Science has established without a doubt that, in today’s “full-world economy,” it is necessary to operate within an overall Earth System budget with respect to allowable physical throughput. However, rather than constituting an insurmountable obstacle to human development, this can be seen as initiating a whole new stage of ecological civilization based on the creation of a society of substantive equality and ecological sustainability, or ecosocialism. Degrowth, in this sense, is not aimed at austerity, but at finding a “prosperous way down” from our current extractivist, wasteful, ecologically unsustainable, maldeveloped, exploitative, and unequal, class-hierarchical world. Continued growth would occur in some areas of the economy, made possible by reductions elsewhere. Spending on fossil fuels, armaments, private jets, sport utility vehicles, second homes, and advertising would need to be cut in order to provide room for growth in such areas as regenerative agriculture, food production, decent housing, clean energy, accessible health care, universal education, community welfare, public transportation, digital connectivity, and other areas related to green production and social needs.
182 notes
·
View notes
My review about Miraculous World: Paris, Tales of Shadybug and Claw Noir
This is a (first) review about a Miraculous element (especially an episode form Miraculous: Tales of Ladybug and Cat Noir).
This post contains spoilers.
Today, I've watched the Special Episode. I am prepared for the watching. I will reveal my aggregation in the end of the post.
And now, time to read:
Plot:
This happens in the same moment (at the night) as the episode Destruction (5.03). After Monarch has been cataclysmed at the left arm and before he configurates the stolen Miraculouses.
In a parallel world, a Butterfly superhero named Hesperia (Gabriel Agreste/Gabi Grassette) who is helped by Alya, Nino, Max and Markov, leaves his homeworld universe for escape from Shadybug (Toxinelle) and Claw Noire (Griffe Noire), two evil versions of Ladybug and Cat Noir. When the three characters come to the Ladybug and Cat Noir main universe, Hesperia teams up with the two titular heroes for make the ShadyClaw duo into good people. At the other side, the evil counterparts try to steal the Butterfly miraculous to Hesperia (and later to try to combine the Ladybug and Cat powers for make their wishes).
I've learned about news elements in the Miraculous lore by watching the Special:
They exist some billions an infinity of Parallel Worlds in the lore.
Each Parallel World is home to one Tikki and one Plagg (so One Ladybug holder and one Cat holder).
The inconvenients from the Ladybug's and Cat's powers (secondary effects)due to their excessive using. Shadybug and Claw Noire cause their own deterioration in their bodies by using their power for the evil.
The morale about the hope in dark and sad moments (Thanks, Hesperia.)
The parallel world (ShadyClaw/Hesperia's world) is a dystopian world ruled by the Supreme
Hesperia's, Shadybug's and Claw Noir's backstories
What I liked:
The Hesperia opening in the intro (that was WTF but that was fun)
The coming of Shadybug and Claw Noire, their odd relationships
The Claw Noir's lines and moments
The Kamiko (good alternate name to Akuma)
The akumatization forms: Chat Céleste (Cat Noir) and Ubiquity (first Alya and later Ladybug)
Ladyfly (Marinette with Ladybug + Butterfly unification)
The travels across multiple parallel worlds (Hi, Scarabella and Kitty Noire. Hi, Mister Bug and Ladynoire.)
The concept of Re-Verse (the idea of what would Marinette and Adrien have looked like if theirs lives had been different from the Canon)
The thing how Monarch has failed (again) to take the Ladybug and Cat Miraculouses when he travelled across parallel worlds.
What I disliked:
The lack of end post-credits scene: I would like to see what happens in the Hesperia's world after the battle (interractions between the reformed Shabybug and Claw Noire, Hesperia, Alya ans Nino about reconciliation ans reorganisation of the Resistance against the Supreme).
The absence of other Miraclass counterparts, Luka, Kagami, Félix, Zoé, Chloé and Lila/Cerise (Only Alya, Nino, Max and Markov from the class appear in the episode as parallel counterparts)
The missing full appearance of the Supreme (his/her appearance from the shadow for reveal himself/herself/themself to spectators could make the cliffhanger effect for a sequel).
