the onset of the pandemic and in South Dakota, there were virtually no restrictions on businesses that would have prohibited the rally from taking place. South Dakota Governor Kristi Noem actually welcomed the event, hoping it would revitalize the economy.

Photos and videos from the event show a sea of largely unmasked crowds, many wearing Trump 2020 gear and shirts that read “Screw Covid I went to Sturgis.”

One reporter in the area shared anecdotes of how bikers who contracted the virus don’t want to admit or acknowledge they acquired it at the rally.

Per the AP, South Dakota itself has 105 of the 260+ reported COVID-19 cases linked with the rally. Victor Huber, a biomedical sciences professor at the University of South Dakota, told NBC News that the infection rate in South Dakota before the rally had been “hovering at 8 to 10 percent. The last couple weeks, it’s been up over 15 percent.”

Dr. Sadiya Khan, an epidemiologist at the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, also told NBC News that Sturgis and the return to college campuses are driving the increase in cases in the area.

Michael Ciaglo/Getty Images

“Two things clearly appear to be driving it,” Khan said. “The motorcycle rally in Sturgis, as well as students returning to college and universities. The timeline seems to support that.”

State Health Officials also learned that some individuals who knowingly tested positive for the virus attended the rally while infectious.

The post Man Dies From COVID-19 After Attending 400,000 Person Motorcycle Rally appeared first on Scary Mommy.

U.S. Marshals Service Locates 39 Missing Children In Georgia

39 missing children in Georgia recently found by U.S. Marshals Service

A relatively new program out of the U.S. Marshals Service has announced that they recently located 39 missing children in Georgia. Sadly, child and human trafficking continue to plague the world, the latest statistic is that in the U.S. around 500,000 children went missing last year, but this latest news is a heartening trend we hope to see more of.

The U.S. Marshals Service Missing Child Unit led the two-week search, dubbed “Operation Not Forgotten,” in collaboration with local and state agencies and successfully found 26 missing children and successfully located 13 others in safe locations. U.S. Marshals Service broke the news on Thursday, saying this is a “relatively new mission for the U.S. Marshals” but added that “the future should see many similar operations throughout the United States as the Missing Child Unit ramps up operations using the man hunting skills, in which the Marshals specialize, to locate and rescue missing minors.”

View this post on Instagram

The U.S. Marshals Service Missing Child Unit, in conjunction with the agency’s Southeast Regional Fugitive Task Force, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) and Georgia state and local agencies, led a two-week operation in August in Atlanta and Macon, Georgia, to rescue endangered missing children. "Operation Not Forgotten" resulted in the rescue of 26 children, the safe location of 13 children and the arrest of nine criminal associates. Additionally, investigators cleared 26 arrest warrants and filed additional charges for alleged crimes related to sex trafficking, parental kidnapping, registered sex offender violations, drugs and weapons possession, and custodial interference. The 26 warrants cleared included 19 arrest warrants for a total of nine individuals arrested, some of whom had multiple warrants. “The U.S. Marshals Service is fully committed to assisting federal, state, and local agencies with locating and recovering endangered missing children, in addition to their primary fugitive apprehension mission,” said Director of the Marshals Service Donald Washington. “The message to missing children and their families is that we will never stop looking for you.” These missing children were considered to be some of the most at-risk and challenging recovery cases in the area, based on indications of high-risk factors such as victimization of child sex trafficking, child exploitation, sexual abuse, physical abuse, and medical or mental health conditions. Other children were located at the request of law enforcement to ensure their wellbeing. USMS investigators were able to confirm each child’s location in person and assure their safety and welfare. The Justice for Victims of Trafficking Act of 2015 enhanced the U.S. Marshals’ authority to assist federal, state, and local law enforcement with the recovery of missing, endangered or abducted children, regardless of whether a fugitive or sex offender was involved. The Marshals established a Missing Child Unit to oversee and manage the implementation of its enhanced authority under the act.

