#signal analysis pro | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

olderthannetfic · 9 months

Note

As someone who's been wondering why there've been so many senseless, needless arguments online about a hypothetical derth of purity in fiction and how it affects people negatively (it doesn't), now learning from several friends who are teachers (with the oldest being a uni professor) that Gen Z (27-11 yo) and Gen Alpha can't read, have poor media literacy, and soley seek fiction to reaffirm their own worldviews without curiosity and with judgement (and a lot of it). I say this as someone who is Gen Z. I'm only 26 years old, but I'm also a TA right now while I'm in grad school. it's not just the middle school and high school students. College students who should be able to do simple literary analysis cannot. Sure these issues (puritanical thinking, absent/poor parenting, lackluster curriculum, etc) have always existed, but with this in mind, it absolutely makes sense why there's so much dumb discourse over things in media that anyone with sense could separate from reality. Even simple things that you learn in elementary school at 6 years old, like "just because the story is focalized through a specific character, doesn't mean they're correct/the protagonist≠morally righteous/you're not always supposed to agree with the POV character or main characters." Maybe it really is the case that, sure some people are being deliberately obtuse, but there are also others who probably don't know.

I've seen it explained to people in fandom and on tumblr with popular series people have read or seen. No, you're not supposed to think Light Yagami is a good guy or a hero. "L is the straightforward hero in Death Note the whole time" isn't clever. It's the main text. No, you're not supposed to agree with Eren Jaeger or military fascists. "SNK is pro military and pro genocide" is just inaccurate. All the characters exhibiting those traits are killed to signal the flaws in their rhetoric. It's actually really unambiguous in that regard, not at all subtle. No, x shoujo/YA fantasy/Ya romance isn't advocating for middle school or high school girls to date men in their mid-20s. Teen girls have always fantasized about adults they find attractive, and these stories (made for and marketed to teen girls) fulfills that desire while protecting them from the possibility of that reality (an adult returning their feelings). No, it's not weird that mythological gods (but I see people mostly complaining about Greek and Egyptian ones) are related. It's purposeful. They're all related concepts and personifications of nature, which is all connected. Get over yourselves. No, it's not weird that gothic stories have incest in them. It was a common practice among aristocracy and nobility all around them world (so, not just a "white people thing"), and it typically symbolizes the decay as social norms. If you feel discomfort, then the story was successful.

On the one hand, sure. It's purity culture, ignorance, misogyny, etc. On the other hand, do the people who harp on about these actually know how to interpret stories? I'm often told "They can't read" as an explanation by others. I'm starting to think it's true, and I don't know how to combat that as someone who may be an educator down the road myself while also being involved in fandom.

I'd say it's about 50/50 the usual The Kids These Days scaremongering and a genuine shift.

Reading comprehension can be taught. I was taught to analyze passages in school. Students have to be open to learning, but it's not like some critical language thing you need to absorb before the age of two: a college student who's actually interested in getting better can perfectly well do so, possibly with some help or possibly just with experience.

Plenty of it is anxiety about being wrong and immoral and hurting people too. It's fundie thinking where listening and engaging means capitulating. Lots of people do slowly get over this. Many will calm down about it if they ever get the anxiety meds they so desperately need. Some would probably benefit from ceasing to self harm via social media doomscrolling or exclusively consuming attention span-destroying, FOMO-inducing garbage.

...I say as I answer tumblr asks instead of getting out of bed to start my New Year's resolutions.

111 notes · View notes

thoughtfulchaos773 · 9 months

Text

The truth is through the lens

Just another scene analysis. Right now, I'm obsessed with this scene for the close shot placed on Carmy when Sydney says, Tell Claire I said thank you then. From there, we zoom in on Carmy's face. Remember how close shots can heighten the anxiety?

I love the close shots with Carmy because we catch every nuance in his facial expressions, revealing how he feels whenever he disagrees with Sydney and/or showing us exactly what he feels for Claire.

Usually, Syd and Carmy's disagreements are evenly placed(best I can describe). It's usually a wide shot where Sydney and Carmy are on camera at the same time (ex., the 1x06 argument, the 2x03 argument, and even 1x07).

But this particular camera angle switches between Sydney and Carmy, signaling that their argument has two different sides.

Another similar choice with switching sides and a close-up shot for Carmy and Sydney is 2x10 (refire the sets). Now, what do these arguments have in common? The focus of their disagreement is Claire.

Perhaps this choice in angles shows that Carmy gets anxious when the thought of Claire shows up. Example? A zoom-in on Carmy when Richie and Mikey say they saw Claire. It's the difference between Claire and Sydney, telling us how he feels about both of them.

Another close-up shot regarding claire? The kitchen scene.

This is what pro-Claire/Carmy fans can't get. It's the subtext in the sweet nothings Carmy has to say to her. The contrast in their scenes with zoom-ins and heartbreaking songs elicits a cold and anxious response regarding their relationship (that's the feeling we should get if you're really watching) Ex. of the opposite? The love scene that should have the same sparks flying as 2x05, but instead, we get a song about death and blue lighting.

But I digress.

Here's another thing in common between this argument and 2x10 besides the central focus being Claire and Carmy getting anxious about her? Sydney calms him each time.

Notice it goes back to a wide shot when the argument stops.

Why would the writers contrast how Carmy feels for Sydney vs Claire if this is a strict work relationship between Sydney and Carmy?

This show touches all angles to tell us how Sydney makes him feel.

In a show that mostly tells us of Carmy's emotions through contrast, Sydney plays not just the woman who calms Carmy, but she calms the viewers as we go through this rollercoaster. Sydney's character gets to the heart of the matter, and with her, we hear Carmy's true thoughts even if he is suffering from a panic attack. There's a serenity with Sydney.

The heart of this scene? Since the main obstacle with Carmy is anxiousness, the show tells us Carmy is beating this obstacle with Sydney, the same silence he felt when he focused on cooking in the past and got away from his family. When he focuses on Sydney, everything else fades away and they've told us this through dialogue, cinematography, and sound.

#I almost forgot- there's a close shot between sydney and carmy in 2x02 pasta at the table- this one is different- there's no contrast #there's this asmr thing- carmy making pasta #syd telling a story and being vulnerable- the close shot helps us focus #does this make sense?#carmy x syd #sydcarmy

129 notes · View notes

doomspiral · 4 months

Note

I'm confused. How are any of those ships proship? I'm genuinely confused and not trying to be mean or anything, do I have the wrong definition of proship?

Preface: I think terms like "proship" and "antiship" are very silly.

"Antiship" was originally used for specific ships, like, "anti-fruk" for example. Someone who just fucking loathes the ship and harasses people for it. This got a more broad name through calling someone an anti while people were talking about anti-smut, anti-kink, anti-ship. so we have antishippers now. iIts a derogatory term.

