#readmission | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

artbyblastweave · 2 years

Text

There are a lot of ways in which Bonesaw seems to be in conversation with Harley Quinn. They’re both blonde, perky minions with an exaggerated affect and an affinity for black comedy, the girl-fridays to their respective society-dwelling chaotic-evil middle-aged masterminds. Both of them have sympathetic backstories in which they were brought to their current sorry state through deft and continual emotional abuse and/or torture. Both of them are painted as arguably more competent and creative than their respective bosses, and both of them ultimately receive redemptive arcs in which they rediscover their sense of personal agency and get out from under the thumb of their abuser. And neither of them has a valid license to practice medicine.

One thing I don’t see brought up a lot, though, is that Harley Quinn as she’s currently written and marketed is already subverting and deconstructing a character archetype- namely, that of Harley Quinn. She was originally introduced as a relatively flat and uncomplicated minion of The Joker, for a gendered sight gag they didn’t even go through with in the final cut of the episode. She verged on being a stock character. I’ve always parsed Mad Love, the comic/episode that fleshed out her backstory, as the writers subsequently sitting down and seriously considering the whole moll archetype; asking themselves how someone ends up the sidekick of someone like The Joker, and how dysfunctional that relationship would be behind closed doors. Harley Quinn is already thoroughly subverting Harley Quinn, to the extent that it’s now possible to go your whole life without consuming any Batman media that contains the original dynamic being subverted.

So what Bonesaw is doing is that she takes that subversion and cranks it up a notch. Bonesaw is a version of Harley Quinn who, in my opinion, is vastly more sympathetic than Harley herself, but she also (very reasonably!) gets handed much less of a pass by the narrative despite this.

Harley was a grown woman with a doctorate. Bonesaw was Six. Harley breached professional ethics by becoming involved with her patient. Bonesaw was Six. Harley (I think @zoobus brought this up recently and got me thinking about this) was, as the Joker’s doctor, and thus at least initially was the more powerful party in regards to the power imbalance. Bonesaw was six.

But! Despite the fact that Bonesaw was six, and was dealt an unabashedly terrible hand, the redemption arc is significantly more uphill because she, you know, she did torture and murder scores and scores of people in the most horrifying ways possible! And at a certain point issues of culpability have to take a back-seat to questions like “Are we physically capable of stopping her if she changes her mind and starts doing this again?” Pound-for-Pound I’m pretty sure she’s much worse in terms of raw bodycount than Harley Quinn, regardless of how much choice they each had in the matter. No real way to elide that. No marketing-based impetus for the author to do so.

Her redemption arc doesn’t happen because people within the setting idealistically recognize her as an abused child who’s deserving of a second chance on principle; instead they get her in their custody, they need something from her, and extend her the courtesy of not killing her because that’s the only way to get what they need. They never trust her; they never will trust her, (I personally don’t feel like they’re under any obligation to ever trust her) and her readmission to society is so knifes-edge conditional that from her perspective it was only barely worth it to return to the fold. She is not happier for her decision. There’s no just-so story about how doing good makes everyone forgive you and become your friend, or at least become cautiously indifferent to you. This is, like, the most cynical, harsh and bitter redemption arc possible. And in spite of all this, there’s also a level on which Bonesaw is lucky, because her “redemption arc” is so mechanistic; so dependent on timing and circumstance, on people needing something from her instead of just killing her, on being young enough that “she never had a chance to be anything else” is an argument that lands with people despite being also reasonably true for a lot of adult supervillains who got fucked over as early and as hard as she did.

This has been sitting in my drafts long enough that I don’t have a good sense of what the final takeaway should be, so I’ll just end with this- Bonesaw’s situation, as melancholy and cynical as it makes me feel, is definitely in line with one of the big recurring beats of the book- that regardless of questions of what one deserves, you get away with a lot if you have something to offer and if you play ball. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Taylor’s visit to Sophia in prison comes right on the tail of the Bonesaw sequence; Shadow Stalker could have gotten better, if anyone had cared enough to put in the legwork, and probably could have done so with much less work than Bonesaw. But nobody entertained that idea, because at a certain point she stopped being worth it. And Taylor, who probably did do a lot more harm to a lot more people just because she was running free for longer, gets a seat at the table because she made herself useful, and a charitable assessment from the fandom because we live in her head. And after a sufficiently long bout of fruitless plate-spinning and sin-weighing, kindness and mercy and the extension of second chances inevitably come out in the wash, as a knot-cutting measure if nothing else.