A post shared by U.S. Marshals Service (@usmarshalshq) on

“When we track down fugitives, it’s a good feeling to know that we’re putting the bad guy behind bars. But that sense of accomplishment is nothing compared to finding a missing child,” Darby Kirby, Chief of the Missing Child Unit, said in a statement. “It’s hard to put into words what we feel when we rescue a missing child, but I can tell you that this operation has impacted every single one of us out here. We are working to protect them and get them the help they need.”

A total of nine individuals were arrested, and according to the U.S. Marshalls Service, some of these missing children were victims of child sex trafficking, child exploitation, sexual and physical abuse. “Other children were located at the request of law enforcement to ensure their wellbeing,” officials added while stating that the children were found to be safe after all.

Shane T. McCoy / US Marshals

Since the U.S. Marshalls Service got involved with locating missing children, they have contributed to the recovery of a missing child in 75 percent of cases received. In 2019 they have helped recover 295 missing children. “Additionally, of the missing children recovered, 66 percent were recovered within seven days of the USMS assisting with the case.”

Child trafficking is a very real problem — and should not be conflated with the bizarre QAnon conspiracies on the subject — and we’re so happy to see stories like this one and see missing children reunited with their families. As Donald Washington, Director of the Marshals Service stated, “the message to missing children and their families is that we will never stop looking for you.”

The post U.S. Marshals Service Locates 39 Missing Children In Georgia appeared first on Scary Mommy.

Martin Luther King Jr.’s Granddaughter Delivers Powerful Speech At March On Washington

Martin Luther King Jr.’s granddaughter Yolanda Renee King gives powerful speech on the 57th anniversary of his “I Have A Dream” speech

On Friday, August 28, 2020, Martin Luther King Jr.’s 12-year-old granddaughter Yolanda Renee King gave a powerful speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, the same place Reverend King gave his famous “I Have A Dream” speech 57 years ago. Thousands of protesters gathered in Washington D.C. today for the “Get Your Knee Off Our Necks” March on Washington — calling for criminal justice reform and racial equality, and to honor the late Martin Luther King Jr.

Taking it upon herself to uphold her grandfather’s legacy in his fight for civil and racial justice, Yolanda’s confident and rousing speech spoke directly to her generation, to kids, asking them to join her and continue to march, and protest, and rally for justice and change.


“Great challenges produce great generations. We have mastered the selfie and TikTok…Now we must master ourselves,” she told the giant crowd. “My generation has already taken to the streets — peacefully and with masks and social distancing — to protest racism. And I want to ask the young people here to join me in pledging that we have only just begun to fight — and that we will be the generation that moves from me to we. We are going to be the generation that dismantles systemic racism once and for all, now and forever. We are going to be the generation that calls a halt to police brutality and gun violence once and for all, now and forever.”

“Less than a year before he was assassinated, my grandfather predicted this very moment,” she continued. “He said that we were moving into a new phase of the struggle. The first phase was for civil rights and the new phase is a struggle for genuine equality.”

View this post on Instagram

March on Washington: 2020 vs. 1963.

A post shared by The Recount (@therecount) on

Yolanda was joined at the podium by her father, Martin Luther King III, who later shared on Instagram how proud he was of his activist daughter.

“As she said in her speech today, she is part of the generation that will change the world,” he wrote. “They will dismantle systemic racism, call a halt to police brutality and gun violence, reverse climate change to save the planet, and end poverty. She is the future. She is my father’s dream.”

After leading the crowd in a rousing protest chant, she honored her grandfather one last time, shouting out, “Papa King, we won’t forget.”

The post Martin Luther King Jr.’s Granddaughter Delivers Powerful Speech At March On Washington appeared first on Scary Mommy.

Health Experts Are Confused By The CDC’s New Guidelines For COVID Testing

Health experts don’t agree with CDC’s new guidelines to limit coronavirus testing

Apropos of nothing, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention changed its COVID-19 testing guidance to say that if you have been exposed to someone with COVID-19, you don’t necessarily need to get tested yourself if you aren’t showing any symptoms, which is a full 180 from their previous guideline that stated that testing was appropriate for anyone who had come in contact with an infected individual, even if they weren’t showing any symptoms. Unfortunately, the CDC’s newest guideline is leaving health experts and doctors scratching their heads.