"Proship" came about as being the opposite of all of that. Pro-ship, pro-kink, pro-smut. However, antis decided this was short for "problematic-ship(per)". Apparently there's another term like com-ship because of some internal fandom drama where some antis wanted to be clear they weren't freaks but like to explore "complicated/complex" themes. Which obviously did not work lmfao. I didn't know about this until i asked a friend. So, to call a ship itself "proship" signals that op believes it means "problematic" and is likely an anti or surrounded by them.

In this instance, I think it's easy to point out that ruspru, lietpru, polpru, and rusliet are inherently problematic. Problematic just means that something is complicated, has parts or is entirely made up of things that could be done poorly, maybe its bad optics maybe theres room for issues. now, everything is problematic, but for the sake of clear language, something in meta analysis being problematic means more so than the average. It's generally considered that lietpol is healthy enough to not be problematic, but this is objectively false due to the nature OF meta analysis and problematics. To believe something is unproblematic is to ignore the problems it has. Which is also why I just softblock or block people with "proshippers DNI" because I'm not dealing with people who can't or wont use basic media analysis in fandomspace.

49 notes · View notes

the-garbanzo-annex-jr · 4 months

Text

by Eugene Kontorovich

Hamas’ grisly terror raid on Oct. 7 has proved to be the single most stunningly successful act in gaining support for the Palestinian cause—not among Israeli or American voters, of course, but among top Democratic policymakers, and their counterparts across the Western world. One might think that a campaign of unrepentant killing, torture, rape, and hostage-taking would be disqualifying for a national independence movement. But in Washington, Hamas’ ongoing crimes have resulted in much of the weight of the U.S. government being brought to bear on advancing the cause of Palestinian statehood, and its correlate, the punishment and demonization of the Jewish state.

Months of U.S. backing for the Palestinian national cause have produced glorious results for Palestinian diplomacy. Whereas less than two years ago, at a meeting with President Mahmoud Abbas, President Biden had declared that “the ground is not ripe” for renewing negotiations between Ramallah and Jerusalem, the Oct. 7 massacres made Biden change his mind—and make the establishment of a Palestinian state with all deliberate speed a central priority of U.S. Middle East policy. Since Oct. 7, four countries have recognized the “State of Palestine,” with three European states indicating their intent to do so in May. That is more recognition than the PA has won in the entire past decade (notably, only one country moved to recognize Palestinian statehood during the Trump administration).

International institutions, seeing that Israel’s protection by the U.S. has been lifted, have also showered gifts on the perpetrators of Oct. 7. In recent weeks, the U.N. General Assembly voted to upgrade the Palestinians’ status, giving them privileges reserved for member states. On Monday, the International Criminal Court charged Israel’s prime minister and defense minister with committing war crimes, placing them on a par with the terrorist leader of Hamas, Yahya Sinwar—a huge diplomatic coup for the terrorist group that creates a moral equivalence between it and Israel. Had Oct. 7 only managed to revive the trial of Jews for killing babies, it would have still been a triumph.

Indeed, in his first three years in office Biden was careful to avoid overtly repealing any of President Trump’s historic pro-Israel initiatives, preferring a more indirect approach that nevertheless signaled the administration’s preferences and end goals. In recent months, the administration has dropped all pretenses—making it clear that Iran, not Israel, is its favored regional client. Israel is forbidden from restoring peace to the country’s north by attacking Hezbollah in Lebanon, or from offering anything more than a token response to a massive direct attack by Iran.

By itself, the specific identity of the perpetrators of gruesome violence does not account for Western advocacy on their behalf. That is explained only by the specific identity of the victims: Jews.Share

A similar about-face applied to the question of Israel’s borders. In November 2019, then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo clarified that the United States did not view Jews residing in Judea and Samaria (“West Bank settlers,” as they are called) as a violation of international law; two months later he “disavowed” the so-called Hansell Memorandum of 1978, which used shaky legal reasoning to declare Jewish communities in the historic Jewish heartland to be illegitimate. In June 2023, the State Department circulated foreign policy guidance to relevant agencies ending bilateral scientific and technological cooperation with Israeli institutions in Judea and Samaria, East Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights, even as it maintained that it had not reinstated the Hansell memo.

This past February, however, the administration let it all hang out. Without bothering to present any legal analysis, Secretary of State Blinken declared that Jewish communities in those areas that had been ethnically cleansed by Jordan after 1948 were illegal (“inconsistent with international law”), going further than even the Obama administration, which had used the lesser epithet “illegitimate.”

Last month, the administration indicated it might require that Israeli-made products from Judea and Samaria no longer be labeled as “Made in Israel.”

#hamas #gaza #biden administration #united nations #eugene kontrovich #anthony blinken #hansell memorandum #bds #democratic party

43 notes · View notes

end-otw-racism · 1 year

Text

End OTW Racism Link Round-up: Week 2!

Our first (hopefully of many) two-week #EndOTWRacism action is over! Check out our post on next steps and how to stay involved if you haven’t already.

Just like our first week link round-up, here’s a collection of some of the longer-form discussion/analysis that people shared in week two (we're going with posts on tumblr, dreamwidth, and other sites, as well as twitter threads that are longer than three tweets). These are posts that we think would be helpful to consider as fandom engages in the necessary conversations about these issues.

Note: There has been a plethora of information that’s come out about OTW in the past week, particularly from former and current volunteers, which calls into question the way the organization functions and details the harm they have done to their own volunteers. Much of it does not directly reference our campaign or racism, so we won’t be sharing all of that conversation here, but you can find a round-up of that conversation at the dreamwidth account synonymous.

Tumblr

seepunkrun: I haven’t heard back from the OTW on this yet. In fact, I’m still waiting for a reply to the last letter I sent them on this subject. That’s why I’m glad to see increased transparency included in @end-otw-racism’s list of demands [link]

wondersmith-and-sons: if we're gonna be frank about otw's "anti-racism policies"/hiring of diversity consultants/attempt for social change, i'm gonna say that my good faith in them has run out a while ago and that i genuinely don't think they ever had the intention to follow through on tackling racial abuse, like, ever. [link]

elumish: In response to criticism about EndOTWRacism (part 2): one of the main questions that I see a lot about stuff like this is, how do we write policy to keep there it from backfiring or being used for purges? [link]

princeescaluswords: Activism Isn’t a Raincoat [link]

massharp1971: The right want free speech, but only for themselves [link]

