Open mike 16/02/2022

Written By: - Date published: 6:00 am, February 16th, 2022 - 147 comments
Categories: open mike - Tags:


Open mike is your post.

For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.

The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).

Step up to the mike …

147 comments on “Open mike 16/02/2022 ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. observer 1
    16 February 2022 at 7:41 am

    Well done to Parliament for passing the ban on "conversion therapy". And credit where it's due, to those National and ACT MPs who had previously expressed misgivings but voted for it in the end. 122-8 is a stonking result.

    Interviewed this morning on TVNZ's Breakfast (not online yet), Christopher Luxon made clear he voted for the ban (good) but then squirmed when asked about the 8 Nats who voted against the bill.

    He claimed MPs in other parties opposed the bill too. The interviewer (McClean) did not challenge this assertion. He should have.

    • I Feel Love 1.1
      16 February 2022 at 8:25 am

      Great stuff.

    • dv 1.2
      16 February 2022 at 8:26 am

      http://norightturn.blogspot.com

      So who were the eight? Simon Bridges, Simeon Brown, Melissa Lee, Todd McClay, Simon O'Connor, Chris Penk, Michael Woodhouse and Shane Reti. None of them bothered to speak to explain their hate – too ashamed, I guess

      • observer 1.2.1
        16 February 2022 at 8:31 am

        Yes, we know who the Nat MPs are, their votes are on the record.

        My point was that Luxon claimed there were other MPs who didn't vote against, but secretly were.

        We can speculate, of course (a few Labour and ACT MPs could be possible). But it's a claim that should be backed up with evidence. Otherwise it's just a diversion smear on all MPs from all other parties.

        • dv 1.2.1.1
          16 February 2022 at 8:35 am

          Sorry, wasn't challenging the point.

          • observer 1.2.1.1.1
            16 February 2022 at 8:38 am

            Cool, I realize that.

            Michael Woodhouse is the only one that is a bit surprising. The others are predictable conservatives (even though Reti is quite sensible on Covid and other matters).

      • Molly 1.2.2
        16 February 2022 at 10:20 am

        "None of them bothered to speak to explain their hate – too ashamed, I guess"

        It's not 'hate' that keeps me from your own self-congratulation, it's concern.

        I think – as shown in other countries where similar legislation has been passed – that due to the vague wording, and lack of separation between same sex orientation and gender identity 'conversion' therapy, we will see a tendency toward the affirmation only model in NZ. A conversion therapy of its own, which also creates harm.

        But call it 'hate' if that makes you feel better.

        • francesca 1.2.2.1
          16 February 2022 at 11:17 am

          Actually Molly , it may be possible to apply this law as a protection against those transwomen who badger lesbians for sex using their fully functional "female" penises.

          In effect these biological males attempt to convert lesbians from their natural sexual preferences

          • weston 1.2.2.1.1
            16 February 2022 at 11:34 am

            Geez francesca alls fair in love an war right ? You make it sound like there are hoards of these transgender males out harassing poor "natural " lesbians .Whats your actual experience ?

            • francesca 1.2.2.1.1.1
              16 February 2022 at 1:00 pm

              The BBC did a doco about it Weston .Not a lesbian , just recognise their right to same sex attraction without being vilified as bigots.

            • Molly 1.2.2.1.1.2
              16 February 2022 at 1:10 pm

              Stonewall (remember them, campaigning for homosexual rights in the UK in the 80's), has a CEO, Nancy Kelley that considers same sex orientation to be a form of societal prejudice.

              The article itself includes quotes from a statement released by Stonewall chief executive Nancy Kelley, in which she says:

              “If you find that when dating, you are writing off entire groups of people, like people of colour, fat people, disabled people or trans people, then it’s worth considering how societal prejudices may have shaped your attractions.”

              This is more explicit than previous statements. In the past Kelley has claimed that those who recognise the importance of biological sex are as morally reprehensible as those who hate Jewish people. It seems Kelley also believes homosexuality is akin to racism. Given this, one wonders on what basis Stonewall can claim to advocate for homosexuals?"

              Yes. The organisation that successfully advocated the repeal of Section 28, now considers those with a same sex preference (and I assume opposite sex preference) possess those preferences because of "societal prejudice."

              You can find many examples online on the coaching and grooming of (mainly lesbians) to accept males into their sexual partners pool.

              Ah, conversion therapy. So glad it's been banned.

            • CAnker the pig fucker 1.2.2.1.1.3
              16 February 2022 at 5:02 pm

              https://freespeech.buzzsprout.com/370355/9954982-special-report-interview-with-the-public-service-advisor-censored-for-using-the-term-male-bodied

              You are possibly not going to listen to the podcast Weston. So just to sumarize a public servant was attending a training run by Inisde Outabout inclusivity at her workplace.

              The public servant bravely and within context pointed out that her sister was lesbian and surely she shouldn't be expected to have a sex partner who was male bodied. The tutor said, we don't use that term now. The public servant then got a letter from the Deputy CE chastising her for using this term and saying the tutor and other employees found her use of the word male bodied offensive. So challenging the rights of lesbians to not to have sex with male bodied trans women, gets you a letter from your boss. Trans women must not be referred to as male bodied. Make of that what you will.

              The ridiculous thing is it took a lot of bravery for the woman to stand up at her work meeting and say this and to assert her freedom of speech to her Boss

              • weston …
                21 February 2022 at 8:20 pm

                Hi ankor only just found your reply sorry .I did listen to the podcast golly dosnt sound like a very nice place to work for the particular public servant !orwelian is a fitting description .Have to confess i find all this stuff confusing , in the times ive been involved with lesbians there was just lesbians an gays an straights more or less and amongst the lesbians i know and count as friends theyve mostly settled down now and as far as i know are much less idiologically driven .In their time though they could scaresly have been thought of as reqiring protection and were very strong women in their own right heck one of them drove a tractor into town to get her groceries and on occasion fired shots over my head to let me know i was tresspassing { she mustve thought i was thinking of doing so cause i was walking on a private path at the time !}

                • CAnker the pig fucker …
                  22 February 2022 at 11:14 am

                  Hi Weston, appreciate you took the time to listen to the podcast.

                  It is truly Orwelian. I have recently read 1984 in which the term newspeak was used whcih is exactly what is happening here.