So under this new guidance, if you found out that your coworker — who you might come in contact with on a daily basis — has COVID-19 — the CDC is like, nahhh you don’t really need to get tested. It’s perplexing to say the least. Why wouldn’t you want to get tested to find out if you’re an asymptomatic carrier?

A federal health official told CNN that this sudden change on testing protocols came from pressure from the Trump administration to do less testing overall, and as we all know, Trump continues to make “jokes” about how our country does too much testing and lamented earlier this summer that “we do so much more [testing] than other countries it makes us, in a way, look bad.”

Whatever the reason for the CDC’s new policy of testing, it’s not sitting well with health experts and local elected officials.

Dr. Leana Wen, an emergency physician and public health professor at George Washington University, told CNN that “I’m concerned that these recommendations suggest someone who has had substantial exposure to a person with Covid-19 now doesn’t need to get tested. This is key to contact tracing, especially given that up to 50% of all transmission is due to people who do not have symptoms. One wonders why these guidelines were changed — is it to justify continued deficit of testing?”

Dr. Tom Frieden, the former director of the CDC, did not mince words when he tweeted, “If an asymptomatic contact tests positive, their contacts can be identified, warned, and quarantined. Not testing asymptomatic contacts allows Covid to spread. The CDC guidance is indefensible. No matter who wrote it and got it posted on the CDC site, it needs to be changed.”

The American Medical Association released a statement on the subject and said, “Months into this pandemic, we know COVID-19 is spread by asymptomatic people. Suggesting that people without symptoms, who have known exposure to COVID-positive individuals, do not need testing is a recipe for community spread and more spikes in coronavirus.”

California Governor Gavin Newsom point-blank refused to enforce the CDC’s new guidelines and stated that California (which already has the most COVID-19 cases of any in the country) would do even more COVID-19 testing.

In the meantime, mask up and stay safe.

The post Health Experts Are Confused By The CDC’s New Guidelines For COVID Testing appeared first on Scary Mommy.

This Is Why I’m Suddenly So Intolerant Of Other People’s ‘Opinions’

Last week, I shared to my Facebook page an article I had written calling out QAnon conspiracy theorists. I referred to them as “gullible fucking dingalings.” A follower told me via the comments that she thought I was mean and that I had changed a lot. “You used to respect other people’s opinions,” she said, “but lately it’s like no one else can have a different opinion. What happened to you?”

She’s been a follower for a long time, five or six years at least, so her words made me pause. Had I changed that much? Was I being closed-minded and intolerant?

Then, a couple of days later, a friend asked on her Facebook wall, “When did you become radicalized?” The question generated a long thread, with answers ranging from “When I was 10, I witnessed…” to “Ever since the 2016 election…”

Was that what the woman who follows my Facebook page had meant? Had I become “radicalized”? And if yes, when did it happen?

I should say first of all that for several years now, I haven’t written much on the kinds of topics we can all agree to disagree on, like whether or not you breastfeed or choose to medicate your child who has ADHD, or whether you compost or think leggings qualify as pants. I used to write a lot about those sorts of things, so I suppose it makes sense that at one time I may have come off as more accommodating to differing opinions.

Lately, I write more more on topics like climate change, women’s issues, racism, voting rights, and LGBTQ+ topics. Some say these are “political issues,” and I suppose they are, insofar as politics impact each of these subjects. But they’re also civil rights issues, and I don’t have much wiggle room when it comes to my feelings about civil rights. To me, these are not topics on which a person can remain objective, nor are they topics on which we can “agree to disagree.” Everyone has a right to their opinion until those opinions begin to infringe upon the civil rights of others.

For example, I find it violently hypocritical that those who would support a bill allowing healthcare providers to deny life-saving health care to queer or transgender people are the same people who would claim that providing that care would somehow infringe on their freedom of religion. Pardon me if I don’t believe “religious freedom” includes violating your hippocratic oath to first do no harm. If you don’t believe queer people deserve gender-affirming healthcare, the part where your religious freedom comes in as you consider a career in healthcare, is that you have the freedom to choose a different profession where your religion-backed bigotry cannot harm people.