What I want to know for the future:
The most intriguing point, for me, is: The Supreme (This hidden character I have just mentioned in this post)
Who is the Supreme ? Human or Deity ? Big Brother (1984, George Orwell) ? How do s/he looks like ?
All I've learned about him/her/them is:
The Supreme is an entity/being who rules the Hesperia's homeworld (possibly the Hesperia's entire universe).
S/He is a tyrant, a dictator (worst than Chloé, possibly more machiavelic and charismatic than Cerise, more dangerous than Monarch) on this Earth (or simply Paris).
S/He hates the Love, the Freedom/Liberty, the Justice, the Happiness, positive emotions and particularly the superheroes.
It's him/her/they who is THE overarching antagonist of the Paris Special (even if s/he is only mentioned many times). S/He's so more antagonistical than Monarch.
S/He makes Hesperia and the Resistance from this world (and by extension Ladybug 2 (former Shadybug) and Cat Noir 2/Paw Noir (former Claw Noir)) as Outlaws.
It's him/her/them who given the Ladybug and Cat miraculous to Emo Marinette and Emo Adrien. Ironical and Ridiculous from the Supreme !
S/He is too powerful, too surnatural and too overcheated: s/he has a great control on the Miraculous Ultimate Absolute Power. S/He has implanted a blockage spell on Tikki and Plagg for prevent anyone to summon Gimmi.
ML theory: I'm thinking the Supreme is probably a evil type of Guardian of Miraculouses. A Fallen Guardian (NOT Master Fu NOR Su-Han). S/He has many knowledges about Miraculouses and their using + the Absolute Power.
My personal aggregation on the Paris Special:
I've enjoyed to see the episode. The narrative is excellent. The idea of Multiverse in the Miraculous lore is well found. The various animations from the episode are fun. Miraculous World: Paris, Tales of Shadybug and Claw Noire is a wonderful episode.
Result: 10/10
133 notes
·
View notes
started reading the cass review because i'm apparently just Like That and i want everybody crowing about how this proves sooooo much about how terfs are right and trans people are wrong to like. take a scientific literacy class or something. or even just read the occasional study besides the one you're currently trying to prove a point with. not even necessarily pro-trans studies just learn how to know what studies actually found as opposed to what people trying to spoonfeed you an agenda claim they found.
to use just one infuriating example:
Several studies from that period (Green et al., 1987; Zucker, 1985) suggested that in a minority (approximately 15%) of pre-pubertal children presenting with gender incongruence, this persisted into adulthood. The majority of these children became same-sex attracted, cisgender adults. These early studies were criticised on the basis that not all the children had a formal diagnosis of gender incongruence or gender dysphoria, but a review of the literature (Ristori & Steensma, 2016) noted that later studies (Drummond et al., 2008; Steensma & Cohen-Kettenis, 2015; Wallien et al., 2008) also found persistence rates of 10-33% in cohorts who had met formal diagnostic criteria at initial assessment, and had longer follow-up periods.
if you recognize the names Zucker and Steensma you are probably already going feral but tldr:
There are… many problems with Zucker's studies, "not all children had a formal diagnosis" is so far down the list this is literally the first i've heard of it. The closest i usually hear is the old DSM criteria for gender identity disorder was totally different from the current DSM criteria for gender dysphoria and/or how most people currently define "transgender"; notably it did not require the patient to identify as a different gender and overall better fits what we currently call "gender-non-comforming". Whether the kids had a formal diagnosis of "maybe trans, maybe just has different hobbies than expected, but either way their parents want them back in their neat little societal boxes" is absolutely not the main issue.