                  Things have changed a lot over the last five or 10 years. How I see it is the universities are teaching young people gender ideology and if you don't accept it, it become very problematic. There have been many posts on this site about what is happening. If you are interested in finding out more about gender ideology let me know and I'll post some links.

            • weka 1.2.2.1.1.4
              18 February 2022 at 11:13 am

              Geez francesca alls fair in love an war right ? You make it sound like there are hoards of these transgender males out harassing poor "natural " lesbians .Whats your actual experience ?

              All's fair in love and war? Let's make it plain then. Do you believe that lesbians should date male bodied people despite being only attracted to female bodies?

              • weston …
                21 February 2022 at 6:03 pm

                Sorry for the delay replying weka my reply tab only works about one time out of five ! Should is not a word i would use in this context and why would i agree with such a silly statement ?

                Lesbianism wasnt invented yesterday weka and lesbians are just human beings after all subject to pretty much all the same relationship issues as we all are whether we are seeking long term relationships or a one night stand .

                I queried francesca,s statement which suggested all these transgender males were harrassing lesbians , turns out she had whatched somthing produced by BBC .Are you saying i shoudnt have asked ?

          • Molly 1.2.2.1.2
            16 February 2022 at 11:44 am

            Silver lining it would be. But I think unlikely.

            As a non-conforming Asperger's teenager, I would have been a prime candidate for ROGD if I had the access to the internet that we have now. Discomfort with puberty and a sense of not being naturally feminine, and inquisitive for answers would have me prepped and ready for gender ideology. I don't honestly know what choice I would have made.

            However, I do know that the prevalence of autistic, and non-conforming children in the transgender community deserves some scrutiny and research. We may do irreparable harm to many, if the conversion therapy bill results in 'affirmation only' models of therapy and counselling. There is some indication that that is already occurring in NZ.

            The contradiction of providing medical interventions for a condition no longer considered medical is without precedent as far as I know.

            It strikes me that it is the Gender Critical that really don't have a problem with self expression and identity exploration. This has been ignored when discussing this issue that perpetuates gender stereotypes. It is also quite fascinating to see recent criticisms of Gender Critical Feminists being the ones to perpetuate gender stereotypes. I think this is indicative of a movement that avoids scrutiny and casts aspersions. We will see how they get on.

            We also know that while the promotion and celebration is public and uplifting, the isolation and lack of support for detransitioners is invisible. This has an effect on both transition and detransition.

            https://youtu.be/T9UYDyqkH2E

    • Chris T 1.3
      16 February 2022 at 8:35 am

      As long as it is clearly worded only "sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression" it seems an odd thing to vote against.

      Even if they are religious.

    • observer 1.4
      16 February 2022 at 8:52 am

      Self-correction: 112 votes for, not 122.

    • Molly 1.5
      16 February 2022 at 10:12 am

      Badly done to Parliament for passing the badly worded piece of legislation that relied on people's abhorrence of gay conversion therapy to avoid scrutiny.

      Despite not showing evidence of this particular practice being a concern in present-day New Zealand, this practice was deemed so harmful that the passing of this legislation (along with others) was considered a necessity. Despite submissions against, and requests for clarity. Despite concerns that it is not specified that effective therapy may result in a resolution of gender dysphoria. Despite the fact that this legislation in other countries had resulted in the 'affirmation only' model being practiced, a conversion therapy of its own, and so, with consequent harms. Despite the now familiar practice of including gender identity in a discussion about sexual orientation, and conflating the two.

      Oh, the bigots must of course be ignored.

      Strangely enough, the bigoted Equality and Human Rights Commission in the UK, recently issued a statement regarding very similar legislation for the Scottish government:

      https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/consultation-response-banning-conversion-therapy-26-january-2022.docx

      Before addressing the specific consultation questions, we have some general comments about the Government’s proposals and the consultation approach. We are supportive of measures to end harmful conversion therapy practices, but the likely significant and wide-ranging implications of the Government’s proposals for a legislative ban for criminal and civil justice, clinicians and therapists, families and religious organisations require careful and detailed consideration. The consultation document contains no clear definition of what will amount to “conversion therapy” caught by its proposals, nor of the meaning of “transgender” – a term which has no clear legal meaning, is potentially wider than the concept of gender reassignment in current UK law, and is understood by different people in different ways.

      Nor does the consultation address the possible need to consider a differentiated approach in relation to sexual orientation and being transgender so as to ensure, in particular, that clinicians and therapists are not prohibited from providing appropriate care and support for individuals with gender dysphoria. Given the documented lack of evidence about conversion therapy in relation to being transgender, recent attention and litigation on the implications of medical and surgical transition, and the ongoing NHS-commissioned independent review of gender identity services for children and young people led by Dr Hilary Cass OBE, we consider that these matters require further careful and detailed consideration before legislative proposals are finalised and the implications of them can be fully understood.

      Same bigoted areas of concern. Oh, well.

      Remember this day years hence, when you wonder how much harm resulted from such good intentions, when all you were trying to do was be kind.

      • Rosemary McDonald 1.5.1
        16 February 2022 at 10:40 am

        The consultation document contains no clear definition of …

        Of course not. Nothing can be clearly defined anymore. Anything means whatever the individual wants it to mean.

        Only a bigot expects actual definition. Actual clarity of meaning. Actual reality. Actual science. Actual critical thinking and perhaps a passing thought about long term (unintended) adverse effects.

        We need to get with the program Molly…get on board that feels good train…

        Grim day indeed.

        • Molly 1.5.1.1
          16 February 2022 at 10:54 am

          (I think I'll wait for the grown up's train, wink.)

          https://youtu.be/x1rEZ9TzD34?t=12

          • Ad 1.5.1.1.1
            16 February 2022 at 11:11 am

            With the passage of this bill and the Births Deaths and Marriage Bill, wasn't your essential female nature supposed to have evaporated along with your actual existence by now?

            Where's a parliamentary review when you need one?

            • francesca 1.5.1.1.1.1
              16 February 2022 at 11:20 am

              No Ad , just our sex based right to have privacy and segregation from male bodies once in a while

            • Molly 1.5.1.1.1.2
              16 February 2022 at 11:29 am

              Strangely enough Ad. Despite the slogans, and words on a piece of paper passed by parliament, I do still know what it is to be a woman, and the consequences of that reality.