Twitter

tea_deviation: this is even further off topic, but I was doing the math here and it boggles my fucking mind that ao3 is not driving towards being endowment funded? [link]

fiercynonym: i mentioned, as an aside in my thread about how OTW appears to have $2.5 MILLION that they are spending on absolutely nothing, that francesca coppa received a fan studies grant from OTW once, but i want to talk about that specific piece a little more [link]

generalfrings: For all the disingenuous raising of "concerns" at #EndOTWRacism over hypothetical volunteers that would hypothetically handle racists in AO3 (+ the dismissal of the real current harm on poc and black fans), I want to see some response for OTW actually traumatizing real volunteers [link]

_impertinence: #EndOTWRacism the way chinese fans have been sidelined and belittled by the org is so fucking disgusting [link]

hydrochaeris3: ok full disclosure this came about bc i was thinking about why i havent seen people be "pro worker" (or in the otw/ao3's case "pro volunteer") more in response to the endotwracism campaign. bc in most leftist circles ik that ppl would use workers rights arguments to push back on [link]

saathi1013: If it's anything I've learned from contemporary activism it's this: it's never "just" racism. [link]

cyrilapologist: worth considering that end otw racism is also a labor issue [link]

hydrochaeris3: stalking IS bad but i do think it's real funny that so many bnfs are coming out of the woodwork to say smthn about how upsetting it is that this white person got stalked instead of literally anything for #EndOTWRacism for the last two whole weeks [link]

aral_was_here: I'm going to keep the pfp and account name for a bit because I'm feeling pissed about how #EndOTWRacism has been dismissed by so many fans as virtue signaling or as a smokescreen for certain people they see as fandom boogeymen lying in wait to take our porn at a moment's notice. [link]

Dreamwidth

beatrice_otter: Signal boost: "Be more democratic, be more autocratic, OTW", by chestnut_pod (with background & highlights) [link]

wistfuljane: Mythical Dragons & Wild Unicorns: A Decade Later [link]

naye: The Glorious 25th of May - #EndOTWRacism [link]

naye: OTW needs a lot more transforming [link]

Other sites

enk-dash-one at fandom.ink: 1/3 Fellow white people, I encourage you to read this thread first: Then, I'd like to add, speaking exclusively to fellow white people who are worried about this: we are already racist. [link]

Klaudiasays on TikTok: let's get #EndOTWRacism trending [link]

Stitch for Teen Vogue: As #EndOTWRacism Fights for AO3 Policy Changes, Fandom Racism Bubbles to the Surface [link]

We'd love for folks to keep discussing the issues raised during this action! We organizers are probably going to go quiet for a little while to gather ourselves and work on moving forward, but if you send us posts by submitting to our tumblr, tweeting at us, messaging us on dreamwidth, or emailing us at endotwracism [at] gmail [dot], we will consider linking or posting them. We do reserve the right to only share posts that are in line with the intent of the campaign and that we believe are adding to the conversation.

#end otw racism #racism in fandom #ao3 #otw #organization for transformative works #archive of our own #fandom racism #endotwracism #link round up

102 notes · View notes

hadesoftheladies · 7 months

Text

One of the biggest reasons that I know majority of current transgender ideology is faux-oppression is because of how copy-paste it’s analysis is, which makes its lack of serious academic thought that much more obvious. it’s activists use buzz words from other activist movements like the black liberation movement and feminism (“black trans lives matter”/“cis women can’t identify as transwomen”), co-opt terms from other oppressed groups like the intersex community (AFAB/AMAB), and when it comes to creating their own language, the words are utter nonsense, like “transmisogyny”, which is a nonsense word that pairs two charged words together without considering the internal meaning of either.

what oppression do trans-people face for being transgender? being trafficked (that’s usually black, homosexual people in poorer areas), refusal of hormones or surgery (which are damaging to your body), perception of transness (usually homophobic or misogynistic hatred), being killed (black people again), being the wrong gender (gender is made up you can act and wear whatever you like, and if it is harming you, is it not more helpful to reject gender than redeem it?) And yea, there can be issues of intersection, but what about transness is specifically targeted or resisted on a structural level? The analysis has to keep borrowing from other struggles (being a woman, homo/bisexual gnc person in a patriarchal misogynistic world, being black, the taboo of being intersex) and then labeling those issues as “trans” or “gender” issues. Dysphoria is disorder brought on by existing in a sick social environment, much like dysmorphia and depression can be (because gender isn’t innate). It isn’t about “female” or “male” brains. These are very real issues that women, gnc LGB and intersex people have gone through. Is it a coincidence that these demographics are where dysphoria most thrives? but they’ll never analyze that. gender has to be innate. they won’t analyze how consumeristic trans culture is. they’ll cry about how awful the trans genocide is, but the black trans-identified people dying in brothels won’t push most of them to criticize porn culture or criticize the pro-porn trans icons in their group. interesting.

which is further evident in the huge absence of internal diversity of thought. the rise of micro identities and the way a lot of “queer” activists speak (the endless virtue signaling and verbal diarrhea) shows that this is an “oppression product.” they popularized oppression olympics. having a micro identity is a fad. who is being denied a job for identifying as greysexual? mom and dad I’m so sorry I’m sapiosexual please don’t kick me out.

most prominent trans icons are from the rich white upper class. and also mostly male. they are product influencers, convincing women and children to please buy thing so they can finally be satisfied. isn’t being part of a niche underground “oppressed” group cool? when your oppressed people listen to you, and doesn’t that just feel so good? it’s so white. it’s so capitalist America. it’s so MRA in how it trivializes historic, academic and global human rights movements. like listening to a porn-addicted man ramble on about how feminism is actually just about hating men, and anti-racism is about hating white people.

devoid of any true social analysis, because then we’d actually have to talk about the underlying rot which real activist groups are being killed and censored and disrupted to stop addressing.

#oppression olympics #feminism #radblr #trans #discourse #gender #politics #racism

21 notes · View notes

religion-is-a-mental-illness · 4 months

Text

By: Christina Buttons

Published: May 13, 2024

A guide to the international debate on youth medical transition, where medical authorities in the United States depart from a growing international consensus.

The world is reacting to the U.K.'s Cass Review and associated systematic evidence reviews, which found "remarkably weak" evidence supporting medical interventions for gender transition in minors. Released on April 9, 2024, the final report from the national gender clinic service for those under 18—following four years of meta-analyses of the available literature—dealt a major blow to the gender-affirming model of care and marked its termination in England.

NHS England, which commissioned the report, expressed gratitude to Dr. Hilary Cass and committed to implementing her recommendations. These advocate for primarily relying on psychotherapy to address gender-related distress in minors and discontinuing the use of puberty blockers as part of England’s publicly funded healthcare system. The NHS predicted the landmark review would have "major international importance and significance"—a prediction that has proven correct. Just one month later, we are already beginning to see its impact.