As far as “when” my supposed radicalization happened, I’d say it was a gradual process, over the course of decades, though the lead-up to the 2016 election and all that has happened since have cemented my beliefs. As it became clear in 2016 that Trump had serious public support, I began noticing a disturbing shift in public discourse. Trump was vomiting openly hateful rhetoric that was unprecedented in the history of this country, and seemingly ordinary people were latching onto it with rabid ardor. And then he won.

Trying to understand the moment I was witnessing, I dug into history books, biographies of historical figures, and journalistic articles and podcasts. Meanwhile, my social media feeds filled with memes and viral posts that often contradicted the vetted, source-cited material I was consuming. Friends and family members broke my heart as they announced their appreciation of the divisive, hate-filled words that flowed from the new president’s mouth. People whose views had previously been unknown to me now loudly and proudly flaunted their racism, homophobia, and xenophobia.

Those who weren’t openly racist, homophobic, or xenophobic, now simply denied those issues existed. They accused progressives like me of “making everything about race” or being “snowflakes.” Seemingly intelligent people questioned the reality of climate change. When COVID-19 hit, people I’d thought were reasonable were accusing scientists of partaking in a vast conspiracy to exaggerate the severity of a virus so they could take down Trump. People I’d known in high school who had been straight-A students were sharing conspiracy theories that a few years ago they would have fact checked and not shared.

The changes I’ve witnessed on social media have been profound, but so have the changes I’ve seen in real life. Bumper stickers, hats, and other merch are everywhere. People are openly proud to be part of a disturbingly homogenous group that confidently denies the claims that marginalized groups make about their own experiences. They don’t only want us to know that we share a difference of opinion; they also want to make it clear that their opinions are accompanied by loaded weapons. They dare us to contradict them.

But I’m the one who’s been “radicalized”?

I began my public presence in 2014 as a blogger, posting to my small Facebook page about topics that mattered to me. I went viral in 2016 when I wrote a strongly worded essay in response to Brock Turner’s insulting three-month sentence for sexually assaulting a college woman. The way I speak now, the opinions I hold, are no less firm than my Brock Turner essay. I may write less about ADHD meds and leggings, but my take on matters of social injustice remain as firm and intolerant of bullshit as ever. I analyze and research topics with the same thoroughness and zeal and passion to root out my own bias that I always have.

My beliefs have not changed. I have not changed the way I react to injustice or ignorance. I care about the same things I have always cared about: equity, acceptance, and for people to give a shit about the truth. For people to give a shit about others besides themselves. So it wouldn’t really be accurate to say I have been radicalized, at least not in the way that implies I have changed the way I express my feelings about the things I care about.

A festering hatred has come boiling up out of the ground since Donald Trump took office — if anything has changed, that is it. And what has “happened to me” is that I feel compelled to make it clear that I will not tolerate people’s ignorance, bigotry, selfishness, and cruelty. If that makes me a radical, then I guess I’ll proudly wear the label of radical.

The post This Is Why I’m Suddenly So Intolerant Of Other People’s ‘Opinions’ appeared first on Scary Mommy.

Taylor Swift Calls Out Trump For ‘Calculated Dismantling Of USPS’

Taylor Swift slams Trump over USPS corruption and urges fans to vote early

Once upon a time, Taylor Swift stayed out of politics to focus on the music. That Taylor is gone, and we are here for angry, new political Taylor. In a couple of tweets on Saturday, August 15, 2020, Swift lashed out at Trump and got her fans up to speed on the very scary stuff that’s happening with the U.S. Postal Service.

The corruption surrounding the USPS is bad enough, but it’s even more worrisome considering there’s an election in three months and more people than ever before are planning to vote by mail as safer alternative to physically going to the polls during the coronavirus pandemic. The USPS literally warned the country that it might not be able to deliver ballots in time and now Trump is pushing a false narrative that voting by mail is fraudulent and wants to defund the USPS. However, without a functioning and bipartisan postal service, mail-in and absentee ballots will become a lost cause.

It’s not wrong to fear the fate of the USPS and its impact on the election and on Saturday, Swift made her opinions on the subject crystal clear.