              "With the passage of this bill and the Births Deaths and Marriage Bill, wasn't your essential female nature supposed to have evaporated along with your actual existence by now?"

              You've made this comment in various ways a couple of times now. It seems to be a projection of the external validation needed by some who claim they are being denied the right to exist. That's not me.

              I still have objections to the appropriation of words and language that accurately describe being a woman or female. But existence is not dependent on other's misuse of those terms.

              Don’t worry. You’ve earned your ticket …get on board.

      • CAnker the pig fucker 1.5.2
        16 February 2022 at 5:14 pm

        Thank you Molly for articulating why some of us have concerns with this bill.

        Currently children are being taught at school at a young age that it is possible to be born in the wrong body (no it isn't) and that there are many genders (upwards of 70 are quoted). Many kids are gender non conforming. A close relative of mine was and she grew up to be gay, this is what the research supports. She had the freedom to be a tom boy and eventually realized she was gay, in her late teens.

        Now days these kids are being encourged to think they are trans. This is the beginning to social and medical transition. These kids are being given puberty blockers and cross sex hormones and the changes these cause to their bodies can not be rolled back to easily. So young women are being left with male sound voices, facial hair and Adams Apples (in some cases). So are using breast binders and some are having double masectomies and hysterectomies by the age of 19 years. this kids are left with irreversible damage. There are currently 25.000 such detransitioners on Reddit.

        The Bill will mean any parent or health professional that tries to stop the path of medical transition could be considered offering a conversion practice. Rainbow Youth and their allies only want affirmation therapy for these vulnerable teans who are not old enough to consent to life altering surgery.

        If you read Counting Ourselves, it is very clear that the transgender people in this survey felt they experienced conversion practice from a range of health professionals.

        There is very little evidence that health professionals use what is usually considered converstion practices. Certainly no ethical ones do. So the people in this survey I think consider anything other that affirmation and confirmation of the gender identity as conversion therapy.

        This is why this bill is so problematic.

        • Molly 1.5.2.1
          16 February 2022 at 5:21 pm

          "The Bill will mean any parent or health professional that tries to stop the path of medical transition could be considered offering a conversion practice. "

          I hope that is not the case. What is true, is that the legislation allows for interpretation where this may result. No clarification edits were made before passing.

          The Counting Ourselves publication is worth a critical read. The self validation of the survey takers, has no standard by which to judge credibility or bias.

          The dearth of robust data is commonplace on this issue, and its many impacts.

    • Blade 1.6
      16 February 2022 at 11:01 am

      ''The interviewer (McClean) did not challenge this assertion. He should have.''

      I agree, although I doubt National MPs who voted against the bill were all religious or anti gay.

      ''Luxon claimed MPs in other parties opposed the bill too .''

      I would say that's correct, given the high percentage of Maori and Island MPs in the Labour Party. No doubt walking past the political corpse of Louisa Wall cleared the sinuses and focused the mind when it came time to vote.

      Strange when you think Faʻafafines are a part of Polynesian life.

    • Drowsy M. Kram 1.7
      16 February 2022 at 11:05 am

      Thanks observer – great to see such a large majority of MPs showing some progressive common sense.

      Not as big a deal as voting rights for women (20 ayes, 18 nays), homosexual law reform (49 ayes, 44 nays), or even civil unions and same-sex marriage legislation (77 ayes, 44 nays), but still well worth celebrating as another nail in the coffin of bigotry, imho.

      • Molly 1.7.1
        16 February 2022 at 11:23 am

        "…but nevertheless worth celebrating as another nail in the coffin of bigotry, imho."

        Such nuance, detail and understanding.

        And yet, it could have been excellent legislation (although probably still unnecessary) if they had just addressed the concerns put forward by those 'bigots'. What was the prevalence of conversion therapy in NZ in 2021? Is there a difference between gay conversion therapy, and appropriate therapy for gender dysphoria that explores each individual's needs, and may result in a reconciliation between someone's biological sex and their gender identity? How do we ensure that the 'affirmation only' model for gender identity is not the result for therapists, counsellors, which in itself can be shown to be a type of conversion therapy?

        But at least we did have it explained particularly ambiguously, by the Minister. (Apologies for being unable to find the sound recording where he does exceptionally well at accurately portraying the undefined nature of what exactly is being converted, and how that will be determined. It was a masterclass in bumbling obfuscation) But only 'bigots' are concerned on those points.

        Robust discussion…well, it was good while it lasted.

        • Drowsy M. Kram 1.7.1.1
          16 February 2022 at 12:26 pm

          Molly, I was replying to observer @1; you were the first person (@1.5) to introduce "bigots" and "bigoted" into this "robust discussion." I can't help feeling differently to you about this legislation, nor (imho) will any amount of robust discussion shift our respective views. Let’s agree to disagree.

          • Molly 1.7.1.1.1
            16 February 2022 at 12:45 pm

            Talk about a continuation of redirect from relevant content.

            I have no concern with being called a 'bigot' or 'transphobic' on this issue. I have seen how and when this is deployed, and have no problem being included with those who have tried to raise concerns about the failure of such legislation to define terms and address unintended impacts and have been labelled in such a way.

            I have also been told that my understanding of the words 'woman' and 'female' are exclusionary. Well, the misuse and appropriation of language is a deliberate feature here. The fact that 'bigot' is used nonsensically is par for the course.

            "What was the prevalence of conversion therapy in NZ in 2021? Is there a difference between gay conversion therapy, and appropriate therapy for gender dysphoria that explores each individual's needs, and may result in a reconciliation between someone's biological sex and their gender identity? How do we ensure that the 'affirmation only' model for gender identity is not the result for therapists, counsellors, which in itself can be shown to be a type of conversion therapy?"

            Any thoughts on the above? Or on the concerns raised by the EHRC on similar points in the Conversion Therapy Bill in the Scottish government?

            No?

            Well, we may disagree, but I contend that our disagreement comes from a complete failure on your part to do investigation and look deeper.

            My evidence for this is your failure to even address those concerns listed above, and redirect to the most mundane of assumptions.

            • Drowsy M. Kram 1.7.1.1.1.1
              16 February 2022 at 1:37 pm

              Well, we may disagree, but I contend that our disagreement comes from a complete failure on your part to do investigation and look deeper.

