#Research problem

[kenapiece-main]

Can you believe I'm having to make this meme even after successfully finishing up taxes and applying to job

[archaeologistproblems]

Archaeologist problems: can't heckle a guy to give you his full citation data when he's been dead for 14 years.

[why-animals-do-the-thing]

average United States contains 1000s of pet tigers in backyards" factoid actualy [sic] just statistical error. average person has 0 tigers on property. Activist Georg, who lives the U.S. Capitol & makes up over 10,000 each day, has purposefully been spreading disinformation adn [sic] should not have been counted

I have a big mad today, folks. It's a really frustrating one, because years worth of work has been validated... but the reason for that fucking sucks.

For almost a decade, I've been trying to fact-check the claim that there "are 10,000 to 20,000 pet tigers/big cats in backyards in the United States." I talked to zoo, sanctuary, and private cat people; I looked at legislation, regulation, attack/death/escape incident rates; I read everything I could get my hands on. None of it made sense. None of it lined up. I couldn't find data supporting anything like the population of pet cats being alleged to exist. Some of you might remember the series I published on those findings from 2018 or so under the hashtag #CrouchingTigerHiddenData. I've continued to work on it in the six years since, including publishing a peer reviewed study that counted all the non-pet big cats in the US (because even though they're regulated, apparently nobody bothered to keep track of those either).

I spent years of my life obsessing over that statistic because it was being used to push for new federal legislation that, while well intentioned, contained language that would, and has, created real problems for ethical facilities that have big cats. I wrote a comprehensive - 35 page! - analysis of the issues with the then-current version of the Big Cat Public Safety Act in 2020. When the bill was first introduced to Congress in 2013, a lot of groups promoted it by fear mongering: there's so many pet tigers! they could be hidden around every corner! they could escape and attack you! they could come out of nowhere and eat your children!! Tiger King exposed the masses to the idea of "thousands of abused backyard big cats": as a result the messaging around the bill shifted to being welfare-focused, and the law passed in 2022.

The Big Cat Public Safety Act created a registry, and anyone who owned a private cat and wanted to keep it had to join. If they did, they could keep the animal until it passed, as long as they followed certain strictures (no getting more, no public contact, etc). Don’t register and get caught? Cat is seized and major punishment for you. Registering is therefore highly incentivized. That registry closed in June of 2023, and you can now get that registration data via a Freedom of Information Act request.

Guess how many pet big cats were registered in the whole country?

97.

Not tens of thousands. Not thousands. Not even triple digits. 97.

And that isn't even the right number! Ten USDA licensed facilities registered erroneously. That accounts for 55 of 97 animals. Which leaves us with 42 pet big cats, of all species, in the entire country.

Now, I know that not everyone may have registered. There's probably someone living deep in the woods somewhere with their illegal pet cougar, and there's been at least one random person in Texas arrested for trying to sell a cub since the law passed. But - and here's the big thing - even if there are ten times as many hidden cats than people who registered them - that's nowhere near ten thousand animals. Obviously, I had some questions.

Guess what? Turns out, this is because it was never real. That huge number never had data behind it, wasn't likely to be accurate, and the advocacy groups using that statistic to fearmonger and drive their agenda knew it... and didn't see a problem with that.

Allow me to introduce you to an article published last week.

This article is good. (Full disclose, I'm quoted in it). It's comprehensive and fairly written, and they did their due diligence reporting and fact-checking the piece. They talked to a lot of people on all sides of the story.

But thing that really gets me?

Multiple representatives from major advocacy organizations who worked on the Big Cat Publix Safety Act told the reporter that they knew the statistics they were quoting weren't real. And that they don't care. The end justifies the means, the good guys won over the bad guys, that's just how lobbying works after all. They're so blase about it, it makes my stomach hurt. Let me pull some excerpts from the quotes.

"Whatever the true number, nearly everyone in the debate acknowledges a disparity between the actual census and the figures cited by lawmakers. “The 20,000 number is not real,” said Bill Nimmo, founder of Tigers in America. (...) For his part, Nimmo at Tigers in America sees the exaggerated figure as part of the political process. Prior to the passage of the bill, he said, businesses that exhibited and bred big cats juiced the numbers, too. (...) ���I’m not justifying the hyperbolic 20,000,” Nimmo said. “In the world of comparing hyperbole, the good guys won this one.”