What’s New

Scotland and Wales

In response to the Cass Review, Wales and Scotland have joined England in halting new prescriptions of puberty blockers for minors under 18 diagnosed with gender dysphoria. Additionally, in Scotland, cross-sex hormones will not be available to those under 18. In the last few years, beyond the U.K., Sweden, Finland, and Denmark have adopted a more cautious approach by placing restrictions on medical interventions for the treatment of gender dysphoria in minors. Norway has also signaled intentions to follow a similar path.

Germany

Now, Germany has emerged as the latest country to initiate steps towards placing restrictions on gender transition treatments for minors. Earlier this week, the German Medical Assembly, a pivotal body representing medical professionals across the country, passed a resolution that calls for the restriction of puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgeries for gender dysphoric youth to strictly controlled research settings. Another resolution passed that stated minors should not be permitted to "self-identify" into a chosen sex without first undergoing a specialist child and adolescent psychiatric evaluation and consultation.

While national restrictions have not yet been formalized, experts in gender medicine research are describing this update as a “major development” — especially considering that Germany has been one of the most permissive countries on this issue.

Read the SEGM Analysis

Belgium

Additionally, in Belgium, leading physicians are advocating for significant reforms in the treatment protocols for gender dysphoria in children and adolescents. According to an April 2024 report authored by pediatricians and psychiatrists P. Vankrunkelsven, K. Casteels, and J. De Vleminck from Leuven, there is a pressing need to follow the precedents set by Sweden and Finland, where hormones are regarded as a last resort. Their findings and recommendations were published in a prestigious medical journal associated with Dutch-speaking medical faculties in Belgium and their alumni associations.

International Bodies

International bodies such as the United Nations (UN) have also responded to the Cass Review. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, Reem Alsalem, issued a statement on the UN’s website declaring that the Review’s recommendations are essential for protecting children, especially girls, from harm.

In addition, the European Society of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (ESCAP), a prominent umbrella association of 36 Child and Adolescent Psychiatry societies worldwide, recently issued a policy statement on child and adolescent gender dysphoria. They urged healthcare providers to "not to promote experimental and unnecessarily invasive treatments with unproven psycho-social effects and, therefore, to adhere to the ‘primum-nil-nocere’ (first, do no harm) principle."

These responses stand in stark contrast to that of World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH), a body-modification advocacy organization. WPATH emailed a statement to its subscribers in response to the Cass Review, vehemently rejecting its findings and adhering to its ideological beliefs. WPATH criticized the Cass Report as “harmful” and "rooted in a false premise" that suggests distressed children can be helped without "medical pathways.”

United States

In response to the Cass Review, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the Endocrine Society (ES) recently provided statements to WBUR, doubling down on their endorsement of the gender-affirming model of care and medical interventions for minors. Both blamed “politics” for spreading “misinformation.” Meanwhile, prominent gender clinicians have expressed to WBUR that they are “perplexed and concerned” by these organizations’ statements, given the Cass Review’s findings.

WPATH, AAP, and ES continue to mislead the public by claiming that the gender-affirming model of care adheres to the principles of evidence-based medicine (EBM), despite clear evidence to the contrary. Their recommendations for medical interventions are not grounded in robust evidence but rather rely on "circular referencing" of each other’s guidelines, effectively creating a citation cartel.

Comprehensive Overview of the International Debate On Youth Transition by Country

In recent years, there has been an ongoing debate about the best approach for treating gender-distressed youth, addressing the global increase in young people, primarily adolescent females, seeking services from gender clinics. Countries with pediatric gender clinic services have shown varied responses, ranging from highly medicalized treatment pathways to approaches that prioritize psychotherapy.

Nations such as the UK, Sweden, Finland, and Denmark have taken unified steps to heavily restrict medical transitions for minors, aligning their guidance with the results of systematic evidence reviews, with Norway similarly indicating moves in this direction. Elsewhere, medical and health authorities remain divided on best practices, although there are signs of some reevaluating their positions on the medical transition of minors. This guide will highlight significant updates and changes observed in these practices over recent years.

The Netherlands

In the Netherlands, the birthplace of the Dutch Protocol—the highly medicalized approach to treating youth with gender dysphoria—is facing increased scrutiny. As of 2023, there is a growing debate within medical, legal, and cultural realms about the practice of youth gender transitions.

On February 15, 2024, the Dutch Parliament ordered an investigation into the physical and mental health outcomes of children who have been prescribed puberty blockers. Despite these developments, the guidelines for treating gender dysphoria have not yet been updated.

In April 2024, Amsterdam UMC, the Dutch clinic that pioneered youth gender transition practices, issued a statement in response to the Cass Report. The clinic commended several elements of the report but expressed disagreement with its conclusion that the evidence supporting the use of puberty blockers is insufficient.

In May 2024, one of the Netherlands' national newspapers profiled the new policy statement from The European Society of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (ESCAP) that advocated for a non-medicalized approach to treating child and adolescent gender dysphoria.

Norway

In 2023, the Healthcare Investigation Board of Norway (Ukom) issued recommendations urging the Ministry of Health and Care to instruct the Directorate of Health to revise the national professional guideline for gender incongruence, drawing on systematic evidence reviews. Additionally, the Ukom report proposed classifying puberty blockers, as well as hormonal and surgical interventions for children and young people, as experimental treatments. This classification would subject these treatments to more stringent regulations regarding informed consent, eligibility, and outcome evaluation. However, Norway has not yet issued any explicit new guidelines following these recommendations.

Denmark

In July 2023, Ugeskrift for Læger, the journal of the Danish Medical Association, reported a significant shift in Denmark's approach to treating youth with gender dysphoria. Instead of receiving prescriptions for puberty blockers, hormones, or surgery, most young people referred to the centralized gender clinic now receive therapeutic counseling and support.

France

In 2022, the National Academy of Medicine in France advised exercising "the utmost medical caution" for the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for children and adolescents, citing the risk of regret. Despite this caution, the prescription of these treatments remains permissible at any age with parental authorization.

A 2023 poll by the Journal International de Médecine found 84% of healthcare professionals in France are in favor of a moratorium on the administration of hormonal treatments for trans-identified minors.

In March 2024, French senators released a 369-page report advocating for the cessation of cross-sex hormones and puberty blockers on minors. Based on the findings of this report, lawmakers have drafted a bill that is set to be debated on May 28, 2024.

Italy

In January 2023, the Italian Psychoanalytic Society (SPI) wrote a letter to Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, expressing "great concern" over the "ongoing experimentation" with drugs designed to halt puberty in children and calling for a "rigorous scientific discussion."

In March 2024, the Vatican’s doctrine office, after five years of preparation, released a report approved by Pope Francis that declared gender-related surgeries to be "a grave violation of human dignity."

In April 2024, five Italian medical organizations released a joint position paper on managing adolescent gender dysphoria. This document, which extensively references WPATH, supports the medical transition of minors.