              We most certainly do disagree, and I'm trying not to be disagreeable about that. Since my reply @1.7 to observer seems to have riled you so, and since you have judged my considered and deeply held views to derive from a complete failure on my part, that leaves me nowhere to go except to express my genuine disappointment.

              • Molly …
                16 February 2022 at 2:00 pm

                Once again, failure to address concerns,

                Yes, I made comment on your direct comment to observer, because I will not stand quietly by watching the complacency pass without comment.

                The issues of concern are clearly stated, and always, always avoided.

                Your disappointment is a manipulation, rather than engagement. I don't respond to such with capitulation, perhaps it works with you.

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  16 February 2022 at 2:22 pm

                  Your disappointment is a manipulation…

                  My disappointment is genuine – "manipulation" is a misperception.

                  "Complacency", "failure" "failure" "failure", "manipulation" – no thanks.

                  I don't respond to such with capitulation…

                  None of my comments in this thread were made to elicit "capitulation" – again that's a misperception, imho. I don't need anyone's capitulation. As observer observed @1: "122-8 is a stonking result."

                  • Molly …
                    16 February 2022 at 2:38 pm

                    I respond to you in the hope that a discussion will ensue, about the concerns raised.

                    I don't use my emotive reaction to your comments as points worthy of expression. I consider it manipulation, I avoid the same when parenting. My comments to you are not unique in that regard.

                    I, however, persist in asking for discussion on the points raised.

                    But I understand the avoidance. There have been repeated examples of this on this topic. What is one more?

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      16 February 2022 at 4:04 pm

                      I respond to you in the hope that a discussion will ensue, about the concerns raised.

                      You and others have raised concerns. Some of these concerns I share to a greater or lesser extent. I have my own concerns. We have discussed this before, and in some of my comments I've provided a small amount of personal information as to where I'm coming from, but generally it seems that the more we correspond, the more heated the discussion becomes (like now), such that there is nothing to be gained by continuing – we disagree.

                      On balance, I support the legislation that has just been voted into law (see @1 and @1.7). The reasons underpinning my support relate mostly to personal experiences that I won't detail on this blog. If it turns out that the outcomes of that legislation are, on balance, negative for NZers, then trust me that I won't be part of a "see no evil, hear no evil" whitewash to cover up those negative outcomes.

                    • Molly …
                      16 February 2022 at 4:16 pm

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      "You and others have raised concerns. Some of these concerns I share to a greater or lesser extent. I have my own concerns. We have discussed this before, and in some of my comments I've provided a small amount of personal information as to where I'm coming from, but generally it seems that the more we correspond, the more heated the discussion becomes (like now), such that there is nothing to be gained by continuing – we disagree."

                      We have indeed discussed this before, and looking back on your link it is more of the same. No real addressing of content, just reiteration of perspective and feelings.

                      This discussion might feel heated for you, but that is not a view shared by me. I'm persistent in asking for a discussion of the issues, and not moved from this by your personal feelings.

                      "On balance, I support the legislation that has just been voted into law (see @1 and @1.7). The reasons underpinning my support relate in large part to personal experiences that I won't detail on this blog."

                      That's convenient. A possibility of actual discussion subverted once again.

                      "If it turns out that the outcomes of that legislation are, on balance, negative for NZers, then trust me that I won't be part of a "see no evil, hear no evil" whitewash to cover up those negative outcomes."

                      Yes, using a considered and precautionary approach that prevents harm occurring is such an outdated concept. I'm less reassured than you that any consequent harms for individuals won't have to number in the thousands before it gets addressed.

                      You have spent a considerable amount of time and words to contribute neither critique or justification.

                      Then given yourself permission to not provide any.

                      This is a pattern.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      16 February 2022 at 4:24 pm

                      That's convenient.

                      "Convenient" is your word. It wasn't, isn’t, and your concerns are moving me less and less with every comment – nonetheless I will continue to share some of them. Carry on.

                    • Molly …
                      16 February 2022 at 4:32 pm

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      I see you have participated in some discussion below with Rosemary.

                      I didn't aim to 'move' you with my concerns, I hoped to discuss them, and perhaps be persuaded that they were unwarranted. I'll have to go elsewhere for that as you say your points on this are unable to be articulated on this blog.

                      Well done, for at least making a start down below.

                      I'll concede that Rosemary has a more successful approach to drawing you out, and will read with interest what transpires.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      16 February 2022 at 5:31 pm

                      Molly, not interested in persuading you that your concerns are unwarranted – on the contrary, I think that some are warranted, to various degrees. We each have views and concerns that are informed by personal experiences and other information; my personal experiences are the single most important reason that I'm pleased this legislation has been passed, and (in this particular instance) I can't help how I feel.

                      Any and all negative outcomes will be regrettable, and if negative outcomes are actually as numerous and/or severe as some believe then NZ's legislation may be modified or repealed. Time will tell.

                    • Molly …
                      17 February 2022 at 9:54 am

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      "Molly, not interested in persuading you that your concerns are unwarranted – on the contrary, I think that some are warranted, to various degrees. We each have views and concerns that are informed by personal experiences and other information; my personal experiences are the single most important reason that I'm pleased this legislation has been passed, and (in this particular instance) I can't help how I feel."

                      Fair enough. But why engage at all if you are not prepared to discuss another perspective? I'm willing to have my ideas and perspectives challenged and be informed, but to do that I first have to articulate them and expose them for critique.

                      "…my personal experiences are the single most important reason that I'm pleased this legislation has been passed,…"

                      Once again, fair enough. But if you are unwilling to give that perspective, then don't engage.

                      My pseudonym comes from the Molly Whuppy story that used to be on Sunday mornings on 1ZB, and the phrase that leaps to mind is "Oh, if you could see what I see….". Said from inside a sack that was pitch dark.

                      Women on TS talking on various aspects of the legislation impacts have revealed sustained familial sexual abuse, personal experience of sexual attacks and other personal experiences not because they enjoy the reveal of past trauma, but in an effort to bring understanding.

                      Coy referrals to personal experiences, to my mind, is a dishonest method of engagement. Either keep those experiences and thoughts private, and enter the discussion regardless, or don't enter it at all. If you don't recognise this approach as manipulative in any way, then on this, we disagree.

                      The perspective you refer to – but don't articulate – may be of immense value in improving the discussion. But we will never know.