“Trump’s calculated dismantling of USPS proves one thing clearly: He is WELL AWARE that we do not want him as our president,” Swift tweeted. “He’s chosen to blatantly cheat and put millions of Americans’ lives at risk in an effort to hold on to power.”

“Donald Trump’s ineffective leadership gravely worsened the crisis that we are in and he is now taking advantage of it to subvert and destroy our right to vote and vote safely. Request a ballot early. Vote early,” Swift added.

Notably, Swift urged her fans to vote “early” if they want their voices heard, and she’s right to recommend that. As the postal service experiences loss of funding, you should expect delays, so making sure your ballot doesn’t get — quite literally — lost in the mail ahead of the election is very important.

If you want to do your part to help the USPS, The Slacktivists says an easy way to start is by buying stamps from the USPS. And to guarantee that your vote is counted, you must make sure your ballot is mailed 15 days before election day, so mail that sucker in by October 20!

The post Taylor Swift Calls Out Trump For ‘Calculated Dismantling Of USPS’ appeared first on Scary Mommy.

CDC Says COVID-19 Survivors Have Immunity For About Three Months

New information out of the CDC says that immunity following coronavirus infection lasts approximately three months

Since the onset of the coronavirus pandemic, it’s been a struggle to get clear information about the novel coronavirus, and one of the biggest question marks is what a positive COVID-19 test means for one’s future immunity. If I get COVID am I immune forever, am I immune at all? A new update from the CDC states that people who have been infected with the virus and recovered are immune for up to three months after the fact.

The new update was quietly dropped in a CDC page on how and when to quarantine and stated that a person who does not have the coronavirus will have to quarantine for 14 days if they come in close contact with someone who is positive for the virus, however, a healthy person does not need to quarantine themselves if they come in contact with another person who “had COVID-19 within the past 3 months.”

“People who have tested positive for COVID-19 do not need to quarantine or get tested again for up to 3 months as long as they do not develop symptoms again,” a statement on the CDC’s website reads. “People who develop symptoms again within 3 months of their first bout of COVID-19 may need to be tested again if there is no other cause identified for their symptoms.”

We’d love a little more guidance on “as long as they do not develop symptoms again” means, but like most things concerning this virus, we’re sure clarification will come with time.

The CDC reportedly arrived at this fact after a study published in June stated that antibodies “start to decrease within 2–3 months after infection.” This new three-month window of protection brings up a whole host of new questions, but this knowledge is coming at a good time, especially as COVID-19 cases skyrocket across the country and many falsely assumed that surviving the virus was a free pass for lifetime immunity. Stay safe out there.

Information about COVID-19 is rapidly changing, and Scary Mommy is committed to providing the most recent data in our coverage. With news being updated so frequently, some of the information in this story may have changed after publication. For this reason, we are encouraging readers to use online resources from local public health departments, the Centers for Disease Control, and the World Health Organization to remain as informed as possible.

The post CDC Says COVID-19 Survivors Have Immunity For About Three Months appeared first on Scary Mommy.

Don’t ‘Dirty Delete’—It’s Rude AF And You Need To Own Your Shit

The internet can be a dark and soul-sucking web of despair, and Facebook groups and comment sections hold the worst of humanity. Everyone is a keyboard warrior, and folks run headfirst into arguments with what they think are the most important opinions, smartest thoughts, and hottest takes in the room. But as sure as someone has something to say, someone will disagree and happily vocalize their reasons why. Just because someone feels bold enough to say something, doesn’t mean they’re always confident enough to let their comments stand. Sometimes when an original poster (OP) doesn’t like the backlash they’re getting, they delete their post, thus deleting all comments in response to the OP. This is called “dirty deleting,” and it’s rude AF.

I’m in several groups where dirty deleting is cause for removal from the group because it shows a low level of emotional intelligence and polices the tone of those who have something to say in response. It lacks culpability and shows cowardice.

Not dirty deleting should be the first rule everyone agrees to when walking into the ring of Facebook groups. If you are going to say something, either stand by it or openly admit you are wrong or willing to change. Hitting the delete button means denying all accountability and—at minimum—erasing someone else’s point of view just because you felt threatened by it or didn’t like it.

