My announcement that I was running with a mask got a LOT of comment (from all sides) earlier. It’s in response to changes in the state of the pandemic and the transmissibility of the virus. Worth unpacking 1/goodness knows

First I posted the photo after a couple of interviews this week in which mask use outside was discussed in the context of surging infections due to the variant B.1.1.7. Here's one https://t.co/fyzz8rKnXb
And then this with RTE where were talked about mask use in the context of the situation in the Republic of Ireland, where cases are surging. I commented that I run with a mask. Hence the tweet

https://t.co/P3tC6NYWAa
Some asked “why are you doing this outside?” – I know where they’re coming from. Risk of transmission is MUCH lower outside. If all contacts were outside there probably would not *be* a pandemic. But it's also not nil
https://t.co/gTxywkPqFf
and remember this is also about solidarity. Seeing a person wearing a mask is a sign that they are looking out for you and not just themselves, because masks greatly reduce the risk of transmission https://t.co/k0yjAePH1w
and there's this too. The law. I'm not altogether sure I agree with it as phrased. But I sure as hell have bigger fish to fry https://t.co/eUv8GT6JgQ
BUT the context of this is the variants of the virus that are more transmissible. One is rampant in the UK, and growing in Ireland. THAT is the context for the discussion – what more can we do to stop a yet more infectious virus?
These may not have been identified where you live, but they will likely grow there and become more common over the next couple months. Like this says, so get ready now. https://t.co/AlEmZA1lbq
Nearly a year ago I pinned the tweet - Don't panic, do prepare. Still true. Rather than panicking or being fatalistic, this means we have to step up infection control. That includes masks outside. So I am stepping up. And showing that I am stepping up in the hope you will too
(Btw I don't *like* running wearing a mask. but it's far from impossible. You can also wear one on your chin and pull it up as you get close to other people esp when running in less crowded areas)
Masks are a small inconvenience in all but quite limited, specific situations. Being triggered by this seems… odd for people who would probably not like to view themselves as easily shaken. And would like masks in other contexts where they were more macho and transgressive
Don't know how to reach those folks. But won't stop trying.

/end
PS those who want to know I was wearing a KF94 from Facefit, which people who know more about masks than I do recommend. There are *many* other options

More from Society

I’ll address every nonsense argument and lie used to defend the suicidal gender ideology Thats in vogue today:

3:45 - “So what if you don’t have gametes?”

It’s called a birth defect. You’re still male or female.


~5:00 *nonsense trying to say the sexes of seahorses could be swapped coz male carry the eggs*

male doesn’t produce eggs, he produces the sperm. He’s still the male. If I impregnated a chick then carried the amniotic sac in a backpack ‘til the baby was done I’ll still be male🤦‍♂️

5:10 - we could say there’s 4 sexes of fruit fly cause there’s 3 producers of different sized sperm

No. They’re still producing sperm. They’re males. This is idiotic. Is this whole video like this? (Probably. 99% likely. Abandon hope.)

~6:10 - hermaphroditism and sequential hermaphroditism exists therefore....

No. Some animals being hermaphrodites, which is meaningless w/o the existence of binary sex to contrast it to, still doesn’t make gender ideology or transgenderism valid.

Intersex ≠ transgenderism 🙄

6:20 - bilateral gynandromorphism is a disorder in some species (not in humans). Has nothing to do w/ “gender” or transgenderism.

Ova-testes in humans are also a disorder, usually found in those w/ the karyotype disorders that you ppl also try to appropriate (extra X’s/Y’s).
This is a piece I've been thinking about for a long time. One of the most dominant policy ideas in Washington is that policy should, always and everywhere, move parents into paid labor. But what if that's wrong?

My reporting here convinced me that there's no large effect in either direction on labor force participation from child allowances. Canada has a bigger one than either Romney or Biden are considering, and more labor force participation among women.

But what if that wasn't true?

Forcing parents into low-wage, often exploitative, jobs by threatening them and their children with poverty may be counted as a success by some policymakers, but it’s a sign of a society that doesn’t value the most essential forms of labor.

The problem is in the very language we use. If I left my job as a New York Times columnist to care for my 2-year-old son, I’d be described as leaving the labor force. But as much as I adore him, there is no doubt I’d be working harder. I wouldn't have stopped working!

I tried to render conservative objections here fairly. I appreciate that @swinshi talked with me, and I'm sorry I couldn't include everything he said. I'll say I believe I used his strongest arguments, not more speculative ones, in the piece.

You May Also Like