                      I see you have redirected once again on Rosemary's thread.

                      No more to say on how well you have done there.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      17 February 2022 at 10:48 am

                      Once again, fair enough. But if you are unwilling to give that perspective, then don't engage.

                      Thanks Molly, that's good advice. I've avoided replying to your comments for a few months now, and my attempt (@1.7.1.1) to disengage was a momentary lapse on my part. Won't happen again.

                    • Molly …
                      17 February 2022 at 11:57 am

                      @Drowsy M. Kram

                      Since you contribute nothing of substance, that's probably for the best.

                      Spend that energy talking with others about how mean some people on TS are, expecting discourse rather than taking note of your private feelings.

              • Rosemary McDonald …
                16 February 2022 at 2:01 pm

                ….deeply held views… Can I assume that you do truly believe that the appropriate way to manage gender dysphoria is with lifelong powerful drugs and surgery to amputate or modify healthy body parts?

                And that talking therapies that help a (usually quite young) person to accept the body they are born with and learn that it is perfectly ok to have a different gender is wrong and evil and should be criminalized?

                Asking for a friend.

                • Drowsy M. Kram …
                  16 February 2022 at 3:01 pm

                  Manipulation 'cuts' both ways, imho. Did you by any chance help to write the question for the 2009 NZ child discipline referendum?

                  Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?

                  Asking for a friend wink

                  My immediate answers to your very even-handed questions were going to be 'Never', and 'Of course not', but, on reflection, 'Case by case' for Q.1, and for Q.2 'It should be an individual's (even if quite young) right to have an input into decisions about what 'therapies' they are subjected to.'

                  It's appropriate for our government and/or health services to determine what therapies are medically acceptible/justifiable, and those determinations should be based on data relating to treatment outcomes. Those who are of the view that it never hurts to 'talk' must have led charmed lives indeed.

                  • Rosemary McDonald …
                    16 February 2022 at 4:22 pm

                    See. That wasn't that difficult was it? This is almost a discussion.

                    It's appropriate for our government and/or health services to determine what therapies are medically acceptible/justifiable,

                    Hmmm…do you really expect me, of Misery/Mystery/Miserly of Health fame, to accept that? Of course the Ministry is keeping up with the trend… but clearly medical science left the building when this Advisory was written, because some fool seems to think that sex is "assigned" at birth rather than being a biological fact that was observed and noted by a health professional.

                    And while this is a very wordy Advisory…it details no therapy other than ….

                    Gender affirming health care, including surgical procedures such as those listed below, are the responsibility of DHBs. Patients seeking these procedures should be referred to their local DHB provider:

                    • feminising breast augmentation
                    • masculinising chest reconstruction
                    • hysterectomy (removal of the uterus)
                    • salpingo-oophorectomy (removal of ovaries and fallopian tubes)
                    • orchidectomy (removal of testicles)
                    • facial feminisation
                    • laryngeal shave (reducing the size of the Adam’s apple).

                    And the government…who voted to allow people to, on a whim, change the sex on their birth certificate even though 'changing sex', in human beings is a scientific impossibility? You seriously think the disparate bunch of numpties who warm the Seats can be trusted with such important decisions? These are the people who persist in confusing sex with gender.

                    And the data? Where is the data? Its very complicated…but you'd hope that when it came to giving pre- teens drugs with unknown long term side effects the precautionary principle would prevail. First do no harm and all that.

                    • Molly …
                      16 February 2022 at 4:46 pm

                      Yes, the Ministry have a wonderful surgical and budget capacity for treating a non-medical condition with… medical interventions.

                      One that we can thank the Labour party for increasing:

                      We’re helping trans people to access the care they need. To help reduce wait times for gender affirming surgery, we lifted the cap on the number of publicly funded surgeries and increased funding for the service, supporting the mental health of our trans whānau.
                      Link to Labour bragging:
                      https://www.labour.org.nz/rainbow

                      Some questions:

                      Can a female request breast augmentation if she identifies as female – or is that considered cosmetic surgery and not covered? What about if she identifies as non-binary? Is it possible to access breast augmentation then? Or is it only available to males? In which case, isn't that discriminatory?

                      How has it been determined that the mental wellbeing of breast cancer patients who have asked for both breasts to be removed instead of one, is considered non-medically justified, but the removal of two healthy breasts is considered necessary?

                      How are medical interventions for young people that will reduce sexual sensation, intimacy and/or enjoyment, may impact on maturity and physiological changes that are of benefit, and will sterilise many considered a suitable treatment for an apparently non-medical problem?

                      What is the difference between a culture that promotes and implements surgeries such as those on offer, and a culture that still performs FGM? One is performed in a pristine surgery, but the effects are the same.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      16 February 2022 at 5:06 pm

                      As the implications sink in, maybe there'll be a huge public backlash over this legislation, even greater than that given form by the anti-mandate protesters & assorted hangers-on? Time these uppity self-important pollies and experts got a dose of reality – hang 'em high!!

                      You're not the boss of me now… Gawd save us.

      • Blade 1.7.2
        16 February 2022 at 11:31 am

        That bigotry would still be with us, if at the time, those suggested law reforms you mention were put to a public referendum.

        But as this Labour government is showing with Three Waters and handling the protesters -why let democracy stand in the way of a good thing?

    • McFlock 1.8
      16 February 2022 at 2:23 pm

      yeah, good to see.

  2. Blazer 2
    16 February 2022 at 8:15 am

    I guess it's not really an issue these days for people who have stable living situations.

    'New Zealand needs to stop talking about a housing crisis and accept the situation is catastrophic, the Salvation Army says.'

    ' “Housing is pivotal to other social issues. If we can’t get warm, safe, affordable housing for Kiwis it’s going to impact on other social issues we’re seeing now and going to see more of as the Covid tail drags on.”

    Salvation Army: It's a housing catastrophe, not crisis | Stuff.co.nz

  3. Tony Veitch (not etc.) 3
    16 February 2022 at 9:53 am

    From the farcical (the Wellington protest) to the irrelevant:

    Andrew Windsor settles out of court (for an undisclosed sum) with the girl [deleted]

    All in all, quite an expensive night out.

    • higherstandard 3.1
      16 February 2022 at 10:17 am

      Best not to open this blog up to a defamation lawsuit Tony.

