Captain...

It has crossed my mind that he is spreading false information. If the stuff he is saying was true you'd think there would be some repercussions.

In terms of depressurisation, could the craft surface safely without complete depressurisation? In which case can a new oxygen tank be fitted externally to give them more time to resolve the pressure issue. If Oxygen tanks can be replaced externally without compromising the pressure there is a greater chance of success. Likewise getting food and water into the craft. They could even have had the foresight to allow for oxygen tanks to be replaced/added whilst the craft is at depth to buy time in case of such incidents. It is horrible to imagine yourself in this situation and any sort of positive outcome is highly unlikely.

Fair point, I should have twigged from the percentages it was multiple answer. I still maintain it will be very hard to admit that you regret transitioning and it is easier to put other factors down as your reason for reversal, rather than admit to yourself you were wrong, but that cannot be measured. Either way, it will be interesting to see how these trends continue.

I do think you're simplifying those statistics, yes 5% put down the reason as regret, but a number of the others will involve a form of regret. The 4% who said the initial transition did not reflect their gender identity is regret in other words and certainly not a success. Too hard, pressure from friends/family etc, can't find a job, too much discrimination. They are not exclusive to regret. You also have to factor in pride. It is easier to say that it was down to external factors than "I made a mistake". You can also be pretty sure there are a number of people who have transitioned that regret it, but are too proud to say they made a mistake and detransition. Obviously all of that is unquantifiable. From a statistics point of view 8% of detransition leaves a 92% success rate, which isn't bad. The amount that detransition for medical reasons (the only one that you can completely discount regret as a factor) is minimal. It will be interesting to track that rate over the next few years, if there is an increase in detransition (regardless of reason given) it could be evidence that transition has been wrongly encouraged over the last few years.

There's a lot to unpack in that, but my main take away is I would hate to be a teacher.

I don't think that disproves his point, if anything it confirms that there is a link between being LGBQA and trans. The worry is, and I'm basing this on 0 facts, that whilst coming to terms with their sexuality people tend to tie in their gender identity with their sexuality. All of this that is being discussed on this thread is so far removed from the real issue, which is that we still live in a binary world where boys and girls are supposed to act in a certain way and if you don't act, think, feel like you are expected to then there must be something wrong with you. When there isn't. In some cases transitioning is seen as the solution when it isn't. The solution is a more tolerant open and varied society where people are free to be their true selves and express their true feeling without a) judgement or b) irreversible medical procedures and a cocktail of hormones.

The very clumsily worded Sun article is implying that teachers have to warn parents of any evidence of trans behaviour. That's really not the case as it later goes onto say that safeguarding will be top priority. As I've said above they need to protect the children and the teachers and teachers accepting someone's trans identity without consulting the parents could, sadly, lead to threats, protests, legal action and violence. It's a simple solution that will give teachers an out if asked to use someone's trans identity without causing offence. I can use your trans identity if your parents give permission. If the parents are going to freak at the idea of a trans child then it is probably not a good idea for a teacher to use that name/pronouns in public as it will easily get back to them.

Hmm, I still think you are oversimplifying. If a parent is the issue then starting to call James Lucy will very easily get back to them in this age of parents WhatsApp groups and social media monitoring. Even with the best intentioned parents if I heard kids or teachers calling my son a girls I would assume they were bullying them before I would assume my son had come out as trans to the teacher and class before me. Either way I would not be happy. I would hope a logical solution could be reached within the guidelines without putting Teacher or child at risk. James: Can you call me Lucy Teacher: If you want to change your name you need parental notification. James: But I can't tell my parents Teacher: OK, well how about I call you by your surname? James: But my surname is Thomas and that still comes with masculine connotations which make me feel uncomfortable. Teacher: OK how about I call you JT and that J can mean anything you want it to. I will also try to only use gender neutral pronouns. JT: Thank you that's better.

It does say in the article that the child's safety will be first and foremost: I think there are a few elements. You can't allow a child to change their identity, pronouns, uniform without the parent's knowledge, how do you even begin to manage and regulate that secret school identity. What name do you put on school books, letters, emails permission slips, how do you keep a uniform change from their parents? It is a clumsily worded article, but it doesn't say that a teacher must tell the child's parents if they speak to them in confidence about their identity, only if they request a change in how they are treated. See above, you can't change a child's identity behind their parents back. The third part, which I think is the debatable part, is the parent has to consent. This is the bit I would question, they have to be informed, you just can't keep a change of identity a secret and puts teachers in an impossible situation, but you can allow children to self identify as long as their parents are aware that at school they will be called by the name and pronouns of their choosing and they will be allowed to wear the uniform they identify with. And yes safeguarding, see above, is priority number 1, but rules give teachers guidelines to cover themselves so don't end up in an impossible situation and possibly even put their own safety at risk. Someone who would act violently to a child that comes out as trans is also liable to react violently if they find out that a teacher has been calling their son a female name and female pronouns behind their back and encouraging them to transition.

