I am no psychiatrist or therapist, but I have been on the receiving end of verbal abuse, multiple times over decades, and managed to escape and recover from (most of) the trauma. I'm not sure that really "qualifies" me to say the following, in the academic sense, but...1/

I am seeing the press engaging in what I would call verbal abuse. When you invite a "guest" onto a program to present his or her POV, or to discuss their "expert" opinion on a subject, and then laugh at them, roll your eyes and talk over them, ask only rhetorical questions 2/
...and then accuse the guest of harming/doing disservice to the audience, you are behaving like an abuser. You are "informing" no one of anything other than your willingness to bully and abuse other human beings. Hosts with honest disagreements can and should ASK questions 3/
The hallmark of sincere disagreement is the listener who first checks for understanding of the speaker's POV, then asks why they say that. The host could challenge their arguments on the merits, with their evidence, then allow the guest to respond. This is how adults act. 4/
Immature, irrational, indoctrinated, and/or abusive, people talk OVER, mock, belittle, and accuse guests with different points of view of being "dangerous" or "harming" viewers/listeners. This is the behavior of deeply insecure people who know their ideas lack merit. 5/
Like other abusers, those who willingly gaslight and verbally abuse others seem to feel powerless, and derive power from putting others down. If you want to talk about seeking "social justice," you should talk about denying such people your eyes, ears and attention. 6/
There is nothing to be gained from interactions with verbal abusers, even when you agree with the ideas they seem to support. They are less interested in the value of those ideas than in the power they can derive from holding them, and that power comes at others' expense 7/
When I was leading a support group for survivors of narcissistic abuse some years ago, I tried to help people find ways to go "no-contact" with their abuser. It was the only way for them to rebuild their sense of self, and resist being sucked back into the neg feedback loop 8/
I see the same need now. It's not being "closed-minded" to shut off or shut out verbal abusers. There are rational, calm people presenting points of view that challenge your own, if that's what you want to find. Avoiding abuse doesn't mean finding an echo-chamber. 9/
In fact, too much validation puts you at risk of becoming the monster you're trying to escape. No, just look for sources of information and discussion partners (as well as friends and romantic partners) who understand the rules of adult verbal interaction 10/
Confident, self-assured, NON-abusive people don't resort to ad hominem, gaslighting, or other logical fallacies to support their claims. They aren't trying to "win," they're trying to understand. They may still disagree with your ideas, but know they have to PERSUADE 11/
These media abusers are bad faith actors b/c they knew their guests' views before they invited them to speak. The whole thing was an ambush, done for their, and your amusement. To me this is evidence of an emotionally UNWELL society. 12/
How do we fight it? Turn it off. Do not engage. Go no-contact from this sort of thing. Deny them their audience, your time, their "supply," and you deny them power. It really is that simple. Once they lose it, politicians whose policies they prop up lose it too. 13/
We have the power, "Dorothy," we've had it all along. Call it what it is: ABUSE, turn if off, ignore it, see them for the sad, insecure, immature, terrified children they are. "There's no place like the home of the free, land of the brave." BE BRAVE. /end
@threadreaderapp unroll

More from Health

this simple, counter narrative fact keeps cropping up all over the world.

hospital and ICU utilization has been and remains low this year.

it's terribly curious that so few of these monitoring tools provide historical baselines.

getting them is like pulling teeth.


we might think of this as an oversight until you see stuff like this:

this woman was arrested for filming and sharing the fact that their are empty hospitals in the UK.

that's full blown soviet. what possible honest purpose does that

this is the action of a police state and a propaganda ministry, not a well intentioned government and a public heath agency.

"we cannot let people see the truth for fear they might base their actions on real facts" is not much of a mantra for just governance.


90% full ICU sounds scary until you realize that 90-100% full is normal in flu season.

staffed ICU beds are expensive to leave empty. it's like flying with 15% of the plane empty. hospitals don't do that.

and all US hospitals are mandated to be able to flex to 120% ICU.

the US is currently at historically low ICU utilization for this time of year.

61% is "you're all going to go out of business" territory as is 66% full hospital use.

can you blame them for mining CARES act money? they'll die without it.
You gotta think about this one carefully!

Imagine you go to the doctor and get tested for a rare disease (only 1 in 10,000 people get it.)

The test is 99% effective in detecting both sick and healthy people.

Your test comes back positive.

Are you really sick? Explain below 👇

The most complete answer from every reply so far is from Dr. Lena. Thanks for taking the time and going through


You can get the answer using Bayes' theorem, but let's try to come up with it in a different —maybe more intuitive— way.

👇


Here is what we know:

- Out of 10,000 people, 1 is sick
- Out of 100 sick people, 99 test positive
- Out of 100 healthy people, 99 test negative

Assuming 1 million people take the test (including you):

- 100 of them are sick
- 999,900 of them are healthy

👇

Let's now test both groups, starting with the 100 people sick:

▫️ 99 of them will be diagnosed (correctly) as sick (99%)

▫️ 1 of them is going to be diagnosed (incorrectly) as healthy (1%)

👇

You May Also Like

**Thread on Bravery of Sikhs**
(I am forced to do this due to continuous hounding of Sikh Extremists since yesterday)

Rani Jindan Kaur, wife of Maharaja Ranjit Singh had illegitimate relations with Lal Singh (PM of Ranjit Singh). Along with Lal Singh, she attacked Jammu, burnt - https://t.co/EfjAq59AyI


Hindu villages of Jasrota, caused rebellion in Jammu, attacked Kishtwar.

Ancestors of Raja Ranjit Singh, The Sansi Tribe used to give daughters as concubines to Jahangir.


The Ludhiana Political Agency (Later NW Fronties Prov) was formed by less than 4000 British soldiers who advanced from Delhi and reached Ludhiana, receiving submissions of all sikh chiefs along the way. The submission of the troops of Raja of Lahore (Ranjit Singh) at Ambala.

Dabistan a contemporary book on Sikh History tells us that Guru Hargobind broke Naina devi Idol Same source describes Guru Hargobind serving a eunuch
YarKhan. (ref was proudly shared by a sikh on twitter)
Gobind Singh followed Bahadur Shah to Deccan to fight for him.


In Zafarnama, Guru Gobind Singh states that the reason he was in conflict with the Hill Rajas was that while they were worshiping idols, while he was an idol-breaker.

And idiot Hindus place him along Maharana, Prithviraj and Shivaji as saviours of Dharma.