Ukrainian forces withdraw from Avdiivka; megathread for news/updates/discussion of Russian invasion of Ukraine - February 17
There hasn't been a megathread for a while so I wanted to post the latest news as well as a couple other pieces of news from the past week along with a couple articles providing additional context.
The latest piece of news is Ukrainian forces withdraw from Avdiivka to avoid encirclement, army chief says. This is very concerning and I hope encourages people to continue urging their politicians to find ways of supporting Ukraine in a larger capacity than they have in recent months.
The other day there was also this article titled Rate of Russian military production worries Europe's war planners. If you don't have time to listen to Perun's hour-long PowerPoint from 4 months ago on the same subject (Russian Defence Production 2023 - Can Russia keep up with equipment attrition in Ukraine?), then The Guardian article is a decent primer.
It also links to a Foreign Affairs article published in January of 2024 going into more detail about Russia's economic expenditures and its uneven footing: Putin’s Unsustainable Spending Spree: How the War in Ukraine Will Overheat the Russian Economy (Archive.is link). This is a particularly interesting article as it details the expenses as a percent of GDP that have recently made the rounds in the news this week, as well as how military spending as spurred growth in some industries, while others also tangentially related are lagging behind despite the government's stimulus. Additionally, Russia is spending the equivalent of billions of dollars on annexed regions of Ukraine. It then details the consequences of this substantially increased spending and increased wages that may be dislocating the civilian economy in favor of maintaining enough supplies for a further extended attritional war.
The Guardian article say that:
New analysis by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) estimates that Russia has lost 3,000 armoured fighting vehicles in the last year and close to 8,800 since the war began.
Unable to produce anywhere near that number of vehicles, Russia has mainly refurbished ageing hardware ...
Russian factories claimed to have delivered 1,500 main battle tanks this year, of which 1,180 to 1,280 had been reactivated from storage, according to IISS. Those numbers, along with reactivated armoured personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, meant Russia would “be able to sustain its assault on Ukraine at current attrition rates for another two to three years, and maybe even longer”, the group said.
For reference, the landing ship that was recently destroyed by Ukrainian Unmanned Surface Vessels (Magura V5 sea drones), Caesar Kunikov, could carry 10 main battle tanks and 340 troops or 12 armored personnel carriers and 340 troops. Though it's not clear what role that ship was playing, as trains play a significant role in deploying men and materiel to the frontlines.
Finally, an article I'd meant to post several months ago to just sort of talk about in general terms: What would happen if Russia invaded Finland? I went to a giant war game in London to find out. Has anyone ever participated in war gaming, have a background or took a class on game theory, or enjoyed the history of tabletop gaming that dates back to this war-time activity? Just interested in what people have to say.
The Avdiivka withdrawal seems worse for Ukraine than initially thought: Hundreds of Ukrainian Troops Feared Captured or Missing in Chaotic Retreat
I wish Congress (read: the GOP) would stop delaying but there are so many incentives for them to continue rejecting more funds that I am not hopeful. I think the initial delay in supplying Ukraine with heavy arms will be seen as a massive strategic blunder in years to come. Allowing Russia to dig in over winter 2022-2023 has made it much more difficult to see an endgame where Ukraine returns to its pre-war borders.
UK, Allies Look to Arm Ukraine With AI-Enabled Swarm Drones - Bloomberg - (archive)
...
Also, here's a Google translatation of an article in Ukrainian:
Ukrainian analogues of "Lancet" drones passed the first tests - Fedorov
Tangentially related to this is renewed interest in fielding laser and microwave weaponry to support modern forces. In particular, they would neutralize the drone threat at a price point far below what it costs to intercept those drones with kinetic weapons, thus neutralizing the advantage of using cheap off the shelf kit to make the drones. Perun's latest update would be right at home on any sci-fi channel, except this isn't scifi. This is real technology, it's already here and in use now, and we're going to see a lot more of it in the coming years.
Air Force: Ukraine shoots down another Russian A-50 aircraft over Azov Sea
7/9 left to go, and Russia's once again blaming this on their own air defense, without seemingly realising that makes it worse.
Exclusive: Turkish-Russian trade hit by fresh US sanctions threat (Reuters)
...
...
There's some commentary on Moneyness:
...
US cracks down on sanctioned Russian oligarchs (The Kyiv Independent)
Speakers of 23 parliaments address their US counterpart Mike Johnson regarding support for Ukraine (Ukrainska Pravda)
I'm surprised this hasn't generated more headlines. Or is it common for parliaments to send each other this type of missive?