This would be a problem even if Zucker was pro-trans (spoiler: He Is Not, and people who are immediately suspicious of pro-trans studies because "they're probably funded by big pharma or someone else who profits from transitioning" should apply at least a little of that suspicion to the guy who made a living running a conversion clinic); sometimes "formal" criteria change as we learn more about what's common, what's uncommon, what's uncommon but irrelevant, etc, and when the criteria changes drastically enough it doesn't make sense to pretend the old studies perfectly apply to the new criteria. If you found a study defining "sex" specifically and exclusively as penetration with a dick which says gay men have as much sex as straight men but lesbians don't, it's not necessarily wrong as far as it goes but if THAT'S your prime citation for "gay men have more sex than lesbians", especially if you keep trying to apply it in contexts which obviously use a broader definition, there are gonna be a lot of people disagreeing with you and it won't be because they're stubbornly unscientific.
Also Zucker is pro conversion therapy. Yes, pro converting trans people to cis people, but also pro converting gay people to straight people. That doesn't necessarily affect his results, i just find it funny how many people enthusiastically support his findings as evidence transitioning is… basically anti-gay conversion therapy? (even though plenty of trans people transition to gay? including T4T people so even the "that's actually just how straight people try to get with gay people" rationale for gay trans people is incredibly weak? and also HRT has a relatively low but non-zero chance of changing sexual orientation so it wouldn't even be reliable as a means of "becoming straight"? but a guy who couldn't reliably tell the difference between a tomboy and a trans boy figured out the former is more common than the latter + in one whole country where being trans is legal but being gay is not, sometimes cis gay people transition, so OBVIOUSLY that means sexism and homophobia are the driving factors even in countries with significant transphobia. or something.) anyway i hope zucker knows and hates how many gay people and allies are using his own study to trash-talk any attempts to be Less Gay. ideally nobody would take his nonsense seriously at all but it doesn't seem we'll be spared from that any time soon so i will take my schadenfreude where i can.
Steensma's studies have the exact same problem re: irrelevant criteria so "well someone ELSE had the same results!" is not exactly convincing. This is not "oh trans people are refusing to pay attention to these studies because they disagree with them regardless of scientific rigor", it's "one biased guy using outdated criteria found exactly the numbers everyone would expect based on that criteria, i can't imagine why trans people are treating those numbers as relevant to the past criteria but not present definitions, let's find a SECOND guy using outdated criteria. Why do people keep saying the outdated criteria is not relevant to the current state of trans healthcare. Don't we all know it's quantity over quality with scientific studies. (Please don't ask what the quantity of studies disagreeing with me is.)"
Steensma also counted patients as 'not persisting as transgender' if they ghosted him on follow-up which counted for a third of his study's "detransitioners" and a fifth of the total subjects and. look. i'm not saying none of them detransitioned, or assuming they all didn't would be notably more accurate, but i think we can safely treat twenty percent of subjects as a bit high for making a default assumption, especially when some of them might have simply not been interested in a study on whether or not they still know who they are. Fuck knows i've seen pro-trans studies which didn't make assumptions about the people who didn't respond still get prodded by anti-trans people insisting "the number of people claiming they don't regret transitioning can't possibly be so high, some of the people who responded must have been lying. (Scientific rigor means thinking studies which disagree with me are wrong even if the only explanation is the subjects lying and studies which agree with me are right even if we need to make assumptions about a lot of subjects to get there.)"
and this is not new information. not the issues with zucker, not the issues with steensma, not any of the issues because this is not a new study, it's a review of older studies, which in itself doesn't mean "bad" or "useless" -- sometimes that allows connecting some previously-unconnected dots -- but the idea this is going to absolutely blow apart the Woke Media, vindicate Rowling and Lineham, and "save" ""gay"" children from """being forcibly transed""" is bullshit. At most it'll get dragged around and eagerly cited by all the people looking for anything vaguely scientific-sounding to justify their beliefs, and maybe even people who only read headlines and sound bites will buy it, but the people who really believe it will be people who already agreed with all its "findings" and have already been dragging around the existing studies and are just excited to have a shiny new citation for it.
the response from people who've been really reading research on transgender people all along is going to be more along the lines of "……yeah. yeah, i already knew about that. do you need a three-page essay on why i don't think it means what you think it means? because i don't have time for that homework right now but maybe i can pencil it in for next semester if you haven't learned how to check your own sources by then."
33 notes
·
View notes