BC FOR LATER READ
Saved by @jacobhtml

A lot of women get in touch to ask me about #coercivecontrol and come to the conclusion that their partner is controlling, but not abusive enough that they want to leave.

So when is the right time to leave?

A THREAD

 Is it when he calls you an ugly bitch the first time?
Or do you wait for him to call you it again?
Or do you wait until he has so completely undermined your sense of self worth that you don’t think you can leave?
Is it when he says that no one will love you like he does?

Or do you wait until he says that no one else COULD love you.

Or that you are unloveable?
Do you leave when he says he likes women to be women?

Or do you wait until he says you are fat and unless you lose weight, he will divorce you?
Do you leave when he pushes you into the wall and then claims he lost control because you made him so jealous?

Or do you wait until you no longer go anywhere, for fear of making him jealous?
Do you leave when the abuse starts, as it so often does, in your pregnancy?

Or do you wait to see if he calms down after the birth?
Do you leave when your friends and family say you’ve changed since meeting him?

Or do you wait until you no longer see them?
Do you leave the first time he pressurises you into sex?

Or do you wait until it has become a nightly routine to just let him do what he wants because saying ‘no’ means he’ll create hell for the whole household?
Do you leave when he says he doesn’t want to live, if it means living without you?

Or do you wait until he has threatened or attempted to kill himself?
Do you wait until the children are older so as not to disrupt their lives?

Or do you wait until the children ARE older and are suffering the trauma of living in a house under siege?
Do you leave the first time he raises his voice/raises his fist/ makes you feel worthless?

Or do you accept his apology and his promise to change ?
Do you leave when you have doubts about the relationship?

Or do you ask friends and family who talk you out of it by saying that ALL marriages are difficult / you made your bed/ you need to make it work?
It’s so easy to tell someone to leave but so many situations aren’t all that clear cut.

When the abuse is *drip drip* it’s so easy to believe you’re overreacting. Abusers ALWAYS accuse you of overreacting, because it enables them to minimise THEIR abuse and blame YOU.

More from For later read

Operation Cupcake
Operation Cupcake
@PhillipsBarrie
Wow, Morgan McSweeney again, Rachel Riley, SFFN, Center for Countering Digital Hate, Imran Ahmed, JLM, BoD, Angela Eagle, Tracy-Ann Oberman, Lisa Nandy, Steve Reed, Jon Cruddas, Trevor Chinn, Martin Taylor, Lord Ian Austin and Mark Lewis. #LabourLeaks #StarmerOut 24 tweet🧵

Morgan McSweeney, Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, launched the organisation that now runs SFFN.
The CEO Imran Ahmed worked closely with a number of Labour figures involved in the campaign to remove Jeremy as leader.

Rachel Riley is listed as patron. https://t.co/nGY5QrwBD0


SFFN claims that it has been “a project of the Center For Countering Digital Hate” since 4 May 2020. The relationship between the two organisations, however, appears to date back far longer. And crucially, CCDH is linked to a number of figures on the Labour right. #LabourLeaks

Center for Countering Digital Hate registered at Companies House on 19 Oct 2018, the organisation’s only director was Morgan McSweeney – Labour leader Keir Starmer’s chief of staff. McSweeney was also the campaign manager for Liz Kendall’s leadership bid. #LabourLeaks #StarmerOut

Sir Keir - along with his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney - held his first meeting with the Jewish Labour Movement (JLM). Deliberately used the “anti-Semitism” crisis as a pretext to vilify and then expel a leading pro-Corbyn activist in Brighton and Hove
FOR LATER READ
The Real Diana Prince
The Real Diana Prince
@wqnder_wqman
Smoking gun.


https://t.co/r5xm608OD9


https://t.co/BzJxJ7bmSF


https://t.co/BMylBvog2m


https://t.co/c9lCbvv4NF
FOR LATER READ
Advertisement
Dani\xeblle Stotijn
Daniëlle Stotijn
@DDay35962863
If it doesn,t make sense...
something else is going on.....

#xrp
#xrpcommmunity

Expand your thinking

This thread is updated and can be approached from multiple perspectives.
That is how big Platform 2020 is
#TheGreatAwakeningWorldwide

Connect the dotes
FOR LATER READ , THREAD PLEASE
Christ is the Cure
Christ is the Cure
@Christ_the_Cure
My view on lent:

My biggest problem with lent is the public display of fasting which is contrary to scripture: Matthew 6:16-18

Just as well, overhearing discussions of humble brags, “oh man, this is so hard fasting from x” while displaying ashes on one’s forehead seems overtly contrary to scripture. Again, Matthew 6:16-18 is clear.

Additionally it has been my experience that repentance and fasting lose much of their substance for those practicing the tradition.

However....

We cannot oversimplify and call lent a “Roman Catholic invention” or a “pagan” practice given its presence, minimally the term, in the early church with people like Athanasius.

In the modern conception: Advent is to Christmas what lent is to Easter. While asceticism is removed and shallow tradition enters into the practice, this can happen in most everything.
FOR LATER READ
Rogier v Vlissingen
Rogier v Vlissingen
@vliscony
@jeffreyatucker In the end, it is all a natural consequence of a very human foible, namely that we all do everything we can to blame anybody or anything else for our problems, if we can get away with it. It's the reason why rulers start wars to squelch domestic dissent - macro and micro the same

The very notion of the germ theory of disease revolves around this and while it is good for selling medical interventions, treatments and pharmaceuticals, it is no good for either personal health, or public health in any way. We need to start looking at health on a holistic level

More of a systems approach to health would get us to see that the whole instinct to stamp out viruses, like the very counter-factual notion of "zero Covid," and other nonsense, are driven by this need to blame somebody or something else for our problems, so we can have our cake

and eat it too, i.e. we can pass the blame to others and go and kill them, be they bugs or other people (lockdowns???). The results are disastrous for health on both a personal and a public level, and we continue on a path of assured self-destruction. But times are changing, now.