#bonesaw #worm #wildbow #parahumans #thoughts #worm thoughts #worm web serial #meta

536 notes · View notes

she-is-ovarit · 8 months

Text

#feminism #women #healthcare #STEM #women in stem #female physicians #science

146 notes · View notes

racefortheironthrone · 1 month

Note

So I know my homoiousios vs. homoousios, and my monophysite vs. dyophysite, and my monothelite vs. dyothelite, and how it all led to the Arab caliphates getting a decent navy and winning the Battle of the Masts.

I don't, and I'd love to! (If you feel like it, obviously.) I'm pretty sure the homoiousios one is about, like, the Trinity or something, but beyond that it's all Greek to me.

(At this point, I feel like I owe @apocrypals royalties or something, but I'm getting a weird kick from doing this on Saint Patrick's Day, so let's do this).

I covered the impact of the monophysite vs. dyophysite split and the Battle of the Masts here, so I'll start from the top.

You are quite correct that the homoiousios vs. homoousios split was, like most of the heresies of the early Church, a Cristological controversy over the nature of Christ and the Trinity. This is perhaps better known as the Arian Heresy, and it's arguably the great-granddaddy of all heresies.

The Arian heresy was the subject of the very first Council of the early Church, the Council of Nicea, convoked by Emperor Constantine the Great in order to end all disputes within the Church forever. (Clearly this worked out well.) In part because the Church hadn't really sat down and attempted to establish orthodoxy before, this debate got very heated. Famously, at one point the future Saint Nicholas supposedly punched Presbyter Arius in the face.

What got a room of men devoted to the "Prince of Peace" heated to the point of physical violence was that Arius argued that, while Christ was the son of God and thus clearly divine, because he was created by God the Father and thus came after the Father, he couldn't be of the same essence (homoousios) as the Father, but rather of similar essence (homoiousios). Eustathias of Antioch and Alexander of Alexandria took the opposing position, which got formulated into the Nicean Creed. As this might suggest, Arius lost both the debate and the succeeding vote that followed, as roughly 298 of 300 bishops attending signed onto the Creed. This got very bad for Arius indeed, because Emperor Constantine enforced the new policy by ordering his writings burned, and Arius and two of his supporters were exiled to Illyricum. Game over, right?

But something odd happened: the dispute kept going, as new followers of Arius popped up and showed themselves to be much better at the Byzantine knife-fighting of Church politics. About ten years later, the ever-unpredictable Constantine turned against Athanasius of Alexandria (who had been Alexander's campaign manager, in essence) and banished him for intruiging against Arius, while Arius was allowed to return to the church (this time in Jerusalem) - although this turned out to be mostly a symbolic victory as Arius died on the journey and didn't live to see his readmission.

....and then it turned out that Constantine the Great's son Constantius II was an Arian and he reversed policy completely, adopting the Arian position and exiling anyone who disagreed with him, up to and including Pope Liberius. While the Niceans eventually triumphed during the reign of Theodosius the Great, Arianism unexpectedly became a major geopolitical issue within the Empire.

See, both during their exile and during their brief period of ascendancy within the Church, one of the major projects of the Arians was to send out missionaries into the west to preach their version of Christianity. Unexpectedly, Arianism proved to be a big hit among the formerly pagan Goths (thanks in no small part to the missionary Ulfilas translating the Bible into Gothic), who were perhaps more familiar with pantheons in which patriarchal gods were considered senior to their sons.

While they weren't particularly given to persecuting Niceans in the West, the Ostrogothic, Visigothic, Burgundian, and Vandal Kings weren't about to let themselves be pushed around by some Roman prick in Constantinople either - which added an interesting religious component to Justinian's attempt to reconquer the West.