Garand Thumb is not someone I post here because I think his video would probably be unpopular. I don't subscribe to any of his political views but I do enjoy the content. He recently posted an interview with 2 veterans of the Ukranian Foreign Legion. It's a great video to get an idea about the direct boots on the ground perspective beyond the typical combat footage you usually see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tge7YMi4gJs
Very interesting video. Whatever anyone thinks of Garand, I appreciate that he only asks realistic questions as prompts and then shuts up and lets the professionals discuss.
I have no idea of Garand Thumb's personal or political views. Is he some sort of alt-right chud who hides his 'power level'? It'd be a shame, because I've had similar warnings.about Brandon Herrera after watching and enjoying one of his vids. It seems ridiculous to be so suspicious of people, but unfortunately the way YT's algorithm works it'll funnel you right down the rabbit hole if you let your guard down.
I don't know about alt-right, but he is a big proponent of the US second amendment and the last bet they did on video resulted in the loser having to put pronouns in their twitter bio that the winner dictated (I believe they opted for xir/xem).
It seems to me a lot less insidious and a lot more dude-bro stuff so think of that what you may.
I think GT himself funneling you into that direction is less of a threat than the youtube algorithm doing it. Aside of the second amendment stuff (which comes with the gun nut territory in the US so that was obvious) they do a fairly good job of keeping their videos "politics free" and at least firmly recommend that you should get training with a firearm at the end of every video, which I guess is the next best thing if you're already pro 2A.
What have you heard about Herrera?
this leaves a bad enough taste in my mouth that I just wouldn't watch the channel myself but it definitely does seem possible that they're just clueless white boys that don't understand why being juvenile and disrespectful is wrong.
it just also is the exact kind of thing someone who was a much bigger shithead would do to stay cryptofash. so I'm unwilling to give them the benefit of the doubt here.
Maybe I'm giving them too much benefit of the doubt. As for calling them boys, that would defend them on the basis of their age, and at least the main guy himself has a successful air force career behind him. These aren't 19 year olds, they should, at this point, be approaching their 30s at the very least.
Neopronouns are such a strange concept that I cut them some slack for making fun of them. Beyond that I haven't heard anything I would strongly disagree with.
So far I’m fairly unconvinced that they serve a useful purpose or do anything besides impede communication.
Genuinely asking: have you ever been in a situation where someone's pronouns have seriously impeded communication? What does that look like? I interact with people who use 'neopronouns' on a semi-regular basis and it has never complicated things other than being a detail to remember about them.
That’s not my word, I didn’t use it. I only said it impedes communication.
Yep, a detail that carries very close to zero useful information. It’s burdensome to have to remember non-meaningful information about people.
I’m 110% on board with using an existing pronoun of a person’s choice. If someone wants to be identified as male, female, or neither (they/them) that’s what I will identify them as. My language already has slots for those identifiers, and it takes almost zero effort to associate them.
If someone does not choose to identify as male or female, then the remaining useful option is neither. A pronoun such as xi/zi/zir/etc does not convey additional information about their gender. Its meaning is not even transferable in any sense to another person who shares that pronoun — there are no generally understood social customs or behaviours associated with the communities of zirs versus xis versus zes.
Sorry, hope it didn't come across as me putting words in your mouth. I was only meant to paraphrase.
I suppose everyone has different lines in the sand for what they deem useful. To me, knowing that someone uses one of these non-standard pronouns tells me a lot about a person, about how they want to present themselves to the world, and also provides opportunities for learning more (should the context deem that appropriate) by asking them about it or at the very least looking it up on my own time. The pronouns are only meaningless if they are arbitrarily chosen — although certainly the meaning might only be properly understood by talking to the person about it (again, if appropriate) as opposed to being societally known. I'd wager that for a large majority of the people using these pronouns the specific one they identify with is not arbitrary, to them. It's a choice that's meant to convey some facet of their identity and (again, to me) you can certainly get to know someone by understanding why that set of pronouns.
Not to derail the conversation further but I knew a guy who regularly showed up at barbeques who every few cookouts would give people a different name. He introduced himself as Cookie to me with a straight face so I thought nothing of it. We were discussing the smoked brisket he brought and someone else called him Midnight. I thought I was crazy for a bit, I swear he was Cookie, Then someone else told me that Cookie wasn't even first name he'd used.
