Read on Twitter
Yeah, the false dichotomy bugs me as well. This is a good discussion of phases of activity relative to lockdown.
But so tired of this thing where either you have “lockdown! economic disaster! Suicides! Domestic violence!”
Or “openness! Freedom! Crash the hospitals!” https://twitter.com/jennygadget/status/1252801662055403523">https://twitter.com/jennygadg...
But so tired of this thing where either you have “lockdown! economic disaster! Suicides! Domestic violence!”
Or “openness! Freedom! Crash the hospitals!” https://twitter.com/jennygadget/status/1252801662055403523">https://twitter.com/jennygadg...
I admit I do not take it well when someone says to me “oh you’re in favour of [lockdown, closing schools, etc], have you EVEN CONSIDERED that people won’t be able to PAY RENT? That people will have to stay home to look after kids? That there will be severe mental health issues?”
And like... yeah mate, I have considered that, because newsflash: none of that is obscure or esoteric. You follow the chain of proposed events and consequences and BOOM there they are.
So yeah, being not a total dunderhead, YES I did consider that.
So yeah, being not a total dunderhead, YES I did consider that.
But the virus doesn’t care about the economy. It exists only to make more of itself, and will attempt to infect any available host, like a seed germinating in whatever soil it lands in.
It won’t negotiate with you.
So: we need to take steps. That’s a given.
It won’t negotiate with you.
So: we need to take steps. That’s a given.
The discussion should *not* be this false binary of open vs closed, of “lockdown consequences” vs “deaths from covid-19.”
The conversation needs to be framed in light of physical reality and expert advice.
“Given that we *must* lock down to prevent the spread of covid-19, what can we do to mitigate the negative consequences of lockdown?”
“Given that we *must* lock down to prevent the spread of covid-19, what can we do to mitigate the negative consequences of lockdown?”
Because yes, the mental health issues, the economic challenges, the risk of poverty and eviction and domestic abuse - those are all very real and severe and concrete concerns.
Acknowledging that reality does *not* mean ending lockdown.
Acknowledging that reality does *not* mean ending lockdown.
It means that - *within* the context of lockdown - those concerns need to be addressed. With compassion, creativity, generosity and (ideally) swiftness.
THAT is the discussion to have, and it seems very clear to me that it’s the discussion people need to be having.
THAT is the discussion to have, and it seems very clear to me that it’s the discussion people need to be having.
It’s the discussion happening in Australia, mostly, and I would expect in other places as well.
Don’t let people get away with this bullshit dichotomy. Don’t minimise the costs of lockdown: acknowledge them! They are very serious!
But that demands mitigation, not reversal.
Don’t let people get away with this bullshit dichotomy. Don’t minimise the costs of lockdown: acknowledge them! They are very serious!
But that demands mitigation, not reversal.
This thread was brought to you by “ADHD nerd let her meds wear off and ended up cruising Twitter while waiting for the next dose to make the thinky thinky parts work” so if it is disjointed or repetitive... oof, I apologise.
Take care, friends; back to the memes
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="🌸" title="Cherry blossom" aria-label="Emoji: Cherry blossom">
Take care, friends; back to the memes