Sweden

In 2022, Sweden's National Board of Health and Welfare declared that the potential harms of puberty blockers and gender-affirming hormone treatments for individuals under 18 years of age surpass the possible benefits for this demographic. The board recommended that such treatments should primarily occur within a research setting to better assess their effects on gender dysphoria, mental health, and quality of life among young people. Additionally, it noted that hormone treatments could still be administered in exceptional circumstances.

In April 2023, a systematic review conducted by researchers from Karolinska Institutet, University of Gothenburg, Umeå University, and the Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services was published in Acta Paediatrica. This review assessed the existing evidence on hormonal treatment for individuals under 18 years old with gender dysphoria. The researchers concluded that such interventions “should be considered experimental treatment rather than standard procedure.”

Finland

Finland was the first Western country to conduct a systematic review of the evidence for youth gender transition, that led to a significant update of its guidelines in 2020. Observations from Finnish gender clinics showed that hormone treatments do not typically improve—and can worsen—the functioning of gender-dysphoric youth. In response, the country's Council for Choices in Health Care revised its guidelines to emphasize psychosocial support as the primary approach and restricted hormonal interventions to exceptional cases. These interventions are permitted before age 18 only if the individual's cross-sex identity is confirmed as permanent and causes severe dysphoria, the child fully understands the significance, benefits, and risks of the treatments, and there are no contraindications.

In October 2023, Dr. Riittakerttu Kaltiala, a leading Finnish gender clinician and researcher at Tampere University Hospital, wrote an op-ed in The Free Press, titled "Gender-Affirming Care Is Dangerous. I Know Because I Helped Pioneer It.” She highlighted concerns about the practice of pediatric medical transition in the U.S. and the lack of solid evidence supporting the efficacy of medical transition in reducing suicide rates among young people.

In February 2023, a landmark study from Finland revealed low suicide rates among trans-identified youth and found no evidence of benefits from gender reassignment. The study showed that, after accounting for psychiatric needs, there was no statistically significant evidence that gender-referred youth have higher suicide rates compared to the general population. The authors concluded that the risk of suicide related to transgender identity and/or gender dysphoria "may have been overestimated."

England

In January 2020, National Health Service (NHS) England formed a Policy Working Group (PWG) to conduct an assessment of the existing research on the use of puberty blockers and feminizing/masculinizing hormones in children and young people with gender dysphoria. This was aimed at shaping a policy stance on their continued application. The findings from these reviews were released in March 2021.

In February 2022, the interim report to the Cass Review was published, which had been commissioned by NHS England to evaluate the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) at the Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust, the UK's only national clinic for children and adolescents with gender dysphoria. The review highlighted significant concerns about the clinical decision-making framework, noting a lack of robust evidence and consensus on the most effective treatments.

In July 2022, NHS England announced it would close GIDS in Spring 2023, which was delayed until Spring 2024. Two new regional hubs opened in London and the north of England to move away from a single-service model.

In October 2022, the NHS England issued new draft guidance following their systematic evidence review, stating that there is "scarce and inconclusive evidence to support clinical decision-making" for minors with gender dysphoria, and for most who present before puberty, it will be a "transient phase" requiring psychological support rather than medical intervention.

In March 2024, NHS England announced that it would end the prescription of puberty blockers at gender clinics for children due to insufficient evidence regarding their safety and effectiveness. These treatments will now only be accessible through clinical research trials.

On April 9, 2024, the final 388-page report of the Cass Review was published, along with 9 studies (8 of which were systematic evidence reviews) by the University of York.

Ireland

In March 2023, HSE published a review of the interim Cass Report to assess Gender Identity Services for children and young people in Ireland.

In April 2024, the Health Service Executive (HSE) announced the development of a new clinical program for gender healthcare, scheduled over the next two years. They also stated that the final report for the Cass Review will be included as part of this process.

Canada

In January 2024, Alberta announced the implementation of measures that significantly restrict medical transitions for minors. This policy establishes Alberta as the only province in Canada to enforce such limitations on gender transition procedures for individuals under 18. Under the new regulations, minors are prohibited from undergoing any gender-related surgeries, and those aged 16 and younger are prevented from accessing puberty blockers or cross-sex hormones.

United States

The three main organizations that have issued guidelines on youth medical transition include the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the Endocrine Society (ES), and the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH). Other groups, such as the American Medical Association, have either publicly supported “affirming” medical practices without presenting evidence, or have aligned themselves with the guidelines set by one or more of these three organizations. Notably, none of these organizations have yet conducted systematic reviews of the evidence, which are designed to avoid selective inclusion of studies and biased interpretations.

Leaders at the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) ignored five resolutions from its members over four consecutive years, each urging that youth transition guidelines be aligned with findings from systematic evidence reviews. In August 2023, the AAP Board of Directors finally agreed to conduct their own systematic review of the evidence and consider updating its guidance. At the same time, the Board "voted to reaffirm" its 2018 policy statement on gender-affirming care.

In 2022, Florida took the lead as the first state to curtail the widespread administration of hormonal and surgical interventions to the increasing number of gender-dysphoric youth. Early in the year, Florida’s public health authority commissioned an overview of existing English-language systematic evidence reviews. Based on the findings from this review, the Florida Boards of Medicine subsequently decided to halt the provision of gender-transition services to minors, unless conducted within research settings across the state.

As of April 2024, 24 states have now placed age restrictions on hormonal and surgical sex-trait modification interventions for minors. Democrats in four states (Texas, Louisiana, New Hampshire, and Maine) have voted in favor of age restriction laws or against turning their states into hormone sanctuaries.

Spain

In 2018, the Spanish Association of Paediatrics and the Spanish Society of Paediatric Endocrinology published a statement endorsing youth medical transition.

In 2022, the directors of Spain’s Society of Psychiatry, Association of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, and Society of Endocrinology expressed their opposition to a proposed law that would enable minors to access medical transition procedures. El Mundo, the second-largest daily newspaper in Spain, highlighted this controversy on its front page with the headline: “Psychiatrists explode against the Trans Law: It can bring a lot of pain and regret to many people.”

Australia and New Zealand

In August 2021, The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP) issued its first position statement focused on the mental health needs of individuals with gender dysphoria, followed by an update in September 2021. This statement was the first from a professional body that did not explicitly endorse a gender-affirming approach.

Australia has experienced considerable debate in recent years regarding youth medical transition. This topic has been extensively covered by Australian journalist Bernard Lane for his Substack, Gender Clinic News.

New Zealand's Ministry of Health was expected to release an evidence brief in early 2024, aimed at reviewing the current evidence on the safety of puberty blockers. Although the publication has been delayed, it is anticipated to be released soon.