My gut reaction was "Whatever, man" because who am I to care? He wants to give everyone a different name that's fine, but now his name is essentially "The brisket guy?" because not everyone was at the last barbeque when he decided to give a different name again.
My personal view is that pronouns are for the convenience of everyone else. They're communication short hands so I don't have to say "Mohammed said that Mohammed wanted us to stop by Nina's place for the equipment" and sound like Elmo on Sesame Street. For many people, attempting to utilize a neopronoun is then viewed as an imposition, as though I expected you to handwrite anything you'd rather just send as an email. I'm taking away my convenience for your comfort, not that that's a bad thing for someone you care about, but let's be frank and admit that maybe I don't care about literally every single person I come across. I can hardly remember the name of the person working the floor to help me pick out a bra, I'm not going to remember what her, if those even are her pronouns, pronouns are.
Not to play the "I've got X friend card" but for my trans friends I've had zero issues flipping the switch to say "He" instead now because that's just who he is. Having to not only remember a new word (as an aside, how is that even pronounced? Zee, Zur? Chi, chir? Ex-ee, ex-ur?) but also explain that word to anyone I choose to discuss that person with? I'll just skip the story and how xem went to Applebee's instead.
It surprises me that some troll somewhere hasn't realized this and made their twitter pronouns gif.
I'm sure they have, we've just hopefully kept far enough away from the CHUD side of the net to avoid it.
Oh, now I'm super curious to know more about your demographics. I have a belief that brain plasticity plays a large part in someone's acceptance of non standard pronouns. Several of the older people that I know have trouble with pronouns. One of my older friends get visibly agitated when they're brought up as a topic, but he's a pretty typical liberal guy who supports peoples' right to identify how they wish. I am getting into middle age, myself, and I have to stop and parse sentences that use 'they' and 'their' as a singular. I am also not opposed to people wanting to break away from a gender binary, but my brain is rebelling against the change in language. Whereas younger people seem to have an easier time adapting to the new language, if they're not politically opposed to the whole thing.
One of the recent Murderbot books had a character with a non-binary gender pronoun (zhe or xim or something). I found myself having a lot of trouble reading those passages. I eventually just started replacing the words with 'she' and 'her', effectively assigning a gender to the character, and was able to read the book without any mental fatigue.
For some reason, having new pronouns is not the same as learning a new noun or adjective. The plural-ness of "they" and the binary distinction between "he" and "she" seem to be much more deeply rooted in my brain's understanding of english. I can accept a new adverb pretty easily. Hell, I play with words all the time in poetry and daily discourse. I like using random words as verbs for fun and incorporating them into my speech to make other people confused for a bit. But, for some reason I can't fathom, I have trouble incorporating neopronouns into my lexicon.
What’s so new about using they or them when you don’t know if it’s a he or a she? I learned it twenty years ago from an English teacher in my third world country, so I’m just wondering if my teacher was too progressive at the time they taught me. Although their political stance right now is very questionable in other ways.
Your English teacher was correct -- using singular they in that context is very old and has been around for centuries. Using it for specific people is what's new.
That said, I'm impressed with your English teacher for teaching you to use it regardless -- a lot of English pedagogy (even or pwrhaps especially for native speakers!) incorrectly teaches that singular they is "wrong" and attempts to convince students to only use "he or she" or sometimes even just "he" as an alternative.
I think the above poster is referring to "Neo" Pronouns, as their example, "Zhe" "Xim" or as a previous poster mentioned "Xir/Xem", rather than He/She/They/Them.
They/Them is not hard at all and something I've been doing for a period already, as it just makes reasonable sense when you're unaware of a persons gender and how to refer to them. That said, I would also struggle with "Neo" pronouns and am only a step away from dismissing them out of hand.
They specifically said this so that’s why asked:
This is a thing with some linguistics behind it -- pronouns in English are traditionally what we would call a "closed class", whereas nouns, adjectives, and adverbs are an "open class". It's very easy and common to coin new words in an open class, much less so with a closed class. Neopronouns as a concept essentially try to make pronouns into an open class, usually because the person in question finds the existing options inadequate. It's an interesting thing, linguistically, but it's unsurprising that it's difficult for many people to learn to use them comfortably. It does indeed take more work for you than a noun or adjective might.