#history #late roman empire #byzantine empire #heresy #theology #arianism

27 notes · View notes

gliklofhameln · 6 months

Text

Menasseh ben Israel’s 1656 petition to Oliver Cromwell • The National Archives

In 1290, the Jews were expelled from England, and until 1656 there was no open Jewish presence in the country. Rabbi Menasseh ben Israel, a distinguished Amsterdam scholar, played an important role in the readmission of the Jews to England. In 1655, he came to England from Amsterdam to petition the Lord Protector, Oliver Cromwell, to readmit Jews to the country.

Cromwell was favourable to the re-establishment of a Jewish community in England on both economic and religious grounds. After much debate, in 1656 Cromwell gave the Jews permission “to meet privately in their houses for prayer” and to lease a cemetery. In 1657, about 30 Sephardi families founded a synagogue in Creechurch Lane in the City of London.

#jumblr #judaism #menassesh ben israel #oliver cromwell #jewish history #uk #manuscripts #myposts

37 notes · View notes

i-make-art14 · 3 months

Text

#ducktales #tumblr polls #villain #duckblr #ducktales 2017 #redemption arc

14 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 9 months

Text

Health care systems do their best to safeguard against breaches. But all of us could be doing more to protect our confidential health data. That starts with understanding when this data is most at risk.

When a patient called to ask if she could email me a CT report and imaging, I wanted to help. But I heard the loud whirring of a smoothie or espresso machine and figured she was at a public café. She confirmed that she was calling from a coffee shop.

I asked her to use our hospital portal from home to protect her privacy. She said she wasn’t sure she remembered her login details and didn’t want to wait. She also didn’t understand why her records wouldn’t be protected under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996.

“I’m not surprised,” says Nichole Sweeney, general counsel and chief privacy officer for Chesapeake Regional Information System for Patients, a nonprofit health information exchange for several US states.

“The public may not realize that consumer-generated data is not protected. What she does with her own information is not secure. The federal government doesn’t regulate the health data itself. It’s the actual facility, medical office, or hospital—under HIPAA, a covered entity under that designation.”

Many of us also have devices at home that collect and store personal data about our health. I asked Sweeney if that data is covered if my doctor asked me to use the device.

She explains, “If I get my blood pressure taken at a clinic or any medical office, that is covered, and your personal data is protected. But if you take readings at home, this is not HIPAA. It’s not regulated. Those new wearable trackers? Those are not covered either. You’re on your own.”

So what else is not regulated? People. Any person using their own data is not covered under HIPAA.

Matt Fisher worked as a health care corporate and regulatory attorney. He is now general counsel for Carium, a virtual care platform. He believes people need more education about HIPAA and its limitations.

“It works effectively for what it was designed to do within the traditional health care industry. The issue is the assumption that it protects all information regardless of setting,” he says. “The fact is, as an individual who holds their own information HIPAA does not apply at all.”

Beyond hospitals and private medical offices, who is actually covered? Subcontractors. These include third-party associates, health plans, insurance companies, and individual physician providers. Labs, clinics, and any other medical offices that bill for their services are also expected to be HIPAA-compliant. Notably, this does not include social media businesses.

Even doctors, notoriously busy and working long hours, don’t always have the luxury of using patient portals to communicate effectively. They’re more likely to text or email colleagues with potentially sensitive information, all on personal devices that may or may not be locked down. But their goal is fast and efficient patient care, not necessarily data security.

Zubin Damania, who is a doctor and goes by ZDoggMD on social media, uses satire on his YouTube channel to educate viewers and poke fun at the health care system. His more than 488,000 YouTube subscribers no doubt include health care employees, but you don’t have to be one to appreciate parodies like “EHR State of Mind” (EHR is short for electronic health records), which is set to Alicia Keys’ hit “Empire State of Mind,” or “Readmission,” a play on R. Kelly’s “Ignition.” Damania hopes to inspire change in the health care tech sector so, as he puts it, “doctors can just be doctors.” Another target of his satire? Massive health data portals like Epic. He and other physicians believe the design of these systems can actually hinder security if medical personnel find it more restrictive than care-focused.