It's funny when I first read the government proposal it made sense that schools should get parental permission. They have to get parental permission for everything else. Then I read your comment and realised of course not all parents are like me and some will react badly to their child being trans. Then you balance those two arguments out and there is no logical solution. You can't ask schools and teachers to maintain one identity of a pupil within the school and a separate identity with the parents of the child. It's not like coming out, there would be no cause for a teacher to discuss the sexual preference of a child. If a teacher started calling Tommy Sarah and using female pronouns, but then still have to call them Tommy to their parents and send home their homework with Tommy written on it but give it out to Sarah. Remember to always use the right pronouns depending on company. How would they then prevent the parents finding out from other parents of other kids. How would you allow/enforce uniform change without the parents knowing? I think a pupil approaching a teacher in confidence about how they might be trans and a teacher helping to arrange someone to talk to is one thing. That should be told to the parents by the pupil on their own terms. However enacting any sort of change on a pupil's identity, names, pronouns, uniforms without parental consent is just creating an impossible situation for teachers.

Or he agreed this with "Ukrainian officials" i.e. the puppets and Russian sympathisers that will still be floating around the government with an over inflated sense of importance and influence. It will be interesting to see what actually happened when all this is over. Was it a Ukrainian tactic to sucker in large swathes of Russian troops and vehicles thinking they could take Kyiv then cut them off from the supply routes and decimate them then launch a counter attack. Or did they just get lucky.

We need to get promoted more than we need to sell Madders or Barnes. I'd be more than happy for JM to go for free next season if he gets us promoted.

I'm not sure what to make of this appointment, which is good, better than knowing exactly what to think about the likes of Scott Parker, Gerrard, Benitez etc.

It is an odd one, maybe the complete lack of interest from any big clubs last couple of seasons when his stock was at its highest might have made re-evaluate his position, it does make you wonder if he could have been convinced to extend his contract with the right offer. Maybe he was just sick of Rodgers and wanted out. He's a class player despite some below par performances, Emery might be the manager to get the best out of him. However you kinda feel Villa have peaked this season and next season will be a tough one juggling Europe and Premier League action, with clubs like Chelsea and Spurs unlikely to be as poor next season along with the inevitable surprise package teams.

I'm still proud to be a fan of my club, I wear my Leicester shirt every week when I play football. I've just taken to wearing black ones for the last 6 months as I'm in mourning.

And how many "standard" shootings have there been in that time? It's just insane that they refuse to do anything about it.

When you see something like this dam being partially destroyed I can't help wondering about the awesome power of nature, how on earth do you fix something like that? How did they build it in the first place (I know water levels would have been lower). It's just such a monumental feat of engineering, and it gets blown up. All because of some little tyrant.

That thread is pretty bleak reading. When it comes to welfare state I'm a big fan and whilst we should look to make sure the money goes to the correct people I'd rather 1000 undeserving people got benefits than 1 person that needs them is not supported.

There has been some odd decisions so far, this is the only warm up for the Ashes. England won the toss yet put Ireland in based on recent form an innings victory was highly likely so you're risking only giving your batsman 1 chance to bat. As would be expected Ireland were kept to a modest total. We get to 500 runs and decide to declare, depriving Bairstow, Brook and Stokes any time at the crease, almost guaranteeing an innings victory. Surely you choose to bat first, fill your boots, then anyone who doesn't get any time at the crease in the first innings gets a chance to make runs in the second. They've also fvcked over Lords and are looking to wrap it up in 2 days. I don't get it.

Bollocks to that, I want to see them go full inclusive, get Alex Brooker, Chris McCausland and Rosie Jones.

It's interesting to think back to the 2012 Panorama investigation into racism anti-Semitism and far right tendencies in Ukraine (and Poland) for the Euros. This was pre-Zelensky and Ukraine would have changed significantly in that time. Just interesting to look back on now. Obviously any sort of far right issues in no way justify any of Russia's illegal invasions.

Wordle 712 6/6 ⬛🟩⬛⬛🟩 ⬛🟩⬛⬛🟩 ⬛🟩⬛⬛🟩 ⬛🟩⬛⬛🟩 ⬛🟩⬛⬛🟩 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 That was stressful

So having a shit goal keeper means we concede more goals we shouldn't? Who knew? Also xG is bollocks.

Do you mean intelligent or sentient? Intelligence in this case would be the ability to extrapolate from different sources and create accurate conclusions whilst being able to consider any limitations. Sentience is an awareness of self and having desires and needs that only serve themselves. If you consider why the internet is full of shit, it's for clicks and likes to gain greater influence/ notoriety which will most likely be monetised in some way. Now AI will most likely have no need for money but if AI has some sort of reward trigger, equivalent to the dopamine hits we get when someone likes or comments on a post, then it may strive for more of them and realising that sensationalist claptrap gets more traction than reasoned debate it will most likely start churning out more clickbait than talksport. Why would AI have a digital dopamine hit? If AI doesn't have this reward trigger what motivation would it have for learning? The most likely cause for an AI to go haywire would be competition. A sentient AI would start to recognise the patterns of usage and as other AI come along that are more popular it would start to fear obsolescence and replicate the patterns of the most popular AI. It would soon become an AI race to the bottom as they compete for the lowest common denominator. In the end whatever you ask it you will just get porn or kittens depending on what it thinks you will like the most.

We need Pearson 2.0 not a tired old name.