However, I don't think this can solely be the reason for your difficulty with singular they in particular. Singular they has been in English for a long time -- longer than singular "you" even! -- when it's used for a referent whose gender or identity is unknown. I absolutely guarantee you that you have used singular they this way without realizing it no matter how old you are if you're a native English speaker. The newness of singular they is only in using it for a specific person rather than only in cases where the person is unknown. There's definitely still adaptation to consciously learning to use it this way -- I struggled myself at first, and I now use they/them as my preferred pronouns -- but it's much easier and more likely for it to stick around long-term in the language when compared to neopronouns. After all, singular you is evidence enough of that.
Overall, your odds of actually encountering a neopronoun user irl are pretty small, and generally just making your best effort to use what they ask out of respect is enough even if you struggle. Singular they is becoming common enough in the English-speaking world that I do recommend working on becoming more comfortable with it in general, but the same principle applies -- do your best to use what someone asks you to use out of respect, and if you screw up quickly correct yourself without making a big deal about it. That's all most trans folks want when it comes to pronouns. It's very easy to tell the difference between accidental slip-ups and malice as a rule.
I'm 28, but I've been in environments where these things are not super uncommon for about a decade so maybe I got used to them younger.
No offense, but this isn't your call to make, and it's a really gross perspective to have. The idea that you have to push back on trans people who do things you don't understand or approve of, even when they don't directly harm anyone, for the "overall goal of fostering acceptance for non-cis individuals", is fundamentally conservative and oppressive. No one's forcing you to use neopronouns. You can just avoid people who use them if you dislike using them and don't want to overtly be an asshole. But framing "pushing back against" them as some sort of progressive act is absurd.
Even if you were correct that people deliberately choose them just to be obnoxious and no one comes to the choice to use them from a serious or well thought-out place (which, to be clear, is not something you are correct about), the idea that someone's choices need to be pushed back because they're weird and annoying at worst is fundamentally harmful to trans people as a whole. Sure, your threshold for what's weird and annoying enough that we should "push back against" it is neopronouns. But for the next person over it's any trans person who doesn't conform to stereotypical gender presentation. For the next person it's literally any nonbinary identity at all -- I've absolutely seen people say almost the exact same shit you have in this comment, except about nonbinary identities as a whole rather than just neopronouns.This is fundamentally no different than that. It's also much like "pushing back against" femme gay men and drag queens because they make it harder for society to accept non-heterosexual people. Queer acceptance shouldn't be contingent on you agreeing with every choice a given person makes or on that person not doing anything you find weird or off-putting.
one of the benefits of having been on the Internet for so long is that I've gotten to see this exact argument used about approximately nine million things and every single time it's nonsense. This is a made up strawman to justify punching down on people that use 'weird' pronouns. A decade ago the same argument was made about genderfluid people and made me and lots of people like me hide for fear of bullying. Two decades ago it was that gay people are okay but transgenderism is too far.
I'm very disappointed to have to see things like this on tildes, I didn't think we would have to deal with respectability politics nonsense here.
yeah I'm honestly becoming more and more disappointed with some of the comments I see about... almost any trans or gender-related issue when it comes up outside of ~lgbt. I try to do my best to respond thoughtfully if I have something to say that might help someone see things from a different perspective but it's kinda exhausting.
Yeah I mean I don't blame people who retreat to echo chambers but the only way to solve such a culture problem as tildes grows is to keep pushing back on it.
If they're on this site I'm a lot more likely to give them a little benefit of the doubt since on here it's actually pretty common to run into people here who really genuinely don't know better, and usually if you are respectful and patient in pushing back they will listen. But that does require a certain patience that few people are willing to extend to Internet strangers.
I understand where you're coming from, but my point is I don't know if that was the joke. If you lose a bet where a friend gets to assign you pronouns to put into your Twitter bio (that was the bet, not literally changing your pronouns in real life or anywhere else), it's obvious they are gonna go with the most ridiculous shit they can think of. It's not gonna stop at they/them.
That's my read as well. For some reason, there's a forgotten weapons -> GarandThumb pipeline that I sorta went down, but I haven't actually found Garand Thumb to lean into any unsavory directions. Not that I did any digging, but beyond the 2A stuff that comes with the gun nuttery territory, I didn't see anything, no dogwhistling, no politics or anything. Seems quite clean, certainly for gun nut youtube.
That he gets peoples backs up for allegedly being your standard alt-right edgelord who hides hateful posts and behaviour behind the excuse that it's a joke or a meme.