In April 2024, Guardian Australia reported that neither New South Wales or Victoria have plans to make changes to puberty blocker prescribing or accessibility as a result of the Cass Review.

International Bodies

In July 2023, for the first time, international experts publicly weighed in on the American debate over "gender-affirming care." 21 leading experts on pediatric gender medicine from eight countries wrote a letter expressing disagreement with US-based medical organizations over the treatment of gender dysphoria in youth, urging them to align their recommendations with unbiased evidence “rather than exaggerating the benefits and minimizing the risks.”

In January 2024, the World Health Organization (WHO) updated its announcement on developing healthcare guidelines for “trans and gender diverse (TGD) people.” The WHO stated in an FAQ that it would not be making recommendations that impact minors. Importantly, they made the following admission: "[O]n review, the evidence base for children and adolescents is limited and variable regarding the longer-term outcomes of gender affirming care for children and adolescents" (January, 2024).

Further Information

For additional information, one of the studies that contributed to the Cass Review conducted a survey of European gender services for children and adolescents from September 2022 to April 2023. Additionally, a Wikipedia page provides an overview of the "legal status of gender-affirming healthcare" (for adults) in various countries worldwide.

If you found this guide helpful, I am working on developing an information-based website that will feature up-to-date data, counterarguments to activist claims, explainers on research, and useful resources related to gender pseudoscience.

#Christina Buttons #systematic review #Cass report #Cass review #gender affirming care #gender affirming healthcare #gender affirmation #medical scandal #medical corruption #medical malpractice #head in the sand #willful ignorance

13 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 7 months

Text

Moscow CNN — Two years ago, when Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, I was among the many long-time observers of the Kremlin who got it wrong.

Few could fathom why Vladimir Putin, Russia’s calculating leader, would embark on such a risky military adventure, especially when the mere threat of a Russian invasion was already yielding results.

In June the previous year, as Russian forces massed near Ukraine, US President Joe Biden met Putin at a superpower-style summit, describing the US and Russia as “two great powers” elevating the Russian leader after previous US administrations had sought to downplay Russia’s influence.

In the days before the 2022 invasion, Washington offered a “pragmatic evaluation” of Moscow’s security concerns, signalling openness to compromise.

Pitching Russian forces against one of the region’s biggest standing armies seemed uncharacteristically reckless and, therefore, unlikely.

There were others, though, who rightly saw the invasion as inevitable, better reading the Kremlin’s intentions, and confidently predicting a swift Russian victory at the hands of Moscow’s vastly superior forces.

Two years on, I like to think that those of us who doubted the Kremlin’s resolve were wrong for the right reasons.

What Moscow still euphemistically calls a Special Military Operation has been a bloodbath of catastrophic proportions, unseen in Europe for generations. Even conservative estimates put the number of dead and injured at hundreds of thousands of people on each side. Small gains, such as the recent capture of Avdiivka, have come at enormous cost.

Russia’s once revered military has shown itself painfully unprepared and vulnerable to modern weapons in the hands of a determined Ukrainian resistance. Even if the war ends tomorrow, it is likely to take many years for its strength and numbers to recover.

And the past two years of brutal war have twisted and distorted Russia internally too.

Hundreds of thousands of its citizens have fled abroad to avoid conscription. Frustrations with the way the war was being fought provoked an armed uprising in which gun-toting Wagner mercenaries marched on Moscow, posing an unprecedented challenge to the Kremlin’s authority.

International disdain has made Russia the most heavily sanctioned country in the world. Even President Putin has been indicted for war crimes at the Hague.

And now Putin’s most vocal critic – Alexey Navalny – is dead. Amid a broader crackdown on dissent, this country has plunged further into isolation and darkness.

Take a longer view, and the direction of travel seems tragically clear.

I was in Chechnya when, in 2000, a newly installed President Putin brought that rebellious Russian region to heel, unleashing a relentless Russian military. We will bomb them in the outhouse, he remarked, in a crude but popular refrain.

In 2006, a leading Russia journalist, Anna Politikovskaya, was murdered, on Putin’s birthday. Her brave dispatches from Chechnya struck a chord. Other critics were silenced at home and abroad.

By 2008, Putin was intervening in neighbouring Georgia, carving out pro-Russian regions from the Georgian state. Before the territory of Crimea was annexed from Ukraine in 2014, Russian forces had for years successfully propped up the Syrian regime in that country’s own brutal crackdown on rebellion, despite international condemnation.

But February 24, 2022, was a watershed.

It’s not just that Putin miscalculated in his ambition to conquer Ukraine, although what was meant as a limited campaign is very much now an open-ended war.

Rather, his full-scale invasion of Ukraine was the moment Putin finally abandoned all semblance of cooperation with the West, and all pretence that dissent and criticism inside this great nation would be tolerated.

And there is currently little sign of any change in course.

In fact, two years into his Special Military Operation, Putin is tightening his grip on power with opponents silenced and elections in March set to confirm his fifth presidential term.

Privately, many Russians remain quietly hopeful that there will, one day, be a change in course. But few believe it is unlikely to be now or even soon.

10 notes · View notes

jobaaj · 3 months

Text

🔴BREAKING NEWS: Big move by Germany! It is deporting terrorist supporters!! 🤔 What's happening?

▪ The German government has a new plan to make it easier to deport people who praise or support terrorism.

▪ Even posting about terrorism on social media could lead to deportation under this new law.

▪ This change aims to take away the right to stay in Germany from immigrants who support terrorism.

▪ Chancellor Olaf Scholz says promoting terrorism is an insult to victims, their families, and Germany's democracy.

🧐 Why?

▪ Recently, an Afghan asylum seeker killed a young German police officer and injured four others in a knife attack.

▪ After Hamas's terrorist attack on October 7th, there was a big increase in hate posts on social media in Germany.

▪ There have also been several pro-Palestine protests, especially on student campuses.

😲Interestingly: ▪ The national chairman of the police union, Jochen Kopelke, welcomed the Cabinet’s decision, which he described as a clear signal to terror sympathizers. ▪ However, the bill has drawn criticism from some politicians. ▪ Critics claim that the move clamps down on the freedom of speech and is similar to the measures imposed by authoritarian regimes!! 🥸Analysis: ▪ This move by Germany is meant in good faith. ▪ Germany is trying to counter the growth of anti-Semitism in the country and trying to preserve an atmosphere of peace. ▪ However, the lack of clarity in this law will make it a tool of discrimination if used inappropriately. ❓Should more countries follow Germany’s example? Will this help the situation or worsen it?? Follow Jobaaj Stories (the media arm of Jobaaj.com Group for more)

About Jobaaj Stories: Jobaaj Stories started as the storytelling branch of Jobaaj. Over time, it has grown to cover news, inspiring stories, and informational resources. Our mission is to educate and inspire budding professionals and students through storytelling. We exist to enrich you with information and inspiration!

