Tuesday's Most Active Threads

Today's post will be a bit briefer than normal because I have another commitment to which I must attend. The two most active threads yesterday were both covered in yesterday's blog post. So, I will skip them today and move on to the next most active thread which was titled, "Youngkin is a book banner" and posted in the "Metropolitan DC Local Politics" forum. The original poster of the thread embedded a tweet describing Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin's appearance on a CNN town hall. According to the tweet, Youngkin said that he would have signed HB 1448 had the VA Senate not blocked the bill. Also according to the tweet, that bill would have allowed Youngkin to ban books that he deemed offensive. Hence, the original poster's description of Youngkin as a book banner. I Googled "HB 1448" myself to see what the bill is all about. It is only one short paragraph in length and calls for the creation model policies dealing with the selection and removal of books from public school libraries. That is a few steps removed from giving Youngkin the power to ban books, so the tweet clearly overstates things. This highlights an ongoing trend in the local politics forum in which a left-leaning poster constantly posts anti-Youngkin posts, often engaging in extreme exaggeration if not outright misinformation. The poster's style mimics much of that to which we have become accustomed to seeing from right-wingers. Personally, I think Youngkin's actions lend themselves to significant justifiable criticism, leaving no need for hyperbole or misstatements and I wish this poster would rein himself in a bit.

Next was a thread posted in the "Private/Independent Schools" forum titled, "HATE OUR BIG 3 too late to leave?" The original poster explains that she has two children at a "Big 3" private school, one of whom is a rising senior and the other "older than 9th". Something that the original poster will not detail has caused her to become disenchanted with the school. She realizes that it is too late to withdraw the rising senior, but wonders about the younger child. She feels that too much of their savings has been invested in the school and the child wants to remain there. Those responding argue that the interests of the kids are most important and, as long as they are happy, should remain at the school. The original poster responded fairly quickly to acknowledge the advice and agree with it. Subsequent to that, however, the thread turned acrimonious. Several posters believe that they recognize the original poster from other threads and, hence, are aware of the issue that caused her to become upset and are able to identify the school. As such, they are offended by the thread's title and post critically about the original poster. This led to several pages of posters attacking the original poster. Frankly, I'm surprised the original poster has not asked that the thread be removed or locked. It could have been satisfactorily concluded on page 1 and I am skeptical that the following eleven pages of bashing helped with her issue.

Next was a thread titled, "Why are some people so bothered by unmedicated birth?" and posted in the "Expectant and Postpartum Moms" forum. The original poster is interested in why women who desire as few medical interventions into giving birth are often seen as self-righteous or naively idealistic. The first poster to respond puts things fairly simply by saying that she sometimes views women as being more concerned about the birth experience than the health of the baby and it is normal to be concerned about that. On the other hand, posters argue that unmedicated births are actually better for the baby and that nobody wants to experience pain, but they do it for the health of the baby. Another poster points out that such individuals are often viewed as self-righteous because they are indeed self-righteous about it. Fairly quickly this thread devolved into an argument over medicated vs unmedicated childbirth, a topic that has been repeatedly debated on DCUM. For those new to the topic, it may be interesting, but for those us of who have seen the same arguments repeated for years, there is really nothing new.

The final thread at which I'll look today was posted in the "Adult Children" forum. Titled, "Taking adult child’s boyfriend on vacation - sleeping arrangement???", the original poster explains that her family of five, including a 21 year old daughter, will be taking the daughter's boyfriend on vacation with them. They plan to have two hotel rooms and asks whether her daughter and daughter's boyfriend should get one room or if the rooms should be segregated by gender. Those responding basically divide into three camps. One group argues that the daughter and her boyfriend are adults and deserve their own room. A second group believes that segregated rooms are better. The third group thinks that the two-room limitation is the problem and that a more expansive arrangement would be preferable. Several posters also suggested that the original poster simply ask her daughter what she preferred. The original poster later followed up to respond to many of the concerns expressed in earlier posts. The new information caused some poster's to rethink their initial postions, but was not sufficient to create any sort of consensus. Many posters are mystified by the original poster's contention that her family's habit is to crowd together in a single hotel room and that having two rooms will be especially spacious for them. Ultimately, however, many posters stick with their insistance that three rooms would be the best solution.