the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to [email protected]
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
view the rest of the comments
I mean I won't go so far as to say she has no valid needs/concerns here, but like, they're on different levels. One could have severe health complications if their vigilance slips, the other wants to eat indoors at restaurants and host parties. I get that there are serious legitimate social needs people have, but I don't think these are equally important.
The only remotely "unreasonable" thing they mention on his side is "wearing a mask outdoors when nobody is around", which doesn't affect anyone but himself or prevent any socializing... You can't just "compromise" on infection-prevention measures, because you don't get half as sick if you get covid from dining in at a restaurant when it's not very busy vs when it's busy, you just get sick either way and risk major complications. And the fact that it's being published in a national publication definitely makes it feel worse, to me anyhow.
This seems like an extreme minimization and dismissal of mental health to say it can't have severe health complications.
I hoped it was clear that wasn't what I was saying. Of course mental health issues can be a serious health concern with serious complications and consequences. But this writer doesn't present it in those terms, and I would say that at least in this specific case, she isn't experiencing anything with a risk of severe health issues. She wants a return to a normalcy that she knows he can't give without severe risk of harm.
They're about to have a child.
Do you think she will be able to raise a well-adjusted child if that child can only ever interact with other children through a screen or outdoors? Her husband's need necessitate home-schooling or remote learning, and severely restrict the child's opportunities for socialization.
Her husband's needs and the needs of their future child are on a collision course right now. I consider that a severe complication.
again, not how the author frames it at all, though certainly possible for that to be an issue in the abstract. But I think it is reasonable to expect, if that were the main issue, it might be mentioned in the article, whatsoever
but in the article, it is implied the child has already been born, 1-2 years ago, and yet the author explicitly frames the conflict here in terms of her desire to return to normal. There is no mention of homeschooling or the child at all besides the pregnancy and that he went along on the vacation discussed in the last paragraph. I don't think those would be unreasonable concerns, but they are your concerns, not those of the author. For all we know they've already worked out an amenable solution to the kid's schooling and it isn't a source of conflict at all.
Their child would probably appreciate a dad who's healthy and alive, and doesn't have to quarantine from them
Or being healthy and alive themselves. Covid can get kids too.
Can't help but notice that no one's going to bat in these threads for the mental health of those of us who lost a parent to COVID
I mean I think the kid would have a tougher time at life if they were to find out that their immunocompromised dad were to die because their mom valued treats and trips to Dubai over the health of her husband.
There's lots of ways to modify the way you socialize (which she even goes over in the article) to accommodate for an immunocompromised spouse. If she isn't willing to keep doing it for whatever reason that's a separate problem.
It doesn't seem like a separate problem. It seems like the modifications are not sufficient to meet her needs.
Did you write this article or what?
lol