#germany #deport #economy #politics #geopolitics #german #laws #news #currentaffairs #newsupdates #canada #india #indian

5 notes · View notes

hathorik · 9 months

Text

E-mail exchange between Elizabeth Dwoskin of the Washington Post and Ali Abunimah, Executive Director of the The Electronic Intifada.

Transcript under the cut.

From: Dwoskin, Elizabeth Date: Thu, Jan 4, 2024 at 11:09 PM Subject: Time-sensitive: Comment for an upcoming Washington Post story

Hi there, I cover social media for the Washington Post, and am writing a piece about efforts to minimize or misdirect information about the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel. As part of this piece, I am noting various headlines on your service that point to evidence of Israeli deaths being caused by the Israeli army. I'm also noting that many people I've spoken to who belief that the IDF was responsible for Oct 7 cite the work of Electronic Intifada. For instance, in the article here, your publication claims "The confession, discovered by The Electronic Intifada, is one of the highest level confirmations to date that Israel killed many, if not most, of the civilians that died during the Palestinian offensive." The referenced confession appears loosely sourced. It derives from a YouTube channel from a self-described israeli general who was not there at the time. It does not say "most." Do you believe that Hamas was behind the Oct 7 attacks, as is well-documented? Why does your publication claim otherwise as noted above? We describe Eletronic Intifada as a far left publication that is focused on Palestine and has an anti-Israel bent. We'd appreciate your comment in the story. If any of this seems inaccurate to you, please let me know. I can be reached on Pacific time in the US at [REDACTED] Many thanks, Elizabeth

Ali Abunimah Re: Time-sensitive: Comment for an upcoming Washington Post story

Dear Ms. Dwoskin, Here is my comment: It would appear that the reach and success of The Electronic Intifada in debunking and exposing the kind of pro-Israel propaganda routinely published by the Washington Post is now causing enough worry that you have been assigned to do a hit-piece, in which labels such as "far-left" and "anti-Israel" will be deployed in order to try to misdirect your readers from our careful, factual reporting. More accurate labels for our publication might be pro-fact, pro-Palestinian rights, pro-international law and anti-genocide. But if you consider facts, and the existence of Palestinians who speak up to be "anti-Israel," then that is a reflection of your anti-Palestinian bias, not of our publication. Your reliance on the labels you propose is a signal to me that you and your publication have been frustrated by the accuracy of our reporting, translations and analysis and your inability to poke holes in it. Thus you will take the lazy route of using dog-whistle labels. We are quite accustomed to that. You may have a different interpretation of a story we reported, which is your right, but I emphasize that you haven't pointed out any error in our large amount of reporting on October 7 and the Israeli genocide that has followed. Nonetheless, you are clearly fishing for some kind of "gotcha" comment in a desperate attempt to further your smears. I'm very proud of the good, solid reporting we do and that it was our publication that first fully translated the interviews of Yasmin Porat, the Israeli survivor at Kibbutz Be'eri, who revealed that it was Israeli tank fire, not Hamas, which killed her partner and other Israeli civilians there. Does your newspaper, which has neglected this key story, dispute that? We're very happy to see a wide and growing audience for what we do: careful, factual reporting, and that this is causing worry at your offices. Our work is more vital than ever as corporate, pro-White House, pro-Israel, anti-Palestinian outlets such as yours continue to mislead the public. We will keep doing our job of careful, factual reporting, and I have no doubt you will continue doing your job of smears and propaganda on behalf of supporters of genocide. I will be most pleasantly surprised if you were to include my comment in full in your upcoming article and allow your readers to be the judges of who is most trustworthy. Yours, Ali Abunimah Executive Director The Electronic Intifada

[End of transcript.]

#palestine #gaza #zionist entity #zionism #free palestine #free gaza #end occupation #united nations #genocide #crimes against humanity #human rights #FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA PALESTINE WILL BE FREE #ALL LAND BACK

8 notes · View notes

alcorian-cycle · 1 year

Text

transformers as cold war era media: an analysis written at 1 am, based on things me & my friends talk about in my tf server

Okay, so, G1 Transformers was made in the 1980s, which is the late Cold War era. I think that laid the foundations for the traces of pro-capitalist Americana we see throughout the franchise even in the modern day.

In G1, Megatron’s main ideological ‘catchphrase’ is “peace through tyranny.” To me, this is a pretty good representation of how many anti-communism Americans viewed and still do view communism; I’ve seen a lot of this idea that the evil communists are going to come take away your money and your rights for the sake of building a better world, and they’re not even gonna be good at it. Sure, they say they want to create a peaceful world free of inequality, but they’ll have to take away your rights to exploit others to do it! And communism in the US was largely colored by the Soviet Union and their authoritarianism.

It’s peace (economic equality) through tyranny (authoritarianism).

Also notable is the fact that the entire war in G1 seems to be focused on a race for resources, which is very similar to how the Cold War played out! Rather than being a war of physical battles, it was largely a war of economics, ideology, and resources. Anyways, nearly every episode is about the Decepticons finding some new energy source, and the Autobots having to stop them from taking advantage of it, because then they will use that energy source to power their weapons and vehicles, and spread their evil "peace through tyranny" throughout the galaxy. It’s very reminiscent of the Cold War and the development of nuclear weapons and power, and the ways nuclear power was treated as being very entwined with the advancement of capitalist and communist ideologies.

Another thing is that the Autobots worked openly and often with the US government in G1, and the government was portrayed as the good guys who only wanted to develop new power sources for good—but those nasty Decepticons want to steal it for evil purposes! I vividly remember an episode where the US government developed a new, novel, and extremely powerful energy source, and had to do everything in their power to keep it away from the ‘Cons. One of the protagonists of that episode was a human scientist working for the government, who was kidnapped by the ‘Cons, but never gave up their secrets.

Another thing I noticed is the language at play in Megatron and Optimus’ character designs, and the designs of their respective faction members. Optimus is very clearly the colors of the American flag, and Megatron's construction reminds me of stereotypical Soviet bloc architecture—big, grey, rectangular, heavy, utilitarian. Ruth pointed out that the Autobots are mainly consumer vehicles like cars and vans, while the ‘Cons are mostly military and industrial builds, which plays into the narrative about Evil Commies Coming For Your Consumer Products With Their Weapons. Also notable is the Decepticons’ association with red (a VERY popular stand-in for communism—it wasn’t called the Red Scare for nothing). On the other side, the Autobots all have blue eyes, which to me is reminiscent of the Stereotypical Good, Strong, Blonde-Haired Blue-Eyed All American Man. Certainly, some of this is coincidental, but I still enjoy pointing it out and pointing out the associations these character design choices would have had at the time they were made, and even today.