    • Blade 3.2
      16 February 2022 at 11:03 am

      I must have missed the court case, tell me more?

      • solkta 3.2.1
        16 February 2022 at 11:13 am

        For someone who reads a lot you sure miss a lot.

        • Blade 3.2.1.1
          16 February 2022 at 11:22 am

          I'm listening. Fill me with your wisdom. Start at the part where Andrew has been found guilty in a court of law.

          • solkta 3.2.1.1.1
            16 February 2022 at 11:40 am

            Yeh nah, if you want to know what is going on then off you go.

            • Blade 3.2.1.1.1.1
              16 February 2022 at 11:42 am

              Next time before you troll, engage your brain.

              • solkta …
                16 February 2022 at 11:44 am

                Are you still here? don't you have reading to do?

                • weka …
                  16 February 2022 at 2:08 pm

                  both of you stop it, now.

                • aom …
                  16 February 2022 at 2:16 pm

                  Don't bother Solkta, if people don't understand the difference between a criminal case and a civil case in the US, they are unlikely to know what is meant by a settlement.

                  • Blade …
                    16 February 2022 at 2:51 pm

                    I'm well aware of what is what, Aom. However, when you make a statement such as Tony Veitch did; since deleted by Weka, I believe that has to be proven in criminal court of law, otherwise you open yourself up to legal action.

                    An out of court settlement doesn't necessarily mean an admission of guilt.

    • Tony Veitch (not etc.) 3.3
      16 February 2022 at 1:35 pm

      Yes, I agree. Delete the word 'molested' and substitute the word 'knew.'

      • weka 3.3.1
        16 February 2022 at 2:10 pm

        I've deleted the half sentence. I don't have time to sort out other people's mistakes or check what’s legal or not, the onus is on the commenter to get it right. Next time, put in a link and then it's easy to fact check, better yet check yourself. This isn't FB, for casual, slanderous comments. Another sentence and you could have made a clear political argument.

  4. observer 4
    16 February 2022 at 10:49 am

    Sometimes it's unfair to demand a simple "Yes/No" answer. There are nuances, variables, unknowns.

    But sometimes there aren't any. Sometimes it's really, really easy. Do you agree: Yes, or No?

    Luxon couldn't handle it.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300518896/christopher-luxon-cant-say-whether-or-not-national-supports-minimum-wage-boost

  5. Ad 5
    16 February 2022 at 11:08 am

    With the Queen's Platinum Jubilee celebrations will begin on Thursday, June 2, 2022, and through June 5th, that would be a great time to start to strip the monarchy right back, resign as Queen and hand over to Prince Charles.

    Charles can then pull the whole royal family farce back to a minimum, and chuck out the taxpayer entitlements for all but those children directly in line of succession.

    Chuck out the industry of pervert Dukes, star-fucking low-rent z-grade actors, horse-worshippers, contitutional nobodies, and the entire swirling shit-constellation of psychobabble tv and film industries.

    Even the Maori Party wants them gone. Hopefully we give them all the heave in time for our bicentennary in 18 years.

    • Puckish Rogue 5.1
      16 February 2022 at 11:34 am

      How would the treaty negotiations go on if we became a republic, would they have to end because the Crown is no longer, would the treaty have to be renegotiated with the government, would there still be a legally binding treaty?

      • McFlock 5.1.1
        16 February 2022 at 2:39 pm

        Not sure how it's worked with every peaceful independence transition, but generally it seems to be a bit like buying a company: the new structure (parliament, president, Grand Moff, whatevs) assumes the rights and responsibilities of the previous owner.

        If I've got a lease, and the building owner changes without nixing the lease, I just call them about the broken washing machine, not the old owner.

        • Puckish Rogue 5.1.1.1
          16 February 2022 at 2:58 pm

          Thats a shame.

          This could have been a chance to renegotiate the treaty, have one written that both parties agree on, that is updated for the world we live in today

          To fix it

          • McFlock 5.1.1.1.1
            16 February 2022 at 3:00 pm

            I doubt Māori will cede their sovereignty this time, either.

            • Puckish Rogue 5.1.1.1.1.1
              16 February 2022 at 3:12 pm

              I doubt lawyers and elites would, willingly, give up gravy trains

              • McFlock …
                16 February 2022 at 3:24 pm

                Weird you link that with sovereignty.

                Since your current gig has made you a staunch ally of the working classes, maybe your next stint could be in Te Puni Kōkiri? We could turn you into a full-spectrum wokish warrior, one govt department at a time…

            • higherstandard 5.1.1.1.1.2
              16 February 2022 at 4:23 pm

              "The Chiefs assembled including Chiefs not present at the assembly hereby cede absolutely to the Queen of England for ever the Government of all of their lands"

              "Her Majesty the Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the Chiefs and Tribes of New Zealand, and to the respective families and individuals thereof, the full, exclusive, and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates, Forests, Fisheries, and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess, so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession; but the Chiefs of the United Tribes and the Individual Chiefs yield to Her Majesty the exclusive right of Pre-emption over such lands as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to alienate, at such prices as may be agreed upon between the respective Proprietors and persons appointed by Her Majesty to treat with them in that behalf".

              http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-NgaTrea-t1-g1-t1.html

          • Robert Guyton 5.1.1.1.2
            16 February 2022 at 3:29 pm

            It's not broken.

            • Puckish Rogue 5.1.1.1.2.1
              16 February 2022 at 3:38 pm

              Yes it is.

              We need one treaty that the government and the tribes can agree on so we can then we forward rather than always looking backwards and falling over

              NZ becoming a republic would be the perfect time to do it

              • Robert Guyton …
                16 February 2022 at 3:43 pm

                Not isn't. It's a living, vital treaty. Live it, PR. Your conservative, regressive views are blocking the natural flow between cultures, ideologies and concepts.

                Stop dragging the chain.

                Let the lively, the young, the energised, attend to these matters.

  6. Puckish Rogue 6
    16 February 2022 at 12:37 pm

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/127789940/teenager-indecently-assaulted-by-taxi-driver-driving-her-home

    'Judge Farish said she did not think a sentence of imprisonment was necessary to meet the principles and purposes of sentencing.'

    “You are not a sex offender. You have offended in a sexual way, but you are not a sex offender,” she said.

    'She said she did not think the man was a risk to the public.'