"Michelle Sinnott, director and counsel for captive animal law enforcement at the PETA Foundation, emphasized that the law accomplished what it was set out to do. (...) Specific numbers are not what really matter, she said: “Whether there’s one big cat in a private home or whether there’s 10,000 big cats in a private home, the underlying problem of industry is still there.”"

I have no problem with a law ending the private ownership of big cats, and with ending cub petting practices. What I do have a problem with is that these organizations purposefully spread disinformation for years in order to push for it. By their own admission, they repeatedly and intentionally promoted false statistics within Congress. For a decade.

No wonder it never made sense. No wonder no matter where I looked, I couldn't figure out how any of these groups got those numbers, why there was never any data to back any of the claims up, why everything I learned seemed to actively contradict it. It was never real. These people decided the truth didn't matter. They knew they had no proof, couldn't verify their shocking numbers... and they decided that was fine, if it achieved the end they wanted.

So members of the public - probably like you, reading this - and legislators who care about big cats and want to see legislation exist to protect them? They got played, got fed false information through a TV show designed to tug at heartstrings, and it got a law through Congress that's causing real problems for ethical captive big cat management. The 20,000 pet cat number was too sexy - too much of a crisis - for anyone to want to look past it and check that the language of the law wouldn't mess things up up for good zoos and sanctuaries. Whoops! At least the "bad guys" lost, right? (The problems are covered somewhat in the article linked, and I'll go into more details in a future post. You can also read my analysis from 2020, linked up top.)

Now, I know. Something something something facts don't matter this much in our post-truth era, stop caring so much, that's just how politics work, etc. I’m sorry, but no. Absolutely not.

Laws that will impact the welfare of living animals must be crafted carefully, thoughtfully, and precisely in order to ensure they achieve their goals without accidental negative impacts. We have a duty of care to ensure that. And in this case, the law also impacts reservoir populations for critically endangered species! We can't get those back if we mess them up. So maybe, just maybe, if legislators hadn't been so focused on all those alleged pet cats, the bill could have been written narrowly and precisely.

But the minutiae of regulatory impacts aren't sexy, and tiger abuse and TV shows about terrible people are. We all got misled, and now we're here, and the animals in good facilities are already paying for it.

I don't have a conclusion. I'm just mad. The public deserves to know the truth about animal legislation they're voting for, and I hope we all call on our legislators in the future to be far more critical of the data they get fed.

[cvttcat]

me: huh, i have this problem, i wonder if i can find any resources to help support me!

google: 7 ways to KILL a person with this evil manipulative abuser trait! how to know if someone you know has this trait and is LEECHING off of you and SECRETLY ABUSING you! remember that people with this trait are EVIL and SUBHUMAN and UNWORTHY OF ANYTHING GOOD!!!

[notbrucewayne48]

"aphobia doesn't exist"

bitch literally not that long ago an aroace youtuber animator was insulted by almost half of its community for being it

[thelighthousemp3]

12 hr study session today is not sitting well with my head

[probablyanalienindisguise]

my favorite thing is explaining to people one of my favorite fictional characters is an entire fuckinh spaceship who is also in a love-hate relationship with another ai

[inky-duchess]

Fantasy Guide to Dowager Queens and Queen Mothers

The King is dead. Long live the next monarch (I guess). Their eldest child is now monarch, their other kids have probably started up lives elsewhere or started careers in the military or such. But what happens their Queen?

Queen Mother vs Dowager Queen

There are two titles the now widowed Queen can take after her husband dies. The first is Dowager Queen or Queen Dowager, which basically means ex-Queen or the previous Queen. The second is Queen Mother, which is the title which can be taken by the mother of the next monarch (this title cannot be granted to step-mothers). Ex-Queens who mothered the current monarch can go for either title if they wish. As for addressing a former Queen, it will still be "Your Majesty" and she would simply be referred to as Queen Firstname.

Life and Perks

The former Queen will move out of the palace after a few weeks. She will take up residence at one of the Crown's many palaces or houses, able to keep on as many servants as she wants - or that is paid for. She can typically do whatever she likes now, she can travel, she can live at court, she can spend her life away from it all in the country. She will have to surrender her official jewelry which sucks. This can lead to trouble such as the tension between Dowager Empress Maria Feodorovna and Empress Alexandra. Dowager Queens and Queen Mothers usually inherited lands and estates from their husband's will, which basically is a way to support them and their lifestyle. They may also recieve money from the Crown annually. However, some Dowager Queens faced some trouble if the new monarch didn't want to provide for them. This often led to conflict.