So that's just G1. But later on I think we see echoes of that original Cold War era signaling throughout the franchise, even in media made after the War ended. For example, in Aligned; Megatron wants to force economic equality on the populace. He does this in a violent way that threatens both Cybertron’s way of life, and the rich and middle class bots of the planet. Megatron is a scary, violent communist rising up from the working class to wreak havoc on Good, Polite Society with his Radical Ideas. What I find interesting is that this version begins to lean more into the fear of American communists, with Megatron being a disenfranchised member of the community & building up his own army of rebels who commit acts of domestic terrorism, rather than being an outside force. And in Aligned, in response to the Decepticon uprising, we see Optimus Bravely Defending the American Capitalist Upper Class From Robot Antifa, Who Tried To Blow Them Up, How Nasty! Aligned really espouses the idea that “sure, economic equality sounds great and all, but these people really want to blow up rich people’s houses and amusement parks and destroy our government entirely! Is it really worth it?”

And finally, Ruth suggested that there’s something in the way the G1 Autobots and Decepticons teamed up to fight a mutual threat (the Quintessons) and then the Decepticons turned on them because they were too “war hungry” to settle, so the Autobots have to continue fighting them to keep their evil ideology and empire from expanding. It all screams “metaphor for American capitalism and Soviet communism.”

I think this could have easily been unintentional, and probably was. A lot of it is just the public perception of what "evil" looked like during the Cold War Era. The thing about creative media is that it’s always coloured by the assumptions and stereotypes of the time. Even if an author didn’t mean to create a commentary on something, you can still observe how certain pervasive ideas of the time made their way into the work. This is especially true of villains (what does “evil” look like to them?). Look at Bram Stoker’s Dracula. The character of the Count plays on fears of immigrants from southeastern Europe “corrupting” England. Any shorthand for “evil” will be STEEPED in the era and location’s politics. Since Transformers is meant to be a kids’ show with very clear cut heroes and villains, it makes it especially easy to locate these biases and discuss them.

#alv posts #transformers #maccadam #meta #analysis

9 notes · View notes

frogtansonyeondan · 4 months

Note

hey im curious to hear your analysis on why namjoonbis basically saying he's queer in rpwp? i haven't found any good lyric analysis so far and im curious to hear your thoughts 👀

Ok so I definitely feel like this album is mostly about 4 relationships. A relationship with a woman that seems to have been either long term or on and off, a relationship with a man that was short-lived (and might have been a rebound?), his relationship with the public/k-pop industry, and his relationship with himself (the most important one on this album imo). I think that "she/he's a pro-rider" is a double entendre. he's saying that his partners took HIM for a ride, as in they manipulated him and took advantage of him, as well as using "riding" in the sexual sense. He describes both the man and woman in the song as "pro-gaslighters" and from the line "always on that fucking kakaotalk" it seems he might be implying that the male partner was cheating on him? I tried to think of different ways you could interpret these lines and can't really. At first I thought he might be talking about himself, but the "he" in the song is clearly a different person bc Namjoon addresses himself in first person when he says "I go nuts, becoming a monster". The only other heterosexual explanation I could come up with was that he was talking about a friend or maybe the man his female partner cheated with? Beacuse of the "no woman could stop him" line? But then he seems to imply that he had a romantic relationship with this person in the last line of the verse and there's also the obvious sexual connotation of "pro-rider".

I don't want to speculate too much about NJ's personal life, but the timing of some things that happened last year and these lyrics is interesting to say the least...

Idk. To me it really seems like NJ was signaling to us that he's queer as much as he could last year without arousing enough suspicion to get barred from the military, and now he's just decided he doesn't GAF anymore lmao

I hope this makes sense! I only got 3 hrs of sleep last night bc of this damn album lmao

5 notes · View notes

fx-signals · 3 months

Text

Top 10 Forex Signals Service Providers for Accurate Trading in 2024

Choosing the best forex signals service provider is essential for traders seeking to enhance their trading strategies and achieve consistent profits. Here’s a detailed overview of the top 10 forex signals service providers for 2024, known for their reliability, accuracy, and comprehensive support.

1. Forex Bank Signal Pro

Website: https://forexbanksignal.pro/

Forex Bank Signal Pro stands out as the leading forex signals service provider for 2024. Renowned for its precise signals and real-time market analysis, this platform caters to traders of all levels. With a user-friendly interface and dedicated customer support, Forex Bank Signal Pro ensures traders have the tools needed to capitalize on trading opportunities effectively.

2. 1000pip Builder

1000pip Builder is recognized for its consistent performance and transparent signal delivery. Managed by experienced traders, the service provides daily signals via email and SMS, accompanied by detailed trade analysis and a proven track record.

3. Learn 2 Trade

Learn 2 Trade offers a comprehensive range of signals across forex, cryptocurrencies, and commodities. Their signals are based on thorough technical analysis and come with educational resources, making it a valuable resource for traders looking to deepen their trading knowledge and refine their strategies.

4. ForexSignals.com

ForexSignals.com combines accurate trading signals with a robust educational platform. With a team of expert traders and an active community, the platform provides real-time insights, live trading sessions, webinars, and extensive educational resources to support trader development.

5. Pips Alert

Pips Alert stands out for its high accuracy and detailed market analysis. Offering multiple membership plans, the service includes various signal types and a comprehensive educational platform to empower traders in making informed trading decisions.

6. MQL5

MQL5 offers a diverse selection of trading signals from multiple providers. Traders can choose signals based on performance metrics and user reviews, with access to trading robots and custom indicators for automated trading strategies.

7. FXTM Signals

FXTM Signals delivers reliable forex signals generated by professional analysts. Covering a wide range of currency pairs, the service is supported by a strong track record and supplemented with educational resources such as webinars and market analysis reports.

8. DailyForex

DailyForex provides high-quality forex signals alongside comprehensive market analysis and broker reviews. Signals are delivered via email and mobile notifications, ensuring traders stay informed and ready to capitalize on trading opportunities.

9. eToro

eToro stands out as a leading social trading platform that allows traders to replicate the trades of successful investors. While not a traditional signals provider, eToro’s CopyTrader feature enables traders to benefit from the expertise of top performers and enhance their trading strategies.

10. ZuluTrade

ZuluTrade connects traders with signal providers globally through its social trading platform. Users can follow and copy trades from top signal providers, customize their trading strategies, and leverage the platform’s intuitive interface and comprehensive performance data.

Conclusion

Selecting the right forex signals service provider is crucial for achieving success in the competitive forex market. The providers listed above offer reliability, accuracy, and robust support to help traders navigate and thrive in 2024. Forex Bank Signal Pro, with its precision and real-time market insights, stands out as our top recommendation for traders aiming to optimize their trading performance and profitability.

1 note · View note