    This is how you guarantee lower prison numbers

    • Molly 6.1
      16 February 2022 at 12:56 pm

      "“You are not a sex offender. You have offended in a sexual way, but you are not a sex offender,” she said."

      That statement doesn't even require comment to critique, it is perfectly circular.

      'She said she did not think the man was a risk to the public.'

      Well, she could be right. He really has only shown himself to be a risk for an inebriated 17 year old woman, walking home in the dark. How many of those are there?

      A man's behaviour is protected from further censure because of the impact it would have on his wife. If only all non sexual offenders could boast the same, we would reduce the need for rehabilitation.

      • Puckish Rogue 6.1.1
        16 February 2022 at 3:43 pm

        "“You are not a sex offender. You have offended in a sexual way, but you are not a sex offender,” she said."

        I read that and I thought I had read it wrong so I had another look and yep it still didn't make any sense

  7. Blade 7
    16 February 2022 at 12:44 pm

    I said when the last political poll was taken that people would still be happy and in a holiday mood. But as the year ground on things would change. Well, the year hasn’t ground on very far and already a new poll is showing a shift in all directions.

    Quote:

    ”The poll also found that an upswing in the overall national mood experienced over summer had dropped away”.

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300518993/new-poll-national-surge-up-closer-to-labour-greens-and-act-down

    • swordfish 7.1
      16 February 2022 at 7:01 pm

      .

      Curia Poll for the Taxpayers Union:

      [Fieldwork: Feb 1-10]
      .

      Party Support

      Labour ……….. 42.3% (up 1.1)

      Green …………. 6.3% (down 4.4)

      Lab +Green … 48.6% (down 3.3)

      .

      National ……… 38.4% (up 5.4)

      ACT ………………. 6.6% (down 4.9)

      Nat + ACT …….. 45.0% (up 0.5)

      .

      Preferred PM

      Ardern …………. 38.9% (up 1.4)

      Luxon ………….. 28.5% (up 10.1)

      .

      • swordfish 7.1.1
        16 February 2022 at 10:11 pm

        Luxon is starting to look competitive in much the same way Brash was over the months immediately following his Orewa speech … It'll be interesting to see if the trend is confirmed by the TV Polls.

      • Blade 7.1.2
        16 February 2022 at 10:15 pm

        Thanks for posting the graphics. That always puts things in a more perspective frame.

  8. Robert Guyton 8
    16 February 2022 at 1:08 pm

    Is this correct, I wonder?

    "FEB 15, 2022 —

    Today on STUFF it was confirmed that Destiny Church had been removed from the register of Charities.

    A HUGE THANKYOU TO ALL THOSE WHO SIGNED THE PETITION.

    On Tuesday, February 15, the Charities Services changed the listings for Destiny Church Auckland Trust, Destiny Church Taranaki, Destiny International Trust and Te Hahi o Ngā Matamua Holdings Limited.

    Their removal from the register comes two months after Charities Services revealed it launched an “initial inquiry” into the charities, having received 28 complaints about Destiny Church in the space of a few months."

    https://www.change.org/p/destiny-church-revoke-destiny-church-s-charitable-status/u/30212420

    • UncookedSelachimorpha 8.2
      16 February 2022 at 1:28 pm

      Stuff story here. Unfortunately seems they are deregistered due to failure to file annual returns, rather than their “uncharitable” vile beliefs and practices. In my view religions generally should be ineligible, unless they are doing some specific and material community work.

      But good news! His bank account is something the Eftpostle will really care about.

    • Patricia Bremner 8.3
      16 February 2022 at 7:50 pm

      yes

  10. UncookedSelachimorpha 10
    16 February 2022 at 1:35 pm

    1160 new cases today. And 9 people in intensive care (after being at zero the last few days) – presumably most with Omicron? It won't be mild for all, unfortunately.

  11. gsays 11
    16 February 2022 at 1:36 pm

    I've put this here to try and avoid cheap, glib covidesque quips.

    There is a big of concern for the fear of the health system being overwhelmed.

    I would suggest, in pockets around the country, it already is.

    A couple of nights ago, a Stat 2 patient with cardiac issues was put in the ED, on a chair because the ED was full, chocka. The Ed was full because the hospital was full.

    He sat on the chair for an hour and a half until he inevitably arrested.

    This then added to the stress of an understaffed, overworked nursing crew, with a VERY junior skillmix who were already unable to advocate for their patients and providing the bear basics to the sick and needy.

    Every pay round this issue comes up and the DHBs want a new metric, a new system to evaluate staffing needs. (I can't recall the name of the latest as my health professional isn't home ATM.)

    It was suggested that perhaps the Board gets fined each time the hospital reaches a certain crisis point. Since they are the neo-liberal governance part of the system, bearing a financial penalty may motivate them. Have no fear, those at the coal face have personal consequences every shift this happens and really dire ones when there is a death or very bad outcome.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/456765/patients-with-mental-health-needs-dhb-blames-poor-rating-on-difficulty-of-filling-liaison-role

    • Barfly 11.1
      16 February 2022 at 1:58 pm

      Hospitals have been stretched to the limit for years – I remember being hospitalised for a bad infection and needing to have IV antibiotics – after several hours I ended up in the heart ward…literally the only bed that was available in Auckland Hospital and this was in the last NACT governments era.

      • gsays 11.1.1
        16 February 2022 at 2:00 pm

        Yep, I suppose I am talking about systemic failures.

        Any surplus in a budget is a shameful state of affairs.

        We have the money but lack the will.

    • McFlock 11.2
      16 February 2022 at 2:57 pm

      The hospital understaffing is largely due to central government, rather than the boards. The boards end up creating new systems to manage the number of towels, but that doesn't hire 50 more nurses or a registrar. It just shows effort when the minister sends another letter about the dhb "debt".

      But I like the idea – if the fines are nixed and the minister is held accountable. Make it home D. A day for every time a crisis level is hit during their tenure as minister. That'll get them begging more money out of their cabinet colleagues.

      • gsays 11.2.1
        16 February 2022 at 6:49 pm

        Ironically, I have just found out, the Safe Staffing Review Report of the Care Capacity Demand Management (CCDM) Programme is being released tomorrow arvo.

        There is a feeling of SSDD. Whatever the results I am sure it will lack teeth and accountability for those at senior management or governance levels.