Duties

The former Queen might also be called in to help the Crown. She might be sent on diplomatic state visits, act as a diplomatic hostess, advise the new monarch and stand in for them at events if needed. The former Queen will also take an active role in the family if she wishes. Some Dowager Queens and Queen Mothers might act as Regents for underage monarchs.

Prospects

Being a Dowager or the Queen Mother is a relatively cushy job. While you lose some influence and prestige, you are still highly ranked but with less responsibility. Most ex-Queens spend their time relaxing and treating themselves while some stayed relevant with taking on full calenders of duties and events. Mostly, as long as you help out occasionally, live a quiet life, you will pretty much have a nice life. However, there have been instances of Dowager Queens and Queen Mothers going a little off the rails. A Dowager Queen without children might leave behind her new country and go home if she wanted to. She would remain Dowager Queen with all the perks unless she remarried. Some young widowed Queens remarried to varying successes (Catherine of Valois, Isabella of Angoulême, Kathryn Parr, Queen Margaret Tudor, Mary Tudor Queen of France).

[viktorarcanedeservesbetter]

tbh I don’t think therapy would have fixed Jayce and Viktor lmao. maybe would have softened their self-destructive tendencies but there’s no fixing that co-dependent relationship. Heimerdinger Mel and Sky are told “yeah, I can help treat their individual depressions but nothing is gonna reduce their co-dependency. I’m pretty sure separating them makes it a lot worse for not only them but much worse for everyone else. for everyone’s safety I suggest they’re not allowed to be more than a buildings length away from each other and even that is pushing it.” That therapist then quits on the spot cause now they’ve literally seen everything.

It’s like that scene in Brooklyn nine nine where all the physiatrists are observing and talking with Gina but instead it’s a whole crew of therapists and neurologists and physiologists trying to find out how these two men literally mind-melded together. They go to couples therapy but it’s literally just individual therapy held together because why tf not it’s the only way to get them to go.

[alfietimewolf]

[kaiserouo]

partaking in some normal titan activities

ref.

[idontmindifuforgetme]

I think my life would be fixed if I fell asleep at a beautiful 8 pm and woke up at a beautiful 4 am bc it means I’m asleep when most people are awake and I’m awake when most people are asleep and honestly? Couldn’t ask for more

[archaeologistproblems]

To quote the writings of prolific curator and historian Harry Piers, “Mrs. Thompson of Hammonds Plains, about 1874, says that ~~~~~ ~~~~, ~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~.” Uh, thanks, Harry!

Archaeologist problems: the time it takes to decipher this level of what may or may not be “handwriting”!

[chronicsymptomsyndrome]

Clinical studies be like

1 billion random boys were tested. results show that 0% of girls are autistic* 👍

1 billion autistic males were tested. results show that 0% of autistics are female* 👍

1 billion minors were tested. results show ADHD stops at age 18, often to be replaced by plain laziness* 👍

*certified😎 totally credible source✨ we are pros🤓 with coats🥼

[elodieunderglass]

was it the decision to dismount

[lilithofpenandbook]

Do you think that Snape, after being yelled at by McGonagall for showing her attitude and somehow the fight escalating to their past when Snape was a child, and told that if he was actually traumatised by her actions, he'd be afraid of her, not rude to her, would lock himself in his room and cry, cry, cry, because despite the fact that he fought back and screamed that he IS traumatised, that she DID hurt him by not being there, that she IS responsible for him being this way, he isn't sure? Because every single person around him tells him that he's the problem. That he's rude. That it's his fault the other party was offended. Even though he didn't mean to be rude, he was just being him, but surely he's the problem if everyone's saying it? Or maybe he's surrounded by the wrong people? Or maybe he is wrong, and he is a horrible person, he is a piece of trash, he's wrong and just stubborn?

Do you think that sometimes he doesn't even know if he's right or wrong? That he doesn't even care, all he knows is that he's so, so angry, he's in so, SO much pain, he wants to scream, he wants to cry, it all hurts and no one's coming to make it better and he can never get it out, he can never truly vocalise it because the words won't come, and he looks hysterical, insane, and selfish.

He's just tired.