Lifestyle Medicine @aclifemed provides the new paradigm, more of a systems approach to health, in which personal responsibility for our habits comes first, starting with nutrition. Immune systems become depressed by fatigue, stress, inner conflict, malnutrition and so on. Change
FOR LATER READ

You May Also Like

Jeannette Ng \u5433\u5fd7\u9e97
Jeannette Ng 吳志麗...
@jeannette_ng
So, you’re a writer and you’re worried about writing outside your immediate experiences and identities.

Here is the thread of practical advice for you.

EXAMINE YOUR MOTIVES. Why do you want to write this?

Are you trying to solve racism/sexism/colonialism with your work?

As writers we love stories about heroic writers whose work has changed the world. And as such we like to look to our own writing to solve societal problems.

And I understand this completely, not the least because I’ve felt the pull.

But if you’re looking to play saviour with your words, it is unlikely that you will do the marginalised people you are trying to save justice.

And I understand this very often comes from place of good intentions, but there is a reason that most of the moralising plays written by white abolitionists are deeply uncomfortable to read.

It is incredibly easy for works looking to play saviour to become patronising or traffic in simplistic stereotypes that ultimately hurt the people they are looking to rescue.
WRITING
Noah Smith
Noah Smith
@Noahpinion
1/People I know on the Right tend to be obsessed with the idea of "crimethink", taboos, and the (supposedly) oppressive, omnipresent enforcement of liberal cultural norms.

Why?

My new theory: A lot of it is guilt.

2/It's true that in some circles - the media, universities, many big corporations - liberal norms *are* enforced to some degree, and the enforcement has probably gotten stronger in recent years.

But I don't think this explains all of the Right's obsession.

3/The stereotype is that people on the Right tend to be more threat-sensitive. That would help explain the perception that liberal norm-enforcers are lurking everywhere, ready to pounce and anathematize anyone who makes a misstep.

But I don't think that's all of it either.

4/And of course, it's always fun - whether you're on the Right or the Left, or playing a video game, or whatever - to style yourself as the brave iconoclastic rebel fighting against the oppressive forces of blah blah blah.

But I don't think this is all of it, either.

5/The reason I think it's more than these things is that even *in private*, people on the Right express their "crimethink" ideas very gingerly and hesitantly.

I get the sense that they're not just afraid of external censure, but have also internalized liberal norms.
SOCIETY
Advertisement
Simon Wardley #EEA
Simon Wardley #EEA
@swardley
X : Our executive team is concerned that we need to up our game in order to out innovate Amazon.
Me : Do you map?
X : Yes
Me : Like this?
X : No. What's that?
Me : A map of a tea shop.


X : Why is that a map?
Me : Long story, all to do with how space has meaning. To keep it short, maps help people to focus on user needs, the components involved, to communicate missing components and scenario play ideas like staff becoming robots.


Me : They’re also good for measuring and managing capital flow, making investment decisions, removing bias and getting rid of duplication.
X : I don’t see how that helps with innovation?


Me : Well, innovation is a tricky word because we use it to describe many things. If you’re talking about differentiation with the adjacent unexplored then you’re experimenting in the “uncharted” space e.g. immortality with magic provided by the special custom built kettle.


X : That sounds like nonsense.
Me : A lot of what people think will be the next great innovation is nonsense. Actually, most of it is. That’s the nature of the uncharted space, it’s experimental, high risk and generally results in failure.
X : We need more reliable innovation.
TECH
STEALTH JEFF
STEALTH JEFF
@drawandstrike
So it's now October 10, 2018 and....Rod Rosenstein is STILL not fired.

He's STILL in charge of the Mueller investigation.

He's STILL refusing to hand over the McCabe memos.

He's STILL holding up the declassification of the #SpyGate documents & their release to the public.

I love a good cover story.......

The guy had a face-to-face with El Grande Trumpo himself on Air Force One just 2 days ago. Inside just about the most secure SCIF in the world.

And Trump came out of AF1 and gave ol' Rod a big thumbs up!

And so we're right back to 'that dirty rat Rosenstein!' 2 days later.

At this point it's clear some members of Congress are either in on this and helping the cover story or they haven't got a clue and are out in the cold.

Note the conflicting stories about 'Rosenstein cancelled meeting with Congress on Oct 11!"

First, rumors surfaced of a scheduled meeting on Oct. 11 between Rosenstein & members of Congress, and Rosenstein just cancelled it.
ALL
David Rothkopf
David Rothkopf
@djrothkopf
Pretending that voting for Trump or denying climate change or suggesting the solution to every problem is more guns is a legitimate point of view, worthy of respect is not "how America works." It is how it dies.

People in a free society are entitled to any point of view no matter how obviously wrong or outlandish or destructive provided they do not impose their views on others.

But suggesting that something ignorant or divorced from reality warrants the same kind of treatment in public debate as something based in fact or at least credible is absurd and when done on behalf of a society in public media or academic settings it is self-destructive.

We would not grant media coverage or much bandwidth at all to a group that argued that unicorns exist or that there was a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Yet views like denying climate change or basing policy decisions on sweeping, obvious lies, are just as unsound.

Somewhere, somehow, judgments must be made. Some behaviors are wrong and must be condemned. Someone must challenge lies and demand facts. Coddling people who embrace idiocies does not help them no matter how loudly they demand to be coddled.
POLITICS