        Edit, TBF, this isn’t the same all through the country, but it is particularly bad here in Mid Central.

  12. Tony Veitch (not etc.) 12
    16 February 2022 at 2:21 pm

    Just watching Question Time in our House.

    2 observations: 1 – a) Luxon reading from a prepared list of questions, not able to think on his feet and b) Simon Bridges able to extemporise as he goes along. Not as mentally agile as his shadow Finance Minister, or just inexperienced?

    2 – Jacinda wiped the floor of Luxon, and so did Robertson of Bridges. No contest really!

    • aj 12.1
      16 February 2022 at 2:54 pm

      Jacinda wiped the floor of Luxon, and so did Robertson of Bridges.

      Will never be reported as such in the MSM. Tripled hammered both of them. Almost embarrassing.

      • Enough is Enough 12.1.1
        16 February 2022 at 4:35 pm

        Will never be reported in the media because its meaningless.

        Question time is a sport. Nice for entertainment but who on earth takes it seriously.

    • observer 12.2
      16 February 2022 at 3:00 pm

      Bridges was National's best opposition leader at Question Time, his experience as a prosecutor came through, and – as you point out – he could pick up on a previous answer and think on his feet. (Bridges' problem was not in Parliament but the other areas, like being grumpy on TV).

      As for Luxon, I get the impression Ardern enjoys squashing him, she's more feisty these days. Her body language says "you think you're such a big shot CEO, let's see what you got".

      Always makes me laugh when people say she's just hugs and smiles. If they can't see the steel they really should watch Question Time.

      • Tony Veitch (not etc.) 12.2.1
        16 February 2022 at 3:45 pm

        In military terms (and I'm a pacifist!) – she's conducting a pre-emptive strike.

        The poor bugger (Luxon) will never get up to speed if JA keeps shoving him down!

      • Puckish Rogue 12.2.2
        16 February 2022 at 3:45 pm

        Her body language says "you think you're such a big shot CEO, let's see what you got".

        So you reckon shes got a bit of an inferiority complex then, you'd have thought she'd have gotten over that being the PM and all

        • McFlock 12.2.2.1
          16 February 2022 at 3:53 pm

          Nah, it must be nice having a fish in a barrel to shoot, rather than dealing with a serious opposition.

          • Puckish Rogue 12.2.2.1.1
            16 February 2022 at 3:58 pm

            I don't understand her issue, she went from working in a fish n chip shop to working for someone alleged to be a war criminal to being PM

            Thats a not too shabby rise in circumstances, I'd have thought anyone would be pleased with that

        • observer 12.2.2.2
          16 February 2022 at 3:57 pm

          Fly-swatting is not one of the symptoms of an inferiority complex.

          Still, Luxon ran an airline. You'd think he might have mentioned it. He ran an airline.

          "What's your policy on the minimum wage?". "I ran an airline."

      • mac1 12.2.3
        16 February 2022 at 4:08 pm

        Great to hear a tribute to the Prime Minister, Jacinda Ardern, from Hon. Kiritapu Allan in today's debate on the PM's statement.

        The ‘Boss’.

        "Humble', "compassion with innate wisdom'. a 'very clear sense of purpose which gives us a sense of clarity.”

    • mac1 12.3
      16 February 2022 at 4:21 pm

      Agreed. The Prime Minister is in command of her material, her debating skills are so apparent and the opoosition have no reply to the rejoinders that they in government did little or even nothing to develop health, education, housing.

      Today, Finance Minister Robertson informed the House in Question Time that the previous National government for two years spent nothing at all on new Health expenditure!

      A great leadership team.

    • alwyn 12.4
      16 February 2022 at 9:04 pm

      " Jacinda wiped the floor of Luxon, and so did Robertson of Bridges. No contest really!"

      But you claimed that you were watching Question Time.

      Can I suggest you turn the TV to Channel 31 and turn the sound on in future?

  13. Sanctuary 13
    16 February 2022 at 4:07 pm

    Who is going to tell the NZ Herald that Julie-Anne Genter hasn't been a minister for over a year, and Richard Prebble is now… a senile old man?

    Update: It looks like they've pulled the story online (hence no link) but the opinion piece where Prebble spends an entire column attacking Julie-Anne Genter as the "associate transport minister" for reducing speed limits it is still in the print edition.

    An utter debacle for the Herald.

  14. Puckish Rogue 14
    16 February 2022 at 4:25 pm

    Another reason why I'm glad to live here and not elsewhere, just imagine if the NZ government did this

    • weka 14.1
      16 February 2022 at 6:27 pm

      sorry, but if he can't give a clue as to what he is on about in the first thirty secs I'm struggling to know why I should spend time listening to the polemic of a RW youtuber.

      • Puckish Rogue 14.1.1
        16 February 2022 at 6:33 pm

        Basically this:

        https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60383385

        ‘With no need for court orders, banks can freeze personal accounts of anyone linked with the protests.’

        ‘Critics have noted that the prime minister voiced support for farmers in India who blocked major highways to New Delhi for a year in 2021, saying at the time: “Canada will always be there to defend the right of peaceful protest.”

        • Molly 14.1.1.1
          16 February 2022 at 6:41 pm

          "Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has taken the unprecedented step of invoking the Emergencies Act to crack down on anti-vaccine mandate protests.

          Mr Trudeau said the scope of the measures would be "time-limited", "reasonable and proportionate" and would not see the military deployed.

          With no need for court orders, banks can freeze personal accounts of anyone linked with the protests."

          Well, that will just confirm protestors fears about overreach. It looks like an intention to add fuel to the fire.

          I always considered him a numpty, and not in a good way. Now I consider him a dangerous authoritarian.

  15. McFlock 15
    16 February 2022 at 4:43 pm

    Tsk. More wokism.

    Guy tweets a fight from finger poking to cops breaking it up, another dude asks how the cops knew who to arrest and who to ignore.

    https://twitter.com/BeauTFC/status/1493781019375276037

  16. Stephen D 16
    16 February 2022 at 5:25 pm

    If you want to see what an opioid crisis looks like, fuelled by greed, watch Dopesick. Michael Keaton is superb.
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dopesick_(miniseries)

    https://thespinoff.co.nz/the-bulletin/16-02-2022/preventing-an-avoidable-health-crisis