“Epic and others like it were not designed for use by clinicians on the front line trying to help patients,” he says. “These systems are giant billing platforms. It’s varying fields of data to be walled off.”

Sadly, Epic and others like it are all we have when it comes to storing patient data safely, and despite their flaws, these portals are still the safest available option for doctors and patients. Health care facilities are strictly regulated to receive federal government funding, and they must pass safety certifications, including security protections for patient data. They also seek to maintain industry recognition in order to stay credible and competitive. Want to make a hospital exec nervous? Tell them the Joint Commission is coming by for a visit. They need those gold star approval ratings.

Some patients are under the misconception that these systems are not really that secure. But in the past few years, data breaches have been rare (though they do happen). Hackers frequently target hospitals and health care systems for ransomware attacks, but it doesn’t pay for hackers to demand money when robust backups exist. While the industry has made some progress, the problem of individuals taking personal risks continues.

A former Department of Homeland Security adviser and a doctor, Chris Pierson is CEO of BlackCloak, a company that specializes in personal digital protection from financial fraud, cybercrime, reputational damage, and identity theft. He believes vigilance is key for doctors and patients alike.

Protect Your Entire Family

“I don’t think people realize that once someone is able to get just one piece of information, that can lead to opening others’ private data,” Pierson says. “It’s no longer the original individual on their computer, but additional family members’ identity that can be compromised.”

He explains that even if one organization keeps your data safe, another associated one may not, and that’s where criminals will strike.

“It’s not just medical offices. It’s your pharmacy, labs, insurance company, anyone who keeps personal information. That has real value, and selling it is the priority.”

Victims of identity theft can be revictimized when personal information gets into multiple hands. A street address and verified phone number can go far, especially if the phone contains many contacts, who then become vulnerable to attack themselves.

“If you get Mom’s info, you can get the child’s as well. An ID card, social security, all of it, and then they have the ability to collect false medical claims or just extortion. It’s a two for one.”

Two-Factor Authentication Is Worth the Effort

Pierson mentions how critically important it is to use a multistep authentication system. Your level of protection goes up considerably just by using secure passwords and one-time authentication codes.

Thankfully, setting all this up is easier than it sounds. Apps on your phone or tablet can help. Google Authenticator, when paired with a service that supports authenticator apps, provides a six-digit number that changes every few seconds and can keep people out of your data even if they have your username and password. Other companies ask users to enter an SMS code as the second authentication factor, in addition to a password, although SMS codes are less secure than authenticator apps. Either approach is better than none—unless a hacker is in physical possession of your phone, they are not getting access.

Social Media and Tracking

Social media is becoming a popular way for health care providers and entrepreneurs to connect with the public—and often to sell them treatments or advice. These Instagram or TikTok accounts may offer tips from someone in the medical industry, which can appeal to those facing rising health care costs and difficulties accessing care. But an internet doctor’s background or popularity does not ensure that they observe strong privacy guidelines or secure their transactions.

My Instagram is flooded with offers promising everything from better sleep to improved sexual health. It’s nice to have options, but that help and any information you receive from those accounts or send to them isn’t covered under HIPAA. Any time you pay out of your own pocket for health-related items or services, or on a direct-to-consumer health app, there is no recourse if someone steals your personal information or shares it.

Along with social media and direct-to-consumer health options comes large-scale data tracking. Outside of official medical practices, you should view surveillance as an expectation, rather than an exception.

Ask Questions

When you sign up for any service, whether through a new doctor’s patient portal or an online supplement shop, ask how your data is stored and where it goes. Read the privacy policies and settings, even briefly, to find out what options you have to restrict the sale or reuse of your data. Check the default settings to make sure you’re not giving away too much information. Find out if the service or platform offers two-factor authentication and set that up if it’s available. Know that it’s rare for anyone to need your social security number, no matter what a customer service agent says. A birth date and address is usually enough.

Pierson and others agree that we all need to consider security from several angles and do our best to protect ourselves and our loved ones. “The sophistication of identity attacks will always evolve and change. Remember, they only have to get it right once, but we have to guess right all of the time.”