I acknowledge that some people are flaming assholes and sometimes delete and block is your best bet when they show up with their sack of isms and ignorance. I am not upset when someone needs to protect their safety or mental health; I am upset when someone feels like they need to protect their image or their pride—and that is usually the root motivation for dirty deleting.

Let’s circle back to the dark hole of despair. Not everything is true all of the time, so this means the internet can also be a great place to learn things. Sometimes both asked-for and unsolicited responses to comments left in Facebook groups facilitate great discussions, even if uncomfortable at times. There is a difference between being attacked and being educated and held to a higher standard. This is where my biggest gripe lies with dirty deleting.

When an OP doesn’t like the tone of a discussion or the comments people are leaving, they claim victim status and delete long threads, conversations that amount to hours of effort and emotional labor, simply because they didn’t like being challenged. The OP may feel embarrassed or bullied. Dirty deleting is a gross sign of insecurity and a sign of unwillingness to learn or be uncomfortable.

In one of the local groups I am in, a parent I know expressed frustration that the elementary school kids were being read I Am Jazz, a picture book written for preschool kids and older that tells the childhood story of transgender woman and activist Jazz Jennings. The parent felt that kind of discussion should happen at home and should be up to the parents to decide if and when to talk about that stuff. Well, that stuff is my stuff, and the stuff of my transgender daughter who was in class with hers.

I made several points that my child’s safety, respect, and acceptance shouldn’t be compromised because she or other parents were uncomfortable. I posted several articles about early conversations with kids about LGBTQIA+ topics and added age appropriate book lists. Other parents added comments too. None of the language was disrespectful or explosive. I was optimistic that I had made good points for her and other parents to digest. Then she DMed me and told me she deleted the post because she didn’t want to look like she wasn’t accepting. She privately apologized but was worried what others would think of her. I was pissed, exhausted, and felt defeated by her inability to see the value in that community conversation.

You need to own your shit, people. If you haven’t heard it before, let me tell you some really important things.

It’s okay to be wrong.

It’s okay for someone to disagree with you.

It’s okay to check your biases.

It’s okay to admit you have some learning to do.

It’s okay to change your mind.

It’s okay to make mistakes.

It’s okay to dig your heels in and claim righteousness.

But it is not okay to pretend like none of it existed by deleting other people’s words—their time and emotional labor—because they made you feel things you didn’t like.

The most heated debates seem to happen when an OP talks over, or doesn’t listen to, marginalized voices or their allies. Agreeing to disagree is not an option when Black folks are explaining the ways they continue to experience systemic racism and violence. Agreeing to disagree about the existence of transgender children is a no-no. Hiding behind religion to love the queer sinner but not the queer sin is bad. Then there are science deniers, anti-vaxxers, and pro-lifers who seem to be oxymorons of themselves. Opposing views with rational arguments fill a thread with valuable counter points, links to articles, lived experiences, and fact checks, but when the OP has had enough, it’s all gone. They delete the post because they claim it has become too toxic, when in reality the most toxic thing was their inability to stay in an adult conversation.

This has happened too many times to me, and it’s maddening. I am often level-headed even in my disagreements with folks. I try to see their side of a topic while still hoping I can help them see where I am coming from. I often take the time to validate my points through studies or research-based articles. I understand I may come from a place of being biased, but I do my best to argue within common ground.

When other folks will chime in, really wonderful perspectives can be shared. I also know more people are reading than responding, and I hope the work I and others are doing—specifically to move equity and humanity forward—is educating people on the topic at hand. But in my work as a LGBTQIA+ educator, I know how often people shy away from being wrong or thinking they hurt someone.

When someone starts to see how their original comment could have been worded differently or that they didn’t actually believe what they said because they didn’t understand the topic well enough to believe anything, they often want to make their shame or guilt go away. So they dirty delete. They undo all of the emotional labor and time taken to get to that point instead of rewarding it with proof that people can either change or stay mad in their convictions.

Strengthen that backbone, folks. You said what you said.

The post Don’t ‘Dirty Delete’—It’s Rude AF And You Need To Own Your Shit appeared first on Scary Mommy.