29 notes · View notes

mccallsmemaybe · 2 months

Text

WHO ― @stylinskies

WHEN & WHERE ― january, outside the mystic hills preserve

There were ups and downs to having a motorcycle. On one hand, you looked cool and it felt cool. The downside was, if per chance it snowed or it got cold ― you were forced to find another ride. Which, for Scott, almost always meant asking Stiles, his best friend, roommate, partner in crime, and basically his brother for all intents and purposes at that point. It worked out, too. Stiles had said he needed to talk to him about something later ( when he dropped him off at the Animal Clinic ), so they got to hit a bird with a stone or whatever that saying was. Horrible saying, too. Who would want to throw a rock at a bird? That was awful. Poor bird.

Scott was kind of surprised Stiles hadn't rambled it all off the minute he got into the jeep. It couldn't be that important? Right? He figured it was something to do with his readmission paperwork for school. Maybe something about him unable to get back in. He wouldn't be surprised, even though he'd been working really hard to get readmitted to the program. Nevertheless, he waited until they'd swung through the drive thru at their usual place and parked outside of the preserve instead of going home. That's where his patience finally ran thin.

He looked over, arm leaning against the jeep. ❝Okay, dude, spill it. What's so important to talk to me about that we couldn't talk about at the apartment?❞ Unless Stiles forgot, but then why were they at one of Scott's favorite spots ( despite the terrible accident that happened there the a little over a year before ), it's where him and Allison used to hike all the time when they couldn't escape out of town. ❝Is it something about the case? Did you find out something new? Is there, like, I don't know ― a new Star Wars movie coming out or something?❞

#c: stiles #stiles 001.

8 notes · View notes

artsyallouette · 9 months

Text

There are no words to describe how devastated and furious with the ending of Good Omens season 2 I am. I have literally been sobbing on my couch for half an hour now after finishing it. Let me explain.

Season 1 came out in May of 2019 (or June. I don't recall). In July of 2019, I was diagnosed with a very bad case of OCD. I watched GO in June, shortly before that diagnosis, and I stuck with it through the thick and the thin. My mental illness got worse and worse over the summer, to the point where I was so riddled with my OCD triggers and a smattering of depression that I was contemplating suicide again, which had never been a problem before the summer, had to drop out of my university classes, and wound up admitting myself to a mental hospital by the first few days of October. I stayed there on and off, with few-day passes, until the middle of November. I went back to school (one class) in December, and I've slowly tried to claw my life back out of the gutter and make it to being the well-liked, Miss Frizzle type chemistry teacher I want to be when I graduate.

Season 2 was announced in 2020/2021. My life was still a mess, but getting better. I happily put everything, all my hopes, on another wonderful season. The more we heard, 'Soft and Romantic,' 'a sweet interim story,' the more excited I got. Others had their doubts, but after season 1 got me through so much hardship and pain, I trusted @neil-gaiman. Even as my mental health crashed and burned again in the summer of 2022, when my meds failed and I found myself considering a readmission to the hospital, I trusted Neil Gaiman and this season.

My fucking mistake.

This season has made me terrified for everything else I was eagerly anticipating this year. It's made me realise that people I respect and admired can easily ruin their own creations in the name of causing a stir and getting their goddamn season 3, instead of being happy with what they got in season 2. It's made me realise how everyone will do anything to keep getting their fame and fortune, and take love story that got me through everything I've been through in the last four years, and throw it into an inferno. Sure, I know the writers and authors don't owe me an ending I like, but to string us along for three years for that ending is downright reprehensible.

Maybe in the morning I'll feel better. Maybe in two years I'll feel better. Maybe, if this ploy works and there's enough hype for season 3, by the time we get that, I'll feel better. But right now, it feels like someone just took a knife to my guts. To ruin a beautiful, million year friendship and romance for a quick buck, turning their whole relationship into a shitty, toxic, one-sided mess and then really taking a grenade to it in the last ten minutes.

I was so happy for this season. And now I have only one thing to say.

Fuck off. You can count me among those who will not be posting again, will not be watching again, will not be helping you get a season 3 when you tanked season 2 in order to get it.

#good omens #good omens season 2 #good omens spoilers #gos2 spoilers #GOS2Spoilers

18 notes · View notes